4.4 Article

Diverse Bacteria Promote Macrophage Foam Cell Formation Via Toll-Like Receptor-Dependent Lipid Body Biosynthesis

期刊

JOURNAL OF ATHEROSCLEROSIS AND THROMBOSIS
卷 19, 期 2, 页码 137-148

出版社

JAPAN ATHEROSCLEROSIS SOC
DOI: 10.5551/jat.10249

关键词

Foam cell; Toll-like receptor; Lipid body; Bacteria; Cholesterol; Atherosclerosis

资金

  1. University of Leicester College of Medicine
  2. Leicester NIHR Biomedical Research Unit in Cardiovascular Disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: Atherosclerotic lesions contain DNA signatures from a wide variety of bacteria, although little is known of how exposure to these organisms may modulate the accumulation of lipids in macrophages. Methods: To address this, a panel of nine bacteria representing those most frequently reported to be present in human atheroma were examined for their potential to promote lipid accumulation in human primary monocytes and murine J774 macrophages. Results: All bacteria examined, and defined stimulants of Toll-like receptors (TLRs) 2, 3, 4, 5 and 9, induced lipid body formation and cholesterol ester accumulation in a dose-dependent manner. The mechanisms of bacteria-mediated foam cell formation were found to be dependent on TLR2 and/or TLR4 signalling, but independent of lipoprotein oxidation pathways, since lipid accumulation was significantly inhibited by the TLR4 inhibitors polymyxin-B and TAK-242, or the TLR2 and TLR4 inhibitor oxidised palmitoyl-arachidonyl-phosphatidyl-choline, but not by the scavenger receptor blocker polyinosinic acid or the antioxidant butylated hydroxytoluene. A number of genes involved in lipid body biosynthesis, including perilipin-A, stearoyl-coenzyme-A desaturase 1, fatty acid synthase and HMG-CoA reductase were upregulated in response to TLR4 stimulation. Conclusions: The bacterial debris observed in human atheroma, which is currently considered to be harmless, may have potential to contribute to disease progression via TLR-dependent lipid body formation in macrophages.

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

4.4
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