4.6 Article

Carbon monoxide down-modulates Toll-like receptor 4/MD2 expression on innate immune cells and reduces endotoxic shock susceptibility

期刊

IMMUNOLOGY
卷 144, 期 2, 页码 321-332

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/imm.12375

关键词

carbon monoxide; haem-oxygenase 1; lipopolysaccharide; septic shock; Toll-like receptor 4

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Carbon monoxide (CO) has been recently reported as the main anti-inflammatory mediator of the haem-degrading enzyme haem-oxygenase 1 (HO-1). It has been shown that either HO-1 induction or CO treatment reduces the ability of monocytes to respond to inflammatory stimuli, such as lipopolysaccharide (LPS), due to an inhibition of the signalling pathways leading to nuclear factor-B, mitogen-activated protein kinases and interferon regulatory factor 3 activation. Hence, it has been suggested that CO impairs the stimulation of the Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4)/myeloid differentiation factor-2 (MD2) complex located on the surface of immune cells. However, whether CO can negatively modulate the surface expression of the TLR4/MD2 complex in immune cells remains unknown. Here we report that either HO-1 induction or treatment with CO decreases the surface expression of TLR4/MD2 in dendritic cells (DC) and neutrophils. In addition, in a septic shock model of mice intraperitoneally injected with lipopolysaccharide (LPS), prophylactic treatment with CO protected animals from hypothermia, weight loss, mobility loss and death. Further, mice pre-treated with CO and challenged with LPS showed reduced recruitment of DC and neutrophils to peripheral blood, suggesting that this gas causes a systemic tolerance to endotoxin challenge. No differences in the amount of innate cells in lymphoid tissues were observed in CO-treated mice. Our results suggest that CO treatment reduces the expression of the TLR4/MD2 complex on the surface of myeloid cells, which renders them resistant to LPS priming in vitro, as well as in vivo in a model of endotoxic shock.

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