4.6 Article

Recruited Exudative Macrophages Selectively Produce CXCL10 Following Noninfectious Lung Injury

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1165/rcmb.2010-0471OC

关键词

macrophage; bleomycin; pulmonary fibrosis; CXCR3; CXCL10

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 HL77291-02, T32 HL007538-23]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The chemokine, CXCL10, and its cognate receptor, CXCR3, are important mediators of the pathobiology of lung fibrosis. Macrophages are a known source of CXCL10, but their specific source in the lung is poorly defined due to incomplete characterization of macrophage subpopulations. We recently developed a novel flow cytometric approach that discriminates resident alveolar macrophages from recruited exudative macrophages (ExMacs) after infectious lung injury. We hypothesized that ExMacs are present after noninfectious lung injury with bleomycin, and are a source of CXCL10. We found that ExMacs are recruited to the lung after injury, peaking at Day 7, then maintained through Day 28. ExMac recruitment was significantly reduced, but not abolished, in CCR2 null mice. ExMacs, but not alveolar macrophages, produce CXCL10, both constitutively and after stimulation with hyaluronan (HA) fragments. Interestingly, ExMac stimulation with LPS resulted in complete suppression of CXCL10. In contrast, ExMacs produced TNF-alpha and CXCL2/MIP-2 (Macrophage Inflammatory Protein-2) after stimulation with both HA and LPS. ExMacs were present in CXCR3 null mice after bleomycin, but produced minimal CXCL10. This impairment was overcome by administration of exogenous IFN-gamma or IFN-gamma with HA. Collectively, these data suggest that ExMacs are recruited and maintained in the lung after noninfectious lung injury, are a source of a variety of cytokines, but importantly, are essential for the production of antifibrotic CXCL10. Understanding the contribution of ExMacs to the pathobiology of lung injury and repair could lead to new treatment options for fibrosing lung diseases.

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