4.4 Article

Essential role of platelet-activating factor in control of Leishmania (Leishmania) amazonensis infection

期刊

INFECTION AND IMMUNITY
卷 68, 期 11, 页码 6355-6361

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/IAI.68.11.6355-6361.2000

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present study we investigated the role of platelet-activating factor (PAF) and prostaglandins in experimental Leishmania (Leishmania) amazonensis infection and the relationship between these mediators and nitric oxide (NO) production. Mouse peritoneal macrophages elicited with thioglicolate were infected with leishmania amastigotes, and the infection index determined 48 h later. The course of infection was monitored for 5 weeks in mice infected in the footpad with promastigotes by measuring the footpad swelling and parasite load in regional lymph nodes and spleen. The addition of PAF to C57BL/6 mouse macrophages significantly inhibited parasite growth and induced NO production. Treatment of macrophages with a selective PAF antagonist, WEB2086, increased the infection, indicating that endogenously produced PAF regulates macrophage ability to control leishmania infection. This effect of PAF was abolished by addition of the inhibitor of NO synthesis, L-NAME, to the cultures. The addition of prostaglandin E, significantly increased the infection and NO production. Treatment with cyclo-oxygenase inhibitor, indomethacin, reduced the infection and PAF-induced release of NO. Thus, the increased NO production induced by PAF seems to be mediated by prostaglandins. The more-selective inhibitors of cyclo-oxygenase 2, nimesulide and NS-398, had no significant effect. Thus, antileishmanial activity correlates better with the presence of PAF or absence of prostaglandins than with NO production. In vivo treatment with PAF antagonists significantly increased leishmania lesions, as well as the parasite load, in regional lymph nodes and spleens. These findings indicate that PAF is essential for the control of leishmania 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

4.4
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