Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Infection and Immunity, September 2000, p. 5254-5260, Vol. 68, No. 9
Northwest Center for Medical Education,
Indiana University School of Medicine, Gary, Indiana
46408,1 and Departments of
Pathology2 and
Medicine,3 University of California San
Diego School of Medicine, the VA San Diego Healthcare System, San
Diego, California 92161
Received 27 March 2000/Returned for modification 29 May
2000/Accepted 20 June 2000
The purpose of this study was to identify the functional
significance of the binding of soluble CD14 (sCD14) to bacterial peptidoglycan (PGN) and to compare the structural requirements of sCD14
for the binding to PGN and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and for
sCD14-mediated enhancement of PGN- and LPS-induced cell responses. sCD14 did not facilitate the responses of membrane CD14
(mCD14)-negative pre-B 70Z/3 cells to PGN, although it facilitated the
responses of these cells to LPS and although mCD14 facilitated the
responses of 70Z/3 cells to PGN. sCD14 enhanced mCD14-mediated cell
activation by both PGN and LPS, but only the responses to LPS, and not
to PGN, were enhanced by LPS-binding protein. Four 4- or
5-amino-acid-long sequences within the 65-amino-acid N-terminal region
of sCD14 were needed for binding to both PGN and LPS and for
enhancement of cell activation by both PGN and LPS. However, deletions
of individual sequences had different effects on the ability of sCD14 to bind to PGN and to LPS and on the ability to enhance the responses to PGN and to LPS. Thus, there are different structural requirements of
sCD14 for binding to PGN and to LPS and for the enhancement of PGN- and
LPS-induced cell activation.
Peptidoglycan (PGN), the major
constituent of the cell walls of gram-positive bacteria, can reproduce
major clinical manifestations of bacterial infections, including fever,
inflammation, hypotension, leukocytosis, sleepiness, decreased
appetite, malaise, and arthritis (5, 6), through the
activation of macrophages and stimulation of secretion of mediators of
inflammation, primarily cytokines and chemokines (5, 6, 21).
The first step in macrophage activation by PGN is the binding of PGN to
its specific receptor, membrane CD14 (mCD14) (4-7, 22, 23).
mCD14 is a pattern recognition receptor; i.e., it also serves as the
receptor for other bacterial macrophage activators, primarily
lipopolysaccharide (LPS) or endotoxin from gram-negative bacteria, and
also lipoteichoic acid from gram-positive bacteria, lipoproteins from
spirochetes, lipoarabinomannan from mycobacteria, and others (5,
6). However, mCD14 is a glycosylphosphatidylinositol-linked rather than a transmembrane molecule, and mCD14 by itself probably cannot transmit the activating signal into the cell. Therefore, the
second step in macrophage activation by PGN is transmission of the
activating signal from the receptor into the cell, which most likely
occurs through the Toll-like receptor-2 (13, 15, 25).
Soluble CD14 (sCD14) lacks the glycosylphosphatidylinositol anchor but
has the same amino acid sequence as mCD14 and is present in normal
human serum at 4 to 6 µg/ml (5, 6). Serum also contains an
acute-phase protein, LPS-binding protein (LBP), which facilitates the
binding of LPS to CD14 by catalytically transferring monomeric LPS from
LPS aggregates onto mCD14 or sCD14 molecules. Therefore, LBP greatly
enhances CD14-mediated responses to LPS (9, 17, 18, 24, 26).
Although both PGN and LPS bind to CD14 and activate cells through CD14,
there are several differences in the function of CD14 as the PGN and
LPS receptor. First, LBP enhances CD14-mediated cell activation by LPS
but not by PGN (7, 22). Second, LBP increases the affinity
of binding of LPS, but not of PGN, to CD14 (4). Third, the
binding sites for PGN and LPS on CD14 and the sites needed for cell
activation are partially different (4, 7). Fourth, PGN and
LPS induce differential activation of mitogen-activated protein kinases
(3) and induce different patterns of gene activation (21). And fifth, sCD14-LPS complexes activate mCD14-negative endothelial and epithelial cells, whereas sCD14-PGN complexes do not
(10).
The reason for the unresponsiveness of these mCD14-negative cells to
sCD14-PGN complexes is unknown (10), although sCD14 binds to
PGN with high affinity (Kd = 25 nM) and
forms stable complexes with PGN at an approximately 1:1 molar ratio
(4, 23). Nonmyeloid cells are also unresponsive to PGN when
they are transfected with and express mCD14, even though these cells are fully responsive to LPS through mCD14 or sCD14 (10). By contrast, lymphoid and monocytic cells expressing mCD14 are responsive to PGN (7, 10).
Therefore, the first aim of our current study was to determine if
sCD14-PGN complexes activate mCD14-negative lymphoid cells. Because we
found here that sCD14-PGN complexes do not activate CD14-negative
lymphoid cells, the functional significance of sCD14-PGN binding still
remained unknown. However, in addition to facilitating activation of
mCD14-negative cells by LPS, sCD14 has another function; i.e., sCD14
enhances mCD14-mediated cell activation by LPS by binding LPS and then
by transferring LPS to mCD14 (9). Therefore, the second aim
of this study was to determine if sCD14 enhances mCD14-mediated cell
activation by PGN. Because different regions of sCD14 and of mCD14 are
important for LPS binding and cell activation (4, 7, 19,
20), and also because different regions of mCD14 are important
for PGN- and LPS-induced cell activation (7), the third aim
of this study was to compare the regions of sCD14 involved in
sCD14-mediated enhancement of cell activation by PGN and LPS and
binding to PGN and LPS. Because LBP increases low-affinity binding of
PGN to CD14 (4), our fourth aim was to determine if LBP had
any effect on mCD14- and sCD14-mediated cell activation by PGN.
Materials.
Polymeric non-cross-linked soluble PGN (PGN) was
purified by vancomycin affinity chromatography and analyzed as before
(12). PGN contained <24 pg of endotoxin/mg, as determined
by the Limulus lysate assay (12). LPS from
Salmonella enterica serovar Minnesota Re 595 (a minimal,
naturally occurring endotoxic structure of LPS), obtained by
phenol-chloroform-petroleum ether extraction, was purchased from Sigma,
and its purity was analyzed as described before (2).
0019-9567/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Soluble CD14 Enhances Membrane CD14-Mediated
Responses to Peptidoglycan: Structural Requirements Differ from
Those for Responses to Lipopolysaccharide
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Cells and activation of NF-
B.
Untransfected mouse 70Z/3
immature B cells and stable transfectants of 70Z/3 cells, expressing
glycosylphosphatidylinositol-linked full-length human mCD14 obtained as
described before (7), were cultured in RPMI 1640 with 10 mM
HEPES and 7.5% fetal calf serum and, for 70Z/3-CD14 transfectants,
with the addition of 1 mg of G418/ml (7). The expression of
CD14 was verified by flow cytometry (7). Before stimulation,
cells were washed three times with RPMI 1640 (without serum) at 37°C,
suspended in RPMI 1640 with 10 mM HEPES at 3 × 106
cells/ml, dispensed in 0.3-ml aliquots into wells of 48-well tissue
culture plates, and incubated for 30 min at 37°C in 5% CO2. Stimulants (PGN or LPS) were mixed with sCD14 (wt or
mutants) with or without LBP in RPMI 1640 (as indicated in Results),
incubated at 37°C in 5% CO2 for 1 h, and added to
cell cultures to yield the following final concentrations: PGN, 15 µg/ml for 70Z/3 cells or 4 µg/ml for 70Z/3-CD14 transfectants; LPS,
100 ng/ml for 70Z/3 cells or 10 ng/ml for 70Z/3-CD14 transfectants;
sCD14 (wt or mutants), 10 µg/ml; and LBP, 0.2 µg/ml. Cells were
left unstimulated (control) or were stimulated with PGN for 90 min
(70Z/3) or 60 min (70Z/3-CD14), or with LPS for 45 min (70Z/3) or 30 min (70Z/3-CD14) (optimum times) and were harvested, and nuclear
extracts were prepared as previously described (7).
Activation of NF-
B in the nuclear extracts was determined by the
electrophoretic mobility shift assay as described (7). The
NF-
B bands on autoradiograms were quantified using Kodak Digital
Science Image Station 440CF and the Image Analysis Software 3.0. The
results were then normalized to unstimulated groups (which equaled 1 arbitrary unit) and expressed as means ± ranges or standard
errors (SE).
Inhibition of binding of 32P-sCD14 to PGN-agarose and LPS-agarose. Full-length human sCD14 (wt), containing at the C terminus a phosphorylation site for protein kinase A (16), was labeled with 32P (4), and the binding of 32P-sCD14 to PGN-agarose or LPS (from S. enterica serovar Minnesota Re 595)-agarose in the absence or presence of increasing concentrations (0.2 to 200 µg/ml) of sCD14 (wt or deletion mutants) and with or without 1 µg of LBP/ml was determined as previously described (4). The 50% inhibitory concentrations (IC50) were calculated using a logarithmic curve fit generated by SigmaPlot software (Jandel Scientific, San Rafael, Calif.).
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
70Z/3 cells are unresponsive to sCD14-PGN complexes. To test whether sCD14-PGN complexes activate mCD14-negative cells of lymphoid origin, we selected 70Z/3 immature mouse B cells, because when transfected with mCD14, 70Z/3 cells (similarly to human monocytes) become fully responsive to PGN in a CD14-dependent manner (7). The experiments were done in serum-free medium on cells washed before the assay to avoid interference from sCD14 and LBP contained in the serum or CD14 released from CD14 transfectants during culture.
sCD14-PGN complexes did not activate NF-
B in 70Z/3 cells, regardless
of the presence of LBP (Fig. 1).
Increasing the concentration of PGN (up to 30 µg/ml) and the time of
incubation with cells (up to 3 h) still did not activate NF-
B
in 70Z/3 cells (data not shown). By contrast, as expected, sCD14-LPS
complexes activated NF-
B in 70Z/3 cells, and this activation was
greatly enhanced by LBP (Fig. 1).
|
B in 70Z/3 cells (Fig. 1).
The responsiveness of 70Z/3-CD14 transfectants to PGN is enhanced by sCD14. To test the hypothesis that sCD14 and/or LBP enhance mCD14-mediated cell activation by PGN, we selected 70Z/3-CD14 transfectants, because their responsiveness to PGN, similar to the responsiveness of human monocytes (22), is almost completely CD14 dependent (7).
PGN activated NF-
B in 70Z/3-CD14 transfectants in serum-free medium,
and LBP had no effect on mCD14-mediated cell activation by PGN (Fig.
2), confirming our previous results
(7) that in 70Z/3 cells expression of mCD14 alone is
sufficient for NF-
B activation. By contrast, as expected, LPS alone
(at a low concentration of 10 ng/ml) induced very weak activation of
NF-
B in 70Z/3-CD14 transfectants in serum-free medium, but this
activation was greatly enhanced by LBP (Fig. 2).
|
B by
PGN, and LBP had no effect on this enhancement (Fig. 2). sCD14 (wt), as
expected, also enhanced mCD14-mediated activation of NF-
B by LPS,
but in contrast to PGN, this sCD14 enhancement of LPS response was
further potentiated by LBP (Fig. 2).
Because in our previous studies deletions of four different regions in
the N-terminal sequence of mCD14 had different effects on PGN- and
LPS-induced cell activation (7), and because structural requirements of sCD14 and mCD14 for LPS-induced cell activation are not
identical (20), we next tested the effects of the same four
deletions on the capacity of sCD14 to enhance mCD14-mediated responses.
All single-deletion sCD14 mutants and the double-deletion mutant could
still enhance mCD14-mediated cell activation by PGN, and some mutants
(DDED, DPRQY, and DDED + PQPD) had activity similar to that of the
wt sCD14. However, two other mutants (PQPD and AVEVE) had their
enhancing activity diminished by 70% and 25%, respectively (Fig. 2).
LPS-induced activation was enhanced by the DDED, DPRQY, and PQPD sCD14
deletion mutants to the same extent as by the wt sCD14. However, the
enhancing activities on LPS responses of the double DDED + PQPD
deletion mutant and single AVEVE deletion mutant were diminished by
more than 80% (Fig. 2). The quadruple sCD14 deletion mutant had no
effect on PGN- and LPS-induced responses.
LBP had no effect on the activity of sCD14 mutants (similar to that on
wt sCD14) in PGN-induced responses (Fig. 2). However, LBP further
potentiated the enhancing effect of the DDED and DPRQY deletion mutants
on the LPS-induced responses and had no effect on the responses induced
by other deletion mutants (or this effect was not greater than the
enhancing effect of LBP alone on mCD14-mediated responses) (Fig. 2).
Neither LBP alone nor any of the sCD14 preparations alone without or
with LBP activated NF-
B in 70Z/3-CD14 transfectants (Fig. 2).
These results demonstrate that sCD14 enhances mCD14-mediated responses
to both PGN and LPS and that individual deletions have different
effects on the enhancing activity of sCD14 for PGN- and LPS-induced responses.
Differential binding of sCD14 deletion mutants to PGN and LPS. Because the requirements for specific sequences needed for LPS binding and cell activation through mCD14 were different (7, 19), we then wanted to determine whether the changes in the enhancing activity of the sCD14 mutants were due to the changes in their binding capacity for PGN and LPS. To answer this question, the binding of sCD14 and all deletion mutants to PGN and LPS was compared by measuring their IC50 for the binding of 32P-sCD14 (wt) to PGN and LPS in the absence and presence of LBP.
Wild-type sCD14 and the DDED, PQPD, and DDED + PQPD deletion mutants showed essentially similar binding to PGN, consistent with the high-affinity sCD14 (wt) binding that was demonstrated before (4), whereas DPRQY and AVEVE deletion mutants showed 3 to 4 times lower binding, as measured by their IC50 for 32P-sCD14 (wt) binding (Table 1). This binding of wt sCD14 or sCD14 deletion mutants to PGN was not significantly enhanced by LBP. The quadruple mutant showed no binding to PGN (IC50 > 1,000 µg/ml).
|
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Our results demonstrate that (i) sCD14 does not facilitate the responses of mCD14-negative lymphoid cells to PGN, (ii) sCD14 enhances mCD14-mediated cell activation by PGN, (iii) this enhancement is not influenced by LBP, and (iv) four 4- to 5-amino-acid-long sequences within the 65-amino-acid N-terminal region of sCD14 are needed for this enhancing activity. By contrast, sCD14 both facilitates the responses of the same mCD14-negative cells to LPS and enhances mCD14-mediated cell activation by LPS, and both of these activities of LPS and sCD14 are greatly enhanced by LBP. Our results also demonstrate different structural requirements of sCD14 for the binding to PGN and LPS and also for the enhancement of cell activation by PGN and LPS.
These results extend previous findings (10) by showing that lymphoid cells, which are responsive to PGN when transfected with mCD14 (7), are still unresponsive to sCD14-PGN complexes. Although the reason for this unresponsiveness is not clear, the main function of sCD14-PGN complexes in vivo could be enhancement of the responses of mCD14-positive cells to PGN.
The structural requirements of sCD14 and mCD14 for the enhancement
(through sCD14) or induction (through mCD14) of NF-
B responses by
PGN and for the binding of sCD14 to PGN are similar: all four deletions
(DDED, PQPD, DPRQY, and AVEVE) are needed to totally abolish both
responses and the binding, and the same single or double deletions
(DDED, DPRQY, and DDED + PQPD) have little effect on the
activities of either sCD14 or mCD14, whereas other deletions (AVEVE and
PQPD) have only a partial effect (Table
2).
|
The same four sequences are also important for sCD14-mediated or
mCD14-mediated enhancement or induction of NF-
B responses by LPS and
for the binding of sCD14 to LPS, because deletion of all four sequences
totally abolished all LPS responses and binding (Table 2). However, the
roles of specific sequences in the responsiveness to PGN and LPS are
different, because, in contrast to PGN, the single AVEVE deletion or
double DDED + PQPD deletion completely or almost completely
abolished the binding of sCD14 to LPS and the activity of mCD14 or
sCD14 for both LPS responses, whereas they had almost no effect (double
DDED + PQPD deletion) or much less effect (AVEVE deletion) on the
activity and binding to PGN. Another difference between PGN and LPS is
the effect of LBP: all LPS, but not PGN, responses and high-affinity
binding are enhanced by LBP (Table 2).
Whereas our current and previous (7) results demonstrate similar effects of deletions on the binding and activity of sCD14 and mCD14 towards PGN (as described above), our current and previous (7, 19, 20) results demonstrate different behavior of mCD14 and sCD14 deletion mutants towards LPS (Table 2). All mCD14 single- or double-deletion mutants expressed in CHO cells lost their serum-dependent high-affinity binding of 3H-LPS (19), whereas most sCD14 mutants (except DPRQY) retained binding of soluble LPS (20) but had impaired binding or lost their binding to solid-phase-bound LPS (Table 1). Moreover, in the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and fluorescence assays (20), the sCD14 DDED + PQPD double-deletion mutant bound LPS several times better than the wt sCD14, whereas in this study (inhibition of wt sCD14 binding to solid-phase LPS), the same double-deletion mutant showed much poorer binding than the wt sCD14 (Table 1). Some other mutants (DPRQY and AVEVE), which showed good LPS binding in the ELISA and fluorescence assays (20), not only did not inhibit binding of labeled wt sCD14 to LPS but enhanced its binding (Table 1), suggesting that they form aggregates with LPS and sCD14. LPS seemed to have been required for this aggregation, because the same mutants showed good inhibition of wt sCD14 binding to solid-phase PGN (rather than the enhancement seen with LPS [Table 1]).
The reasons for these differences in binding are not clear, but they may be related to several factors, such as the ability of these different assays to detect different affinities of binding, the requirement for LBP in the cell-binding assay (19), the absence of LBP in the assays for the binding of soluble LPS to sCD14 (20), or different structural requirements of sCD14 for the binding to different forms of LPS (monomeric, aggregated, or solid-phase bound) under different conditions (in solution, solid-phase-bound sCD14, membrane-bound CD14, or sCD14 mutants competing for the binding of wt sCD14). The last possibility seems to be supported by results showing that in the ELISA with biotinylated PGN, similar to the assay in which the DDED + PQPD double-deletion mutant showed better binding to LPS than wt sCD14 (20), the DDED + PQPD double-deletion mutant and DDED single-deletion mutant also showed higher binding to PGN than the wt sCD14 (S. Viriyakosol, T. N. Kirkland, and R. Dziarski, unpublished data). These differences in the behavior of various sCD14 mutants towards LPS are less apparent in the functional assays than in the binding assays discussed above, because similar sCD14 mutants are active in the assays for activation of U373 (20) and 70Z/3 (this study) cells, although the 70Z/3 cells seem to be more responsive than the U373 cells.
Our results further support the notion that the binding sites for LPS (1, 11, 14) and PGN (4-6) on CD14 are conformational. The sequences that are common and most critical for CD14 binding to both LPS and PGN and for cell activation are amino acids 35 to 39 (AVEVE deletion) and amino acids 51 to 64 (the site of deletion of amino acids 59 to 63 [DPRQY] and the binding site of anti-CD14 monoclonal antibody [MAb] MEM-18), because AVEVE is the single deletion that has the greatest effect on the binding and activation by both PGN and LPS (7, 19) and because anti-CD14 MAb MEM-18 is most efficient in inhibiting CD14 binding both to LPS (by over 95%) and to PGN (by over 80%) (4) and in inhibiting cell activation by both LPS and PGN (5, 6). Similarly, alanine substitutions revealed that the LPS-binding region is located between amino acid 39 and 44, whereas [A9-13]mCD14 (the site of our DDED deletion), as well as [A57, A59, A61-63]mCD14 (the site of our DPRQY deletion) are still able to bind LPS and to activate transfected CHO cells (14), which is consistent with our results (Table 2).
These two regions, however, may not be sufficient for binding of LPS and PGN, because MAbs specific to other regions of CD14 or deletions in other regions of CD14 also partially or almost totally inhibit binding to LPS, and to a lesser extent to PGN, and cell activation by LPS and PGN (4, 7, 14). However, these other sequences that contribute to LPS and PGN binding and cell activation are at least partially different, because there are other anti-CD14 MAbs (directed to more N-terminal regions of CD14) (4) or other deletions (Table 2) that inhibit LPS binding but not PGN binding, and one MAb (directed to a more C-terminal region of CD14) that inhibits PGN binding but not LPS binding (4).
These results also show that wt CD14 is the most versatile molecule, whereas various deletion mutants are not as versatile as the wt CD14 and function well only in some assays with some ligands. Specific mutations affect different aspects of CD14 functions in various ways, causing more or less severe changes in the function depending on the assay system and the ligand or activator, and this effect is especially evident with LPS but not as much with PGN. Moreover, the differences between the functions of sCD14 and mCD14 may not be due entirely to different behavior of the soluble and membrane forms of CD14 but may also depend on the cell type; i.e., in lymphoid cells stimulated with LPS, sCD14 mutants behave more similarly to the mCD14 mutants (7 and Fig. 2). Therefore, the behavior of sCD14 and mCD14 depends on the ligand (e.g., LPS versus PGN), the form of the ligand (soluble versus solid-phase bound), the presence of soluble accessory molecules (LBP), the cell type, and the form of CD14 (soluble versus membrane).
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We are grateful to Peter Tobias and Richard Tapping for providing sCD14 with the phosphorylation site and LBP.
This work was supported by United States Public Health Service Grants AI2879 (to R.D.) and GM37696 (to T.N.K.) from NIH and by a grant from the Medical Research Service of the Department of Veterans Affairs (to T.N.K.).
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Northwest Center for Medical Education, Indiana University School of Medicine, 3400 Broadway, Gary, IN 46408. Phone: (219) 980-6535. Fax: (219) 980-6566. E-mail: rdziar{at}iunhaw1.iun.indiana.edu.
Editor: R. N. Moore
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Cunningham, M. D.,
R. A. Shapiro,
C. Seachord,
K. Ratcliffe,
L. Cassiano, and R. P. Darveau.
2000.
CD14 employs hydrophilic regions to "capture" lipopolysaccharide.
J. Immunol.
164:3255-3263 |
| 2. |
Dziarski, R., and D. Gupta.
1994.
Heparin, sulfated heparinoids, and lipoteichoic acid bind to the 70 kDa peptidoglycan/lipopolysaccharide receptor protein on lymphocytes.
J. Biol. Chem.
269:2100-2110 |
| 3. | Dziarski, R., Y. Jin, and D. Gupta. 1996. Differential activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) 1, ERK2, p38, and c-Jun NH2-terminal kinase mitogen-activated protein kinases by bacterial peptidoglycan. J. Infect. Dis. 174:777-785[Medline]. |
| 4. |
Dziarski, R.,
R. I. Tapping, and P. Tobias.
1998.
Binding of bacterial peptidoglycan to CD14.
J. Biol. Chem.
273:8680-8690 |
| 5. | Dziarski, R., A. Ulmer, and D. Gupta. 2000. Interactions of bacterial lipopolysaccharide and peptidoglycan with mammalian CD14, p. 145-186. In R. J. Doyle (ed.), Glycomicrobiology. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, N.Y. |
| 6. | Dziarski, R., A. Ulmer, and D. Gupta. 2000. Interactions of CD14 with components of Gram-positive bacteria. Chem. Immunol. 74:83-107[Medline]. |
| 7. |
Gupta, D.,
T. N. Kirkland,
S. Viriyakosol, and R. Dziarski.
1996.
CD14 is a cell-activating receptor for bacterial peptidoglycan.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:23310-23316 |
| 8. |
Hailman, E.,
H. S. Lichenstein,
M. M. Wurfel,
D. S. Miller,
D. A. Johnson,
M. Kelley,
L. A. Busse,
M. M. Zukowski, and S. D. Wright.
1994.
Lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-binding protein accelerates the binding of LPS to CD14.
J. Exp. Med.
179:269-277 |
| 9. | Hailman, E., T. Vasselon, M. Kelley, L. A. Busse, M. C. T. Hu, H. S. Lichenstein, P. A. Detmers, and S. D. Wright. 1996. Stimulation of macrophages and neutrophils by complexes of lipopolysaccharide and soluble CD14. J. Immunol. 156:4384-4390[Abstract]. |
| 10. |
Jin, Y.,
D. Gupta, and R. Dziarski.
1998.
Endothelial and epithelial cells do not respond to complexes of peptidoglycan with soluble CD14, but are activated indirectly by peptidoglycan-induced tumor necrosis factor- and interleukin-1 from monocytes.
J. Infect. Dis.
177:1629-1638[Medline].
|
| 11. |
Juan, T. S. C.,
E. Hailman,
M. J. Kelley,
L. A. Busse,
E. Davy,
C. J. Empig,
L. O. Narhi,
S. D. Wright, and H. S. Lichenstein.
1995.
Identification of a lipopolysaccharide binding domain in CD14 between amino acids 57 and 64.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:5219-5224 |
| 12. | Rosenthal, R. S., and R. Dziarski. 1994. Isolation of peptidoglycan and soluble peptidoglycan fragments. Methods Enzymol. 235:253-285[Medline]. |
| 13. |
Schwandner, R.,
R. Dziarski,
H. Wesche,
M. Rothe, and C. J. Kirschning.
1999.
Peptidoglycan- and lipoteichoic acid-induced cell activation is mediated by Toll-like receptor 2.
J. Biol. Chem.
274:17406-17409 |
| 14. | Stelter, F., M. Bernheiden, R. Menzel, R. S. Jack, S. Witt, X. Fan, M. Pfister, and C. Schutt. 1997. Mutation of amino acids 39-44 of human CD14 abrogates binding of lipopolysaccharide and Escherichia coli. Eur. J. Biochem. 243:100-109[Medline]. |
| 15. | Takeuchi, O., K. Hoshino, T. Kawai, H. Sanjo, H. Takada, T. Ogawa, K. Takeda, and S. Akira. 1999. Differential roles of TLR2 and TLR4 in recognition of Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacterial cell wall components. Immunity 11:443-451[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 16. |
Tapping, R. I., and P. S. Tobias.
1997.
Cellular binding of soluble CD14 requires lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and LPS-binding protein.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:23157-23164 |
| 17. |
Tobias, P. S.,
K. Soldau,
J. A. Gegner,
D. Mintz, and R. J. Ulevitch.
1995.
Lipopolysaccharide binding protein-mediated complexation of lipopolysaccharide with soluble CD14.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:10482-10488 |
| 18. | Tobias, P. S., K. Soldau, L. Kline, J. D. Lee, K. Kato, T. P. Martin, and R. J. Ulevitch. 1993. Cross-linking of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) to CD14 on THP-1 cells mediated by LPS-binding protein. J. Immunol. 150:3011-3021[Abstract]. |
| 19. |
Viriyakosol, S., and T. N. Kirkland.
1995.
A region of human CD14 required for lipopolysaccharide binding.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:361-368 |
| 20. |
Viriyakosol, S.,
J. C. Mathison,
P. S. Tobias, and T. N. Kirkland.
2000.
Structure-function analysis of CD14 as a soluble receptor for lipopolysaccharide.
J. Biol. Chem.
275:3144-3149 |
| 21. |
Wang, Z.-M.,
C. Liu, and R. Dziarski.
2000.
Chemokines are the main pro-inflammatory mediators in human monocytes activated by Staphylococcus aureus, peptidoglycan, and endotoxin.
J. Biol. Chem.
275:20260-20267 |
| 22. |
Weidemann, B.,
H. Brade,
E. T. Rietschel,
R. Dziarski,
V. Bazil,
S. Kusumoto,
H.-D. Flad, and A. J. Ulmer.
1994.
Soluble peptidoglycan-induced monokine production can be blocked by anti-CD14 monoclonal antibodies and by lipid A partial structures.
Infect. Immun.
62:4709-4715 |
| 23. | Weidemann, B., J. Schletter, R. Dziarski, S. Kusumoto, F. Stelter, E. T. Rietschel, H.-D. Flad, and A. J. Ulmer. 1997. Specific binding of soluble peptidoglycan and muramyldipeptide to CD14 on human monocytes. Infect. Immun. 65:858-864[Abstract]. |
| 24. |
Wright, S. D.,
R. A. Ramos,
P. S. Tobias,
R. J. Ulevitch, and J. C. Mathison.
1990.
CD14, a receptor for complexes of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and LPS binding protein.
Science
249:1431-1433 |
| 25. |
Yoshimura, A.,
E. Lien,
R. R. Ingalls,
E. Tuomanen,
R. Dziarski, and D. Golenbock.
1999.
Recognition of Gram-positive bacterial cell wall components by the innate immune system occurs via Toll-like receptor 2.
J. Immunol.
163:1-5 |
| 26. |
Yu, B., and S. D. Wright.
1996.
Catalytic properties of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) binding protein. Transfer of LPS to soluble CD14.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:4100-4105 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| J. Bacteriol. | J. Virol. | Eukaryot. Cell |
|---|
| Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. | Clin. Vaccine Immunol. | All ASM Journals |
|---|