4.6 Article

Inducible nitric oxide synthase-deficient mice show exacerbated inflammatory process and high production of both Th1 and Th2 cytokines during paracoccidioidomycosis

期刊

MICROBES AND INFECTION
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 123-132

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.micinf.2008.10.015

关键词

iNOS; Nitric oxide; Granuloma; Paracoccidioides brasiliensis; Immunosuppression

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)
  2. Joao Santana da Silva
  3. Fundacao de Amparo, a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Paracoccidioidomycosis, the major systemic mycosis in Latin America, is caused by fungus Paracoccidioides brasiliensis. To analyze the influence of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) in this disease, iNOS-deficient (iNOS(-/-)) and wild-type (WT) mice were infected intravenously with P. brasiliensis 18 isolate. We found that, unlike WT mice, iNOS(-/-) mice did not control fungal proliferation, and began to succumb to infection by day 50 after inoculation of yeast cells. Typical inflammatory granulomas were found in WT mice, while, iNOS(-/-) mice presented incipient granulomas with intense inflammatory process and necrosis. Additionally, splenocytes from iNOS(-/-) mice did not produce nitric oxide, however, their proliferative response to Con-A was impaired, just like infected WT mice. Moreover, infected iNOS(-/-) mice presented a mixed pattern of immune response, releasing high levels of both Th1 (IL-12, IFN-gamma and TNF-alpha) and Th2 (IL-4 and IL-10) cytokines. These data suggest that the enzyme iNOS is a resistance factor during paracoccidioidomycosis by controlling fungal proliferation, by influencing cytokines production, and by appeasing the development of a high inflammatory response and consequently formation of necrosis. However, iNOS-derived nitric oxide seems not being the unique factor responsible for immunosuppression observed in infections caused by P. brasiliensis. (c) 2008 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

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