4.6 Article

Fibroblast growth factor-2 drives and maintains progressive corneal neovascularization following HSV-1 infection

期刊

MUCOSAL IMMUNOLOGY
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 172-185

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/mi.2017.26

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Health [R01 EY021238, P30 EY021725]
  2. Research to Prevent Blindness
  3. Presbyterian Health Foundation
  4. NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE [P30EY021725, R01EY021238] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) infection of the cornea induces vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A)dependent lymphangiogenesis that continues to develop well beyond the resolution of infection. Inflammatory leukocytes infiltrate the cornea and have been implicated to be essential for corneal neovascularization, an important clinically relevant manifestation of stromal keratitis. Here we report that cornea infiltrating leukocytes including neutrophils and T cells do not have a significant role in corneal neovascularization past virus clearance. Antibody-mediated depletion of these cells did not impact lymphatic or blood vessel genesis. Multiple pro-angiogenic factors including IL-6, angiopoietin-2, hepatocyte growth factor, fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2), VEGF-A, and matrix metalloproteinase-9 were expressed within the cornea following virus clearance. A single bolus of dexamethasone at day 10 post infection (pi) resulted in suppression of blood vessel genesis and regression of lymphatic vessels at day 21 pi compared to control-treated mice. Whereas IL-6 neutralization had a modest impact on hemangiogenesis (days 14-21 pi) and lymphangiogenesis (day 21 pi) in a time-dependent fashion, neutralization of FGF-2 had a more pronounced effect on the suppression of neovascularization (blood and lymphatic vessels) in a time-dependent, leukocyte-independent manner. Furthermore, FGF-2 neutralization suppressed the expression of all pro-angiogenic factors measured and preserved visual acuity.

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