4.8 Article

A protective Langerhans cell-keratinocyte axis that is dysfunctional in photosensitivity

期刊

SCIENCE TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE
卷 10, 期 454, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aap9527

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [MSTP T32GM007739, T32AR071302-01, R01AI079178]
  2. Alliance for Lupus Research Target Identification grant
  3. Lupus Research Institute Novel Research Grant
  4. St. Giles Foundation
  5. O'Neill Foundation
  6. Barbara Volcker Center for Women and Rheumatic Diseases
  7. NIH Office of the Director grant [S10OD019986]
  8. D

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Photosensitivity, or skin sensitivity to ultraviolet radiation (UVR), is a feature of lupus erythematosus and other autoimmune and dermatologic conditions, but the mechanistic underpinnings are poorly understood. We identify a Langerhans cell (LC)-keratinocyte axis that limits UVR-induced keratinocyte apoptosis and skin injury via keratinocyte epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) stimulation. We show that the absence of LCs in Langerin-diphtheria toxin subunit A (DTA) mice leads to photosensitivity and that, in vitro, mouse and human LCs can directly protect keratinocytes from UVR-induced apoptosis. LCs express EGFR ligands and a disintegrin and metalloprotease 17 (ADAM17), the metalloprotease that activates EGFR ligands. Deletion of ADAM17 from LCs leads to photosensitivity, and UVR induces LC ADAM17 activation and generation of soluble active EGFR ligands, suggesting that LCs protect by providing activated EGFR ligands to keratinocytes. Photosensitive systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) models and human SLE skin show reduced epidermal EGFR phosphorylation and LC defects, and a topical EGFR ligand reduces photosensitivity. Together, our data establish a direct tissue-protective function for LCs, reveal a mechanistic basis for photosensitivity, and suggest EGFR stimulation as a treatment for photosensitivity in lupus erythematosus and potentially other autoimmune and dermatologic conditions.

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