BACKGROUND: Gene expression profiling has the potential to produce new insights into complex biologic systems. To test the value of complement DNA arrays in identifying pathways involved in organ transplant rejection, we examined the gene expression profiles of rat heart allografts from recipients treated with or without immunosuppression to prevent acute allograft rejection. METHODS: Heterotopic heart transplantation was performed using ACI or Lewis donors and Lewis recipients. Recipients were treated with tacrolimus (Tac) or cyclosporine (CsA) at the equivalent effective doses, and graft hearts were harvested on days 3, 5, and 7. A commercial microarray was used to measure gene expression levels of 588 genes in day 5 grafts. Selected genes were analyzed by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: The expression levels of 118 genes were perturbed in the untreated allograft in comparison with the isograft control, of which 77 genes were categorized as candidate genes for Tac- or CsA-mediated immunosuppression or both, and 41 as genes associated with other pathways. Among the 77 candidate genes, 55 genes shared the same response to suppression by both drugs, including inducible nitric oxide synthase, interferon-gamma, and interferon regulatory factor 1. Drug-specific effects were observed in 22 genes: Fourteen genes were exclusively reversed by Tac and eight by CsA. CONCLUSIONS: Gene expression profiling reveals a large variety of genes affected during acute rejection, indicating that multiple metabolic pathways, including immune and nonimmune responses, are involved in the local graft rejection events. The differences and similarities of the gene expression profiles relative to the two immunosuppressants may provide more detailed therapeutic approaches for optimal immunosuppression.
BACKGROUND: Gene expression profiling has the potential to produce new insights into complex biologic systems. To test the value of complement DNA arrays in identifying pathways involved in organ transplant rejection, we examined the gene expression profiles of rat heart allografts from recipients treated with or without immunosuppression to prevent acute allograft rejection. METHODS: Heterotopic heart transplantation was performed using ACI or Lewis donors and Lewis recipients. Recipients were treated with tacrolimus (Tac) or cyclosporine (CsA) at the equivalent effective doses, and graft hearts were harvested on days 3, 5, and 7. A commercial microarray was used to measure gene expression levels of 588 genes in day 5 grafts. Selected genes were analyzed by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: The expression levels of 118 genes were perturbed in the untreated allograft in comparison with the isograft control, of which 77 genes were categorized as candidate genes for Tac- or CsA-mediated immunosuppression or both, and 41 as genes associated with other pathways. Among the 77 candidate genes, 55 genes shared the same response to suppression by both drugs, including inducible nitric oxide synthase, interferon-gamma, and interferon regulatory factor 1. Drug-specific effects were observed in 22 genes: Fourteen genes were exclusively reversed by Tac and eight by CsA. CONCLUSIONS: Gene expression profiling reveals a large variety of genes affected during acute rejection, indicating that multiple metabolic pathways, including immune and nonimmune responses, are involved in the local graft rejection events. The differences and similarities of the gene expression profiles relative to the two immunosuppressants may provide more detailed therapeutic approaches for optimal immunosuppression.
Authors: John K Bellos; Despina N Perrea; Eleni Theodoropoulou; Ioannis Vlachos; Antonis Papachristodoulou; Alkiviadis I Kostakis Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2010-10-19 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Tara L Spivey; Lorenzo Uccellini; Maria Libera Ascierto; Gabriele Zoppoli; Valeria De Giorgi; Lucia Gemma Delogu; Alyson M Engle; Jaime M Thomas; Ena Wang; Francesco M Marincola; Davide Bedognetti Journal: J Transl Med Date: 2011-10-12 Impact factor: 5.531
Authors: Galyna Bondar; Martin Cadeiras; Nicholas Wisniewski; Jetrina Maque; Jay Chittoor; Eleanor Chang; Maral Bakir; Charlotte Starling; Khurram Shahzad; Peipei Ping; Elaine Reed; Mario Deng Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-12-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: I Rebollo-Mesa; E Nova-Lamperti; P Mobillo; M Runglall; S Christakoudi; S Norris; N Smallcombe; Y Kamra; R Hilton; S Bhandari; R Baker; D Berglund; S Carr; D Game; S Griffin; P A Kalra; R Lewis; P B Mark; S Marks; I Macphee; W McKane; M G Mohaupt; R Pararajasingam; S P Kon; D Serón; M D Sinha; B Tucker; O Viklický; R I Lechler; G M Lord; M P Hernandez-Fuentes Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2016-08-08 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Bayram Edemir; Sunil M Kurian; Martin Eisenacher; Detlef Lang; Carsten Müller-Tidow; Gert Gabriëls; Daniel R Salomon; Eberhard Schlatter Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2008-02-08 Impact factor: 3.969
Authors: Katherine J Deans; Peter C Minneci; Hao Chen; Steven J Kern; Carolea Logun; Sara Alsaaty; Kelly J Norsworthy; Stephanie M Theel; Joel D Sennesh; Jennifer J Barb; Peter J Munson; Robert L Danner; Michael A Solomon Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2009-06-24 Impact factor: 3.969