4.6 Article

Molecular and Cellular Profiling of Scalp Psoriasis Reveals Differences and Similarities Compared to Skin Psoriasis

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148450

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program [UL1 TR000043]
  2. Plan Propio de movilidad para investigadores del Instituto Maimonides de Investigacion Biomedica de Cordoba [PP13/009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Scalp psoriasis shows a variable clinical spectrum and in many cases poses a great therapeutic challenge. However, it remains unknown whether the immune response of scalp psoriasis differs from understood pathomechanisms of psoriasis in other skin areas. We sought to determine the cellular and molecular phenotype of scalp psoriasis by performing a comparative analysis of scalp and skin using lesional and nonlesional samples from 20 Caucasian subjects with untreated moderate to severe psoriasis and significant scalp involvement and 10 control subjects without psoriasis. Our results suggest that even in the scalp, psoriasis is a disease of the inter-follicular skin. The immune mechanisms that mediate scalp psoriasis were found to be similar to those involved in skin psoriasis. However, the magnitude of dysregulation, number of differentially expressed genes, and enrichment of the psoriatic genomic fingerprint were more prominent in skin lesions. Furthermore, the scalp transcriptome showed increased modulation of several gene-sets, particularly those induced by interferon-gamma, compared with that of skin psoriasis, which was mainly associated with activation of TNF alpha/L-17/IL-22-induced keratinocyte response genes. We also detected differences in expression of gene-sets involving negative regulation, epigenetic regulation, epidermal differentiation, and dendritic cell or Th1/Th17/Th22-related T-cell processes.

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