4.5 Article

Meprin A impairs epithelial barrier function, enhances monocyte migration, and cleaves the tight junction protein occludin

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-RENAL PHYSIOLOGY
卷 305, 期 5, 页码 F714-F726

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajprenal.00179.2012

关键词

tight junction proteins; Madin-Darby canine kidney cells; knockout mice; metalloproteinase

资金

  1. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases [DK-19691]
  2. Carlino Gift Fund of Penn State Hershey

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Meprin metalloproteases are highly expressed at the luminal interface of the intestine and kidney and in certain leukocytes. Meprins cleave a variety of substrates in vitro, including extracellular matrix proteins, adherens junction proteins, and cytokines, and have been implicated in a number of inflammatory diseases. The linkage between results in vitro and pathogenesis, however, has not been elucidated. The present study aimed to determine whether meprins are determinative factors in disrupting the barrier function of the epithelium. Active meprin A or meprin B applied to Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cell monolayers increased permeability to fluorescein isothiocyanate-dextran and disrupted immunostaining of the tight junction protein occludin but not claudin-4. Meprin A, but not meprin B, cleaved occludin in MDCK monolayers. Experiments with recombinant occludin demonstrated that meprin A cleaves the protein between Gly(100) and Ser(101) on the first extracellular loop. In vivo experiments demonstrated that meprin A infused into the mouse bladder increased the epithelium permeability to sodium fluorescein. Furthermore, monocytes from meprin knockout mice on a C57BL/6 background were less able to migrate through an MDCK monolayer than monocytes from their wild-type counterparts. These results demonstrate the capability of meprin A to disrupt epithelial barriers and implicate occludin as one of the important targets of meprin A that may modulate 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