4.5 Article

Chemical stimulation of the intracranial dura activates NALP3 inflammasome in trigeminal ganglia neurons

期刊

BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 1566, 期 -, 页码 1-11

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2014.04.019

关键词

Headache; NALP3 inflammasome; Interleukin-1 beta; Caspase-1; Dural inflammation; Trigeminal Ganglion

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inflammasomes are molecular platforms that upon activation by cellular infection or stress trigger the maturation of proinflammatory cytokines such as interleukin (IL)-1 beta to engage innate immune defenses. Increased production of IL-1 beta in pain and inflammation such as headache is well documented. However, limited evidence addresses the participation of inflammasomes in inflammatory pain. The present study used rat inflammatory dural stimulation-induced model of intracranial pain to assess whether headache-related pain can induce the activation of NACHT, LRR, and PYD-containing protein (NALP)-3 inflammasome pathway in the trigeminal ganglia (TG) and which cells express NALP3 inflammasome proteins and IL-1 beta. Chemical stimulation of the intracranial dura caused a total drug dose- and time-dependent induction of activated caspase-1 and mature IL-1 beta proteins. Application of a selective caspase-1 inhibitor diminished these effects. Immunohistochemistry revealed that both NALP3 inflammasome and IL-1 beta immunoreactivity were existed mainly in small to medium-sized C-type neurons and increased over time, with intense cytoplasmic staining after 3 days of dural inflammation. Overall, the present observation indicated that dural inflammation promoted assembly of the multiprotein NALP3 complex, activated caspase-1, and induced processing of IL-1 beta, which provides an indirect evidence of the participation of NALP3 inflammasome in the cascade of events involved in the genesis of headaches by promoting IL-1 beta maturation in the TG. This may contribute to strategies for headache control. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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