4.6 Article

Circulating Monocytes Exhibit an Endotoxin Tolerance Status after Acute Ischemic Stroke: Mitochondrial DNA as a Putative Explanation for Poststroke Infections

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 198, 期 5, 页码 2038-2046

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1601594

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fondo de Investigacion Sanitaria/Instituto de Salud Carlos III [PI13/01512, PI14/01234, PIE15/00065]
  2. Fondos FEDER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) suffer from infections associated with mortality. The relevance of the innate immune system, and monocytes in particular, has emerged as an important factor in the evolution of these infections. The study enrolled 14 patients with AIS, without previous treatment, and 10 healthy controls. In the present study, we show that monocytes from patients with AIS exhibit a refractory state or endotoxin tolerance. The patients were unable to orchestrate an inflammatory response against LPS and expressed three factors reported to control the evolution of human monocytes into a refractory state: IL-1Rassociated kinase-M, NFkB2/p100, and hypoxia-inducible factor-1 alpha. The levels of circulating mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in patients with AIS correlated with impaired inflammatory response of isolated monocytes. Interestingly, the patients could be classified into two groups: those who were infected and those who were not, according to circulating mtDNA levels. This finding was validated in an independent cohort of 23 patients with AIS. Additionally, monocytes from healthy controls, cultured in the presence of both sera from patients and mtDNA, reproduced a refractory state after endotoxin challenge. This effect was negated by either a TLR9 antagonist or DNase treatment. The present data further extend our understanding of endotoxin tolerance implications in AIS. A putative role of mtDNA as a new biomarker of stroke-associated infections, and thus a clinical target for preventing poststroke infection, has also been identified.

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

4.6
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