| Literature DB >> 35572554 |
Hui-Bo Du1,2,3, Sun-Ban Jiang1, Zhen-Ao Zhao1,2,3, Hong Zhang1,2,3, Li-Min Zhang1,2,3, Zhao Wang1, Ya-Xiong Guo1,2,3, Jia-Yi Zhai1, Peng Wang1, Zi-Gang Zhao1,2,3, Chun-Yu Niu2,3,4, Li-Na Jiang1,2,3.
Abstract
Purpose: Post hemorrhagic shock mesenteric lymph (PHSML) return contributes to CD4+ T cell dysfunction, which leads to immune dysfunction and uncontrolled inflammatory response. Tumor necrosis factor α induced protein 8 like-2 (TIPE2) is one of the essential proteins to maintain the immune homeostasis. This study investigated the role of TIPE2 in regulation of CD4+ T lymphocyte function in interaction of PHSML and TLR2/TLR4.Entities:
Keywords: CD4+ T lymphocyte; hemorrhagic shock; immune dysfunction; mesenteric lymph; tumor necrosis factor α induced protein 8 like-2
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35572554 PMCID: PMC9101470 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.838618
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 8.786
Primers for reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction.
| Genes | Primers | Accessionnumber |
|---|---|---|
| TIPE2 | F:5’-CGATTTCGTCAGAAGCTACG -3’ | NM_027206 |
| TLR4 | F:5’-CCTGTGGACAAGGTCAGCAACTC-3’ | NM_021297 |
| TLR2 | F: 5’-GACTCTTCACTTAAGCGAGTCT-3’ | NM_011905 |
Figure 1PHSML increased the expression level of TIPE2, TLR2 or TLR4 in CD4+T derived from WT mice. (A) The mRNA expressions of TIPE2 in CD4+T lymphocytes following stimulation with PHSML. (B) The protein expressions of TIPE2 in CD4+T lymphocytes following stimulation with PHSML. Compared to the Control group, PHSML increased the level of TIPE2. (C) The mRNA expressions of TLR2 in CD4+T lymphocytes following stimulating of PHSML. (D) The protein expressions of TLR2 in CD4+T lymphocytes following stimulating of PHSML. (E) The mRNA expressions of TLR4 in CD4+T lymphocytes following stimulating of PHSML. (F) The protein expressions of TLR4 in CD4+T lymphocytes following stimulating of PHSML. Compared to the NML group, PHSML increased the level of TLR2 and TLR4. Data are presented as mean ± SE (n = 3). *P < 0.05 vs control and NML groups.
Figure 2Role of TLR2/TLR4 Mediated TIPE2 in the proliferation of WT CD4+T lymphocytes reduced by PHSML. (A) The effect of TIPE2 expression on the proliferation of CD4+T cells induced by PHSML in vitro. (B) The effect of TLR2/TLR4 expression on the proliferation of CD4+T cells induced by PHSML in vitro. (C) The effect of TIPE2 and TLR2 expression on the proliferation of CD4+T cells induced by PHSML in vitro. (D) The effect of TIPE2 and TLR4 expression on the proliferation of CD4+T cells induced by PHSML in vitro. Data expressed as the mean ± SE (n = 6). *P < 0.05 vs control treated control group, #P < 0.05 vs NML treated control group, ΔP < 0.05 vs PHSML treated control group, φP < 0.05 vs NML treated WT CD4+T group, σP < 0.05 vs PHSML treated WT CD4+T group.
Figure 3The expression of CD25 on CD4+T lymphocytes from WT mice infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML detected by flow cytometry. (A) Representative images. (B) The percentage of CD4+T cells expressing CD25 is expressed as the mean ± SE and is shown in a bar graph. Data are derived from three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 vs control treated control group, ΔP < 0.05 vs PHSML treated control group.
Figure 4The expression of CD25 on CD4+T lymphocytes from WT, TLR2-/- or TLR4-/- mice stimulated with PHSML detected by flow cytometry. (A) Representative images. (B) The percentage of CD4+T cells expressing CD25 is expressed as the mean ± SE and is shown in a bar graph. Data are derived from three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 vs control treated WT CD4+T group, #P < 0.05 vs NML treated WT CD4+T group, ΔP < 0.05 vs PHSML treated WT CD4+T group.
Figure 5The expression of CD25 on TLR2-/- CD4+T lymphocytes infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML detected by flow cytometry. (A) Representative images. (B) The percentage of CD4+T cells expressing CD25 is expressed as the mean ± SE and is shown in a bar graph. Data are derived from three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 vs control treated control group, ΔP < 0.05 vs PHSML treated control group.
Figure 6The expression of CD25 on TLR4-/- CD4+T lymphocytes infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML detected by flow cytometry. (A) Representative images. (B) The percentage of CD4+T cells expressing CD25 is expressed as the mean ± SE and is shown in a bar graph. Data are derived from three independent experiments. *P < 0.05 vs control treated control group, #P < 0.05 vs PHSML treated control group.
Figure 7The changes of IFN-γ production in CD4+T cells isolated from various mice. (A) The production of IFN-γ in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from WT mice infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation of PHSML detected by ELISA; (B) The production of IFN-γ in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from TLR2-/- mice infected withTIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML detected by ELISA; (C) The production of IFN-γ in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from TLR4-/- mice infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML detected by ELISA; (D) The production of IFN-γ in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from WT, TLR2-/- or TLR4-/- mice stimulated with PHSML detected by ELISA, respectively. Data are expressed as the mean ± SE (n = 6). *P < 0.05 vs control treated control group, #P < 0.05 vs NML treated control group, ΔP < 0.05 vs PHSML treated control group, φP < 0.05 vs NML treated WT CD4+T group, σP < 0.05 vs PHSML treated WT CD4+T group.
Figure 8The changes of IL-4 production in CD4+T cells isolated from various mice. (A) The production of IL-4 in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from WT mice infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML detected by ELISA; (B) The production of IL-4 in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from TLR2-/- mice infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML detected by ELISA; (C) The production of IL-4 in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from TLR4-/- mice infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML detected by ELISA; (D) The production of IL-4 in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from WT, TLR2-/- or TLR4-/- mice stimulated with PHSML detected by ELISA, respectively. Data are expressed as the mean ± SE (n = 6). *P < 0.05 vs control treated control group, #P < 0.05 vs NML treated control group.
Figure 9The changes of IL-10 production in CD4+T cells isolated from various mice. (A) The production of IL-10 in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from WT mice infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML; (B) The production of IL-10 in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from TLR2-/- mice infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML detected by ELISA; (C) The production of IL-10 in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from TLR4-/- mice infected with TIPE2 shRNA following by the stimulation with PHSML detected by ELISA; (D) The production of IL-10 in cultural supernatant of CD4+T cells from WT, TLR2-/- or TLR4-/- mice stimulated with PHSML detected by ELISA, respectively. Data are expressed as the mean ± SE (n = 6). *P < 0.05 vs control treated control group, #P < 0.05 vs NML treated control group, ΔP < 0.05 vs PHSML treated control group, σP < 0.05 vs PHSML treated WT CD4+T group.