4.7 Article

Th17 cells and IL-17 receptor signaling are essential for mucosal host defense against oral candidiasis

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE
卷 206, 期 2, 页码 299-311

出版社

ROCKEFELLER UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1084/jem.20081463

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Oral Biology at SUNY Buffalo [DE007034]
  2. Medical Scientist Training Program at SUNY Buffalo
  3. American Institute for Cancer Research
  4. National Institutes of Health [AR054389, DE018822, DE010641, DE017088]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The commensal fungus Candida albicans causes oropharyngeal candidiasis (OPC; thrush) in settings of immunodeficiency. Although disseminated, vaginal, and oral candidiasis are all caused by C. albicans species, host defense against C. albicans varies by anatomical location. T helper 1 (Th1) cells have long been implicated in defense against candidiasis, whereas the role of Th17 cells remains controversial. IL-17 mediates inflammatory pathology in a gastric model of mucosal candidiasis, but is host protective in disseminated disease. Here, we directly compared Th1 and Th17 function in a model of OPC. Th17-deficient (IL-23p19(-/-)) and IL-17R-deficient (IL-17RA(-/-)) mice experienced severe OPC, whereas Th1-deficient (IL-12p35(-/-)) mice showed low fungal burdens and no overt disease. Neutrophil recruitment was impaired in IL-23p19(-/-) and IL-17RA(-/-), but not IL-12(-/-), mice, and TCR-alpha beta cells were more important than TCR-gamma delta cells. Surprisingly, mice deficient in the Th17 cytokine IL-22 were only mildly susceptible to OPC, indicating that IL-17 rather than IL-22 is vital in defense against oral candidiasis. Gene profiling of oral mucosal tissue showed strong induction of Th17 signature genes, including CXC chemokines and beta defensin-3. Saliva from Th17-deficient, but not Th1-deficient, mice exhibited reduced candidacidal activity. Thus, the Th17 lineage, acting largely through IL-17, confers the dominant response to oral candidiasis through neutrophils and antimicrobial factors.

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

4.7
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