TLR2 down-regulates FcεRI and its transcription factor PU.1 in human Langerhans cells.
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Epidermal Langerhans cells (LC) expressing the high-affinity receptor for IgE (FcεRI) play a key role in atopic dermatitis (AD). AD skin is highly colonized with Staphylococcus aureus (S.a.), which are sensed by Toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2). We hypothesized that TLR2 may impact on the expression of FcεRI on LC. OBJECTIVES: To study a putative impact of TLR2 signaling on FcεRI, we analyzed FcεRI and known transcription factors of the receptor after ligand binding to TLR2. METHODS: We generated LC from CD34(+) progenitors in vitro (CD34LC) expressing FcεRI and TLR2 as well as its partners TLR1 and TLR6. The expression of FcεRI and known transcription factors of the receptor was analyzed on the protein and RNA level by flow cytometry, Western blotting, and real-time PCR. RESULTS: For CD34LC from 123 donors, we observed a high heterogeneity in FcεRI surface expression correlating with mRNA level of its α-chain. Stimulation of TLR1/2 or TLR2/6 dramatically down-regulated FcεRI on protein and mRNA level of both α- and γ-chain. Further analysis of putative transcription factors for FCER1A revealed the lack of GATA1 in CD34LC, weak expression of ELF1 and YY1, and high expression of PU.1. While ELF1 and YY1 appeared to be little affected by TLR2 engagement, PU.1 was significantly down-regulated. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, our findings show that in human, LC ligation of TLR2 by S.a.-derived products down-regulates FcεRI and its transcription factor PU.1, thus suggesting that FcεRI is controlled by PU.1 in these cells.
SourceAvailable from: onlinelibrary.wiley.com[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Atopic eczema (AE) is a challenge for modern medicine, because it is prevalent, severely affects quality of life of patients and their families, and causes high socioeconomic costs. The pathogenesis of AE is complex. While initial studies suggested a Th2 deviation as primary reason for the disease, numerous studies addressed a genetically predetermined impaired epidermal barrier as leading cause in a subgroup of patients. Recently, immune changes beyond the initial Th2 concept were defined in AE, with a role for specialized dendritic cells as well as newly identified T helper cell subsets such as Th17 and Th22 cells. Furthermore, trigger factors are expanded beyond classical Th2 allergens such as pollen or house dust mites to microbial products as well as self-antigens. This review pieces together our current understanding of immune as well as barrier abnormalities into the pathogenesis mosaic of AE.Allergy 07/2013; DOI:10.1111/all.12184 · 6.00 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Systemic therapy for atopic dermatitis (AD) is indicated in patients with severe disease refractory to adequate topical treatment. Currently available drugs aim to decrease inflammation by suppressing and/or modulating immune responses and thus may indirectly improve skin barrier function, resulting in a decrease in clinical signs and symptoms in particular pruritus. Before considering systemic treatment, patient adherence to topical treatment including skin care has to be ensured. The selection of the drug depends on the disease severity, localization, complications, concomitant diseases, and age of the patient, but also on their availability and costs as well as the doctor's experience. Bearing in mind the potential risk of resistance, systemic therapy with antibiotics should be exclusively considered in clinically manifest infections such as in children. Here, we review recently published clinical trials and case reports on systemic therapy of pediatric and adult patients with AD to draw conclusions for clinical practice. Although AD is a common disease, controlled clinical studies investigating the efficacy of systemic drugs are scarce, except for cyclosporine, which has been approved for the therapy of severe AD.Allergy 12/2013; DOI:10.1111/all.12339 · 6.00 Impact Factor
Allergy 08/2013; 68(8):957-8. DOI:10.1111/all.12239 · 6.00 Impact Factor