4.6 Article

Delayed Sequelae of Neonatal Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection Are Dependent on Cells of the Innate Immune System

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 88, 期 1, 页码 604-611

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.02620-13

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust, United Kingdom [071381/Z/03/Z]
  2. Medical Research Council, United Kingdom [G1001763]
  3. Medical Research Council [G1001763, G1000758] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. Asthma UK [MRC-AsthmaUKCentre] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. MRC [G1001763] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Infection with respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in neonatal mice leads to exacerbated disease if mice are reinfected with the same virus as adults. Both T cells and the host major histocompatibility complex genotype contribute to this phenomenon, but the part played by innate immunity has not been defined. Since macrophages and natural killer (NK) cells play key roles in regulating inflammation during RSV infection of adult mice, we studied the role of these cells in exacerbated inflammation following neonatal RSV sensitization/adult reinfection. Compared to mice undergoing primary infection as adults, neonatally sensitized mice showed enhanced airway fluid levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), alpha interferon (IFN-alpha), CXCL1 (keratinocyte chemoattractant/KC), and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) at 12 to 24 h after reinfection and IL-4, IL-5, IFN-gamma, and CCL11 (eotaxin) at day 4 after reinfection. Weight loss during reinfection was accompanied by an initial influx of NK cells and granulocytes into the airways and lungs, followed by T cells. NK cell depletion during reinfection attenuated weight loss but did not alter T cell responses. Depletion of alveolar macrophages with inhaled clodronate liposomes reduced both NK and T cell numbers and attenuated weight loss. These findings indicate a hitherto unappreciated role for the innate immune response in governing the pathogenic recall responses to RSV infection.

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