4.7 Article

Differential expression of oestrogen receptors in human secondary lymphoid tissues

期刊

JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
卷 208, 期 3, 页码 408-414

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/path.1883

关键词

oestrogen receptor; autoimmune disease; tonsil; spleen; germinal centre; lymphoma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many autoimmune diseases including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Sjogren's syndrome (SS) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) occur much more frequently in women than in men. There is much evidence that oestrogen is the major cause of this gender difference. Interestingly, oestrogen relieves the symptoms of RA and SS but it exacerbates SLE. This contradictory effect of oestrogen on autoimmune diseases is not well understood. Most of the effects of oestrogen are mediated by two receptors: oestrogen receptor alpha and beta (ER alpha and ER beta). To determine whether these contradictory effects of oestrogen relate to the involvement of distinct effects of the two ERs, we investigated expression of ERa and ER beta in human secondary lymphoid tissues. We observed that, in tonsils, ER beta is expressed in lymphocytes of germinal centres (GC) and the follicular mantle zone as well as in granulocytes, while ER alpha is expressed only in activated germinal centres but not in the follicular zone. ER beta is the predominant ER in human leucocytes from peripheral blood, spleen and in leucocytes infiltrating cancers in both males and females. In addition, in different human lymphoma cell lines including Hodgkin lymphoma, Burkitt lymphoma, and multiple myeloma, ER beta is abundant while ER alpha is not detectable. Our results indicate that ER beta is the predominant type of ER in mature lymphocytes. We suggest that ER alpha and ER beta have distinct roles in secondary lymphoid tissues and that further studies with ER beta-specific agonists will help to elucidate the role of ER beta in these tissues. Copyright (c) 2005 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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