4.5 Article

Gene expression profiling demonstrates a novel role for foetal fibrocytes and the umbilical vessels in human fetoplacental development

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR MEDICINE
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 1317-1330

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1582-4934.2008.00284.x

关键词

umbilical vein; umbilical artery; placenta; funisitis; chorioamnionitis; intrauterine growth restriction; transcriptome; microarray

资金

  1. Intramural NIH HHS [Z01 HD002400-17] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is a difference in the susceptibility to inflammation between the umbilical vein (UV) and the umbilical arteries (UAs). This led us to hypothesize that there is an intrinsic difference in the pro-inflammatory response between UA and UV. Real-time quantitative RT-PCR and microarray analysis revealed higher expression of interleukin (IL)-1 beta and IL-8 mRNA in the UV and differential expression of 567 genes between the UA and UV associated with distinct biological processes, including the immune response. Differential expression of human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DRA mRNA between the UA and UV was due to unexpected HLA-DR+ cells migrating via the umbilical vessels into Wharton's jelly, more frequently in the UV. A significant proportion of these cells co-expressed CD45 and type I pro-collagen, and acquired CD163 or alpha-smooth muscle actin immunoreactivity in Wharton's jelly. Migrating cells were also found in the chorionic and stem villous vessels. Furthermore, the extent of migration increased with progression of gestation, but diminished in intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR). The observations herein strongly suggest that circulating foetal fibrocytes, routing via umbilical and placental vessels, are a reservoir for key cellular subsets in the placenta. This study reports fibrocytes in the human umbilical cord and placenta for the first time, and a novel role for both circulating foetal cells and the umbilical vessels in placental development, which is deranged in IUGR.

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