4.7 Article

Interleukin-33 Drives a Proinflammatory Endothelial Activation That Selectively Targets Nonquiescent Cells

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.112.253427

关键词

endothelial; IL-33; inflammation; quiescence; ST2

资金

  1. Helse Sor-Ost [2008139, 2007044]
  2. Norwegian Cancer Society [PK01-2006-0448, PK01-2007-0199]
  3. Research Council of Norway [133924/300, 204784/V40]
  4. University of Oslo [131406]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective-Interleukin (IL)-33 is a nuclear protein that is released from stressed or damaged cells to act as an alarmin. We investigated the effects of IL-33 on endothelial cells, using the prototype IL-1 family member, IL-1 beta, as a reference. Methods and Results-Human umbilical vein endothelial cells were stimulated with IL-33 or IL-1 beta, showing highly similar phosphorylation of signaling molecules, induction of adhesion molecules, and transcription profiles. However, intradermally injected IL-33 elicited significantly less proinflammatory endothelial activation when compared with IL-1 beta and led us to observe that quiescent endothelial cells (ppRb(low)p27(high)) were strikingly resistant to IL-33. Accordingly, the IL-33 receptor was preferentially expressed in nonquiescent cells of low-density cultures, corresponding to selective induction of adhesion molecules and chemokines. Multiparameter phosphoflow cytometry confirmed that signaling driven by IL-33 was stronger in nonquiescent cells. Manipulation of nuclear IL-33 expression by siRNA or adenoviral transduction revealed no functional link between nuclear, endogenous IL-33, and exogenous IL-33 responsiveness. Conclusion-In contrast to other inflammatory cytokines, IL-33 selectively targets nonquiescent endothelial cells. By this novel concept, quiescent cells may remain nonresponsive to a proinflammatory stimulus that concomitantly triggers a powerful response in cells that have been released from contact inhibition. (Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2013;33:e47-55.)

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