4.7 Article

Expression of toll-like receptor 4 is down-regulated during progression of cervical neoplasia

期刊

CANCER IMMUNOLOGY IMMUNOTHERAPY
卷 59, 期 7, 页码 1021-1028

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00262-010-0825-1

关键词

Toll-like receptor 4; Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; Cervical cancer; P16INK4A

资金

  1. Ph.D. Program Foundation of Ministry of Education of China [20090171110029]
  2. Yuexiu Science and Technology Bureau of Guangzhou, China [2005-WS-001, 2008-WS-003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chronic infection and inflammation are among the most important factors contributing to cancer development and growth. Toll-like receptors (TLRs) are important families of pattern recognition receptors, which recognize conserved components of microbes and trigger the immune response against invading microorganisms. TLR4 is the signaling receptor for lipopolysaccharide (LPS), the endotoxic component of Gram-negative bacteria. Recent studies demonstrate that TLRs are expressed in some tumor cells, and that the expression of TLRs in these cells is associated with tumorigenesis. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is a key stage in the development of cervical cancer and human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is an essential factor in cervical carcinogenesis. As the cervix is in constant contact with bacteria, especially Gram-negative bacteria, we hypothesize that TLR4-mediated bacterial stimulation may be involved in the tumorigenesis of cervical cancer. In the present study, the expression and distribution of TLR4 in CIN and cervical squamous carcinoma were investigated by immunohistochemistry. To our surprise, we observed a decrease in the expression of TLR4 during the progression of cervical neoplasia and this down-regulation of TLR4 appeared to be associated with the expression of P-16INK4A; which is a crucial marker of HPV integration into host cells. These data offer further insight regarding the association of HPV infection and TLR signaling during the carcinogenesis of cervical cancer.

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