4.6 Article

CXCR3 Mediates Renal Th1 and Th17 Immune Response in Murine Lupus Nephritis

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 183, 期 7, 页码 4693-4704

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.0802626

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  2. [PA 754/6-3]
  3. [STE 1822/1-1]
  4. [KFO 228]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Infiltration of T cells into the kidney is a typical feature of human and experimental lupus nephritis that contributes to renal tissue injury. The chemokine receptor CXCR3 is highly expressed on Th1 cells and is supposed to be crucial for their trafficking into inflamed tissues. In this study, we explored the functional role of CXCR3 using the MRL/MpJ-Fas(lpr) (MRL/lpr) mouse model of systemic lupus erythematosus that closely resembles the human disease. CXCR3(-/-) mice were generated and backcrossed into the MRL/lpr background. Analysis of 20-wk-old CXCR3(-/-) MRL/lpr mice showed amelioration of nephritis with reduced glomerular tissue damage and decreased albuminuria and T cell recruitment. Most importantly, not only the numbers of renal IFN-gamma-producing Th1 cells, but also of IL-17-producing Th17 cells were significantly reduced. Unlike in inflamed kidneys, there was no reduction in the numbers of IFN-gamma- or IL-17-producing T cells in spleens, lymph nodes, or the small intestine of MRL/lpr CXCR3(-/-) mice. This observation suggests impaired trafficking of effector T cells to injured target organs, rather than the inability of CXCR3(-/-) mice to mount efficient Th1 and Th17 immune responses. These findings show a crucial role for CXCR3 in the development of experimental lupus nephritis by directing pathogenic effector T cells into the kidney. For the first time, we demonstrate a beneficial effect of CXCR3 deficiency through attenuation of both the Th1 and the newly defined Th17 immune response. Our data therefore identify the chemokine receptor CXCR3 as a promising therapeutic target in lupus nephritis. The Journal of Immunology, 2009, 183: 4693-4704.

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