4.7 Article

The chemokine receptors CCR2 and CX3CR1 mediate monocyte/macrophage trafficking in kidney ischemia-reperfusion injury

期刊

KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL
卷 74, 期 12, 页码 1526-1537

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1038/ki.2008.500

关键词

innate immunity; acute kidney injury; inflammation; chemokines; trafficking

资金

  1. NIH [RO1DK56223, RO1DK62324, RO1 HL070065, R01 CA78400, R21 AI059996]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chemokines and their receptors such as CCR2 and CX3CR1 mediate leukocyte adhesion and migration into injured tissue. To further define mechanisms of monocyte trafficking during kidney injury we identified two groups of F4/80positive cells (F4/80(low) and F4/80(high)) in the normal mouse kidney that phenotypically correspond to macrophages and dendritic cells, respectively. Following ischemia and 3 h of reperfusion, there was a large influx of F4/80(low) inflamed monocytes, but not dendritic cells, into the kidney. These monocytes produced TNF-alpha a, IL-6, IL-1 alpha and IL-12. Ischemic injury induced in CCR2(-/-) mice or in CCR2(+/+) mice, made chimeric with CCR2(-/-) bone marrow, resulted in lower plasma creatinine levels and their kidneys had fewer infiltrated F4/80(low) macrophages compared to control mice. CX3CR1 expression contributed to monocyte recruitment into inflamed kidneys, as ischemic injury in CX3CR1(-/-) mice was reduced, with fewer F4/80(low) macrophages than controls. Monocytes transferred from CCR2(+/+) or CX3CR1(+/-) mice migrated into reperfused kidneys better than monocytes from either CCR2(-/-) or CX3CR1(-/-) mice. Adoptive transfer of monocytes from CCR2(+/+) mice, but not CCR2(-/-) mice, reversed the protective effect in CCR2(-/-) mice following ischemia-reperfusion. Egress of CD11b(+) Ly6C(high) monocytes from blood into inflamed kidneys was CCR2- and CX3CR1-dependent. Our study shows that inflamed monocyte migration, through CCR2- and CX3CR1- dependent mechanisms, plays a critical role in kidney injury following ischemia reperfusion.

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