4.7 Article

An L-selectin ligand distinct from P-selectin glycoprotein ligand-1 is expressed on endothelial cells and promotes neutrophil rolling in inflammation

期刊

BLOOD
卷 112, 期 13, 页码 4915-4923

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2008-04-153866

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Japan
  3. Japan Chemical Industry Association (JCIA)
  4. National Institutes of Health [CA105001, CA96547, AI56363]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neutrophils recruited from the blood are key players in the innate immune response. Selectins play critical roles in neutrophil recruitment by mediating their tethering and rolling in inflamed venules. While the roles of P- and E-selectin in this process are well established, the mechanisms of L-selectin-mediated neutrophil recruitment remain elusive. One proposal is that tethering is mediated by L-selectin on flowing neutrophils interacting with P- selectin glycoprotein ligand-1 (PSGL-1) on adherent neutrophils. To clarify whether L-selectin-mediated neutrophil recruitment depends entirely on PSGL-1, we examined the impact of L-selectin deficiency in mice with a PSGL-1 deficient background. L-selectin and PSGL-1 double-knockout mice exhibited a higher increase in their peripheral blood neutrophil count and a worse defect in neutrophil recruitment into the inflamed peritoneum than PSGL-1-deficient mice. Intravital microscopy of inflamed cremaster muscle venules showed that L-selectin deficiency or antibody blockade of L-selectin reduced the residual leukocyte rolling in PSGL-1-deficient mice. Flow cytometric analyses showed that the endothelial cells from the cremaster muscle bound L-selectin in a PSGL-1-independent manner. These results provide evidence for the existence of an L-selectin ligand distinct from PSGL-1 in inflammation and indicate that such a ligand is expressed on endothelial cells, promoting neutrophil rolling in vivo. (Blood. 2008;112:4915-4923)

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

4.7
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