Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “EPITHELIUM”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources
PubMed1999

Langerhans cells from oral epithelium are more effective in stimulating allogeneic t-cells in vitro than Langerhans cells from skin epithelium.

Dendritic cells, such as Langerhans cells (LC), in different ectodermal compartments may have different functional capabilities. The present study was undertaken to compare oral Langerhans cells (LC) with those of the epidermis in terms of their ability to co-stimulate T-cells in vitro. A Mixed Epithelial Cell Lymphocyte Reaction (MELR) and a mitogen-driven (concanavalin A) T-cell proliferation assay were used. In both assays, LC in a crude cell suspension of freshly isolated oral epithelial cells were found to be five times more effective in mediating T-cell proliferation than freshly isolated epidermal LC. Twenty-four-hour cell culture at 37 degrees C enhanced the T-cell response in the MELR compared with cells cultured at 4 degrees C. This applied to both skin and oral epithelial cells. Oral and skin epithelial cell suspensions depleted of LC lost the capacity to stimulate allogeneic T-cells. Incubation of the epithelial cell suspensions with recombinant Granulocyte/Macrophage-Colony Stimulating Factor (rGM-CSF) did not enhance the co-stimulating capacity of the LC. Titration of different numbers of oral and skin LC to T-cells showed that skin LC were never able to reach more than 44% of the maximal stimulatory capacity of oral LC. Data show that oral LC are more efficient than skin LC in providing co-stimulatory signals to T-cells, suggesting a difference in functional capacity between the two cell populations.

Animals↗
PubMed2000

Influence of the epithelium on acetylcholine release from parasympathetic nerves of the rat trachea.

1. The present study was undertaken to investigate the influence of the airway epithelium on the release of acetylcholine (ACh) from parasympathetic nerves of the rat trachea. Epithelium-intact and epithelium-denuded preparations of rat trachea were incubated with [3H]-choline to incorporate [3H]-ACh into the cholinergic transmitter stores. Release of radiolabelled transmitter ACh was evoked by electrical field stimulation (60 s trains of 1 ms pulses, 5 Hz, 15 V). 2. Field stimulation both of epithelium-intact and epithelium-denuded radiolabelled tracheal preparations evoked an increase in the efflux of radioactivity; however, the mean stimulation-induced (S-I) efflux from epithelium-denuded preparations (2932 +/- 190 d.p.m., n = 9) was approximately 60% of that from epithelium-intact preparations (4802 +/- 820 d.p.m., n = 11). We have shown previously that, in epithelium-intact (but not epithelium-denuded) tracheal preparations, a substantial proportion of the S-I efflux is resistant to tetrodotoxin (1 microM) and to the removal of extracellular Ca2+, indicating that much of the S-I efflux is not caused by exocytotic release of neuronal [3H]-ACh. In epithelium-denuded tracheal preparations, superfused individually, phosphorylcholine (1 and 100 microM) did not alter S-I efflux. In epithelium-intact tracheal preparations, both in the absence and in the presence of atropine (1 microM), neither N(G)-nitro-L-arginine (100 microM), superoxide dismutase (100 units ml(-1)), indomethacin (10 microM), capsaicin (30 microM) nor alpha-chymotrypsin (1 unit ml(-1)) altered S-I efflux. 3. Experiments were also performed using two tracheal preparations superfused in series. When unlabelled epithelium-intact preparations were present in the upper chamber (superfused first), the S-I efflux from radiolabelled epithelium-denuded preparations in the lower chamber (superfused second) did not differ significantly from radiolabelled epithelium-denuded preparations superfused individually. Moreover, there was no significant difference in the S-I efflux from radiolabelled epithelium-denuded preparations in the lower chamber between experiments in which the upper chamber contained epithelium-intact or epithelium-denuded preparations. 4. Field stimulation of epithelium-intact tracheal preparations in the upper chamber with 90, 120 and 300-s periods (trains of 1 ms pulses, 5 Hz, 15 V) did not significantly alter the S-I efflux from radiolabelled epithelium-denuded tracheal preparations in the lower chamber. 5. When introduced into the upper (unlabelled epithelium-intact) and subsequently allowed to superfuse the lower (radiolabelled epithelium-denuded) tracheal preparations, the stable cholinomimetic carbachol (3 microM) markedly reduced the S-I efflux whereas ACh (0.1 and 1 microM) had no significant effect. However, in the presence of the anti-cholinesterase neostigmine (1 microM), ACh (1 microM) significantly reduced S-I efflux, indicating that ACh is subject to rapid hydrolysis by cholinesterase enzymes. When atropine (10 microM) was only exposed to radiolabelled epithelium-denuded preparations in the lower chamber, the inhibitory effects of ACh (1 microM) and carbachol (3 microM) on S-I efflux were prevented. 6. In conclusion, the findings of the present study do not support the notion that the airway epithelium exerts an inhibitory influence on ACh release from parasympathetic nerves of the rat trachea. Alternatively, if epithelium-dependent modulation of cholinergic transmission does occur in the rat trachea, then the mechanism does not appear to involve phosphorylcholine, nitric oxide, superoxide radicals, cyclo-oxygenase products of arachadonic acid, capsaicin-sensitive neuropeptides or vasoactive intestinal peptide. Moreover, the inhibitory effect of carbachol and ACh on transmitter ACh release in the rat trachea appears to be due solely to activation of prejunctional inhibitory muscarinic cholinoceptors on parasympathetic nerves and does not involve the liberation of a putative epithelium-derived inhibitory factor.

Acetylcholine↗