4.6 Article

Functional polymorphisms of TLR8 are associated with hepatitis C virus infection

期刊

IMMUNOLOGY
卷 141, 期 4, 页码 540-548

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/imm.12211

关键词

hepatitis C virus; polymorphisms; promoter; stimulation; Toll-like receptor 8

资金

  1. National Science Council [NSC99-2320-B-182A- 010-MY3]
  2. E-DA Hospital [EDAHT100012, EDPJ101047]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a worldwide threat to public health. Toll-like receptor 8 (TLR8) is critical for eliminating RNA viruses, and variation within the TLR8 gene may alter the function of TLR8 in response to HCV infection. Our previous study demonstrated that the TLR8-129G>C (rs3764879) and TLR8+1G>A (rs3764880) variants were in complete linkage disequilibrium, and that the frequency of TLR8-129C/+1A was significantly higher in male patients with HCV infection compared with the healthy controls. In the present study, we found that the promoter activity of TLR8-129G was higher than that of TLR8-129C in THP-1 cells. Moreover, TLR8-129G mRNA stability and competitive DNA-binding ability were significantly lower than that of TLR8-129C. To investigate the functional effects of TLR8 polymorphisms, we compared the nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kappa B)-driven luciferase activity in HEK293 cells transfected with the TLR8 variants. TLR8+1A plasmids induced less NF-kappa B signalling than did those transfected with TLR8+1G after 20 mu m CL075 (P=0.011) stimulation. We also analysed the mRNA expression and cytokine production in whole blood and monocytes from people of various genotypes stimulated ex vivo by the interferon-gamma and TLR7/8 agonist CL075, R848. TLR8 expression in CD14(+) cells derived from volunteers with TLR8-129G/+1G was significantly higher than that derived from TLR8-129C/+1A, and interleukin-12p40 production was higher in volunteers with TLR8-129G/+1G after stimulation. The data indicate that variations in TLR8 genes may modulate immune responses during HCV infection.

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

4.6
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