4.4 Article

Circulating and cell-bound antibodies increase coxsackievirus B4-induced production of IFN-α by peripheral blood mononuclear cells from patients with type 1 diabetes

期刊

JOURNAL OF GENERAL VIROLOGY
卷 83, 期 -, 页码 2169-2176

出版社

MICROBIOLOGY SOC
DOI: 10.1099/0022-1317-83-9-2169

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increased levels of IFN-alpha have been found in patients with type 1 diabetes who have detectable levels of coxsackievirus B4 (CVB4) RNA in their blood. The IFN-alpha-inducing activity of CVB4 in vitro is weak but can be enhanced by human IgGs. Therefore, it was investigated in vitro whether a preferential IFN-alpha response of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) to CVB4 exists in patients with type 1 diabetes (n = 56) compared with healthy subjects (n = 20) and whether antibodies play a role. In patients, the levels of IFN-alpha obtained after stimulation by PBMCs with CVB4 were higher (P = 0.008), an individual IFN-alpha response by PBMCs to CVB4 was more frequent (P = 0.0004) and increased levels of IFN-alpha were observed in CVB4-infected whole blood cultures. The IFN-alpha-inducing activity of patients plasma and IgGs mixed with CVB4 and then added to PBMCs was high in comparison with healthy subjects (P < 0.001) and was inhibited by preincubating the cells with anti-FcgammaRII, anti-FcgammaRIII and anti-CAR (coxsackievirus and adenovirus receptor) antibodies. The strong IFN-alpha responsiveness of PBMCs to CVB4 suggested that IgGs bound to the cell surface might play a role. A short 56 degreesC incubation of PBMCs from patients responsive to CVB4 generated supernatants, which, when added to cells, exhibited IFN-alpha-enhancing activity in combination with CVB4, whereas those of controls did not. Specific antibodies for FcgammaRI, FcyRII and CAR inhibited this activity. These studies demonstrate that CVB4, through interactions with circulating and/or cell-bound IgGs, can strongly induce the production of IFN-alpha by PBMCs from patients with type 1 diabetes.

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

4.4
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