4.6 Article

Influences of Chloride and Hypochlorite on Neutrophil Extracellular Trap Formation

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 7, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042984

关键词

-

资金

  1. UCSD Pediatric Pulmonary Medicine Fellowship Program
  2. NIH [AI077780, AI090863]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The release by neutrophils of DNA-based extracellular traps (NETs) is a recently recognized innate immune phenomenon that contributes significantly to control of bacterial pathogens at tissue foci of infection. NETs have also been implicated in the pathogenesis of non-infectious diseases such as small vessel vasculitis, lupus and cystic fibrosis lung disease. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are important mediators of NET generation (NETosis). Neutrophils with reduced ROS production, such as those from patients with chronic granulomatous disease or myeloperoxidase (MPO) deficiency, produce fewer NETs in response to inflammatory stimuli. To better understand the roles of various ROS in NETosis, we explore the role of MPO, its substrates chloride ion (Cl-) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and its product hypochlorite (HOCl) in NETosis. Findings: In human peripheral blood neutrophils, pharmacologic inhibition of MPO decreased NETosis. Absence of extracellular Cl-, a substrate for MPO, also reduced NETosis. While exogenous addition of H2O2 and HOCl stimulated NETosis, only exogenous HOCl could rescue NETosis in the setting of MPO inhibition. Neither pharmacological inhibition nor genetic deletion of MPO in murine neutrophils blocked NETosis, in contrast to findings in human neutrophils. Conclusions: Our results pinpoint HOCl as the key ROS involved in human NETosis. This finding has implications for understanding innate immune function in diseases in which Cl- homeostasis is disturbed, such as cystic fibrosis. Our results also reveal an example of significant species-specific differences in NET phenotypes, and the need for caution in extrapolation to humans from studies of murine NETosis.

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