4.5 Article

Human Neutrophils Will Crawl Upstream on ICAM-1 If Mac-1 Is Blocked

期刊

BIOPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 117, 期 8, 页码 1393-1404

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2019.08.044

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of General Medical Sciences [NIH GM123019, GM133060]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The recruitment of neutrophils to sites of inflammatory insult is a hallmark of the innate immune response. Neutrophil recruitment is regulated by a multistep process that includes cell rolling, activation, adhesion, and transmigration through the endothelium commonly referred to as the leukocyte adhesion cascade. After selectin-mediated braking, neutrophils migrate along the activated vascular endothelium on which ligands, including intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1), are expressed. Previous studies have shown that two cells that commonly home from blood vessel to tissue-T cells and hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells-use the integrin lymphocyte functional antigen-1 (LFA-1) to migrate against the direction of shear flow once adherent on ICAM-1 surfaces. Like T cells and hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells, neutrophils express LFA-1, but they also express macrophage-1 antigen (Mac-1), which binds to ICAM-1. Previous reports have shown that neutrophils will not migrate against the direction of flow on ICAM-1, but we hypothesized this was due to the influence of Mac-1. Here, we report that both the HL-60 neutrophil-like cell line and primary human neutrophils can migrate against the direction of fluid flow on ICAM-1 surfaces via LFA-1 if Mac-1 is blocked; otherwise, they migrate downstream. We demonstrate this both on ICAM-1 surfaces and on activated endothelium. In sum, both LFA-1 and Mac-1 binding ICAM-1 play a critical role in determining the direction of neutrophil migration along the endothelium, and their interaction may play an important role in controlling neutrophil trafficking during 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

4.5
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