4.3 Article

Vitamin D reduces the differentiation and expansion of Th17 cells in young asthmatic children

期刊

IMMUNOBIOLOGY
卷 219, 期 11, 页码 873-879

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.imbio.2014.07.009

关键词

Asthma; [25(OH)D3]; Th17; RORC; CCR6; IL-23R

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vitamin D [25(OH)D3] deficiency has been associated with asthma as in many inflammatory and autoimmune pathologies; however, there is still a lack of data about the effects of administration of vitamin D in immune regulation in young asthmatic patients. In this study, we investigated its inhibitory effect on the immune response in young asthmatic patients and the possible mechanisms involved. Peripheral blood CD4(+) T cells from 10 asthmatic patients and 10 healthy controls were cultured under Th17 polarizing conditions in the presence or absence of [25(OH)D3], IL-17 cytokine production was determined by ELISA and flow cytometry. Messenger RNA (mRNA) expression of several factors related to Th17 cell function was determined by real-time PCR. The effect of [25(OH)D3]-treated dendritic cells (DCs) on CD4(+) T cell response was determined by ELISA and flow cytometry. Stimulation of naive CD4(+) T cells under Th17 polarizing conditions showed a higher Th17 cell differentiation in asthmatic patients than healthy controls. The addition of [25(OH)D3] significantly inhibited Th17 cell differentiation both in patients [P < 0.001] and in normal controls [P = 0.001] in a dose-dependent way. [25(OH)D3] was able to inhibit the gene expression of RORC, IL-17, IL-23R, and CCR6. [25(OH)D3]-treated DCs significantly inhibited IL-17 production [P=0.002] and decreased the percentage of CD4(+)IL-17(+) [P = 0.0071 in young asthmatics. The findings suggest that the inhibitory effect of [25(OH)D3] on the Th17 response was mediated via both T cells and DCs. DCs pathway is involved in the direct inhibition of 25(OH)D3 on Th17 cell differentiation in young asthmatics. (C) 2014 Elsevier GmbH. 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

4.3
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