4.0 Review

Complex Regulation and Function of the Inflammatory Smooth Muscle Cell Phenotype in Atherosclerosis

期刊

JOURNAL OF VASCULAR RESEARCH
卷 47, 期 2, 页码 168-180

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000250095

关键词

Atherosclerosis; Inflammation; Matrix; Smooth muscle; VCAM-1

资金

  1. NIH [HL081682, HL082836, HL080956]
  2. American Heart Association Scientist Development Grant
  3. University of Virginia Funds for Excellence in Science and Technology
  4. Cardiovascular Division Partners' Fund Award
  5. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [R01HL082836, R01HL080956, R01HL081682] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vascular smooth muscle cell (SMC) phenotypic modulation plays a key role in atherosclerosis and is classically defined as a switch from a 'contractile' phenotype to a 'synthetic' phenotype, whereby genes that define the contractile SMC phenotype are suppressed and proliferation and/or migratory mechanisms are induced. There is also evidence that SMCs may take on a 'proinflammatory' phenotype, whereby SMCs secrete cytokines and express cell adhesion molecules, e. g. IL-8, IL-6, and VCAM-1, respectively, which may functionally regulate monocyte and macrophage adhesion and other processes during atherosclerosis. Factors that drive the inflammatory phenotype are not limited to cytokines but also include hemodynamic forces imposed on the blood vessel wall and intimate interaction of endothelial cells with SMCs, as well as changes in matrix composition in the vessel wall. However, it is critical to recognize that our understanding of the complex interaction of these multiple signal inputs has only recently begun to shed light on mechanisms that regulate the inflammatory SMC phenotype, primarily through models that attempt to recreate this environment ex vivo. The goal of this review is to summarize our current knowledge in this area and identify some of the key unresolved challenges and questions requiring further study. Copyright (C) 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel

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

4.0
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