4.6 Article

Cathelicidin-Related Antimicrobial Peptide Is Required for Effective Lung Mucosal Immunity in Gram-Negative Bacterial Pneumonia

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 189, 期 1, 页码 304-311

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1103196

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [HL97546, HL25243]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cathelicidins are a family of endogenous antimicrobial peptides that exert diverse immune functions, including both direct bacterial killing and immunomodulatory effects. In this study, we examined the contribution of the murine cathelicidin, cathelicidin-related antimicrobial peptide (CRAMP), to innate mucosal immunity in a mouse model of Gram-negative pneumonia. CRAMP expression is induced in the lung in response to infection with Klebsiella pneumoniae. Mice deficient in the gene encoding CRAMP (Cnlp(-/-)) demonstrate impaired lung bacterial clearance, increased bacterial dissemination, and reduced survival in response to intratracheal K. pneumoniae administration. Neutrophil influx into the alveolar space during K. pneumoniae infection was delayed early but increased by 48 h in CRAMP-deficient mice, which was associated with enhanced expression of inflammatory cytokines and increased lung injury. Bone marrow chimera experiments indicated that CRAMP derived from bone marrow cells rather than structural cells was responsible for antimicrobial effects in the lung. Additionally, CRAMP exerted bactericidal activity against K. pneumoniae in vitro. Similar defects in lung bacterial clearance and delayed early neutrophil influx were observed in CRAMP-deficient mice infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa, although this did not result in increased bacterial dissemination, increased lung injury, or changes in lethality. Taken together, our findings demonstrate that CRAMP is an important contributor to effective host mucosal immunity in the lung in response to Gram-negative bacterial pneumonia. The Journal of Immunology, 2012, 189: 304-311.

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