4.6 Article

Monocyte mRNA phenotype and adverse outcomes from pediatric multiple organ dysfunction syndrome

期刊

PEDIATRIC RESEARCH
卷 62, 期 5, 页码 597-603

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1203/PDR.0b013e3181559774

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [K08 HL085525-01, R01 HL076278, R01 HL40871] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NICHD NIH HHS [K12 HD43372-03] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Impairment of the ability to mount an inflammatory response is associated with death from adult critical illness. This phenomenon, characterized by reduced monocyte production of proinflammatory mediators such as tumor necrosis factor a (TNF-alpha), is poorly understood in children. We hypothesized that differential expression of inflammation-related genes would be seen in monocytes from children with adverse outcomes from multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS). Ex viva lipopolysaccharide (LPS)induced TNF-a production and plasma cytokines were prospectively measured biweekly in children with dysfunction of two or more organs. Concomitantly, monocyte expression of 28 pro- and anti-inflammatory genes [cytokines, Toll-like receptor (TLR)/nuclear factor kappa B (NF-kappa B) signaling pathway members, inflammasome elements] was measured. Thirty children (22 survivors, eight nonsurvivors) were evaluated. High mRNA levels for interleukin (IL)-10, IL-1 receptor-associated kinase (IRAK-M), and the putative inflammasome inhibitor pyrin were associated with death (p <= 0.02). Plasma IL-10 levels were higher and ex vivo TNF-a production was lower in nonsurvivors (p < 0.05). Among survivors, high mRNA levels for IL-10, IRAK-M, pyrin, IRAK1, or TLR4 were associated with longer durations of pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) stay and mechanical ventilation (p <= 0.02). These data suggest that adverse outcomes from pediatric MODS are associated with an anti-inflammatory monocyte mRNA phenotype. Future studies are warranted to explore mechanisms of immunodepression in pediatric critical illness.

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