4.7 Article

Critical role of Th17 cells in inflammation and neovascularization after ischaemia

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH
卷 90, 期 2, 页码 364-372

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/cvr/cvq397

关键词

Angiogenesis; Cytokines; Inflammation; Ischaemia; Leucocytes

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
  2. Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare
  3. Vehicle Racing Commemorative Foundation
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23591035, 21591238, 22021018, 22659096, 21390149] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims Increasing evidence suggests that CD4(+) T cells contribute to neovascularization in ischaemic tissue. However, the T cell subset responsible for neovascularization after ischaemia remains to be determined. Here, we investigated the role of Th17 cells secreting interleukin (IL)-17, a newly identified subset of CD4(+) T cells, in the neovascularization after murine hindlimb ischaemia. Methods and results Unilateral hindlimb ischaemia was produced in wild-type (WT) C57BL/6 mice. Depletion of CD4(+) T cells resulted in significantly reduced blood flow perfusion in the ischaemic limbs. The expression of IL-17 and retinoic acid receptor-related orphan receptor gamma t (ROR gamma t) was up-regulated in the ischaemic limbs. IL-17-deficient mice showed a significant reduction in blood flow perfusion, inflammatory cell infiltration, and production of angiogenic cytokines in the ischaemic limbs compared with WT mice. In bone marrow transplantation experiments, the absence of IL-17 specifically in bone marrow cells diminished the neovascularization after ischaemia. Furthermore, IL-17-deficient CD4(+) T cells transferred into the ischaemic limbs of T cell-deficient athymic nude mice evoked a significantly limited neovascularization compared with WT CD4(+) T cells. Conclusion These findings identify Th17 cells as a new angiogenic T cell subset and provide new insight into the mechanism by which T cells promote neovascularization after ischaemia.

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