4.7 Review

Innate immune dysfunction in inflammatory bowel disease

期刊

JOURNAL OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 271, 期 5, 页码 421-428

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2012.02515.x

关键词

bacteria; barrier; defensins; inflammatory bowel disease; mucus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gersemann M, Wehkamp J, Stange EF (Robert Bosch Hospital, Stuttgart; Dr. Margarete Fischer-Bosch Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Stuttgart and University of Tubingen, Tubingen; Germany). Innate immune dysfunction in inflammatory bowel disease (Review). J Intern Med 2012; 271: 421428. The pathogenetic mechanisms that cause the two types of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), Crohns disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), are still under investigation. Nevertheless, there is broad agreement that luminal microbes are of particular relevance in the development of these conditions. In recent years, increasing evidence has shown that defects in the innate immunity are at the centre of both types of IBD. The innate intestinal barrier is provided by the epithelium which secretes antimicrobial peptides (so-called defensins) that are retained in the mucus layer. In ileal CD, the alpha-defensins are lacking owing to several Paneth cell defects. In colonic CD, the expression of beta-defensins is inadequate. This may be related to downregulation of the transcription factor peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma and in some cohorts is associated with a reduced HBD2 gene copy number. In UC, the mucus layer, which protects the host from the enormous amounts of luminal microbes, is defective. This is accompanied by an insufficient differentiation from intestinal stem cells towards goblet cells. All these disturbances in the gut barrier shift the balance from epithelial defence towards bacterial offence. The current treatment for CD and UC is based on suppression of this secondary inflammatory process. In future, patients may benefit from new therapeutic approaches stimulating the protective innate immune system.

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