4.5 Article

A model of chronic inflammation and pulmonary emphysema after multiple ozone exposures in mice

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajplung.00252.2010

关键词

airway inflammation; neutrophils; caspase-3; oxidative stress

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust [083905]
  2. Medical Research Council [G0801056B] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Triantaphyllopoulos K, Hussain F, Pinart M, Zhang M, Li F, Adcock I, Kirkham P, Zhu J, Chung KF. A model of chronic inflammation and pulmonary emphysema after multiple ozone exposures in mice. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 300: L691-L700, 2011. First published February 25, 2011; doi:10.1152/ajplung.00252.2010.-Oxidative stress plays a role in the pathophysiology of emphysema through the activation of tissue proteases and apoptosis. We examined the effects of ozone exposure by exposing BALB/c mice to either a single 3-h exposure or multiple exposures over 3 or 6 wk, with two 3-h exposures per week. Compared with air-exposed mice, the increase in neutrophils in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and lung inflammation index was greatest in mice exposed for 3 and 6 wk. Lung volumes were increased in 3- and 6-wk-exposed mice but not in single-exposed. Alveolar space and mean linear intercept were increased in 6- but not 3-wk-exposed mice. Caspase-3 and apoptosis protease activating factor-1 immunoreactivity was increased in the airway and alveolar epithelium and macrophages of 3- and 6-wk-exposed mice. Interleukin-13, keratinocyte chemoattractant, caspase-3, and IFN-gamma mRNA were increased in the 6-wk-exposed group, but heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) mRNA decreased. matrix metalloproteinase-12 (MMP-12) and caspase-3 protein expression increased in lungs of 6-wk-exposed mice. Collagen area increased and epithelial area decreased in airway wall at 3- and 6-wk exposure. Exposure of mice to ozone for 6 wk induced a chronic inflammatory process, with alveolar enlargement and damage linked to epithelial apoptosis and increased protease expression.

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