4.7 Article

Immature mouse dendritic cells enter inflamed tissue, a process that requires E- and P-selectin, but not P-selectin glycoprotein ligand 1

期刊

BLOOD
卷 99, 期 3, 页码 946-956

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood.V99.3.946

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inflammatory processes are associated with the rapid migration of dendritic cells (DCs) to regional lymph nodes and depletion of these potent antigen-presenting cells (APCs) from the Inflamed tissue. This study examined whether sites of cutaneous Inflammation can be repopulated with DCs from a pool of Immature DCs circulating In the blood. In adoptive transfer experiments with ex vivo-generated radioactively labeled primary bone marrow-derived DCs Injected into mice challenged by an allergic contact dermatitus reaction, Immature DCs were actively recruited from the blood to sites of cutaneous Inflammation, whereas mature DCs were not. Immature, but not mature, DCs were able to adhere specifically to immobilized recombinant E- and P-selectin under static as well as under flow conditions. P-selectin-dependent adhesion of immature DCs correlates with their higher level of expression of the carbohydrate epitope cutaneous lymphocyte-associated antigen (CLA) and is blocked by a novel Inhibitory antibody against mouse P-selectin glycoprotein ligand 1 (PSGL-1). Surprisingly, however, emigration of Immature DCs Into Inflamed skin is retained In the presence of this anti-PSGL-1 antibody and is also normal when immature DCs are generated from fucosyltransferase (Fuc-T) Fuc-TVII-deficient mice. By contrast, emigration of wild-type Immature DCs Is reduced by adhesion-blocking anti-E- and P-selectin antibodies, and immature DCs generated ex vivo from Fue-TVII/Fuc-TIV double-deficient mice emigrate poorly. Thus, fucosylated ligands of the endothelial selectins, determined in part by Fuc-TIV, and Independent of PSGIL-1, are required for extravasation of DCs into sites of cutaneous inflammation. (C) 2002 by The American Society of Hematology.

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