4.5 Article

Strain difference in susceptibility to experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis in rats correlates with TH1 and TH17-inducing cytokine profiles

期刊

MOLECULAR IMMUNOLOGY
卷 47, 期 1, 页码 141-146

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.molimm.2009.01.012

关键词

Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis; Carbonyl iron; T(H)1; T(H)17; IL-6; IL-12; IL-23

资金

  1. Serbian Ministry of Science [14506613, 143029B]
  2. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (Bonn, Germany)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Albino Oxford (AO) rats are resistant to induction of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), in contrast to susceptible Dark Agouti (DA) rats. We have previously shown that draining lymph node cells (DLNC) obtained from immunized DA rats before the onset of the clinical disease produced more interferon (IFN)-gamma and interleukin (IL)-17 (signature cytokines of T(H)1 and T(H)17 responses, respectively) compared to DLNC from AO rats. In this study, we extend our analysis to entire induction phase of EAE with the emphasis on the T(H)1 and T(H)17-inducing cytokines. As a result, we show that throughout the inductive phase of the disease DLNC of DA rats, not only expressed higher levels of IFN-gamma and IL-17, but also of T(H)1-inducing cytokine-IL-12. As for T(H)17-inducing cytokines, DLNC of DA rats expressed more mRNA for p19, specific subunit of IL-23, but the expression of transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta in both strains was similar. Interestingly, the analysis of IL-6 expression revealed striking difference: while all DA DLNC were positive for IL-6 mRNA, cells from none of AO rats expressed detectable levels of mRNA for this cytokine. Taken together, our data suggest that the differential regulation of production of T(H)1 and T(H)17 cytokines, and IL-6 in particular, during the induction phase of disease could be responsible for the discrepancy in susceptibility to EAE between these two rat strains. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.5
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