4.6 Article

Toll-like Receptor 4 Relates to Lipopolysaccharide-induced Mucus Hypersecretion in Rat Airway

期刊

ARCHIVES OF MEDICAL RESEARCH
卷 40, 期 1, 页码 10-17

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.arcmed.2008.10.005

关键词

Airway mucus hypersecretion; Dexamethasone; Lipopolysaccharide; Toll-like receptor 4

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (Beijing, China) [30425007, 30370627, 30670921]
  2. China Medical Board of New York (Cambridge, MA) [00-722, 06-834]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) is a transmembrane protein that participates in the recognition of lipopolysaccharide (LPS), a potentially important source of inflammation. To investigate the role of TLR4 in LPS-induced airway Mucus hypersecretion (AMH), we used a LPS-induced rat model treated with dexamethasone (DEX). Methods. Rats were randomly divided into four experimental groups: 1) saline (SA)treated with distilled water (DW) (control group); 2) LPS-treated with DW (LPS group); 3) LPS-treated with DEX (LPS plus DEX group); 4) SA-treated with DEX (DEX group). DEX (5 mg/kg) was intraperitoneally injected I h before being administered intratracheally with LPS. Expressions of TLR4 and MUC5AC were evaluated with RT-PCR, in situ hybridization, immunohistochemistry and Alcian blue/Periodic acid-schiff (AB/PAS) staining. Results. Increased expressions of TLR4 protein and mRNA were found in rat airway treated with LPS and peaked on day 2 after LPS administration. Following this, LPS increased MUC5AC expression and AB/PAS-stained goblet cells in rat airway. Correlation analysis showed TLR4 correlated well with the expression of MUC5AC (r = 0.684, p < 0.0 1) and AB/PAS-stained area(r = 0.781, p < 0.0 1). In addition, DEX pretreatment significantly reduced LPS-induced overexpression of TLR4 (p < 0.05) in rat airway. Conclusions. These results suggest TLR4 relates to LPS-induced AMH and support a role of TLR4 in DEX inhibition of LPS-induced AMH. (C) 2009 IMSS. Published by Elsevier Inc.

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

4.6
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