4.6 Article

Divergent effects of platelet-endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1 and β3 integrin blockade on leukocyte transmigration in vivo

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 165, 期 1, 页码 426-434

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.165.1.426

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The final stage in the migration of leukocytes to sites of inflammation involves movement of leukocytes through the endothelial cell layer and the perivascular basement membrane. Both platelet-endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1 (PECAM-1/CD31) and the integrin alpha(v)beta(3) have been implicated in this process, and in vitro studies have identified alpha(v)beta(3) as a heterotypic ligand for PECAM-1. In the present study we have addressed the roles of these molecules by investigating and comparing the effects of PECAM-1 and alpha(v)beta(3) blockade on leukocyte migration in vivo. For this purpose we have examined the effects of neutralizing Abs directed against PECAM-1 (domain 1-specific, mAb 37) and beta(3) integrins (mAbs 7E3 and F11) on leukocyte responses in the mesenteric microcirculation of anesthetized rats using intravital microscopy. The anti-PECAM-1 mAb suppressed leukocyte extravasation, but not leukocyte rolling or firm adhesion, elicited by IL-1 beta in a dose-dependent manner (e.g., 67% inhibition at 10 mg/kg 37 Fab), but had no effect on FMLP-induced leukocyte responses. Analysis by electron microscopy suggested that this suppression was due to an inhibition of neutrophil migration through the endothelial cell barrier, By contrast, both anti-beta(3) integrin mAbs, 7E3 F(ab')(2) (5 mg/kg) and F11 F(ab')(2) (5 mg/kg), selectively reduced leukocyte extravasation induced by FMLP (38 and 46%, respectively), but neither mAb had an effect on IL-1 beta-induced leukocyte responses. These Endings indicate roles for both PECAM-1 and beta(3) integrins in leukocyte extravasation, but do not support the concept that these molecules act as counter-receptors in mediating leukocyte transmigration.

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