Resistance of neonatal porcine Sertoli cells to human xenoantibody and complement-mediated lysis is associated with low expression of α-Gal and high production of clusterin and CD59

Yin Z, Wang L, Xiang Y, Ruan Y, Li J, Wang X, Ichim TE, Chen S, Chen G. Resistance of neonatal porcine Sertoli cells to human xenoantibody and complement‐mediated lysis is associated with low expression of α‐Gal and high production of clusterin and CD59. Xenotransplantation 2010; 17: 215–223. © 2010...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Xenotransplantation (Københaven) 2010-05, Vol.17 (3), p.215-223
Hauptverfasser: Yin, Zhuzeng, Wang, Lu, Xiang, Ying, Ruan, Yongle, Li, Junhua, Wang, Ximo, Ichim, Thomas E., Chen, Shi, Chen, Gang
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Yin Z, Wang L, Xiang Y, Ruan Y, Li J, Wang X, Ichim TE, Chen S, Chen G. Resistance of neonatal porcine Sertoli cells to human xenoantibody and complement‐mediated lysis is associated with low expression of α‐Gal and high production of clusterin and CD59. Xenotransplantation 2010; 17: 215–223. © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S. : Background:  Porcine Sertoli cells have an inherent resistance to human xenoreactive antibody and complement‐mediated lysis, however, the mechanisms of protection are still unclear. Methods:  Neonatal porcine Sertoli cells (NPSCs) were isolated from testes of 10 to 15‐day‐old piglets. Immortalized porcine aortic endothelial cells (iPECs) were used as control cells. An in vitro humoral injury model was used to assess whether NPSCs could resist human xenoantibody and complement‐mediated lysis. Expressions of α‐Gal, clusterin, CD59, CD46, and CD55 were examined to investigate the possible mechanisms of the immunoprotection of NPSCs. Results:  Compared with iPECs, NPSCs significantly resisted human natural antibody and complement‐mediated lysis when incubated with 20% normal human serum (NHS) in vitro (24.38 ± 0.50 vs. 53.13 ± 14.53%, P 
ISSN:0908-665X
1399-3089
DOI:10.1111/j.1399-3089.2010.00581.x