4.7 Article

Syndecan-1 Attenuates Lung Injury during Influenza Infection by Potentiating c-Met Signaling to Suppress Epithelial Apoptosis

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201509-1878OC

关键词

influenza; lung injury; syndecan-1; proteoglycan; c-Met

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [HL120947, HL103868, HL089455]
  2. American Heart Association
  3. Cystic Fibrosis Foundation
  4. Cystic Fibrosis Research Translation Center [NIH P30 DK089507]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale: Syndecan-1 is a cell surface heparan sulfate proteoglycan primarily expressed in the lung epithelium. Because the influenza virus is tropic to the airway epithelium, we investigated the role of syndecan-1 in influenza infection. Objectives: To determine the mechanism by which syndecan-1 regulates the lung mucosal response to influenza infection. Methods: Wild-type (WT) and Sdc1(-/-) mice were infected with a H1N1 virus (PR8) as an experimental model of influenza infection. Human and murine airway epithelial cell cultures were also infected with PR8 to study the mechanism by which syndecan-1 regulates the inflammatory response. Measurement and Main Results: We found worsened outcomes and lung injury in Sdc1(-/-) mice compared with WT mice after influenza infection. Our data demonstrated that syndecan-1 suppresses bronchial epithelial apoptosis during influenza infection to limit widespread lung inflammation. Furthermore, we determined that syndecan-1 attenuated apoptosis by crosstalking with c-Met to potentiate its cytoprotective signals in airway epithelial cells during influenza infection. Conclusions: Our work shows that cell-associated syndecan-1 has an important role in regulating lung injury. Our findings demonstrate a novel mechanism in which cell membrane-associated syndecan-1 regulates the innate immune response to influenza infection by facilitating cytoprotective signals through c-Met signaling to limit bronchial epithelial apoptosis, thereby attenuating lung injury and inflammation.

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

4.7
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