4.5 Article

Differential monocyte/macrophage interleukin-1 beta production due to biomaterial topography requires the beta 2 integrin signaling pathway

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.32963

关键词

monocyte; macrophage; biomaterial; topography; integrin

资金

  1. Whitaker Foundation
  2. Medical Scientist Training Program [NIH GM07266]
  3. NSF UWEB ERC [EEC 9529161]
  4. Engineered Biomaterials Training Program [NIH GM065098]
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF GENERAL MEDICAL SCIENCES [T32GM065098, T32GM007266] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Monocytes/macrophages are crucial mediators of the host response to biomaterials, and their level of activation can be directly affected by material characteristics. Previous work has demonstrated that primary human monocytes cultured on polytetrafluoroethylene materials of varying topography but identical surface chemistry are differentially affected. Monocytes/macrophages on biaxially-expanded polytetrafluoroethylene with an average intranodal distance of 4.4 mu m (4.4-ePTFE) produced higher levels of the inflammatory cytokine interleukin-1 beta (IL-1 beta) compared with monocytes/macrophages on nonporous polytetrafluoroethylene (np-PTFE). The current study provides a mechanistic understanding of this response. Scanning electron microscopy revealed that monocytes/macrophages cultured on np-PTFE were more spread than those on 4.4-ePTFE. In addition, the actin cytoskeleton and intact beta 2 integrin receptors were necessary for IL-1 beta production by monocytes/macrophages on 4.4-ePTFE. This IL-1 beta production also required the transcription factor nuclear factor kappa-B, another component of the beta 2 integrin signaling pathway, although it may not be the primary transcription factor involved. These studies demonstrate the importance of several beta 2 integrin signaling components to the monocyte/macrophage response to biomaterial topography. (C) 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 96A: 162-169, 2011.

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

4.5
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