4.6 Article

Modulation of the Chlamydia trachomatis In vitro transcriptome response by the sex hormones estradiol and progesterone

期刊

BMC MICROBIOLOGY
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2180-11-150

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) [401245]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Chlamydia trachomatis is a major cause of sexually transmitted disease in humans. Previous studies in both humans and animal models of chlamydial genital tract infection have suggested that the hormonal status of the genital tract epithelium at the time of exposure can influence the outcome of the chlamydial infection. We performed a whole genome transcriptional profiling study of C. trachomatis infection in ECC-1 cells under progesterone or estradiol treatment. Results: Both hormone treatments caused a significant shift in the sub-set of genes expressed (25% of the transcriptome altered by more than 2-fold). Overall, estradiol treatment resulted in the down-regulation of 151 genes, including those associated with lipid and nucleotide metabolism. Of particular interest was the up-regulation in estradiol-supplemented cultures of six genes (omcB, trpB, cydA, cydB, pyk and yggV), which suggest a stress response similar to that reported previously in other models of chlamydial persistence. We also observed morphological changes consistent with a persistence response. By comparison, progesterone supplementation resulted in a general up-regulation of an energy utilising response. Conclusion: Our data shows for the first time, that the treatment of chlamydial host cells with key reproductive hormones such as progesterone and estradiol, results in significantly altered chlamydial gene expression profiles. It is likely that these chlamydial expression patterns are survival responses, evolved by the pathogen to enable it to overcome the host's innate immune response. The induction of chlamydial persistence is probably a key component of this survival response.

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