The matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) form an enzyme family of which gelatinase B (MMP-9) represents the largest and most complex member. We focus here on the biochemical properties, regulation, and functions of gelatinase B. The tight regulation of gelatinase B activity is highly complex and is established at five different levels. The transcription of the gelatinase B-gene depends on various cis-elements in its gene promotor and is induced or repressed by a large variety of soluble factors, including cytokines, growth factors, and hormones and by cellular contacts acting through specific signaling pathways. The specific regulation of its secretion occurs in cells storing gelatinase B in granules. After secretion, progelatinase B must be activated through an activation network. The enzyme activity is further regulated by inhibition and by other mechanisms, such as fine-tuning and stabilization by glycosylation. The ability of gelatinase B to degrade components of the extracellular matrix and to regulate the activity of a number of soluble proteins confers an important role in various physiological and pathological processes. These include reproduction, growth, development, inflammation, and vascular and proliferative diseases.
Summary
The phytoalexin‐deficient Arabidopsis mutant pad3‐1, which is affected in the production of the indole‐type phytoalexin camalexin, has previously been shown not to display altered susceptibility to either the bacterium Pseudomonas syringae (Glazebrook & Ausubel 1994; Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 91: 8955–8959) or the biotrophic fungi Peronospora parasitica (Glazebrook et al. 1997; Genetics, 146: 381–392) and Erysiphe orontii (Reuber et al. 1998; Plant J. 16: 473–485). We now show that this mutant is markedly more susceptible than its wild‐type parental line to infection by the necrotrophic fungus Alternaria brassicicola, but not to Botrytis cinerea. A strong camalexin response was elicited in wild‐type plants inoculated with either Alternaria brassicicola or Botrytis cinerea, whereas no camalexin could be detected in pad3‐1 challenged with these fungi. Hence, PAD3 appears to be a key determinant in resistance to at least A. brassicicola. The induction of salicylate‐dependent and jasmonate/ethylene‐dependent defense genes was not reduced in Alternaria‐challenged pad3‐1 plants compared to similarly treated wild‐type plants. Camalexin production could not be triggered by exogenous application of either salicylate, ethylene or jasmonate and was not, or not strongly, reduced in mutants with defects in perception of these defense‐related signal molecules. Camalexin‐production appears to be controlled by a pathway that exhibits little cross‐talk with salicylate‐, ethylene‐ and jasmonate‐dependent signalling events.
Nanosized
objects, such as nanoparticles and other drug carriers
used in nanomedicine, once in contact with biological environments
are modified by adsorption of biomolecules on their surface. The presence
of this corona strongly affects the following interactions at cell
and organism levels. It has been shown that corona proteins can be
recognized by cell receptors. However, it is not known whether the
composition of this acquired layer can also affect the mechanisms
nanoparticles use to enter cells. This is of particular importance
when considering that the same nanoparticles can form different coronas
for instance in vitro when exposed to cells in different
serum amounts or in vivo depending on the exposure
or administration route. Thus, in this work, different coronas were
formed on 50 nm silica by exposing them to different serum concentrations.
The uptake efficiency in HeLa cells was compared, and the uptake mechanisms
were characterized using transport inhibitors and RNA interference.
The results showed that the nanoparticles were internalized by cells via different mechanisms when different coronas were formed,
and only for one corona condition was uptake mediated by the LDL receptor.
This suggested that coronas of different composition can be recognized
differently by cell receptors, and this in turn leads to internalization via different mechanisms. Similar studies were performed
using other cells, including A549 cells and primary HUVEC, and different
nanoparticles, namely 100 nm liposomes and 200 nm silica. Overall,
the results confirmed that the corona composition can affect the mechanisms
of nanoparticle uptake by cells.
BackgroundWith the increasing use of nanomaterials, the need for methods and assays to examine their immunosafety is becoming urgent, in particular for nanomaterials that are deliberately administered to human subjects (as in the case of nanomedicines). To obtain reliable results, standardised in vitro immunotoxicological tests should be used to determine the effects of engineered nanoparticles on human immune responses. However, before assays can be standardised, it is important that suitable methods are established and validated.ResultsIn a collaborative work between European laboratories, existing immunological and toxicological in vitro assays were tested and compared for their suitability to test effects of nanoparticles on immune responses. The prototypical nanoparticles used were metal (oxide) particles, either custom-generated by wet synthesis or commercially available as powders. Several problems and challenges were encountered during assay validation, ranging from particle agglomeration in biological media and optical interference with assay systems, to chemical immunotoxicity of solvents and contamination with endotoxin.ConclusionThe problems that were encountered in the immunological assay systems used in this study, such as chemical or endotoxin contamination and optical interference caused by the dense material, significantly affected the data obtained. These problems have to be solved to enable the development of reliable assays for the assessment of nano-immunosafety.
BackgroundDendritic cells (DCs) comprise heterogeneous populations of cells, which act as central orchestrators of the immune response. Applicability of primary DCs is restricted due to their scarcity and therefore DC models are commonly employed in DC-based immunotherapy strategies and in vitro tests assessing DC function. However, the interrelationship between the individual in vitro DC models and their relative resemblance to specific primary DC populations remain elusive.ObjectiveTo describe and assess functionality and applicability of the available in vitro DC models by using a genome-wide transcriptional approach.MethodsTranscriptional profiling was performed with four commonly used in vitro DC models (MUTZ-3-DCs, monocyte-derived DCs, CD34-derived DCs and Langerhans cells (LCs)) and nine primary DC populations (dermal DCs, LCs, blood and tonsillar CD123+, CD1c+ and CD141+ DCs, and blood CD16+ DCs).ResultsPrincipal Component Analysis showed that transcriptional profiles of each in vitro DC model most closely resembled CD1c+ and CD141+ tonsillar myeloid DCs (mDCs) among primary DC populations. Thus, additional differentiation factors may be required to generate model DCs that more closely resemble other primary DC populations. Also, no model DC stood out in terms of primary DC resemblance. Nevertheless, hierarchical clustering showed clusters of differentially expressed genes among individual DC models as well as primary DC populations. Furthermore, model DCs were shown to differentially express immunologically relevant transcripts and transcriptional signatures identified for each model DC included several immune-associated transcripts.ConclusionThe unique transcriptional profiles of in vitro DC models suggest distinct functionality in immune applications. The presented results will aid in the selection of an appropriate DC model for in vitro assays and assist development of DC-based immunotherapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.