4.5 Article

Neisseria gonorrhoeae effectively blocks HIV-1 replication by eliciting a potent TLR9-dependent interferon-α response from plasmacytoid dendritic cells

期刊

CELLULAR MICROBIOLOGY
卷 12, 期 12, 页码 1703-1717

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1462-5822.2010.01502.x

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ontario HIV Treatment Network (OHTN) [ROGB208]
  2. Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR) [HET-85518]
  3. National Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>Clinical and epidemiological research provides evidence for a positive correlation between Neisseria gonorrhoeae infection and HIV transmission; however, mechanistic studies examining this relationship have yielded conflicting results. To explore this interaction, we exposed ex vivo cultured peripheral blood cells from acute HIV+ individuals to N. gonorrhoeae. Unexpectedly, we observed a profound inhibition in HIV-1 replication in the ex vivo cultures, and this was recapitulated when peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from healthy donors were co-infected with HIV-1 and N. gonorrhoeae. Next, we established that gonococcal-infected PBMCs liberated a soluble factor that effectively blocked HIV-1 replication. Cytokine analyses and antibody blocking experiments revealed that the type I interferon, interferon-alpha (IFN alpha), was expressed upon exposure to N. gonorrhoeae and was responsible for the inhibition of HIV-1. Intracellular staining, TLR9-blocking and cell depletion-based studies demonstrated that the IFN alpha was elicited by plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs) in a TLR9-dependent manner. The pDC response to N. gonorrhoeae was unexpected given pDCs more established role in innate defence against intracellular pathogens, suggesting this may be a bacterial immune evasion strategy. In the context of HIV, this overcomes the virus's otherwise effective avoidance of the interferon response and represents a previously unrecognized intersection between these two sexually transmitted pathogens.

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