4.7 Article

Necroptosis Is Active in Children With Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Contributes to Heighten Intestinal Inflammation

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 109, 期 2, 页码 279-287

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2013.403

关键词

-

资金

  1. Sapienza University of Rome [C26A10MHR]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES: A new caspase-independent mode of programmed cell death, termed necroptosis, has recently been identified. Altered expression of molecules involved in the necroptosis pathway has been shown to trigger intestinal inflammation. The initiation of necroptosis is principally mediated by the release of receptor interacting protein 3 (RIP3) from suppression by caspase-8. Furthermore, it has been suggested that the mixed lineage kinase domain-like (MLKL) factor is an interacting target of RIP3 in active necroptosis. This study aims at investigating the occurrence of necroptosis in children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and its contribution to human intestinal inflammation. METHODS: Biopsy samples were collected from the ileum and colon of 33 children with Crohn's disease, 30 with ulcerative colitis, and 20 healthy controls. Ten children with allergic colitis (AC) were used as non-IBD comparators. RIP3, caspase-8, and MLKL protein expression levels were evaluated by western blotting. The adenocarcinoma cell line HT29 was used for in vitro experiments. RESULTS: RIP3 and MLKL increased (P<0.01) in inflamed tissues of IBD and AC patients, whereas caspase-8 was reduced. No variations were observed in uninflamed tissues of patients. The relationship between RIP3 increase, active necroptosis, and intestinal inflammation was confirmed by in vitro analyses. CONCLUSIONS: We show for the first time that necroptosis is strongly associated with intestinal inflammation in children with IBD and contributes to strengthen the inflammatory process. We believe that RIP3 and MLKL could represent attractive targets for the management of human IBD.

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

4.7
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