4.7 Article

Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis Is Mediated by Myeloid C-C Chemokine Receptor 2

期刊

JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE DERMATOLOGY
卷 139, 期 10, 页码 2134-+

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jid.2019.03.1145

关键词

-

资金

  1. Veterans Administration Merit Award [I01BX001958]
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01DK102085, UL1TR001120, R01DK-079996, R01DK78971]
  3. Dialysis Clinic Inc.
  4. Qatar National Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gadolinium-based contrast agents are implicated in several pathologic abnormalities (long-term retention in vital organs such as the skin and the brain) and are the cause of a sometimes fatal condition in patients, nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. Bone marrow-derived fibrocytes and the monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 inflammatory pathway have been implicated as mediators of the adverse effects induced by gadolinium-based contrast agents. Mechanistic studies are scant; therefore, a mouse model of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis was established. Dermal cellularity was increased in contrast-treated green fluorescent protein (GFP) chimeric mice. GFP in the skin and fibrosis were increased in the contrast-treated chimeric animals. Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 and C-C chemokine receptor 2 were increased in the tissues from contrast-treated mice. C-C chemokine receptor 2-deficient recipients of GFP-expressing marrow had an abrogation of gadolinium-induced pathology and displayed less GFP-positive cells in the skin. Wild-type animals that received C-C chemokine receptor 2-deficient bone marrow had a complete abrogation of dermal pathology. That GFP levels and expression increase in the skin, in tandem with a fibrocyte marker, supports the blood-borne circulating fibrocyte hypothesis of the disease. As of now, fibrocyte trafficking has yet to be demonstrated. Importantly, our data demonstrate that the monocyte chemoattractant protein-1/C-C chemokine receptor 2 axis plays a critical role in the pathogenesis of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis.

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