|
| ||
|
|
||
CD36 Expression (cd36 + expression)
Selected AbstractsWhen monocytes and platelets compete: The effect of platelet count on the flow cytometric measurement of monocyte CD36,CYTOMETRY, Issue 2 2010W.H. Dzik Abstract Background: Flow cytometric measurement of monocyte surface CD36 is relevant to several conditions including diabetes, cardiovascular disease, lipid disorders, platelet isoimmunization, and susceptibility to P falciparum malaria. CD36 is also strongly expressed on platelets where it is also known as platelet glycoprotein IV. Methods: Whole blood samples, containing identical monocyte concentrations, were adjusted to contain platelets ranging from 20,000/uL to 600,000/uL, were stained with fluorescent-labeled anti-CD36, and analyzed by flow cytometry. Results: CD36 median fluorescent intensity (MFI) observed on monocytes decreased as the platelet concentration in the sample increased with more than a 50% decline in monocyte MFI over the normal range of platelet values. The effect was not abolished by using larger volumes of monoclonal antibody and was observed with different clones of reagent anti-CD36. The findings were most consistent with competition by platelets for the CD36 reagent. Similar findings were observed with antibody to class I HLA. Under defined assay conditions, monocyte CD36 MFI declined with rising platelet concentration in a predictable fashion following an inverse linear relationship. Conclusions: Measurement of CD36 expression on monocytes by flow cytometry in whole blood samples is affected by the sample platelet count. When comparing the monocyte CD36 expression among different individuals, our approach can be used to adjust measured monocyte CD36 expression for the effect of the platelet concentration in the sample. Competition by platelets for monoclonal reagents may occur in other settings when whole blood assays are used and when the target antigen is strongly expressed on both platelets and leukocytes. © 2009 Clinical Cytometry Society [source] Rapid induction of peroxisome proliferator,activated receptor , expression in human monocytes by monosodium urate monohydrate crystalsARTHRITIS & RHEUMATISM, Issue 1 2003Tohru Akahoshi Objective Peroxisome proliferator,activated receptor , (PPAR,) is a member of the nuclear hormone receptor superfamily and functions as a key regulator of lipid and glucose metabolism, atherosclerosis, and inflammatory responses. This study was undertaken to evaluate the biologic role of PPAR, in self-limiting episodes of acute gouty arthritis. To do this, we investigated PPAR, expression by monosodium urate monohydrate (MSU) crystal,stimulated monocytes, and we studied the effects of PPAR, ligands on crystal-induced acute inflammation. Methods PPAR, expression by MSU crystal,stimulated human peripheral blood mononuclear cells was determined by reverse transcription,polymerase chain reaction and immunostaining. Expression of CD36 on monocytes was detected by flow cytometric analysis. The effects of PPAR, ligands on in vitro crystal-induced cytokine production and on in vivo cellular infiltration during crystal-induced acute inflammation were also investigated. Results MSU crystals rapidly and selectively induced PPAR, expression by monocytes. Gene expression was detected as early as 2 hours, and maximum expression was observed at 4 hours after stimulation. The induced PPAR, was functional, since a PPAR, ligand was able to up-regulate CD36 expression on monocytes. A natural ligand of PPAR,, 15-deoxy-,12,14 -prostaglandin J2 (15deoxy-PGJ2), significantly reduced the crystal-induced production of cytokines by monocytes. Indomethacin inhibited cytokine production only at high concentrations, and an antidiabetic thiazolidinedione (troglitazone) failed to exert significant effects. Administration of troglitazone and 15deoxy-PGJ2 significantly prevented cellular accumulation in a mouse air-pouch model of MSU crystal,induced acute inflammation. Conclusion Rapid induction of PPAR, expression on monocytes by MSU crystals may contribute, at least in part, to the spontaneous resolution of acute attacks of gout. [source] Phenotyping of epidermal dendritic cells allows the differentiation between extrinsic and intrinsic forms of atopic dermatitisBRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, Issue 6 2000T. Oppel Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a clinically characteristic, chronic inflammatory skin disease of unknown origin. IgE-mediated uptake and antigen focusing of environmental allergens by dendritic cells (DCs) is assumed to be a central immunopathogenetic event. A so-called intrinsic type of AD (IAD) has been delineated from the more common extrinsic AD (EAD) by normal serum IgE levels, negative RAST tests and negative immediate-type skin reactions towards environmental allergens. The recently characterized human autoantigen Hom S 1 has been proposed to play a part in the pathogenesis of IAD. Objectives,To compare clinical and laboratory data between patients with IAD and EAD, and to investigate potential differences in the inflammatory micromilieu of the epidermal compartment in IAD and EAD lesions. Methods,Epidermal DC phenotyping, a recently validated technique based on the three-colour flow cytometric analysis of Langerhans cells and the so-called inflammatory dendritic epidermal cells from epidermal single-cell suspensions, was performed on samples from 69 patients with AD (seven with IAD and 62 with EAD) and 94 controls. Results,Patients with EAD tended to have an earlier onset of disease but similar disease duration and family history of atopic diseases. Quantitative analysis of CD36 expression on DCs as a marker of inflammation, as well as the percentage of inflammatory dendritic epidermal cells in the CD1a+ epidermal DC pool, indicated a comparable disease activity in IAD and EAD. EAD was characterized by a significantly higher Fc,RI expression on the CD1a+ epidermal DCs than IAD. Using the Fc,RI/Fc,RII expression ratio as a disease marker for AD, values for IAD fell below the diagnostic cut-off level of 1·5 for this ratio. Conclusions,While IAD is clinically similar to EAD, the inflammatory microenvironment in this condition seems different from classical EAD and can be distinguished by phenotyping of epidermal DCs. [source] | ||||||||||