4.6 Article

Degranulation patterns of eosinophil granulocytes as determinants of eosinophil driven disease

期刊

THORAX
卷 56, 期 5, 页码 341-344

出版社

BRITISH MED JOURNAL PUBL GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/thorax.56.5.341

关键词

eosinophils; degranulation; allergy; airway pathology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background-Degranulation of eosinophils in target tissues is considered a key pathogenic event in major chronic eosinophilic diseases. However, because of a lack of appropriate methods, little is known about degranulation of eosinophils in common eosinophilic diseases. Methods-Using transmission electron microscopic (TEM) analysis, a novel approach has been devised and validated to quantify eosinophil degranulation in human tissues (assessed in individual cells as percentage granules with structural signs of protein release). Biopsy specimens from patients with inflammatory bowel disease, allergic rhinitis, asthma, and nasal polyposis were evaluated. Results-All conditions displayed a similar degree of local tissue eosinophilia, with no differences being observed in eosinophil numbers in the airway mucosa of patients with airway diseases and the colonic mucosa of those with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). m contrast, marked differences in the mean (SE) extent of eosinophil degranulation were observed between the patient groups; IBD 9.3 (1.4)% altered granules, artificial and natural allergen challenge induced allergic rhinitis 67.8 (6.8)% and 86.6 (3.0)%, respectively, asthma 18.1 (2)%, and nasal polyposis 46.6 (7.6)%. Conclusions-This study provides the first quantitative data which show that different eosinophilic conditions, despite having similar numbers of tissue eosinophils, may exhibit markedly different degranulation patterns. The present assessment of piece-meal degranulation would thus make it possible to delineate the conditions under which eosinophils are likely to contribute to disease processes. This novel type of analysis may also guide and validate antieosinophilic treatment options.

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