4.6 Article

STAT1 plays a critical role in the regulation of antimicrobial effector mechanisms, but not in the development of Th1-type responses during toxoplasmosis

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 172, 期 1, 页码 457-463

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.172.1.457

关键词

-

资金

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [R01AI042370, R01AI042334] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [AI 42370, AI 42334] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The production of IFN-gamma by T cells and the ability of this cytokine to activate the transcription factor STAT1 are implicated in the activation of antimicrobial mechanisms required for resistance to intracellular pathogens. In addition, recent studies have suggested that the ability of STAT1 to inhibit the activation of STAT4 prevents the development of Th1 responses. However, other studies suggest that STAT1 is required to enhance the expression of T-bet, a transcription factor that promotes Th1 responses. To address the role of STAT1 in resistance to T. gondii, Stat1(-/-) mice were infected with this pathogen, and their response to infection was assessed. Although Stat1(-/-) mice produced normal serum levels of IL-12 and IFN-gamma, these mice were unable to control parasite replication and rapidly succumbed to this infection. Susceptibility to toxoplasmosis was associated with an inability to up-regulate MHC expression on macrophages, defects in NO production, and the inability to up-regulate some of the IFN-inducible GTPase family of proteins, molecules associated with antitoxoplasma activity. Analysis of T cell responses revealed that STAT1 was not required for the development of a Th1 response, but was required for the infection-induced up-regulation of T-bet. Together these studies suggest that during toxoplasmosis the major role of STAT1 is not in the development of protective T cell responses, but, rather, STAT1 is important in the development of antimicrobial effector mechanisms.

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