4.8 Article

Cell-specific expression and pathway analyses reveal alterations in trauma-related human T cell and monocyte pathways

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0607028103

关键词

anergy; apoptosis; costimulatory receptors; immunosuppression; network analysis

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [U54 GM-62119, 5R01 GM-65237, U54 GM062119, R01 GM065237] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Monitoring genome-wide, cell-specific responses to human disease, although challenging, holds great promise for the future of medicine. Patients with injuries severe enough to develop multiple organ dysfunction syndrome have multiple immune derangements, including T cell apoptosis and anergy combined with depressed monocyte antigen presentation. Genome-wide expression analysis of highly enriched circulating leukocyte subpopulations, combined with cell-specific pathway analyses, offers an opportunity to discover leukocyte regulatory networks in critically injured patients. Severe injury induced significant changes in T cell (5,693 genes), monocyte (2,801 genes), and total leukocyte (3,437 genes) transcriptomes, with only 911 of these genes common to all three cell populations (12%). T cell-specific pathway analyses identified increased gene expression of several inhibitory receptors (PD-1, CD152, NRP-1, and Lag3) and concomitant decreases in stimulatory receptors (CD28, CD4, and IL-2R alpha). Functional analysis of T cells and monocytes confirmed reduced T cell proliferation and increased cell surface expression of negative signaling receptors paired with decreased monocyte costimulation ligands. Thus, genome-wide expression from highly enriched cell populations combined with knowledge-based pathway analyses leads to the identification of regulatory networks differentially expressed in injured patients. Importantly, application of cell separation, genome-wide expression, and cell-specific pathway analyses can be used to discover pathway alterations in human disease.

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

4.8
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