Chamberlin William M, Naser Saleh A
Department of Medicine, Texas Tech Medical Center, El Paso, TX 79905, USA.
Med Sci Monit. 2006 Feb;12(2):RA27-33. Epub 2006 Jan 26.
The most prominent theory describes the Crohn's Syndrome as a dysregulated, inappropriate immune response to otherwise innocuous bowel flora in a genetically susceptible host. The autoimmune theory assumes that a specific infectious agent does not exist. Data from mouse models, impairment of the mucosal epithelial barrier and the influence of gut flora are used to support the autoimmune theory. Critics claim that the dysregulated immune responses are not the primary disorder but secondary to an underlying infection. Two other theories are also consistent with the same data. The immunodeficiency theory hypothesizes that defects in innate immunity leading to compensatory immune processes underlie the Crohn's phenotype and suggests that therapy should stimulate immunity rather than suppress it. The mycobacterial theory proposes that Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis is one of the causes of the Crohn's Disease syndrome. Mycobacterial molecules dysregulate immune signaling pathways as part of the organisms'evolved survival strategy. If MAP were to initiate the dysregulated immune response then the necessity to hypothesize that commensal gut flora provide the antigenic stimulus would be moot. Commensal bacteria would be relegated to a secondary role of modifying the immune response rather than occupying the central role of providing the initiating antigens. Critics claim that MAP is merely a secondary invader. The three theories differ primarily by emphasizing different aspects of the same overall process.
最著名的理论将克罗恩综合征描述为在基因易感性宿主中,对原本无害的肠道菌群产生失调、不适当的免疫反应。自身免疫理论假定不存在特定的感染因子。来自小鼠模型的数据、黏膜上皮屏障的损伤以及肠道菌群的影响都被用来支持自身免疫理论。批评者认为,失调的免疫反应并非原发性疾病,而是潜在感染的继发性表现。另外两种理论也与相同的数据相符。免疫缺陷理论假设,先天性免疫缺陷导致的代偿性免疫过程是克罗恩表型的基础,并建议治疗应刺激免疫而非抑制免疫。分枝杆菌理论提出,副结核分枝杆菌鸟亚种是克罗恩病综合征的病因之一。作为该生物体进化生存策略的一部分,分枝杆菌分子会使免疫信号通路失调。如果副结核分枝杆菌引发了失调的免疫反应,那么假设共生肠道菌群提供抗原刺激的必要性就没有实际意义了。共生细菌将退居次要地位,只是改变免疫反应,而不是占据提供起始抗原的核心地位。批评者称,副结核分枝杆菌只是继发性入侵者。这三种理论的主要区别在于强调了同一整体过程的不同方面。