3.8 Article

CXCR3+ T cells in multiple sclerosis correlate with reduced diversity of the gut microbiome

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtauto.2019.100032

关键词

Microbiome; Multiple sclerosis; Autoimmunity; CXCR3; Th1

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [U19 AI089992, R25 NS079193, P01 AI073748, U24 AI11867, R01 AI22220, UM 1HG009390, P01 AI039671, P50 CA121974, R01 CA227473]
  2. National Multiple Sclerosis Society (NMSS) [CA 1061-A-18, RG-1802-30153]
  3. Nancy Taylor Foundation for Chronic Diseases
  4. Race to Erase MS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a genetically mediated autoimmune disease characterized by inflammation in the central nervous system (CNS). Disease onset is thought to occur when autoreactive T cells orchestrate a cascade of events in the CNS resulting in white and grey matter inflammation and axonal degeneration. It is unclear what triggers the activation of CNS-reactive T cells and their polarization into inflammatory subsets. Mounting evidence from animal and human studies supports the hypothesis that the gut microbiome affects MS pathogenesis. We investigated the association between the gut microbiome and inflammatory T cell subsets in relapsingremitting MS patients and healthy controls. Gut microbiome composition was characterized by sequencing the V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene from fecal DNA, and inflammatory T cell subsets were characterized by flow cytometry. We identified an altered gut microbiome in MS patients, including decreased abundance of Coprococcus, Clostridium, and an unidentified Ruminococcaceae genus. Among circulating immune cells, patients had increased expression of CXCR3 in both CD4 and CD8 T cells, and both CD4(+) CXCR3(+) and CD8(+) CXCR3(+) populations expressing the gut-homing alpha 4 beta 7 integrin receptor were increased. Finally, we show that alpha diversity inversely correlated with a CXCR3(+) Th1 phenotype in MS. These findings indicate the presence of an aberrant gutimmune axis in patients with MS.

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

3.8
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