4.8 Article

Differential function of the NACHT-LRR (NLR) members Nod1 and Nod2 in arthritis

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0710445105

关键词

innate immunity; rheumatoid arthritis; inflammation; PRR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The pathogenesis of chronic joint inflammation remains unclear, although the involvement of pathogen recognition receptors has been suggested recently. In the present article, we describe the role of two members of the NACHT-LRR (NLR) family, Nod1 (nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain) and Nod2 in a model of acute joint inflammation induced by intraarticular injection of Streptococcus pyogenes cell wall fragments. Here, we show that Nod2 deficiency resulted in reduced joint inflammation and protection against early cartilage damage. In contrast, Nod1 gene-deficient mice developed enhanced joint inflammation with concomitant elevated levels of proinflammatory cytokines and cartilage damage, consistent with a model in which Nod1 controls the inflammatory reaction. To explore whether the different function of Nod1 and Nod2 occurs also in humans, we exposed peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) carrying either Nod1ins/del or Nod2fs mutation with SCW fragments in vitro. Production of both TNF alpha and IL-1 beta was clearly impaired in PBMCs carrying the Nod2fs compared with PBMCs isolated from healthy controls. in line with results in Nod1 gene-deficient mice, PBMCs from individuals bearing a newly described Nod1 mutation produced enhanced levels of proinflammatory cytokines after 24-h stimulation with SCW fragments. These data indicate that the Ill family members Nod1 and Nod2 have different functions in controlling inflammation, and that intracellular Nod1-Nod2 interactions may determine the severity of arthritis in this experimental model. whether a distorted balance between the function of Nod1 and/or Nod2 is involved in the pathogenesis of human autoinflammatory or autoimmune disease, such as rheumatoid arthritis, remains to be elucidated.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据