4.5 Article

Association of Fibronectin With Hypogalactosylated Immunoglobulin G in Gingival Crevicular Fluid in Periodontitis

期刊

JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY
卷 81, 期 10, 页码 1472-1480

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1902/jop.2010.100053

关键词

Fibronectin; glycosylation; immunoglobulin G; periodontitis

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia [OI 156017]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Fibronectin (FN) can bind to immunoglobulins (Ig), influencing both the normal clearance and abnormal deposition of circulating immune complexes. This study focuses on the possible interaction between FN and IgG present in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) of periodontitis patients and periodontally healthy controls, with the aim to determine whether such interaction may be connected with the glycosylation profile of IgG and, thus, consequentional in accumulation of proinflammatory IgG in periodontal pockets. Methods: The study included 30 patients with initial or advanced periodontitis, and 13 periodontally healthy subjects. GCF IgG was purified and analyzed for the presence of FN and its fragments and for galactose expression. Results: IgG isolated from GCF contained FN, which was bound to the IgG heavy chains. IgG from GCF of advanced periodontitis patients contained high levels of hypogalactosylated IgG, and bound more FN than IgG from GCF of the other two groups, which contained low levels of this glycoform. FN was in a degraded form in GCF from all studied patients, and a fragment of 48- to 53-kDa molecular mass seemed to be the sole one linked to IgG. Conclusions: IgG and the FN fragment of 48 to 53 kDa in GCF of periodontitis patients and periodontally healthy subjects are physically connected. This fragment was linked to the heavy chains of IgG and the reaction seemed to be particularly intensive with IgG from advanced periodontitis, which contained significantly less galactose in its sugar chains. J Periodontol 2010;81:1472-1480.

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