4.6 Article

IL-17 and VEGF Are Necessary for Efficient Corneal Nerve Regeneration

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
卷 178, 期 3, 页码 1106-1116

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2010.12.001

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [EY018239, EY017120, EY007551]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30672287, 30772387, 81070703]
  3. Department of Veterans Affairs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The contribution of acute inflammation to sensory nerve regeneration was investigated in the murine cornea using a model of corneal abrasion that removes the stratified epithelium and subbasal nerve plexus. Abrasion induced accumulation of IL-17(+) CCR6(+) gamma delta T cells, neutrophils, and platelets in the cornea followed by full restoration of the epithelium and similar to 19% regeneration of sensory nerves within 96 hours. Mice deficient in gamma delta T cells (TCR delta(-/-)) or wild-type mice treated systemically with anti-IL-17 had > 50% reduction in leukocyte and platelet infiltration and > 50% reduction in nerve regeneration. Strategies used to prevent neutrophil and platelet accumulation (eg, wild-type mice treated with anti-Ly6G or anti-GP1b alpha antibody to deplete neutrophils or platelets) also resulted in > 50% reductions in corneal nerve density. Infiltrating neutrophils and platelets stained positively for VEGF-A, tissue levels of VEGF-A peaked coincidentally with peak tissue levels of neutrophils and platelets, depletion of neutrophils before injury reduced tissue VEGF-A levels by > 70%, and wild-type mice treated systemically with anti-VEGF-A antibody exhibited > 80% reduction in corneal nerve regeneration. Given the known trophic effects of VEGF-A for neurite growth, the results in this report demonstrate a previously unrecognized beneficial role for the gamma delta T cell-dependent inflammatory cascade involving IL-17, neutrophils, platelets, and VEGF-A in corneal nerve regeneration. (Am J Pathol 2011, 178:1106-1116; DOI: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2010.12.001)

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