4.6 Article

NK but not CD1-restricted NKT cells facilitate systemic inflammation during polymicrobial intra-abdominal sepsis

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 180, 期 9, 页码 6334-6345

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.180.9.6334

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM 66885, R01 GM066885] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Evidence suggests that NK and NKT cells contribute to inflammation and mortality during septic shock caused by cecal ligation and puncture (CLP). However, the specific contributions of these cell types to the pathogenesis of CLP-induced septic shock have not been fully defined. The goal of the present study was to determine the mechanisms by which NK and NKT cells mediate the host response to CLP. Control, NK cell-deficient, and NKT cell-deficient mice underwent CLP. Survival, cytokine production, and bacterial clearance were measured. NK cell trafficking and interaction with myeloid cells was also studied. Results show that mice treated with anti-asialoGM1 (NK cell deficient) or anti-NK1.1 (NK/NKT cell deficient) show less systemic inflammation and have improved survival compared with IgG-treated controls. CD1 knockout mice (NKT cell deficient) did not demonstrate decreased cytokine production or improved survival compared with wild type mice. Trafficking studies show migration of NK cells from blood and spleen into the inflamed peritoneal cavity where they appear to facilitate the activation of peritoneal macrophages (F4-80(+)GR-1(-)) and F4-80(+)Gr-1(+) myeloid cells. These findings indicate that NK but not CD1-restricted NKT cells contribute to acute CLP-induced inflammation. NK cells appear to mediate their proinflammatory functions during septic shock, in part, by migration into the peritoneal cavity and amplification of the proinflammatory activities of specific myeloid cell populations. These findings provide new insights into the mechanisms used by NK cells to facilitate acute inflammation during septic shock.

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