Jeong C-W, Ahn K-S, Rho N-K, Park Y-D, Lee D-Y, Lee J-H, Lee E-S, Yang J-M
Department of Dermatology, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Clin Exp Allergy. 2003 Dec;33(12):1717-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2003.01782.x.
A small subgroup of atopic dermatitis (AD) patients with normal serum IgE levels and without specific IgE sensitization has been termed 'intrinsic type of AD' (ADi) as a counterpart to the term 'extrinsic type of AD' (ADe). However, there are neither molecular markers nor clinically diagnostic tools for distinguishing between ADi and ADe.
The present studies were undertaken to clarify the pathogenesis and in vivo cytokine micromilieu of ADi patients in comparison with ADe patients.
We used semiquantitative RT-PCR to investigate the expression of various cytokines and assessed the tissue eosinophil counts in skin biopsies from both types of AD patients.
Although there was no significant difference of cellular infiltrates in the lesional skin between ADe and ADi patients, ADe had significantly increased tissue eosinophilia than ADi. Based on our RT-PCR, the expression patterns of cytokines could be categorized into four groups. The first group includes IL-5, IL-13, and IL-1beta, whose levels of mRNA expression were higher in both types of AD patients than non-atopic (NA) subjects, while ADe patients had even higher levels than ADi patients. The second group includes interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma), IL-12, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), IL-4, and IL-10, whose levels of mRNA expression were elevated in both types of AD patients without differences between ADe and ADi patients. The third group includes tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), whose mRNA expression was more decreased in both types of AD patients than NA, and the fourth group includes IL-6 and transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta), which did not show any differences among the three groups.
These current data demonstrate that the expressions of cytokines IL-5, IL-13, and IL-1beta mRNA and the number of dermal infiltrating eosinophils are increased in ADe patients compared with ADi patients.
一小部分血清IgE水平正常且无特异性IgE致敏的特应性皮炎(AD)患者被称为“内源性AD”(ADi),以对应“外源性AD”(ADe)这一术语。然而,目前尚无区分ADi和ADe的分子标志物及临床诊断工具。
本研究旨在阐明ADi患者与ADe患者相比的发病机制及体内细胞因子微环境。
我们采用半定量逆转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)来研究各种细胞因子的表达,并评估这两种类型AD患者皮肤活检组织中的嗜酸性粒细胞计数。
尽管ADe和ADi患者皮损处的细胞浸润无显著差异,但ADe患者的组织嗜酸性粒细胞增多明显高于ADi患者。基于我们的RT-PCR结果,细胞因子的表达模式可分为四组。第一组包括白细胞介素-5(IL-5)、白细胞介素-13(IL-13)和白细胞介素-1β(IL-1β),这两种类型AD患者的mRNA表达水平均高于非特应性(NA)受试者,而ADe患者的水平甚至高于ADi患者。第二组包括干扰素-γ(IFN-γ)、白细胞介素-12(IL-12)、粒细胞-巨噬细胞集落刺激因子(GM-CSF)、白细胞介素-4(IL-4)和白细胞介素-10(IL-10),这两种类型AD患者的mRNA表达水平均升高,ADe和ADi患者之间无差异。第三组包括肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α),这两种类型AD患者的mRNA表达均比NA受试者降低得更多,第四组包括白细胞介素-6(IL-6)和转化生长因子-β(TGF-β),这三组之间未显示出任何差异。
目前这些数据表明,与ADi患者相比,ADe患者中细胞因子IL-5、IL-13和IL-1β mRNA的表达以及真皮浸润嗜酸性粒细胞的数量增加。