4.6 Article

Immunohistochemical detection of myeloperoxidase and its oxidation products in Kupffer cells of human liver

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
卷 159, 期 6, 页码 2081-2088

出版社

AMER SOC INVESTIGATIVE PATHOLOGY, INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)63059-3

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL64344, R01 HL064344] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [AG15012] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK56341, P30 DK056341] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oxidative damage to tissue proteins has been implicated in the pathogenesis of liver disease, but the mechanisms that promote oxidation in vivo are unclear. Hydrogen peroxide is transformed into an array of potentially damaging reactants by the heme protein myeloperoxidase. This proinflammatory enzyme is expressed by circulating neutrophils and monocytes but is generally thought to be absent from tissue macrophages. To determine whether myeloperoxidase is present in Kupffer cells, the fixed-tissue macrophages of liver, Western blot analysis, and immunohistochemistry were performed. Two different antibodies monospecific for myeloperoxidase Identified a 60-kd protein, the predicted molecular mass of myeloperoxidase, in human liver extracts. Immunostaining detected the enzyme in sinusoidal lining cells of normal and diseased human livers. Immunofluorescence confacal microscopy demonstrated co-localization of myeloperoxidase and CD68, a monocyte/macrophage marker, in sinusoidal lining cells. Numerous myeloperoxidase-expressing cells were also evident in the fibrous septa of cirrhotic livers. Immunostaining with an antibody to proteins modified by hypochlorous, acid, a characteristic product of the enzyme, indicated that myeloperoxidase is enzymatically active in cases of acute liver injury and cirrhosis. These findings identify myeloperoxidase as a component of human Kupffer cells. Oxidative damage resulting from the action of myeloperoxidase may contribute to acute liver injury and hepatic fibrogenesis.

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