4.7 Article

Fibroblast foci are not discrete sites of lung injury or repair - The fibroblast reticulum

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.200602-205OC

关键词

fibroblast foci; fibroblast reticulum; idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; usual interstitial pneumonia

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL67671] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP), the pathologic correlate of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, contains characteristic discrete areas of fibroblasts, myofibroblasts, and newly formed collagen, termed fibroblast foci. These lesions are argued to represent isolated sites of recurrent acute lung injury and suggested to be the mechanism of disease progression. We hypothesized that, rather than isolated, these lesions are part of an organized neoplasm. Methods: Morphometric analysis of pentachrome-stained histologic sections of UIP was performed. Using point-counting technique on serial sections, fibroblast foci, arteries, and macrophage clusters were identified and we determined their individual connectiveness by estimating the Euler number. Two-dimensional micrographs were collated into a three-dimensional array from which a visual three-dimensional reconstruction could be constructed. Clonality analysis was performed using human androgen receptor gene methylation assay. Results: Blood vessels show significant connectivity with a Euler number of 2, whereas macrophage clusters exhibited no connectivity. The fibroblast foci showed a high level of interconnection with Euler numbers ranging from 19 to 39. The computer generated three-dimensional models provide a visual confirmation of this connectiveness. Human androgen receptor gene methylation assay analysis of the foci showed balanced methylation consistent with polyclonality. Conclusions: The fibroblast foci of UIP are the leading edge of a complex reticulum that is highly interconnected and extends from the pleura into the underlying parenchyma. It is a reactive, rather than a malignant, process.

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

4.7
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