4.1 Article

INHIBITION OF INTERLEUKIN-10 SIGNALING IN LUNG DENDRITIC CELLS BY TOLL-LIKE RECEPTOR 4 LIGANDS

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL LUNG RESEARCH
卷 35, 期 1, 页码 1-28

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/01902140802389727

关键词

bone marrow-derived dendritic cells; interleukin-10; lipopolysaccharide; lung dendritic cells; Toll-like receptor-4

资金

  1. NIH [R01 HL69459]
  2. Kentucky Lung Cancer Research Program
  3. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [R01HL069459] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The homeostatic microenvironment in lung is immunosuppressive and interleukin-10 (IL-10) helps maintain this microenvironment. Despite constitutive production of IL-10 in normal lung, macrophages (Ms) and dentritic cells (DCs) remain capable of responding to microorganisms, suggesting that these innate immune cells have a mechanism to override the immunosuppressive effects of IL-10. Prior studies by the authors revealed that Toll-like receptor (TLR) ligands inhibit IL-10 receptor signaling in alveolar macrophages (AMs), thereby obviating the immunosuppressive activity of IL-10. This report compares the immunologic phenotypes of AMs and lung DCs and their ability to respond to IL-10 following exposure to microbial stimuli. IL-10 was constitutively produced by normal lung epithelium and exposure to lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in vivo increased the expression of IL-10 during the first 24 hours. AMs constitutively produced IL-10 mRNA, whereas both AMs and LDCs constitutively expressed IL-12 mRNA. AMs and LDCs, as well as bone marrow-derived Ms and DCs, had reduced capacity to activate STAT3 in response to IL-10 if pretreated with LPS. Inhibition was not associated with decreased expression of IL-10 receptor (IL-10R) and was dependent on the MyD88 signaling pathway. These results demonstrate a common underlying regulatory mechanism in both DCs and Ms by which microbial stimuli can override the immunosuppressive effect of constitutive IL-10 production in the lung.

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

4.1
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