4.5 Article

Inhibition of pre-B cell colony-enhancing factor (PBEF/NAMPT/visfatin) decreases the ability of human neutrophils to generate reactive oxidants but does not impair bacterial killing

期刊

JOURNAL OF LEUKOCYTE BIOLOGY
卷 94, 期 3, 页码 481-492

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1189/jlb.1012527

关键词

rheumatoid arthritis; immune complex; NAD(P); H

资金

  1. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) Collaborative Awards in Science and Engineering (CASE) award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

NAMPT inhibitors show potential as anti-inflammatory or anti-cancer agents by decreasing human neutrophils' ability to generate a respiratory burst, with little impairment of bacterial killing. NAMPT, also known as PBEF and visfatin, can act extracellularly as a cytokine-like molecule or intracellularly as a NAMPT, regulating NAD biosynthesis in the NAD salvage pathway. Inhibitors of NAMPT have anti-inflammatory and anticancer activity and are finding use as therapeutic agents. In view of the importance of NAD metabolism in neutrophil function, we determined the effects of NAMPT inhibition on a variety of neutrophil functions associated with their role in host protection against infections. Incubation of human neutrophils with the NAMPT inhibitor APO866 decreased neutrophil NAD(P)/H levels in a dose- and time-dependent manner but without a concomitant change in cell viability. NAMPT inhibition did not affect the expression of a number of cell-surface receptors involved in adhesion and opsono-phagocytosis, but the respiratory burst was decreased significantly. Whereas opsono-phagocytosis of Staphylococcus aureus was unaffected by NAMPT inhibition, intraphagosomal oxidant production was decreased. However, the killing efficiency of neutrophils was unaffected. These data indicate that therapeutic NAMPT inhibition is unlikely to have deleterious effects on host protection against infections, in spite of this ability to down-regulate neutrophil respiratory burst activity significantly.

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

4.5
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