4.8 Article

Peroxiredoxin family proteins are key initiators of post-ischemic inflammation in the brain

期刊

NATURE MEDICINE
卷 18, 期 6, 页码 911-+

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nm.2749

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan
  2. PRESTO from the Japan Science and Technology Agency
  3. CREST from the Japan Science and Technology Agency
  4. National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry (NCNP) [22-4]
  5. SENSHIN Research Foundation
  6. Takeda Science Foundation
  7. Uehara Memorial Foundation
  8. Mochida Memorial Foundation
  9. Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan [09156274]
  10. National Institute of Biomedical Innovation
  11. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [24117718, 21117002, 23591262, 23790545, 23659687, 23791662, 24390061] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Post-ischemic inflammation is an essential step in the progression of brain ischemia-reperfusion injury. However, the mechanism that activates infiltrating macrophages in the ischemic brain remains to be clarified. Here we demonstrate that peroxiredoxin (Prx) family proteins released extracellularly from necrotic brain cells induce expression of inflammatory cytokines including interleukin-23 in macrophages through activation of Toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2) and TLR4, thereby promoting neural cell death, even though intracellular Prxs have been shown to be neuroprotective. The extracellular release of Prxs in the ischemic core occurred 12 h after stroke onset, and neutralization of extracellular Prxs with antibodies suppressed inflammatory cytokine expression and infarct volume growth. In contrast, high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1), a well-known damage-associated molecular pattern molecule, was released before Prx and had a limited role in post-ischemic macrophage activation. We thus propose that extracellular Prxs are previously unknown danger signals in the ischemic brain and that its blocking agents are potent neuroprotective tools.

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

4.8
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