4.5 Article

Interleukin-6 is essential for Staphylococcal exotoxin B-induced T regulatory cell insufficiency in nasal polyps

期刊

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ALLERGY
卷 39, 期 6, 页码 829-837

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2009.03218.x

关键词

cytokine; nasal polyps; Staphylococcal aureus; T regulatory cells

资金

  1. National Natural Science Fund [30572025, 30700935]
  2. Natural Science Fund of Jiangsu Province [BK2007610]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The pathogenesis of nasal polyps is still unclear. There is increasing evidence indicating that Staphylococcal aureus (S. aureus) is associated with the formation of nasal polyps, but the mechanism has not been well documented to date. We stimulated cultured nasal polyps and turbinate tissues with Staphylococcal exotoxin B (SEB), detected the expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-2, IL-6, and IL-8) and T cell cytokines (IFN-gamma, IL-4, IL-5, IL-10, and IL-17) in the supernatants, and evaluated mRNA expression (T-bet, GATA-3, Foxp3, and ROR gamma t) and frequencies of CD4(+)CD25(+) T regulatory cells (Tregs) in nasal tissues. We also evaluated the effects of blocking IL-6 with monoclonal antibodies to T cell profiles in cultured nasal tissues stimulated by SEB. Levels of IL-6, IFN-gamma and IL-4 increased significantly in SEB-stimulated nasal polyps. Meanwhile, mRNA expressions of T-bet and GATA-3 were significantly up-regulated, while Foxp3 was inhibited and the frequencies of CD4(+)CD25(+) Tregs were decreased after SEB stimulation. After blocking IL-6, the levels of IL-10 and Foxp3 mRNA, as well as the frequencies of CD4(+)CD25(+) Tregs, were significantly increased, while IFN-gamma and IL-4 production and the mRNA expression of T-bet and GATA-3 were significantly inhibited. SEB is able to modulate pro-inflammatory factors, T-helper type 1/Th2 profiles and suppress Treg activity in cultured nasal polyps, which were rescued by blocking IL-6 activity. Therefore, IL-6 is essential for SEB-induced Treg insufficiency in nasal polyps.

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