1Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3GE, United Kingdom; and 2Department of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin 9, Ireland
Submitted 9 April 2003 ; accepted in final form 26 August 2003
![]() |
ABSTRACT |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
adhesion molecule; M2 receptor; asthma
The dominant innervation of airway smooth muscle is by the parasympathetic nerves of the vagus. Stimulation of these nerves causes release of acetylcholine onto M3 muscarinic receptors to mediate bronchoconstriction, production of mucus, and dilation of the bronchiolar vasculature (25). This mechanism is subject to feedback control by M2 muscarinic receptors present on the parasympathetic cholinergic terminals. Acetylcholine acting on these M2 receptors leads to a reduction in the further release of acetylcholine (13).
In antigen-sensitized guinea pigs and in some asthmatic patients, pulmonary M2 receptors are rendered dysfunctional, with consequent enhancement of acetylcholine release and increased bronchoconstriction (6, 7, 10, 11). Preventing the localization of eosinophils to the airways prevents the loss of function of the M2 receptors (6, 7, 10). The role of eosinophils in this process appears to be through mediators released by degranulation. MBP, in particular, is implicated, since this protein acts as an allosteric antagonist at M2 receptors (18), and neutralization of MBP with heparin (12) or an anti-MBP antibody (8) restores M2 receptor function in vivo. Thus there is evidence from in vivo studies that eosinophils influence vagal nerve function by an effect on M2 muscarinic receptors.
However, the details of the mechanism of eosinophil-associated loss of function of M2 receptors are not clear, particularly since a previous in vitro study using a synthetic cationic compound to mimic MBP failed to demonstrate loss of M2 receptor function in guinea pig airways (30). We have recently published details of an in vitro model that simulates the interactions between eosinophils and cholinergic nerves (20, 29). In this model, human eosinophils adhere to differentiated cholinergic IMR32 neuroblastoma cells via specific interactions between constitutively expressed neuronal cell adhesion molecules ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 and eosinophil integrins CD11/18 and very late antigen-4 (VLA-4). Adhesion leads to degranulation of the eosinophils and release of mediators, including EPO and leukotriene C4, and the generation of free radicals within the nerve cells. We have now used this model to investigate directly the effects of eosinophils on M2 receptors expressed in these cells (35) and how the various aspects of eosinophil-nerve cell interactions influence this process.
![]() |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Culture of IMR32 human neuroblastoma cells. The human neuroblastoma cell line IMR32 (European Collection of Cell Cultures ECACC no. 86041809) was cultured in 25-ml flasks in proliferation medium consisting of DMEM (GIBCO-BRL, Paisley, UK) with 10% (vol/vol) FCS (GIBCO-BRL), 100 U/ml penicillin, 1 µg/ml streptomycin, and 100 µg/ml gentamicin, at 37°C in 5% CO2-95% air.
Gel electrophoresis and Western blotting to detect the M2 receptor. IMR32 cells were plated onto 24-well plastic plates at a density of 2 x 104 cells/well and differentiated in differentiating medium [same as for proliferation medium above, but with 2% (vol/vol) FCS and 2 mM sodium butyrate] for between 3 and 7 days. The cells were lysed with 20 mM Tris (BDH-Merck, Poole, UK) containing 10 mM EDTA, 0.5% (vol/vol) Nonidet P-40, 0.5% (wt/vol) deoxycholate, 8 M urea, 2% (wt/vol) SDS, and 1% (wt/vol) bromphenol blue, pH 7.1, at a concentration of 2 x 108 cells/ml. Samples were boiled for 5 min, and 2-mercaptoethanol was added to a final concentration of 5% (vol/vol). The samples were then separated on 8% SDS-polyacrylamide gels with a 4% polyacrylamide stacking gel, and the proteins were transferred to nitrocellulose paper (Hybond; Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Little Chalfont, UK) as described previously (27).
The resulting Western blots were incubated with 5% (wt/vol) dried fat-free milk in Tris-buffered saline (TBS; 10 mM Tris and 140 mM NaCl, pH 7.4) for 1 h and then incubated overnight at 4°C with 1:1,000 dilution of mouse monoclonal anti-human M2 receptor antibody (31-1D1; Cambridge Bioscience, Cambridge, UK). Identical blots were incubated with mouse IgG1 immunoglobulin fraction (Caltag Laboratories, Silverstone, UK) at the same concentration to serve as control. Blots were then washed three times with 0.05% (vol/vol) Tween 20 in TBS and incubated with 1:10,000 dilution of peroxidase-conjugated rabbit anti-mouse immunoglobulin for 2 h at room temperature. After being washed again, the blots were incubated with chemiluminescent substrate (Pierce, Rockford, IL) and applied to Kodak X-Omat film. Immunoreactive proteins were visualized on the developed film.
Immunohistochemical detection of the M2 receptor. IMR32 cells were plated onto 24-well plates at a density of 2 x 104 cells/well in proliferation medium. After 24 h, the cells were differentiated as above for 7 days. The cells were then fixed in 4% (wt/vol) buffered paraformaldehyde (pH 7.4) for 20 min and washed three times with PBS. Nonspecific binding sites were blocked by incubation for 30 min with PBS containing 5% (wt/vol) BSA. The IMR32 cells were again washed once with PBS and then incubated with 1:100 dilution of mouse monoclonal anti-human M2 receptor antibody or an equivalent concentration of isotype-matched control IgG1 mouse immunoglobulins or with PBS with 5% (wt/vol) BSA at 4°C for 24 h. The cells were then washed three times with PBS and incubated with 1:100 dilution of biotinylated rabbit anti-mouse secondary immunoglobulin (Vector Laboratories, Peterborough, UK) for 1 h at room temperature. The cells were further washed with PBS before the addition of avidin-horse-radish peroxidase complex (ABC Elite; Vector Laboratories) for 30 min, as directed by the manufacturer. Immunoreactivity was detected by incubation with the peroxidase-dependent 3-amino-9-ethylcarbazole chromagen staining kit (Vector Laboratories).
Isolation of human eosinophils. The procedure for the isolation of human eosinophils was as described previously (29). Briefly, heparinized peripheral venous blood (60 ml) was suspended in an equal volume of PBS containing 1,000 U/ml of heparin sulfate, layered over 12 ml of Percoll solution (specific gravity 1.090 g/ml; Amersham Pharmacia Biotech), and centrifuged at 400 g for 20 min at room temperature. The plasma and monocyte layers were carefully aspirated, and the red blood cells were removed by hypotonic lysis in water. The remaining granulocytes were washed in buffer consisting of 10% (wt/vol) PIPES (pH 7.4), 1% (wt/vol) glucose, and 0.0003% (wt/vol) human serum albumin. The cells were then incubated with anti-human CD16 microbeads (1 µl/106 cells; Miltenyi Biotech, Bisley, UK) and an equal volume of buffer consisting of 0.5% (wt/vol) BSA and 2 mM EDTA in PBS at 6°C for 45 min. The eosinophils were separated from contaminating neutrophils by the VarioMACS magnetic cell separation system (Miltenyi Biotech). Cell viability and purity were determined by trypan blue exclusion (ICN Biomedicals, Basingstoke, UK) and Diffquick staining (Dade, Munich, Germany), respectively. Only those eosinophil preparations showing >95% viability and >98% purity were used.
RNA isolation and RT-PCR analysis of the M2 receptor. IMR32 cells were plated onto 24-well culture plates at a density of 2 x 105 cells/well and differentiated for 7 days, as described above. Cells were then left untreated or were cocultured with 2 x 105 eosinophils/well for 24 and 48 h. Total RNA was isolated from the cells with TRIzol reagent according to the manufacturer's instructions. For quantitative LightCycler PCR (Roche Molecular Biochemicals, Lewes, UK), 1 µg of total RNA was reverse transcribed into cDNA with an oligo(dT)15 primer by means of the First Strand cDNA Synthesis kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals). Amplification of cDNA was carried out by quantitative PCR in a LightCycler in the presence of the double-stranded DNA binding dye SYBR Green 1 (Fast Start DNA Masters SYBR Green 1; Roche Molecular Biochemicals). Fluorescence was monitored during the PCR every 0.1°C. PCR mixtures contained 0.5 µM primers for either -actin (sense: 5' TCC TGT GGC ATC CAC GAA ACT 3', antisense: 5' GAA GCA TTT GCG GTG GAC GAT 3') or for the human M2 receptor (sense: 5' GTG GTC AGC AAT GCC TCA GTT AT 3', antisense: 5' TCC CCA TCC TCC ACA GTT CTC 3'). The samples were denatured at 95°C for 10 min, followed by 45 cycles of annealing and extension at 95°C for 12 s, 55°C for 5 s, and 72°C for 10 s. The melting curves were obtained at the end of amplification by cooling the samples to 65°C for 15 s, followed by further cooling to 40°C for 30 s. Serial 10-fold dilutions were prepared from previously amplified PCR products of
-actin and M2, which were then used as standards to plot against the unknown samples. Data were quantified with LightCycler analysis software, and values were normalized to the level of
-actin expression for each sample on the same template cDNA.
Measurement of acetylcholine release from IMR32 cells. IMR32 cells were plated onto 24-well plates and differentiated for 7 days as described above. In some experiments, the cells were pretreated with 10 mM carbachol for 1 h, with 0.1 mM carbachol for 24 h, or with 25 µM 2-(-naphthoyl)ethyltrimethylammonium iodide (
-NETA) for 30 min. The cells were then incubated with [3H]methyl-choline chloride (74 KBq/ml; specific activity 20.8 GBq/mg choline; Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) in Trowell's T8 (choline-free) medium (GIBCO-BRL) containing 5% (vol/vol) FCS, 100 U/ml (wt/vol) penicillin, 1 µg/ml (wt/vol) streptomycin, and 100 µg/ml (wt/vol) gentamicin. They were then further incubated in HEPES-buffered saline (HBS; 20 mM HEPES, 150 mM NaCl, 5.4 mM KCl, 1.8 mM CaCl2, 0.8 mM MgSO4, and 25 mM glucose, pH 7.4) for 15 min and then in HBS containing 10 µM hemicholinium-3 for a further 15 min to inhibit reuptake of released choline. They were then again washed with HBS for 5 min.
At that point in the various experiments, IMR32 cells were incubated in Trowell's medium alone, with various concentrations of the selective M2 receptor antagonist AF-DX 116 (Tocris Cookson, Bristol, UK) for 10 min, or with various concentrations of the nonselective muscarinic receptor agonist methacholine, the M2 receptor agonist arecaidine but-2-ynyl ester tosylate, with various numbers of human eosinophils in Trowell's T8 medium for 30 min or with 10 mM carbachol for 1 h. In some cases, before the eosinophils were added to the nerve cells, the eosinophils were incubated for 30 min with 1 pg/ml of mouse anti-human monoclonal antibody to CD18 (685A5; Cymbus Biotechnology, Chandler's Ford, UK) or with 10-6 M VLA-4 peptide inhibitor ZD-7349 (a gift from AstraZeneca, Loughborough, UK). In some experiments, culture medium from eosinophils was added to the nerve cells for 30 min. This culture medium was produced by incubating eosinophils with or without either 10-5 M N-formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine (FMLP; Peninsula Laboratories Europe, St. Helens, UK) or 2 x 104 IMR32 cells for 30 min and centrifuging at 300 g to remove cells.
Each well of IMR32 nerve cells was then electrically field stimulated unidirectionally at 2-ms pulse width for 1 min with a specially constructed electrode attached to a stimulator, or, as a control, the electrode was applied to the well without stimulation, and two 100-µl samples of medium were taken after the electrode was applied. Each sample was centrifuged at 300 g for 1 min, and the radioactivity in a 50-µl aliquot was measured in a liquid scintillation analyzer (Tricarb 1500; Packard, Pangbourne, UK). Optimal stimulation parameters were determined in preliminary experiments (results not shown) and proved to be 1 Hz and 5 V. In other preliminary experiments, cells were stimulated in Ca2+-free medium containing 2 mM EDTA; in that case, they were immersed in a version of Trowell's T8 medium without calcium [6 mM KCl, 1 mM MgSO4, 104 mM NaCl, 33.6 mM NaHCO3, 2.9 mM NaH2PO4, 22.2 mM D-glucose, 8.7 µM bovine insulin, 225 µM para-aminobenzoic acid, 50 µM thiamine hydrochloride, and 2% (vol/vol) basal medium Eagle amino acids (GIBCO-BRL)]. Alternatively, instead of being electrically stimulated, cells were exposed for 10 min to Trowell's T8 medium containing 53 mM KCl and 51.4 mM NaCl. In every experiment, measurements were taken from triplicate wells.
Statistical analysis. Comparisons among different treatments were performed by ANOVA for matched samples, with Dunnett's post hoc test for multiple comparisons. P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
M2 receptor-regulated release of radiolabeled acetylcholine from IMR32 cells. The ability of differentiated IMR32 cells to release acetylcholine was assessed by radiolabeling the cells with [3H]methyl-choline chloride and then subjecting them to electrical field stimulation. IMR32 cells preincubated with [3H]choline released radioactivity into the medium; this basal release was statistically significantly enhanced after electrical stimulation at the optimal 1 Hz and 5 V (Fig. 2A). This enhanced release of radioactivity was reproduced by exposing the cells to 53 mM KCl (Fig. 2B).
|
Stimulated release of radioactivity was reduced when cells were preincubated with the choline acetyltransferase inhibitor -NETA (25 µM) before uptake of [3H]choline, indicating that the released radioactivity was mainly in the form of acetylcholine (Fig. 2C). This was reinforced by the fact that the stimulation-induced release of radioactivity was inhibited if the experiments were performed in Ca2+-free medium in the presence of 2 mM EDTA (Fig. 2D).
The function of the M2 muscarinic receptors expressed by IMR32 cells was examined by measurement of acetylcholine release after exposure to the M1/M2 agonist arecaidine or the selective M2 antagonist AF-DX 116. Both agents were effective close to their Kd or Ki values (1, 24). Pretreatment with the M2 agonist arecaidine (Fig. 3A) inhibited the release of acetylcholine after stimulation. There was a similar decrease in acetylcholine release after treatment with the nonselective muscarinic receptor agonist methacholine (results not shown). Conversely, pretreatment with the selective M2 antagonist AF-DX 116 led to an increase in acetylcholine release (Fig. 3B). These data are consistent with the release of acetylcholine being under the control of the M2 receptors.
|
Eosinophil-induced enhancement of acetylcholine release. To determine whether the release of acetylcholine from the IMR32 cells was influenced by the presence of eosinophils, we incubated the nerve cells with eosinophils for 30 min (the time at which adhesion was maximal) and again measured release of radioactivity after stimulation. As previously shown (20), there was an increase in acetylcholine release from IMR32 cells compared with cells incubated without eosinophils. For example, 2 x 104 eosinophils/well (containing 2 x 104 IMR32 cells) significantly increased the release to 136 ± 10% of control (Fig. 3C). The enhanced release of acetylcholine was not due to a general cytotoxicity of the eosinophils toward the nerve cells (data not shown).
Because it was our hypothesis that eosinophil-induced potentiation of acetylcholine release from nerves may be due to antagonism at M2 muscarinic receptors, we examined the effects of eosinophils on acetylcholine release under conditions in which the muscarinic receptors should be desensitized. In these experiments, the IMR32 cells were exposed to a high concentration (10 mM) of the nonselective muscarinic receptor agonist carbachol for 1 h before their exposure to eosinophils. Pretreatment with carbachol in itself reduced acetylcholine release after stimulation to 72 ± 4.4% of control. Consistent with a desensitization of the M2 receptor, carbachol pretreatment completely prevented both the AF-DX 116-mediated enhancement of acetylcholine release and also prevented the stimulation by eosinophils (Fig. 4A).
|
Adhesion of eosinophils to IMR32 cells occurs through CD11/18 and VLA-4 integrins on the eosinophils. To determine the role of adhesion in the ability of eosinophils to enhance acetylcholine release, eosinophils were pretreated with a monoclonal blocking antibody to CD11/18 or with the VLA-4 peptide inhibitor ZD-7349 (17), neither of which had an effect on its own on acetylcholine release. The eosinophil-induced increase in acetylcholine release was inhibited after pretreatment with either ZD-7349 or the anti-CD11/18 antibody (Fig. 4B).
Potentiation of acetylcholine release by factors released from eosinophils. Adhesion of eosinophils to IMR32 nerve cells leads to degranulation (20). To determine whether the effect of eosinophils on acetylcholine release was due to factors released on contact with IMR32 cells, eosinophils were stimulated with FMLP (10 µM), which also induces them to degranulate, or were preincubated with IMR32 cells, and the media from those eosinophils were added to IMR32 cells. Both sets of media produced a significant increase in acetylcholine release from IMR32 cells after stimulation, compared with untreated controls. In contrast, the medium from untreated eosinophils had only a small, statistically insignificant, effect on acetylcholine release (Fig. 4C).
Effect of eosinophils on M2 receptor expression. Finally, to determine the long-term effects of eosinophils on M2 receptor-related cholinergic function, we incubated eosinophils with IMR32 cells for various times up to 48 h, and the expression of M2 receptors was analyzed by quantitative PCR. There was an initial rise in the level of M2 muscarinic receptor mRNA expression in IMR32 cells after coculture with eosinophils at 24 h, but this fell to below baseline after 48 h (Fig. 5). Control experiments (data not shown) demonstrated that the eosinophils did not express detectable mRNA for M2 muscarinic receptors.
|
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
After differentiation for 7 days, IMR32 cells displayed a network of interconnecting neurites (29) and thus had the potential for engaging in at least some aspects of synaptic transmission. First, we demonstrated that the IMR32 cells were capable of taking up radiolabeled choline and that they released the radiolabel in response to electrical stimulation or a solution of high K+. The electrically induced release was less than that produced by potassium, probably because not all the cells in a well would have received the maximal effect of the field stimulation. Release was not simply a result of damage to the cells, as it was abolished in Ca2+-free medium. This fact, along with the ability of -NETA to significantly inhibit the release at a concentration close to its in vitro EC50 value for inhibition of choline acetyltransferase (28), indicated that the release of radiolabeled material reflected nerve terminal acetylcholine release.
Three pieces of evidence, immunohistochemistry, Western blotting, and PCR, indicated that the cells expressed the acetylcholine M2 receptor, which is known to regulate the release of acetylcholine (16). Consistent with the receptor being functional, the muscarinic receptor agonist arecaidine, which acts at both M1 and M2 receptors (23), inhibited acetylcholine release. The agent has some selectivity for cardiac M2 receptors, but its precise degree of selectivity for M2 relative to M1 in IMR32 cells has not been determined. The amount of inhibition of acetylcholine release (20%) was broadly similar to that observed with guinea pig tracheal sections, in which it was used for the same purpose (32). Conversely, the selective M2 receptor antagonist AF-DX 116 (26) potentiated acetylcholine release by
75%.
When eosinophils were added to the IMR32 cells, they potentiated acetylcholine release from the IMR32 cells. The maximum enhancement was somewhat less than that produced by the M2 receptor antagonist AF-DX 116 and was, therefore, within the range that could be explained by an effect on M2 receptors. Inhibitors of eosinophil adhesion to the nerve cells prevented this enhanced release; either an inhibitor of CD11/18/ICAM-1 interactions or of VLA-4/VCAM-1 interactions was sufficient to prevent the enhanced acetylcholine release. This is consistent with our previous findings that inhibiting either interaction reduced adhesion and that both sets of adhesion molecules/integrins are involved (29), possibly acting in synergy (4).
We then sought further evidence that the enhanced acetylcholine release was mediated by the M2 receptor. The M2 receptor can be internalized by exposure to a high concentration of the muscarinic receptor agonist carbachol (22). When we exposed IMR32 cells to 10 mM carbachol for 1 h, eosinophils no longer enhanced acetylcholine release. Muscarinic receptors can be down-regulated by carbachol, but the time course is likely to be of the order of several hours (31), and it was not possible to pretreat radiolabeled IMR32 cells with carbachol for that period of time without their losing the radiolabeled acetylcholine. The results were also complicated by the fact that carbachol itself reduced the release of acetylcholine. Although carbachol was washed from the medium before stimulation, it may not have been possible to reduce its levels sufficiently to prevent its acting as an agonist on the M2 receptor. However, importantly, carbachol pretreatment also prevented the acetylcholine receptor antagonist AF-DX 116 from enhancing acetylcholine release. Thus, carbachol, whether through its supposed action to internalize the receptor or by another means, had the same effect on the eosinophils as it did on a known M2 receptor antagonist. This points to the eosinophils potentiating acetylcholine release through an action on the M2 receptor.
Acetylcholine release could also be increased by application to the nerves of medium from eosinophils that had been in contact with another sample of IMR32 nerve cells or had been treated with FMLP. The amount of acetylcholine released by this medium was quantitatively similar to that produced by direct contact between similar amounts of IMR32 cells and eosinophils. This would suggest that the ability of eosinophils to enhance acetylcholine release was entirely due to their degranulation and release of active chemical mediators. Under the experimental conditions we employed, eosinophils, after exposure to either FMLP or IMR32 nerve cells, released both EPO and leukotriene C4 (20). As mentioned above, the enhancement of acetylcholine release caused by contact between eosinophils and IMR32 cells was completely abolished by treatment of eosinophils with either antibody to CD11/18 or the VLA-4 inhibitor ZD-7349, both of which reduce adhesion of eosinophils to IMR32 cells, the latter down to baseline levels (29). Those same treatments, however, inhibited the IMR32-induced release of EPO and LTC4 from the eosinophils by only 50% (20). This apparent discrepancy can be interpreted in a number of ways. It is possible that the release of EPO and leukotriene C4 from eosinophils was not fully representative of the release of all products and that the release of other products would be completely inhibited by anti-CD11/18 antibody or ZD-7349. Alternatively, the enhanced release of acetylcholine produced by contact between eosinophils and IMR32 cells was a separate phenomenon from the enhanced release induced by the eosinophil degranulation products, and there was a threshold of effect of degranulation products that was not achieved in the presence of the inhibitors. At present, we are unable to distinguish between those two possibilities.
The data do indicate, however, that eosinophil products, whether wholly or partly, contribute to an increased release of acetylcholine from nerves. The most likely candidates for this effect are EPO and MBP, both of which are antagonists at M2 muscarinic receptors (18), with good supporting evidence from in vivo experiments for a major role for MBP (8). Currently, there is only circumstantial evidence that MBP mediates the action of eosinophils in this in vitro model. Heparin, which can bind to and inactivate MBP and can restore M2 receptor function in vivo, was able to prevent the effects of eosinophils to enhance acetylcholine release (results not shown); however, at the concentration used, heparin was also able to prevent adhesion of eosinophils to nerves (29). A more selective inhibitor, if available, would determine whether MBP is the sole molecule mediating the effect.
How specific was the action of eosinophils to promote acetylcholine release? The adhesion of eosinophils to IMR32 cells was not, in fact, selective: human neutrophils also adhered to the cells to a similar extent. However, most importantly, neither neutrophils nor the medium from neutrophils that had been incubated with a separate sample of IMR32 cells were able to alter acetylcholine release (results not shown).
The action of eosinophils on nerves, as simulated in this in vitro model, appears to have both an acute and a chronic component. The acute effect of contact with eosinophils is associated with a number of downstream events in the IMR32 cells that include the production of reactive oxygen species (21), protein tyrosine phosphorylation, induction of transcription factors (34), and remodeling of nerve morphology (21). These phenomena are, at least in part, a consequence of cell adhesion molecule interactions. The M2 muscarinic receptor is a G protein-coupled receptor linked to inhibition of adenylate cyclase (19) and to the Egr family of transcription factors (33). Eosinophils and eosinophil-derived factors could interact at either of those sites to alter protein expression. The data presented here indicate that in addition to the acute effect of eosinophil-mediated loss of M2 receptor function, prolonged exposure leads to an initial upregulation of the M2 receptor itself and a later reduction in the M2 receptor mRNA. In other studies (21), we have shown that prolonged exposure to eosinophils is not associated with cell death nor apoptosis; thus, it unlikely that this reduction was due to a cell death. The significance of this finding may be that prolonged exposure to eosinophils may lead to loss of function of M2 receptors by a mechanism separate from the direct effect of eosinophils on the function of the receptor. Now that the human M2 promoter has been identified (35), it should be possible to determine the precise link between eosinophil interactions and the changes we observed in M2 receptor expression.
In summary, we have produced a model that simulates the effects of eosinophil/nerve interactions on cholinergic nerve function and confirmed the hypothesis that interactions between nerves and eosinophils can modulate both acetylcholine release and M2 receptor expression. The model is currently being used to determine the molecular mechanisms underlying both of these processes.
![]() |
DISCLOSURES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
---|
![]() |
FOOTNOTES |
---|
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|