2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.humimm.2021.03.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Peripheral cells from patients with systemic sclerosis disease co-expressing M1 and M2 monocyte/macrophage surface markers: Relation to the degree of skin involvement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The M1 and M2 phenotypes of macrophages were labeled with CD86 and CD206 respectively, and the conversion levels of macrophages in each group were detected by flow cytometry. [ 36 ] The percentages of CD206 − CD86 + (M1) and CD206 + CD86 − (M2) macrophages in the control group are 5.56% and 6.97%, respectively, whereas the percentage of M1 macrophages is significantly increased to 57.34% after stimulation by LPS ( Figure A). After treatment of LPS‐stimulated polarized M1 macrophages with FGMA/FG/PA hydrogel, the percentage of M1 macrophages significantly decreased to 21.60% and the percentage of M2 macrophages increased to 40.35%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The M1 and M2 phenotypes of macrophages were labeled with CD86 and CD206 respectively, and the conversion levels of macrophages in each group were detected by flow cytometry. [ 36 ] The percentages of CD206 − CD86 + (M1) and CD206 + CD86 − (M2) macrophages in the control group are 5.56% and 6.97%, respectively, whereas the percentage of M1 macrophages is significantly increased to 57.34% after stimulation by LPS ( Figure A). After treatment of LPS‐stimulated polarized M1 macrophages with FGMA/FG/PA hydrogel, the percentage of M1 macrophages significantly decreased to 21.60% and the percentage of M2 macrophages increased to 40.35%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2 ), which makes us shift our focus to M2 macrophages. A recent study found elevated percentages of monocytes/macrophages in the mixed M1/M2 phenotype in peripheral blood of patients with SSc [ 45 ], which is related with SSc-related interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD) [ 46 ]; However, Flow assay results from SSc patients and HCs circulating cell showed significantly elevated M1 and M2 macrophage surface markers compared to HCs, no difference when only M1 markers were detected [ 47 ]; Meanwhile, gene-gene interaction networks created based on three transcriptomic datasets from SSc skin biopsies showed that M2 macrophage activation is the core molecular process in the SSc molecular network [ 48 ]. Given the close association of M2 macrophages with SSc fibrosis, we summarize the inhibitors of M2 macrophage polarization that ameliorate SSc and the role of M2 macrophages in SSc.…”
Section: Ssc and M2 Macrophagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Traditional views regard M2 as the key role in fibrosis due to it producing profibrotic cytokines including IL-4, IL-13, and transforming growth factor β (TGF-β), leading to overexpression of ECM and scleroderma [ 63 , 66 ]. Indeed, M1 also shows relevance to lung and skin involvement in SSc [ 67 , 68 ]. NLRP3 inflammasome is usually regarded as an inhibitor in M2 activation; however, an increased number of M2 and the activation of NLRP3 inflammasome appear simultaneously in asthma patients [ 69 ].…”
Section: Nlrp3 and Sscmentioning
confidence: 99%