4.6 Article

Plasmodium falciparum-infected erythrocytes adhere both in the intervillous pace and on the villous surface of human placenta by binding to the low-sulfated chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan receptor

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
卷 164, 期 6, 页码 2013-2025

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)63761-3

关键词

-

资金

  1. FIC NIH HHS [5D42TW01264, D43 TW001264] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI045086, R21 AI045086, AI43888, AI45086, U01 AI043888] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In pregnant women infected with Plasmodium falciparum, the parasite-infected red blood cells (IRBCs) sequester in the placenta through chondroitin 4-sulfate (C4S)-mediated adherence. The pattern of IRBC adherence in P. falciparum-infected placenta has been controversial. Moreover, the identity of the chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan (CSPG) receptor, that mediates IRBC adherence, and its location in the placenta have not been established. This study, using immunohistochemical techniques, clearly shows, for the first time, that the low-sulfated CSPGs of the placenta are localized predominantly in the intervillous space. Ex vivo IRBC adherence analyses demonstrate that the IRBCs are adhered to the CSPG receptors in the placenta in a C4S-dependent manner. This IRBC binding pattern was similar to that observed in P. falciparum-infected placentas. These data and the results of dual-fluorescence staining of the endogenous RBCs and syncytiotrophoblasts, and co-localization of CSPG and HIBC adherence unequivocally establish that the low-sulfated CSPGs are the major natural receptors for IRBC adherence in the placenta. Further, it was found that IRBCs adhere mainly in the intervillous space and also at significant levels to the syncytiotrophoblasts. Finally, the ex vivo IRBC adherence method described herein provides a reliable procedure for future studies for the assessment of the efficacy of C4S inhibitors and adhesion inhibitory antibodies.

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