4.4 Article

HIV-1 infected immune competent mononuclear phagocytes influence the pathways to neuronal demise

期刊

NEUROTOXICITY RESEARCH
卷 3, 期 5, 页码 461-484

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/BF03033204

关键词

Human Immunodeficiency Virus; NMDA; NMDA Receptor; Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type; Neuronal Apoptosis

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [P01 NS31492-01, R01 NS34239-01, 501 NS34239-02, R01 NS36126-01, P01MH57556-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Secretory products from HIV-1-infected immune-competent mononuclear phagocytes (MP) damage neuronal dendritic arbor (Zheng et al., 2001). The mechanism behind neuronal injury and whether it is species and/or viral strain dependent is not fully understood. To these ends, we investigated whether HIV-1-infected and lipopolysachharide (LPS)-activated MDM elicit neuronal injury in primary human neurons. Neuronal damage was compared to that seen in rat neurons. Utilizing a spectrum of HIV-1 strains to infect human monocyte-derived macrophages (MDM), productive viral replication proved necessary, but not sufficient, for neuronal injury. Neuronal demise was induced by virion-free HIV-1-infected and immune-activated MDM culture supernatants. Maximal alterations in glutamate mediated neuronal signaling, resulted from exposure to secretory products from HIV-1-infected and immune-activated MDM. Apoptosis was the predominant mechanism of cell death induced by HIV-1-infected and LPS-treated MDM. Importantly, neuronal injury and increases in calcium influx mediated by HIV-1-infected and immune-activated MDM culture supernatants was partially blocked by the N-methyl D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist, MK 801. These data support a primary role for immune-activation in MP neurotoxic activities. The upregulation of NMDA receptor sensitive soluble factors and neuronal apoptosis by HIV-1-infected and immune-activated MDM provide unique insights into links between soluble factors, produced as a consequence of MP immunity, and neuronal demise in HAD.

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