4.7 Article

Enhanced Lymph Vessel Density, Remodeling, and Inflammation Are Reflected by Gene Expression Signatures in Dermal Lymphatic Endothelial Cells in Type 2 Diabetes

Journal

DIABETES
Volume 62, Issue 7, Pages 2509-2529

Publisher

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/db12-0844

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [W1205]
  2. Elise Richter Fellowship [FWF V102-B12]
  3. FP7 Marie Curie International Reintegration grant [IRG230984]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Type 2 diabetes is associated with microvascular damage that causes frequent infections in the skin and chronic ulcers as a result of impaired wound healing. To trace the pathological changes, we performed a comprehensive analysis of lymphatic vessels in the skin of type 2 diabetic versus noncliabetic patients. The dermis revealed enhanced lymphatic vessel density, and transcriptional profiling of ex vivo isolated lymphatic endothelial cells (LECs) identified 160 genes differentially expressed between type 2 diabetic and nondiabetic LECs. Bioinformatic analysis of deregulated genes uncovered sets functionally related to inflammation, lymphatic vessel remodeling, lymphangiogenesis, and lipid and small molecule transport. Furthermore, we traced CD68(+) macrophage accumulation and concomitant upregulation of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) levels in type 2 diabetic skin. TNF-alpha treatment of LECs and its specific blockade in vitro reproduced differential regulation of a gene set that led to enhanced LEC mobility and macrophage attachment, which was mediated by the LEC-derived chemokine CXCL10. This study identifies lymph vessel gene signatures directly correlated with type 2 diabetes skin manifestations. In addition, we provide evidence for paracrine cross-talk fostering macrophage recruitment to LECs as one pathophysiological process that might contribute to aberrant lymphangiogenesis and persistent inflammation in the skin.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available