4.6 Article

Identification of high and low responders to lipopolysaccharide in normal subjects: An unbiased approach to identify modulators of innate immunity

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 175, 期 4, 页码 2570-2578

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.175.4.2570

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [1 P50 HL073996-01] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [U54 AI057141] Funding Source: Medline
  3. PHS HHS [K23 62-9063] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

LPS stimulates a vigorous inflammatory response from circulating leukocytes that varies greatly from individual to individual. The goal of this study was to use an unbiased approach to identify differences in gene expression that may account for the high degree of interindividual variability in inflammatory responses to LPS in the normal human population. We measured LPS-induced cytokine production ex vivo in whole blood from 102 healthy human subjects and identified individuals who consistently showed either very high or very low responses to LPS (denoted lps(high), and lp(10w), respectively). Comparison of gene expression profiles between the lps(high) and lps,., individuals revealed 80 genes that were differentially expressed in the presence of LPS and 21 genes that were differentially expressed in the absence of LPS (p < 0.005, ANOVA). Expression of a subset of these genes was confirmed using real-time RT-PCR. Functional relevance for one gene confirmed to be expressed at a higher level in lps(high), adipophilin, was inferred when reduction in adipophilin mRNA by small interfering RNA in the human monocyte-like cell line THP-1 resulted in a modest but significant reduction in LPS-induced MCP-1 mRNA expression. These data illustrate a novel approach to the identification of factors that determine interindividual variability in innate immune inflammatory responses and identify adipophilin as a novel potential regulator of LPS-induced MCP-1 production in human monocytes.

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