4.5 Article

'Danger' effect of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and oxidized LDL on human immature dendritic cells

期刊

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL IMMUNOLOGY
卷 149, 期 3, 页码 543-552

出版社

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2249.2007.03444.x

关键词

danger; dendritic cells; inflammation; LDL; oxLDL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dendritic cell (DC) maturation may accelerate autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis, and may contribute to accelerated atherosclerosis seen in these patients. The immune system responds to both exogenous and endogenous 'dangerous' signals that can induce dendritic cell maturation. We have found that autologous plasma contains danger signals that induce up-regulation of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II and co-stimulatory molecules in immature DCs (iDCs). The objective of this study was to determine whether low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and/or oxidized LDL (oxLDL) constitute danger signals, and to assess the effect of exposure to LDL and oxLDL following monocyte differentiation into iDCs in lipoprotein-deficient serum (LPDS). IDCs were generated in the presence of autologous plasma or LPDS. Expression of maturation and migration molecules was evaluated using flow cytometry, and morphology was assessed by light microscopy. Pro- or anti-apoptotic effect was determined using annexin V and propidium iodide binding. Phagocytosis of apoptotic cells was evaluated using autologous plasma or LPDS. LDL and oxLDL were clearly able to slightly up-regulate levels of HLA-DR and co-stimulatory molecule CD86. High oxLDL concentrations (50-100 mu g/ml) were associated with expression of additional maturation molecules. Moreover, iDCs that were prepared in LPDS showed partial maturation following exposure to LDL and oxLDL, and improved tolerogenic apoptotic cell uptake. This study suggests that oxLDL, and to some extent LDL, are at least partly responsible for the iDC 'danger' response induced by autologous plasma.

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