4.6 Article

Silencing IFN-γ Binding/Signaling in Astrocytes versus Microglia Leads to Opposite Effects on Central Nervous System Autoimmunity

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 194, 期 9, 页码 4251-4264

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1303321

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Multiple Sclerosis Society
  2. National Institutes of Health
  3. Groff Foundation
  4. Chinese National Natural Science Foundation [81100888]
  5. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China [GK261001027]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

IFN-gamma, the hallmark cytokine of Th1 cells, plays an important role in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), an animal model of multiple sclerosis. Thus far, the role of IFN-gamma in EAE has been largely studied through its effects on immune cells, whereas much less is known about its effects on CNS cells, especially in vivo. In this study, we dissected the in vivo effects and mechanisms of IFN-gamma binding/signaling in astrocytes and microglia, and found that IFN-gamma signaling in these cell types has opposite effects in EAE pathogenesis. Silencing IFN-gamma binding/signaling in astrocytes alleviated EAE, whereas in microglia, and likely in some infiltrating macrophages, it increased disease severity. Silencing IFN-gamma signaling in astrocytes resulted in diminished expression of chemokines and fewer inflammatory cells infiltrating into the CNS, whereas blocking IFN-gamma binding/signaling in microglia, probably infiltrating macrophages as well, increased disease severity through augmented activation and proliferation of microglia. Further, blocking IFN-gamma binding/signaling in astrocytes alleviated both Th1- and Th17-mediated adoptive EAE, indicating an important role for IFN-gamma signaling in astrocytes in autoimmune CNS inflammation. Thus, our study defines novel mechanisms of action of IFN-gamma in EAE pathogenesis, and also highlights an opportunity for development of multiple sclerosis therapies directed at CNS cells.

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