4.5 Article

Glutamine attenuates tumor necrosis factor-alpha release and enhances heat shock protein 72 in human peripheral blood mononuclear cells

期刊

NUTRITION
卷 19, 期 1, 页码 1-6

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0899-9007(02)00839-0

关键词

cytokine; amino acid; inflammation; sepsis; endotoxin; lipopolysaccharide; stress proteins; glutamine

资金

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [R01DK038510, R01DK047722, R37DK047722, P30DK042086] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK38510, DK47722, DK-42086] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES: Overexpression of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) can contribute to multiple organ dysfunction syndrome and septic shock in critically ill patients. We previously found that glutamine (GLN) can attenuate cytokine expression, induce heat shock protein 72 (HSP 72), and protect against endotoxin-induced mortality and organ injury in an in vivo rat model. However, data on the effect of GLN on direct attenuation of cytokine release and HSP 72 expression in human peripheral blood polymorphonuclear cells (PBMCs) is lacking. METHODS: In-this study, we assessed-the effect of GLN on TNF-alpha and HSP 72 expression in human PBMCs. After treating with various doses of GLN, human PBMCs were stimulated with lipopolysaccharide(LPS). TNF-alpha, release, was analyzed via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and HSP 72 via western blot. RESULTS: GLN at doses greater than 4 mM decreased TNF-alpha release at 4 and 24 h after LPS stimulation. Sublethal heating of PBMCs before LPS also markedly decreased TNF-alpha after LPS. Doses of GLN greater than 2 to 4 mM led to an increase in HSP 72 expression after LPS. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that GLN, which may improve outcomes in critically ill patients, can-directly attenuate pro-inflammatory cytokine release in PBMCs. This effect may be related to enhanced HSP 72 expression. (C) Elsevier Science Inc. 2003.

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

4.5
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