4.6 Article

Modulation of macrophage cytokine production by ES-62, a secreted product of the filarial nematode Acanthocheilonema viteae

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 167, 期 2, 页码 940-945

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.167.2.940

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Parasite survival and host health may depend on the ability of the parasite to modulate the host immune response by the release of immunomodulatory molecules. Excretory-secretory (ES)-62, one such well-defined molecule, is a major secreted protein of the rodent filarial nematode Acanthocheilonema viteae, and has homologues in human filarial nematodes. Previously we have-shown that ES-62 is exclusively associated with a Th2 Ab response in mice. Here we provide a rationale for this polarized immune response by showing that the parasite molecule suppresses the IFN-gamma /LPS -induced production, by macrophages, of bioactive IL-12 (p70), a key cytokine in the development of Th1 responses. This suppression of the induction of a component of the host immune response extends to the production of the proinflammatory cytokines IL-6 and TNF-alpha, but not NO. The molecular mechanism underlying these findings awaits elucidation but, intriguingly, the initial response of macrophages to ES-62 is to demonstrate a low and transient release of these cytokines before becoming refractory to further release induced by IFN-gamma /LPS. The relevance of our observations is underscored by the finding that macrophages recovered from mice exposed to physiological levels of ES-62 by the novel approach of continuous release from implanted osmotic pumps in vivo were similarly refractory to release of IL-12, TNF-alpha YL-6, but not NO, ex vivo. Therefore, our results suggest that exposure to ES-62 renders macrophages subsequently unable to produce Th1/proinflammatory cytokines. This likely contributes to the generation of immune responses with an antiinflammatory Th2 phenotype, a well-documented feature of filarial nematode infection.

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