Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Int J Mol Sci ; 24(12)2023 Jun 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37373448

RESUMO

Renal transplantation is now the best treatment for end-stage renal failure. To avoid rejection and prolong graft function, organ recipients need immunosuppressive therapy. The immunosuppressive drugs used depends on many factors, including time since transplantation (induction or maintenance), aetiology of the disease, and/or condition of the graft. Immunosuppressive treatment needs to be personalised, and hospitals and clinics have differing protocols and preparations depending on experience. Renal transplant recipient maintenance treatment is mostly based on triple-drug therapy containing calcineurin inhibitors, corticosteroids, and antiproliferative drugs. In addition to the desired effect, the use of immunosuppressive drugs carries risks of certain side effects. Therefore, new immunosuppressive drugs and immunosuppressive protocols are being sought that exert fewer side effects, which could maximise efficacy and reduce toxicity and, in this way, reduce both morbidity and mortality, as well as increase opportunities to modify individual immunosuppression for renal recipients of all ages. The aim of the current review is to describe the classes of immunosuppressive drugs and their mode of action, which are divided by induction and maintenance treatment. An additional aspect of the current review is a description of immune system activity modulation by the drugs used in renal transplant recipients. Complications associated with the use of immunosuppressive drugs and other immunosuppressive treatment options used in kidney transplant recipients have also been described.


Assuntos
Transplante de Rim , Humanos , Transplante de Rim/métodos , Rejeição de Enxerto/tratamento farmacológico , Rejeição de Enxerto/prevenção & controle , Imunossupressores/efeitos adversos , Terapia de Imunossupressão/métodos , Inibidores de Calcineurina/efeitos adversos
2.
Front Immunol ; 12: 761816, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35095840

RESUMO

Neutrophil extracellular trap (NET) formation is a powerful instrument to fight pathogens, but may induce collateral damage in the affected tissues. Besides pathogen-derived factors, immune complexes are potent inducers of NET formation. Neutrophils express IgA and IgG specific Fc receptors (FcRs) and therefore respond to complexed IgA and IgG. Especially in the context of autoimmune diseases, IgA and IgG immune complexes have been shown to trigger NET formation, a process that putatively contributes to disease severity. However, it is of question if both antibody classes stimulate neutrophils to the same extent. In this study, we compared the capability of IgA and IgG complexes formed by heat aggregation to induce NET formation. While stimulation of neutrophils with IgA complexes robustly induced NET formation, complexed IgG only marginally increased the amount of NETs compared to the unstimulated control. Mixing IgA with IgG before heat aggregation did not increase the effect of complexed IgA on neutrophils. By contrast, the presence of IgG complexes seemed to disturb neutrophil stimulation by IgA complexes. The capacity of complexed IgG to induce NET formation could not be increased by the addition of autologous serum or the removal of terminal sialic acid in the Fc glycan. Together, our data show that IgA is a much more potent inducer of NET formation than IgG. IgA may thus be the main driving force in (auto)immune complex-mediated NET formation.


Assuntos
Complexo Antígeno-Anticorpo/imunologia , Armadilhas Extracelulares/imunologia , Imunoglobulina A/imunologia , Imunoglobulina G/imunologia , Neutrófilos/imunologia , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Receptores Fc/imunologia , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA