4.7 Article

IL-17A-versus IL-17F-induced intracellular signal transduction pathways and modulation by IL-17RA and IL-17RC RNA interference in rheumatoid synoviocytes

期刊

ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES
卷 70, 期 2, 页码 341-348

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/ard.2010.132233

关键词

-

资金

  1. Hospices Civils de Lyon
  2. Region Rhone-Alpes
  3. Societe Nationale de Medecine Interne

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective The aim of this study was to compare the effects of interleukin (IL)-17A and IL-17F on gene expression and signalling in human rheumatoid arthritis ( RA) synoviocytes. Methods IL-17A- and IL-17F-induced mRNA expression was analysed using Affymetrix microarrays. IL-6 and IL-8 secretion was evaluated by ELISA. Inhibition of two receptors (IL-17RA and IL-17RC) was achieved by small interfering RNA (saran). The effects on mitogen-activated protein kinase ( MAPK), activator protein 1 (AP-1) and nuclear factor kappa B (NF-kappa B) expression and activation were evaluated by western blotting, qRT-PCR and DNA binding assay. Results IL-17A and IL-17F induced a molecular pattern characterised by 27 inflammation-related genes for IL-17F and 165 for IL-17A. Virtually all IL-17A and IL-17F inducible genes were dependent on NF-kappa B activation, whereas a small number were modulated by p38. IL-17A induced activation of all three MAPKs (ERK, p38 and JNK) and downstream transcription factors AP-1 and p65 NF-kappa B. IL-17F was less potent but induced activation of p50 NF-kappa B. IL-17A was more potent at inducing IL-6 secretion than IL-17F, which was inactive alone. IL-17A and, to a lesser extent, IL-17F induced TRAF6 but not MyD88. Inhibition of either IL-17RA or IL-17RC expression via siRNA led to near complete abrogation of IL-6 expression mediated by IL-17A and the combination of IL-17F and tumour necrosis factor a. Conclusion Like IL-17A, IL-17F regulates proinflammatory gene expression by a very similar but not identical signalling pathway involving IL-17RA and IL-17RC.

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

4.7
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