4.6 Article

Pseudomonas lipopolysaccharide accelerates wound repair via activation of a novel epithelial cell signaling cascade

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 177, 期 12, 页码 8693-8700

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.177.12.8693

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The surface of the airway epithelium represents a battleground in which the host intercepts signals from pathogens and activates epithelial defenses to combat infection. Wound repair is an essential function of the airway epithelium in response to injury in chronic airway diseases, and inhaled pathogens such as Pseudomonas bacteria are implicated in the pathobiology of several of these diseases. Because epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) activation stimulates wound repair and because LPS activates EGFR, we hypothesized that LPS accelerates wound repair via a surface signaling cascade that causes EGFR phosphorylation. In scrape wounds of NCI-H292 human airway epithelial cells, high concentrations of LPS were toxic and decreased wound repair. However, lower concentrations of LPS accelerated wound repair. This effect was inhibited by treatment with a selective inhibitor of EGFR phosphorylation (AG 1478) and by an EGFR neutralizing Ab. Metalloprotease inhibitors and TNF-alpha-converting enzyme (TACE) small interfering RNA inhibited wound repair, implicating TACE. Additional studies implicated TGF-alpha as the active EGFR ligand cleaved by TACE during wound repair. Reactive oxygen species scavengers, NADPH oxidase inhibitors, and importantly small interfering RNA of dual oxidase 1 inhibited LPS-induced wound repair. Inhibitors of protein kinase C isoforms alpha beta and a TLR-4 neutralizing Ab also inhibited LPS-induced wound repair. Normal human bronchial epithelial cells responded similarly. Thus, LPS accelerates wound repair in airway epithelial cells via a novel TLR-4-protein kinase C alpha beta -> dual oxidase 1 -> reactive oxygen species -> TACE -> TGF-alpha -> EGFR phosphorylation pathway.

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