Department of Biology, Lafayette College, Easton, PA 18042, USA.
Cell Immunol. 2010;266(1):67-75. doi: 10.1016/j.cellimm.2010.08.015.
Although TLR are often studied on DC because of their ability to bridge innate and adaptive defenses, TLR are also expressed by epithelial cells. Because the majority of cancers are carcinomas, and thus of epithelial origin, we wanted to know whether a carcinoma and DC responded similarly to a TLR agonist. We found the mammary carcinoma 4T1 and CD11c(+) DC both secreted proinflammatory chemokines in response to the TLR4 agonist lipopolysaccharide (LPS). However a clear dichotomy existed. DC, but not 4T1 secreted IL-1β, TNF-α, and upregulated CD80 and CD86 expression following LPS treatment. A potential reason for differential responsiveness was that DC expressed greater levels of TLR4, CD14, Myd88, and TRAM. Despite the low level of TLR signaling proteins, the carcinoma were able to elicit a range of responses contingent upon the source, dose, length, and frequency of TLR agonist treatment. Thus, carcinoma and DC are distinctly responsive to LPS.
尽管 TLR 因其能够桥接先天和适应性防御而经常在 DC 上进行研究,但 TLR 也在上皮细胞中表达。由于大多数癌症是癌,因此来源于上皮,我们想知道癌和 DC 是否对 TLR 激动剂有类似的反应。我们发现乳腺腺癌 4T1 和 CD11c(+) DC 在 TLR4 激动剂脂多糖 (LPS)的刺激下均分泌促炎趋化因子。然而,存在明显的二分法。在 LPS 处理后,DC 但不是 4T1 分泌 IL-1β、TNF-α 并上调 CD80 和 CD86 的表达。差异反应的一个潜在原因是 DC 表达更高水平的 TLR4、CD14、Myd88 和 TRAM。尽管 TLR 信号蛋白水平较低,但癌能够根据 TLR 激动剂治疗的来源、剂量、持续时间和频率引发一系列反应。因此,癌和 DC 对 LPS 的反应明显不同。