About this Journal Submit a Manuscript Table of Contents
International Journal of Vascular Medicine
Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 508416, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/508416
Review Article

Role of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor-γ in Vascular Inflammation

Department of Molecular Cardiovascular Biology and Pharmacology, Graduate School of Medicine, Ehime University, Shitsukawa, Ehime, Toon 791-0295, Japan

Received 6 May 2012; Accepted 8 June 2012

Academic Editor: David Bishop-Bailey

Copyright © 2012 Kousei Ohshima et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Vascular inflammation plays a crucial role in atherosclerosis, and its regulation is important to prevent cerebrovascular and coronary artery disease. The inflammatory process in atherogenesis involves a variety of immune cells including monocytes/macrophages, lymphocytes, dendritic cells, and neutrophils, which all express peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ (PPAR-γ). PPAR-γ is a nuclear receptor and transcription factor in the steroid superfamily and is known to be a key regulator of adipocyte differentiation. Increasing evidence from mainly experimental studies has demonstrated that PPAR-γ activation by endogenous and synthetic ligands is involved in lipid metabolism and anti-inflammatory activity. In addition, recent clinical studies have shown a beneficial effect of thiazolidinediones, synthetic PPAR-γ ligands, on cardiovascular disease beyond glycemic control. These results suggest that PPAR-γ activation is an important regulator in vascular inflammation and is expected to be a therapeutic target in the treatment of atherosclerotic complications. This paper reviews the recent findings of PPAR-γ involvement in vascular inflammation and the therapeutic potential of regulating the immune system in atherosclerosis.

1. Introduction

Atherosclerosis is the primary cause of cerebrovascular and coronary artery disease through slowly progressive lesion formation and luminal narrowing of arteries. This vascular remodeling leads to thrombotic complications including acute coronary syndrome, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Atherosclerosis is well known to be an inflammatory disease, and the underlying pathology is characterized by a persistent inflammatory process of the arterial wall [1]. With increasing prevalence of risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, and obesity [2], it is critical to control vascular inflammation in order to decrease mortality and improve public health. To solve this problem, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)-γ has emerged as an important player.

PPAR-γ belongs to the nuclear receptor family of ligand-activated transcription factors, which also include the steroid and thyroid hormone receptors [3]. PPAR-γ forms heterodimers with the retinoid X receptor (RXR) and activates transcription by binding to a specific DNA element known as the PPAR response element (PPRE) [4]. In the absence of ligand, PPAR-RXR heterodimers bind a number of corepressors, including nuclear receptor corepressor and the silencing mediator of the retinoid and thyroid hormone receptors, to suppress the target genes. In the presence of selective ligands, PPAR-γ undergoes a conformational change facilitating the dissociation of corepressors and the recruitment of co-activators, leading to transcriptional activation of the target genes [5, 6]. To date, a variety of endogenous and synthetic ligands in addition to its co-activators have been detected (Table 1). PPAR-γ is known to have four splice isoforms: PPAR-γ1, γ2, γ3, and γ4. PPAR-γ1 and γ2 have been identified in mouse, whereas in humans and other species, at least two other isoforms, PPAR-γ3 and γ4, have also been detected [7]. PPAR-γ3 and γ4 encode the same protein as PPAR-γ1, which is expressed in endothelial cells (ECs), vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMCs), macrophages, and cardiomyocytes. On the other hand, PPAR-γ2 is mainly expressed in adipocytes [8].

tab1
Table 1: Endogenous and synthetic ligands for PPAR-γ and genes for PPAR-γ related coactivator.

PPAR-γ plays an important role in regulation of adipocyte differentiation and insulin resistance [9]. The thiazolidinedione (TZD) class of synthetic PPAR-γ ligands reduces peripheral insulin resistance and has been widely used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. For instance, several reports using high-fat diet-induced obese mice demonstrated that PPAR-γ agonists had beneficial effects on improving insulin resistance and inflammation [1013]. In addition, recent large clinical studies have demonstrated that a PPAR-γ agonist had beneficial effects not only on glycemic control but also in preventing atherosclerotic disease [1417]. The lines of evidence derived from study of EC specific PPAR-γ null mice [1820] and from virus-mediated constitutive expression of PPAR-γ in human ECs [21] have also shown important roles of PPAR-γ on atherogenesis. Increasing evidence has demonstrated that PPAR-γ plays important roles in the immune system, since PPAR-γ is expressed in inflammatory cells such as macrophages, T cells, B cells, and dendritic cells [22]. These results suggest that PPAR-γ activation is an important regulator in vascular inflammation and is expected to be a therapeutic target in the treatment of atherosclerotic complications (Figure 1). The present paper focuses on the role of PPAR-γ in vascular inflammation beyond its beneficial effects on glycemic control and discusses the potential therapeutic roles of regulating PPAR-γ activation.

508416.fig.001
Figure 1: Effects of PPAR-γ activation on various immune cells in vascular inflammation. PPAR-γ is expressed in various immune cells such as monocyte/macrophage, lymphocyte, dendritic cell, and neutrophil. PPAR-γ activation by endogenous and synthetic ligands could regulate inflammatory responses induced by these cells, leading to anti-inflammation and antiatherogenicity. CCR, chemokine (C-C motif) receptor; 15d-PGJ2, 15-deoxy-Δ12, 14-prostaglandin J2; IFN, interferon; IL, interleukin; ROS, reactive oxygen species; TNF, tumor necrosis factor; Treg, regulatory T cell; TZD, thiazolidinedione.

2. PPAR-γ and Monocytes/Macrophages

Monocytes/macrophages are key players in vascular inflammation and atherosclerosis [23]. PPAR-γ has been detected in rodent macrophages [24], and human macrophages in atherosclerotic lesions [25]. Differentiated macrophages show two acquired phenotypic characteristics, the classically activated (M1) phenotype and the alternatively activated (M2) phenotype [26]. M1 activation is triggered by stimulation such as by bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and is associated with the production of proinflammatory cytokines including interferon-γ (IFN-γ) and interleukin-12 (IL-12), which are linked to T helper 1 (Th1) immune responses. In contrast to M1, M2 activation is triggered by IL-4 and IL-13, which are linked to Th2 responses [27]. M1 macrophages produce a number of proinflammatory cytokines and express a high level of reactive oxygen species (ROS), having antimicrobial activity. On the other hand, M2 macrophages generate anti-inflammatory products and are involved in pathogen sequestration, wound healing, and phagocytosis of apoptotic cells [28, 29]. The balance between these two subsets is thought to be important in regulating vascular inflammation.

In vitro studies have demonstrated that PPAR-γ agonists attenuated the gene expression and secretion of proinflammatory cytokines associated with M1 macrophages in human monocytes, such as tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), IL-1β, and IL-6 [30], and reduced the activity of macrophages including the transrepression of nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) [24]. In addition, troglitazone and rosiglitazone, PPAR-γ agonists, inhibited monocyte chemotactic protein 1 (MCP-1)-directed monocyte migration through modulation of matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) and tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1) production [31]. These results suggest that PPAR-γ activation may be involved in vascular inflammation through regulating macrophage activation.

PPAR-γ has been also reported to be an invaluable transcriptional regulator of monocyte phenotypic differentiation. Crosstalk between PPAR-γ and IL-4 signaling is thought to be important for M2 macrophage polarization [32, 33]. In macrophages, IL-4-mediated signaling activates the transcription factor, signal transducers, and activators of transcription 6 (STAT6), resulting in upregulation of the expression of PPAR-γ, PPAR-γ coactivator-1β (PCG-1β), and ARG1. Increased PCG-1β enhances STAT6 action on these genes and other genes relating to mitochondrial biogenesis, oxidative metabolism, and M2 differentiation. Additionally, other recent studies have demonstrated that PPAR-γ-deficient macrophages were resistant to M2 polarization and promoted insulin resistance [29, 34].

Foam cell formation of macrophages is also important in the progression of atherosclerosis. Another function of PPAR-γ in macrophages is regulation of lipoprotein uptake and cholesterol efflux. Tontonoz et al. have demonstrated that PPAR-γ ligands induced the differentiation of human monocytes into macrophages and enhanced the transcription of a scavenger receptor for oxidized low-density lipoprotein (oxLDL), CD36 [35]. In addition, oxidized lipids inside the oxLDL particle, including 9-hydroxyoctadecadienoic acid (9-HODE) and 13-HODE, enhance PPAR-γ activation [36]. Thus, PPAR-γ activation in the presence of oxidized lipids could lead to a positive feedback loop to promote foam cell formation [37, 38]. On the other hand, in vivo studies revealed that TZD treatment could increase macrophage CD36 expression, but did not enhance foam cell formation, suggesting that PPAR-γ could activate other pathways that enhance cholesterol efflux and reduce intracellular cholesterol level. The enhancement of cholesterol efflux was mediated by the cholesterol-phospholipid transporter ABCA1, which is an indirect target gene of PPAR-γ via liver X receptor α [39, 40]. These results suggest that PPAR-γ activation couples oxLDL uptake to cholesterol efflux, thus enhancing the removal of oxLDL from the vessel wall.

3. PPAR-γ and T Cells

PPAR-γ is expressed in T cells, and its expression is increased in activated T cells [41]. It is reported that PPAR-γ activation modulates the expression of proinflammatory Th1 cytokines in CD4-positive lymphocytes. For instance, 15-deoxy-Δ12, 14-prostaglandin J2 (15d-PGJ2), an endogenous PPAR-γ ligand, and TZDs reduced IL-2 secretion from murine T cell clones [42] and inhibited IL-2 production and phytohemagglutinin-inducible proliferation in human T cells in a dose-dependent manner [43]. In addition, PPAR-γ activators inhibited the expression of proinflammatory cytokines such as interferon-γ (IFN-γ), TNF-α, and IL-2, leading to attenuation of human monocyte CD64 expression and human endothelial cell major histocompatibility complex class II induction [44]. In a well-established mouse colitis model, it is reported that TZDs attenuated intestinal inflammation, at least in part, due to immune deviation away from Th1 and towards Th2 cytokine production [45].

Th17 cells and a proinflammatory cytokine, IL-17, secreted by them have been reported to be involved in the pathogenesis of atherosclerotic disease. Recently, Klotz et al. have indicated that PPAR-γ activation can regulate the differentiation and function of Th17 cells, a newly identified T cell subset [46]. PPAR-γ activators could suppress the differentiation of Th17 cells by inhibiting the upregulation of retinoic acid receptor-related orphan receptor γt (RoRγt), the key transcriptional factor of Th17 differentiation, in response to Th17 cell-promoting cytokines, such as TGF-β and IL-6. Therefore, PPAR-γ activation selectively suppressed Th17 cell differentiation, but not the differentiation of Th1, Th2, or regulatory T cells (Treg). Pharmacologic activation of PPAR-γ prevented removal of the silencing mediator for retinoid and thyroid hormone receptors corepressor from the RoRγt promoter in T cells, thus interfering with RoRγt transcription. Both T cell-specific PPAR-γ knockout and endogenous ligand activation revealed the physiological role of PPAR-γ in continuous T cell intrinsic control of Th17 differentiation.

CD4+CD25+ Tregs also play an important role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis and are expected to be a novel therapeutic target to attenuate atherosclerosis and stabilize vulnerable plaques [47]. A relationship between PPAR-γ activation and regulation of Tregs has been reported. The PPAR-γ ligand, ciglitazone, enhanced the conversion of effector T cells to Tregs in vitro and had an enhancing effect on both natural and inducible Tregs [48]. Moreover, Lei et al. have demonstrated that PPAR-γ activation with endogenous and synthetic ligands together with transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) elicited Foxp3 deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) methylation through potent downregulation of DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs) such as DNMT1, 3a, and 3b, and induced potent and stable Foxp3, resulting in the generation of functional inducible Tregs [49].

4. PPAR-γ and B Cells

B cells play an important role in atherosclerosis and are thought to have atherogenic and antiatherogenic effects according to their subtype [50]. Mature B cells are categorized into three subtypes according to their surface antigens: conventional B2 B cells, B1 B cells, and marginal zone B cells [51]. The conventional B2 B cell plays an important role in adaptive immunity by producing specific antibodies to cognate antigens. The B1 B cell, which is found primarily in serosal cavities such as the peritoneal and pleural cavities, is important in innate immunity and responsible for production of natural IgM antibodies. The marginal zone B cell in splenic tissue plays a role in first-line defense against circulating blood-borne antigens. B1 B cells are thought to have a protective effect against atherogenicity [52, 53]. On the other hand, it seems that B2 B cells are involved in atherosclerosis, since native conventional B2 B cells can differentiate into two effector B cells, so-called Be1 and Be2 B cells. Be1 B cells produce Th1 cytokines including INF-γ, IL-2 and IL-12, whereas Be2 B cells secrete IL-4, IL-6 and IL-10, which are Th2 cytokines. It is reported that these cytokines secreted by Be cells enhance immunomodulation during chronic inflammation [54]. However, the detailed role of Be1 and Be2 B cells in atherosclerosis remains to be elucidated. Recently, regulatory B cells that produce IL-10 have been recognized as an important component of the immune system [5559]. Regulatory B cells secrete IL-10, and this may lead to suppression of both Th1 and Th2 polarization and inhibition of proinflammatory cytokine production from macrophages and DC. The role of regulatory B cells in atherosclerosis also remains to be elucidated, but they may attenuate the progression of atherosclerosis.

PPAR-γ is expressed in human and mouse B cells [60, 61]. Most studies of the effect of PPAR-γ activation on B cells focus on the apoptotic effect of endogenous and synthetic ligands on normal or B lymphoma cells. Recent reports demonstrated that detailed roles of PPAR-γ and RXRα agonists in PPAR-γ agonist-induced apoptosis of B cells were activation of mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPKs), inhibition of nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB), and CD40 activation [6266]. On the other hand, a recent paper by Garcia-Bates et al. reported the role of the PPAR-γ/RXRα pathway in human B cell differentiation [67]. They demonstrated that activated B cells have upregulated expression of PPAR-γ. In addition, nanomolar levels of PPAR-γ ligands, such as 15d-PGJ2 and rosiglitazone, enhanced B cell proliferation and significantly stimulated plasma cell differentiation and antibody production. The simultaneous addition of nanomolar concentrations of the RXRα ligand, 9-cis-retinoic acid, and PPAR-γ ligands to CpG-activated B cells resulted in additive effects on B cell proliferation, plasma cell differentiation, and antibody production. This result suggests that PPAR-γ activation may also regulate the function and differentiation of B cells. However, the link between PPAR-γ activation and B cell function in atherosclerosis is still unclear.

5. PPAR-γ and Dendritic Cells

DC contributes to chronic vascular inflammation, leading to atherosclerosis and its complications [6870]. In fact, a number of DC has been observed in atherosclerotic lesions of mouse models [7173] and in human advanced plaques [7476]. In normal conditions, DC is professional antigen-presenting cell that presents many kinds of endogenous and exogenous antigens to T cells, providing an important link between innate and adaptive immune responses [77]. Additionally, many lines of evidence have demonstrated that DC contributes to the pathogenesis and progression of atherosclerosis [6870]. DC accumulates in the intima of atherosclerotic lesions through vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1) and CX3C chemokine receptor 1 (CX3CR1) during low-grade chronic inflammation [72, 78]. DC may differentiate from monocytes that CX3CR1-dependently patrol arterial vessels, but can also differentiate from monocytes, which seem to be preferentially recruited. In intimal proliferation of DC, granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) is thought to be important [79, 80]. Excess lipoproteins deposited in the arterial wall accumulate within lipid-loaded CD11c+ DC, contributing to early-stage plaque formation. DC can control lipid homeostasis possibly through lipoprotein uptake and clearance from the circulation. DC also regulates T cell activation in the vessel wall and influence helper T cell responses, with lipoprotein being able to contribute to DC maturation and activation [69]. In addition, various DC subsets can release proinflammatory cytokines [68]. For instance, conventional DC (cDC) can participate in interaction with T and natural killer T cells, which results in increased production of IFN-γ, IL-17, and TNF-α from T cells [81]. Activation of CD36 and Toll-like receptors (TLRs) in CD11b+CD11c+ DC and cDC by lipids results in increased secretion of various DC-derived cytokines, such as IL-6, IL-12, and TNF-α [82]. Plasmacytoid DC (pDC) has been shown to produce amounts of type I IFNs (IFN-α and β), which play a proatherogenic role.

PPAR-γ is expressed in murine and human DC, and PPAR-γ activation has been shown to be involved in DC function [8390]. PPAR-γ ligands inhibited the production of IL-12 and several cytokines such as chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 1 (CXCL1) and chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 5 (CCL5) [85, 86]. Moreover, PPAR-γ inhibited the maturation of DC and attenuated the expression of CD1a, CD40, CD80, CD83, and chemokine (C-C motif) receptor 7 (CCR7) [85, 88, 90]. These results indicate that PPAR-γ activation by synthetic ligands reduced the ability of DC to stimulate lymphocyte proliferation and to prime antigen-specific T cell responses.

6. PPAR-γ and Neutrophils

Neutrophils, as well as macrophages, lymphocytes, and DC, also play crucial roles in atherogenesis [91, 92]. Neutrophils and their mediators have been detected in mouse and human atherosclerotic lesions [9395]. An increased number of circulating neutrophils are also observed in pathological conditions such as hyperlipidemia. Neutrophils are recruited into atherosclerotic lesions via specific chemokine receptors, including CCR1, 2, 5, and CXCR2 [96]. OxLDL may induce the transmigration of neutrophils and release of ROS and granule proteins from neutrophils, which trigger monocyte recruitment and extravasation directly or indirectly through upregulation of adhesion molecules on endothelial cells. In addition, apoptotic neutrophils sustain monocyte recruitment via various find-me and eat-me signals [97]. Thus, neutrophils could provide a chronic inflammation trigger sustaining atherogenesis.

Several lines of evidence have demonstrated the presence of PPAR-γ in neutrophils, and have shown a suppressive effect of PPAR-γ activation by endogenous and synthetic ligands on neutrophil infiltration in various animal models of inflammation [98103]. A recent study by Napimoga et al. [104] reported that administration of 15d-PGJ2, an endogenous PPAR-γ ligand, decreased leukocyte rolling and adhesion to inflamed mesenteric tissue by a mechanism dependent on NO. Specifically, pharmacological inhibitors of NO synthase (NOS) abrogated the 15d-PGJ2-mediated suppression of neutrophil migration to the inflammatory site. Moreover, inducible NOS−/− mice were not susceptible to 15d-PGJ2-mediated suppression of neutrophil migration to inflammatory sites compared with their wild type. In addition, 15d-PGJ2-mediated suppression of neutrophil migration appeared to be independent of the production of cytokines and chemokines, since their production was not significantly affected in the carrageenan-injected peritoneal cavity. These findings demonstrated that 15d-PGJ2 suppresses inflammation-initiated neutrophil migration in a mechanism dependent on NO production in mesenteric tissue. However, the detailed role of neutrophil regulation by PPAR-γ ligands in atherosclerosis remains to be elucidated and further studies are needed.

7. Recent Concern for Cardiovascular Risks of PPAR-γ Agonists

As described above, PPAR-γ activation is expected as a therapeutic target for improving cardiovascular risk factors. However, its safety is controversial in clinical use, since several reports pointed out an increase in risk of ischemic cardiovascular events with PPAR-γ agonists. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials has suggested that rosiglitazone, one of TZD, increased risk of ischemic cardiovascular events [105, 106]. In contrast, meta-analysis of clinical trials of another TZD, pioglitazone has also reported the possibility of an ischemic cardiovascular benefit by pioglitazone [107]; however, both TZDs are reported to increase the risk of congestive heart failure [108]. Recently, meta-analysis of observational studies that directly compared the risk of cardiovascular outcomes for rosiglitazone and pioglitazone among patients with T2DM has demonstrated that the use of rosiglitazone was associated with significantly higher odds of congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, and death compared with that of pioglitazone [109]. However, whether any meaningful difference exists in the magnitude of risk between two TZDs is still unclear. The European Medicines Agency has recommended the suspension of marketing authorization for rosiglitazone, whereas the US Food and Drug Administration has allowed the continued marketing of rosiglitazone with additional restrictions [110]. Further studies are required to understand these contradictory effects of PPAR-γ agonists in the future.

8. Conclusion

Vascular inflammation-induced atherosclerosis is one of the most worrying common problems throughout the world. As described above, PPAR-γ has a wide range of roles in the pathogenesis and progression of atherosclerosis via regulation of inflammatory cells, including monocytes/macrophages, lymphocytes, dendritic cells, and neutrophils. Although regulation of PPAR-γ activity may not alter the underlying cause of the disease, it may regulate pathological conditions, resulting in clinical benefit. Several recent experimental and clinical findings have supported the potential utility of regulating PPAR-γ activity as a therapeutic approach for atherosclerosis. The roles of PPAR-γ regulation still represent huge unmet challenges in therapeutic interventions. Further accumulation of experimental and clinical evidence on the relationship between PPAR-γ and vascular inflammation may contribute to solving this problem.

References

  1. R. Ross, “Atherosclerosis—an inflammatory disease,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 340, no. 2, pp. 115–126, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. R. M. Evans, G. D. Barish, and Y. X. Wang, “PPARs and the complex journey to obesity,” Nature Medicine, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 355–361, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. N. Marx, H. Duez, J. C. Fruchart, and B. Staels, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors and atherogenesis: regulators of gene expression in vascular cells,” Circulation Research, vol. 94, no. 9, pp. 1168–1178, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. J. P. Berger, T. E. Akiyama, and P. T. Meinke, “PPARs: therapeutic targets for metabolic disease,” Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 244–251, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. S. Yu and J. K. Reddy, “Transcription coactivators for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, vol. 1771, no. 8, pp. 936–951, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. V. Zoete, A. Grosdidier, and O. Michielin, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor structures: ligand specificity, molecular switch and interactions with regulators,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, vol. 1771, no. 8, pp. 915–925, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. B. Desvergne and W. Wahli, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors: nuclear control of metabolism,” Endocrine Reviews, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 649–688, 1999. View at Scopus
  8. S. M. Rangwala and M. A. Lazar, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ in diabetes and metabolism,” Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 331–336, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. M. Lehrke and M. A. Lazar, “The many faces of PPARγ,” Cell, vol. 123, no. 6, pp. 993–999, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. J. X. Rong, Y. Qiu, M. K. Hansen et al., “Adipose mitochondrial biogenesis is suppressed in db/db and high-fat diet-fed mice and improved by rosiglitazone,” Diabetes, vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 1751–1760, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. L. W. Engstrom, L. Bober, S. C. Chen et al., “Kinetic assessment and therapeutic modulation of metabolic and inflammatory profiles in mice on a high-fat and cholesterol diet,” PPAR Research, vol. 2010, Article ID 970164, 13 pages, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. G. Y. Song, Y. Gao, C. Wang et al., “Rosiglitazone reduces fatty acid translocase and increases AMPK in skeletal muscle in aged rats: a possible mechanism to prevent high-fat-induced insulin resistance,” Chinese Medical Journal, vol. 123, no. 17, pp. 2384–2391, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. A. Foryst-Ludwig, M. Hartge, M. Clemenz et al., “PPARgamma activation attenuates T-lymphocyte-dependent inflammation of adipose tissue and development of insulin resistance in obese mice,” Cardiovascular Diabetology, vol. 9, article 64, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. J. A. Dormandy, B. Charbonnel, D. J. Eckland et al., “Secondary prevention of macrovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes in the PROactive Study (PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial in macroVascular Events): a randomised controlled trial,” The Lancet, vol. 366, no. 9493, pp. 1279–1289, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. H. C. Gerstein, S. Yusuf, J. Bosch, et al., “Effect of rosiglitazone on the frequency of diabetes in patients with impaired glucose tolerance or impaired fasting glucose: a randomised controlled trial,” The Lancet, vol. 368, no. 9541, pp. 1096–1105, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  16. S. E. Kahn, S. M. Haffner, M. A. Heise et al., “Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 355, no. 23, pp. 2427–2443, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. S. E. Nissen, S. J. Nicholls, K. Wolski et al., “Comparison of pioglitazone vs glimepiride on progression of coronary atherosclerosis in patients with type 2 diabetes: the PERISCOPE randomized controlled trial,” Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 299, no. 13, pp. 1561–1573, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. T. Kanda, J. D. Brown, G. Orasanu et al., “PPARγ in the endothelium regulates metabolic responses to high-fat diet in mice,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 119, no. 1, pp. 110–124, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. J. M. Kleinhenz, D. J. Kleinhenz, S. You et al., “Disruption of endothelial peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ reduces vascular nitric oxide production,” American Journal of Physiology, vol. 297, no. 5, pp. H1647–H1654, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. A. Qu, Y. M. Shah, S. K. Manna, and F. J. Gonzalez, “Disruption of endothelial peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma accelerates diet-induced atherogenesis in LDL receptor-null mice,” Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 65–73, 2012.
  21. N. Wang, L. Verna, N. G. Chen et al., “Constitutive activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ suppresses pro-inflammatory adhesion molecules in human vascular endothelial cells,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 277, no. 37, pp. 34176–34181, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. D. S. Straus and C. K. Glass, “Anti-inflammatory actions of PPAR ligands: new insights on cellular and molecular mechanisms,” Trends in Immunology, vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 551–558, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. S. Z. Duan, M. G. Usher, and R. M. Mortensen, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ-mediated effects in the vasculature,” Circulation Research, vol. 102, no. 3, pp. 283–294, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. M. Ricote, A. C. Li, T. M. Willson, C. J. Kelly, and C. K. Glass, “The peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ is a negative regulator of macrophage activation,” Nature, vol. 391, no. 6662, pp. 79–82, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. M. Ricote, J. Huang, L. Fajas et al., “Expression of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ) in human atherosclerosis and regulation in macrophages by colony stimulating factors and oxidized low density lipoprotein,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 95, no. 13, pp. 7614–7619, 1998. View at Scopus
  26. S. Gordon, “Alternative activation of macrophages,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 23–35, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. D. M. Mosser and J. P. Edwards, “Exploring the full spectrum of macrophage activation,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 958–969, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. R. D. Stout and J. Suttles, “Functional plasticity of macrophages: reversible adaptation to changing microenvironments,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 509–513, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. J. I. Odegaard, R. R. Ricardo-Gonzalez, M. H. Goforth et al., “Macrophage-specific PPARγ controls alternative activation and improves insulin resistance,” Nature, vol. 447, no. 7148, pp. 1116–1120, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. C. Jiang, A. T. Ting, and B. Seed, “PPAR-γ agonists inhibit production of monocyte inflammatory cytokines,” Nature, vol. 391, no. 6662, pp. 82–86, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. U. Kintscher, S. Goetze, S. Wakino et al., “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor and retinoid X receptor ligands inhibit monocyte chemotactic protein-1-directed migration of monocytes,” European Journal of Pharmacology, vol. 401, no. 3, pp. 259–270, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. J. T. Huang, J. S. Welch, M. Ricote et al., “Interleukin-4-dependent production of PPAR-γ ligands in macrophages by 12/15-lipoxygenase,” Nature, vol. 400, no. 6742, pp. 378–382, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. D. Vats, L. Mukundan, J. I. Odegaard et al., “Oxidative metabolism and PGC-1β attenuate macrophage-mediated inflammation,” Cell Metabolism, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 13–24, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. M. A. Bouhlel, B. Derudas, E. Rigamonti et al., “PPARγ activation primes human monocytes into alternative M2 macrophages with anti-inflammatory properties,” Cell Metabolism, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 137–143, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. P. Tontonoz, L. Nagy, J. G. A. Alvarez, V. A. Thomazy, and R. M. Evans, “PPARγ promotes monocyte/macrophage differentiation and uptake of oxidized LDL,” Cell, vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 241–252, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. L. Nagy, P. Tontonoz, J. G. A. Alvarez, H. Chen, and R. M. Evans, “Oxidized LDL regulates macrophage gene expression through ligand activation of PPARγ,” Cell, vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 229–240, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. I. C. Kavanagh, C. E. Symes, P. Renaudin et al., “Degree of oxidation of low density lipoprotein affects expression of CD36 and PPARγ, but not cytokine production, by human monocyte-macrophages,” Atherosclerosis, vol. 168, no. 2, pp. 271–282, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. T. Westendorf, J. Graessler, and S. Kopprasch, “Hypochlorite-oxidized low-density lipoprotein upregulates CD36 and PPARγ mRNA expression and modulates SR-BI gene expression in murine macrophages,” Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry, vol. 277, no. 1-2, pp. 143–152, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. A. Chawla, W. A. Boisvert, C. H. Lee et al., “A PPARγ-LXR-ABCA1 pathway in macrophages is involved in cholesterol efflux and atherogenesis,” Molecular Cell, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 161–171, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. G. Chinetti, S. Lestavel, V. Bocher et al., “PPAR-α and PPAR-γ activators induce cholesterol removal from human macrophage foam cells through stimulation of the ABCA1 pathway,” Nature Medicine, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 53–58, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. R. Cunard, M. Ricote, D. DiCampli et al., “Regulation of cytokine expression by ligands of peroxisome proliferator activated receptors,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 168, no. 6, pp. 2795–2802, 2002. View at Scopus
  42. X. Y. Yang, L. H. Wang, T. Chen et al., “Activation of human T lymphocytes is inhibited by peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ) agonists. PPARγ co-association with transcription factor NFAT,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 275, no. 7, pp. 4541–4544, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. R. B. Clark, D. Bishop-Bailey, T. Estrada-Hernandez, T. Hla, L. Puddington, and S. J. Padula, “The nuclear receptor PPARγ and immunoregulation: PPARγ mediates inhibition of helper T cell responses,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 164, no. 3, pp. 1364–1371, 2000. View at Scopus
  44. N. Marx, B. Kehrle, K. Kohlhammer et al., “PPAR activators as antiinflammatory mediators in human T lymphocytes: implications for atherosclerosis and transplantation-associated arteriosclerosis,” Circulation Research, vol. 90, no. 6, pp. 703–710, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. L. J. Saubermann, A. Nakajima, K. Wada et al., “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma agonist ligands stimulate a Th2 cytokine response and prevent acute colitis,” Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 330–339, 2002. View at Scopus
  46. L. Klotz, S. Burgdorf, I. Dani et al., “The nuclear receptor PPARγ selectively inhibits Th17 differentiation in a T cell-intrinsic fashion and suppresses CNS autoimmunity,” The Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 206, no. 10, pp. 2079–2089, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. J. George, “Mechanisms of Disease: the evolving role of regulatory T cells in atherosclerosis,” Nature Clinical Practice Cardiovascular Medicine, vol. 5, no. 9, pp. 531–540, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. E. A. Wohlfert, F. C. Nichols, E. Nevius, and R. B. Clark, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ) and immunoregulation: enhancement of regulatory T cells through PPARγ- dependent and -independent mechanisms,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 178, no. 7, pp. 4129–4135, 2007. View at Scopus
  49. J. Lei, H. Hasegawa, T. Matsumoto, and M. Yasukawa, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α and γ agonists together with TGF-β convert human CD4+CD25- T cells into functional Foxp3+ regulatory T cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 185, no. 12, pp. 7186–7198, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. T. Kyaw, P. Tipping, B. H. Toh, and A. Bobik, “Current understanding of the role of B cell subsets and intimal and adventitial B cells in atherosclerosis,” Current Opinion in Lipidology, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 373–379, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  51. T. W. Lebien and T. F. Tedder, “B lymphocytes: how they develop and function,” Blood, vol. 112, no. 5, pp. 1570–1580, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. E. Galkina and K. Ley, “Immune and inflammatory mechanisms of atherosclerosis,” Annual Review of Immunology, vol. 27, pp. 165–197, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. C. J. Binder, “Natural IgM antibodies against oxidation-specific epitopes,” Journal of Clinical Immunology, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. S56–S60, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. D. P. Harris, L. Haynes, P. C. Sayles et al., “Reciprocal regulation of polarized cytokine production by effector B and T cells,” Nature Immunology, vol. 1, no. 6, pp. 475–482, 2000. View at Scopus
  55. A. Mizoguchi and A. K. Bhan, “A case for regulatory B cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 176, no. 2, pp. 705–710, 2006. View at Scopus
  56. P. Serra and P. Santamaria, “To “B” regulated: B cells as members of the regulatory workforce,” Trends in Immunology, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 7–10, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. J. D. Bouaziz, K. Yanaba, and T. F. Tedder, “Regulatory B cells as inhibitors of immune responses and inflammation,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 224, no. 1, pp. 201–214, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. F. E. Lund, “Cytokine-producing B lymphocytes—key regulators of immunity,” Current Opinion in Immunology, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 332–338, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. C. Mauri and M. R. Ehrenstein, “The “short” history of regulatory B cells,” Trends in Immunology, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 34–40, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. J. Padilla, K. Kaur, H. J. Cao, T. J. Smith, and R. P. Phipps, “Peroxisome proliferator activator receptor-γ agonists and 15-deoxy-Δ12,14-PGJ2 induce apoptosis in normal and malignant B-lineage cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 165, no. 12, pp. 6941–6948, 2000. View at Scopus
  61. J. Padilla, E. Leung, and R. P. Phipps, “Human B lymphocytes and B lymphomas express PPAR-γ and are killed by PPAR-γ agonists,” Clinical Immunology, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 22–33, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. J. J. Schlezinger, B. A. Jensen, K. K. Mann, H. Y. Ryu, and D. H. Sherr, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ-mediated NF-κB activation and apoptosis in pre-B cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 169, no. 12, pp. 6831–6841, 2002. View at Scopus
  63. J. J. Schlezinger, G. J. Howard, C. H. Hurst et al., “Environmental and endogenous peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ agonists induce bone marrow B cell growth arrest and apoptosis: interactions between mono(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, 9-cis-retinoic acid, and 15-deoxy-Δ12,14-prostaglandin J2,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 173, no. 5, pp. 3165–3177, 2004. View at Scopus
  64. R. Piva, P. Gianferretti, A. Ciucci, R. Taulli, G. Belardo, and M. G. Santoro, “15-Deoxy-Δ12,14-prostaglandin J2 induces apoptosis in human malignant B cells: an effect associated with inhibition of NF-κB activity and down-regulation of antiapoptotic proteins,” Blood, vol. 105, no. 4, pp. 1750–1758, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. D. M. Ray, F. Akbiyik, S. H. Bernstein, and R. P. Phipps, “CD40 engagement prevents peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ agonist-induced apoptosis of B lymphocytes and B lymphoma cells by an NF-κB-dependent mechanism,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 174, no. 7, pp. 4060–4069, 2005. View at Scopus
  66. J. J. Schlezinger, J. K. Emberley, and D. H. Sherr, “Activation of multiple mitogen-activated protein kinases in pro/pre-B cells by GW7845, a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ agonist, and their contribution to GW7845-induced apoptosis,” Toxicological Sciences, vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 433–444, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. T. M. Garcia-Bates, C. J. Baglole, M. P. Bernard, T. I. Murant, P. J. Simpson-Haidaris, and R. P. Phipps, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ ligands enhance human B cell antibody production and differentiation,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 183, no. 11, pp. 6903–6912, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. E. K. Koltsova and K. Ley, “How dendritic cells shape atherosclerosis,” Trends in Immunology, vol. 32, no. 11, pp. 540–547, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  69. H. D. Manthey and A. Zernecke, “Dendritic cells in atherosclerosis: functions in immune regulation and beyond,” Thrombosis and Haemostasis, vol. 106, no. 5, pp. 772–778, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  70. E. A. van Vre, I. van Brussel, J. M. Bosmans, C. J. Vrints, and H. Bult, “Dendritic cells in human atherosclerosis: from circulation to atherosclerotic plaques,” Mediators of Inflammation, vol. 2011, Article ID 941396, 13 pages, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  71. E. Galkina, A. Kadl, J. Sanders, D. Varughese, I. J. Sarembock, and K. Ley, “Lymphocyte recruitment into the aortic wall before and during development of atherosclerosis is partially L-selectin dependent,” The Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 203, no. 5, pp. 1273–1282, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. P. Liu, Y. R. A. Yu, J. A. Spencer et al., “CX3CR1 deficiency impairs dendritic cell accumulation in arterial intima and reduces atherosclerotic burden,” Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 243–250, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. C. Weber, S. Meiler, Y. Döring et al., “CCL17-expressing dendritic cells drive atherosclerosis by restraining regulatory T cell homeostasis in mice,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 121, no. 7, pp. 2898–2910, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. A. Yilmaz, M. Lochno, F. Traeg et al., “Emergence of dendritic cells in rupture-prone regions of vulnerable carotid plaques,” Atherosclerosis, vol. 176, no. 1, pp. 101–110, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. Y. V. Bobryshev, “Dendritic cells in atherosclerosis: current status of the problem and clinical relevance,” European Heart Journal, vol. 26, no. 17, pp. 1700–1704, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  76. C. Erbel, K. Sato, F. B. Meyer et al., “Functional profile of activated dendritic cells in unstable atherosclerotic plaque,” Basic Research in Cardiology, vol. 102, no. 2, pp. 123–132, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  77. R. M. Steinman and H. Hemmi, “Dendritic cells: translating innate to adaptive immunity,” Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology, vol. 311, pp. 17–58, 2006. View at Scopus
  78. J. Jongstra-Bilen, M. Haidari, S. N. Zhu, M. Chen, D. Guha, and M. I. Cybulsky, “Low-grade chronic inflammation in regions of the normal mouse arterial intima predisposed to atherosclerosis,” The Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 203, no. 9, pp. 2073–2083, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  79. Z. Shaposhnik, X. Wang, M. Weinstein, B. J. Bennett, and A. J. Lusis, “Granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor regulates dendritic cell content of atherosclerotic lesions,” Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 621–627, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  80. S. N. Zhu, M. Chen, J. Jongstra-Bilen, and M. I. Cybulsky, “GM-CSF regulates intimal cell proliferation in nascent atherosclerotic lesions,” The Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 206, no. 10, pp. 2141–2149, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  81. K. E. Paulson, S. N. Zhu, M. Chen, S. Nurmohamed, J. Jongstra-Bilen, and M. I. Cybulsky, “Resident intimal dendritic cells accumulate lipid and contribute to the initiation of atherosclerosis,” Circulation Research, vol. 106, no. 2, pp. 383–390, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  82. Y. I. Miller, S. H. Choi, P. Wiesner et al., “Oxidation-specific epitopes are danger-associated molecular patterns recognized by pattern recognition receptors of innate immunity,” Circulation Research, vol. 108, no. 2, pp. 235–248, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  83. C. Faveeuw, S. Fougeray, V. Angeli et al., “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ activators inhibit interleukin-12 production in murine dendritic cells,” FEBS Letters, vol. 486, no. 3, pp. 261–266, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  84. P. Gosset, A. S. Charbonnier, P. Delerive, et al., “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma activators affect the maturation of human monocyte-derived dendritic cells,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 2857–2865, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  85. A. Nencioni, F. Grünebach, A. Zobywlaski, C. Denzlinger, W. Brugger, and P. Brossart, “Dendritic cell immunogenicity is regulated by peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 169, no. 3, pp. 1228–1235, 2002. View at Scopus
  86. M. A. Jakobsen, R. K. Petersen, K. Kristiansen, M. Lange, and S. T. Lillevang, “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α, δ, γ1 and γ2 expressions are present in human monocyte-derived dendritic cells and modulate dendritic cell maturation by addition of subtype-specific ligands,” Scandinavian Journal of Immunology, vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 330–337, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  87. I. Szatmari, E. Rajnavolgyi, and L. Nagy, “PPARγ, a lipid-activated transcription factor as a regulator of dendritic cell function,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol. 1088, pp. 207–218, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  88. L. Klotz, I. Dani, F. Edenhofer, et al., “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma control of dendritic cell function contributes to development of CD4+ T cell anergy,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 178, no. 4, pp. 2122–2231, 2007.
  89. I. Szatmari, D. Töröcsik, M. Agostini et al., “PPARγ regulates the function of human dendritic cells primarily by altering lipid metabolism,” Blood, vol. 110, no. 9, pp. 3271–3280, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  90. F. Zapata-Gonzalez, F. Rueda, J. Petriz et al., “9-cis-Retinoic Acid (9cRA), a Retinoid X Receptor (RXR) ligand, exerts immunosuppressive effects on dendritic cells by RXR-dependent activation: inhibition of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ blocks some of the 9cRA activities, and precludes them to mature phenotype development,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 178, no. 10, pp. 6130–6139, 2007. View at Scopus
  91. M. Drechsler, Y. Doring, R. T. Megens, and O. Soehnlein, “Neutrophilic granulocytes—promiscuous accelerators of atherosclerosis,” Thrombosis and Haemostasis, vol. 106, no. 5, pp. 839–848, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  92. C. Weber and H. Noels, “Atherosclerosis: current pathogenesis and therapeutic options,” Nature Medicine, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 1410–1422, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  93. C. Weber, A. Zernecke, and P. Libby, “The multifaceted contributions of leukocyte subsets to atherosclerosis: lessons from mouse models,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 802–815, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  94. A. Zernecke, I. Bot, Y. Djalali-Talab et al., “Protective role of CXC receptor 4/CXC ligand 12 unveils the importance of neutrophils in atherosclerosis,” Circulation Research, vol. 102, no. 2, pp. 209–217, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  95. P. Rotzius, S. Thams, O. Soehnlein et al., “Distinct infiltration of neutrophils in lesion shoulders in ApoE-/- mice,” The American Journal of Pathology, vol. 177, no. 1, pp. 493–500, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  96. M. Drechsler, R. T. A. Megens, M. van Zandvoort, C. Weber, and O. Soehnlein, “Hyperlipidemia-triggered neutrophilia promotes early atherosclerosis,” Circulation, vol. 122, no. 18, pp. 1837–1845, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  97. O. Soehnlein and L. Lindbom, “Phagocyte partnership during the onset and resolution of inflammation,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 427–439, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  98. M. E. Greene, B. Blumberg, O. W. McBride et al., “isolation of the human peroxisome proliferator activated receptor gamma cDNA: expression in hematopoietic cells and chromosomal mapping,” Gene Expression, vol. 4, no. 4-5, pp. 281–299, 1995. View at Scopus
  99. S. Vaidya, E. P. Somers, S. D. Wright, P. A. Detmers, and V. S. Bansal, “15-deoxy-Δ12,14-prostaglandin J2 inhibits the β2 integrin- dependent oxidative burst: involvement of a mechanism distinct from peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ ligation,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 163, no. 11, pp. 6187–6192, 1999. View at Scopus
  100. M. A. Birrell, H. J. Patel, K. McCluskie et al., “PPAR-γ agonists as therapy for diseases involving airway neutrophilia,” European Respiratory Journal, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 18–23, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  101. E. Imamoto, N. Yoshida, K. Uchiyama et al., “Inhibitory effect of pioglitazone on expression of adhesion molecules on neutrophils and endothelial cells,” BioFactors, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 37–47, 2004. View at Scopus
  102. D. Liu, B. X. Zeng, S. H. Zhang, and S. L. Yao, “Rosiglitazone, an agonist of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ, reduces pulmonary inflammatory response in a rat model of endotoxemia,” Inflammation Research, vol. 54, no. 11, pp. 464–470, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  103. M. Sánchez-Hidalgo, A. R. Martín, I. Villegas, and C. Alarcón De La Lastra, “Rosiglitazone, an agonist of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma, reduces chronic colonic inflammation in rats,” Biochemical Pharmacology, vol. 69, no. 12, pp. 1733–1744, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  104. M. H. Napimoga, S. M. Vieira, D. Dal-Secco et al., “Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ ligand, 15-deoxy-Δ12,14-prostaglandin J2, reduces neutrophil migration via a nitric oxide pathway,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 180, no. 1, pp. 609–617, 2008. View at Scopus
  105. S. Singh, Y. K. Loke, and C. D. Furberg, “Long-term risk of cardiovascular events with rosiglitazone: a meta-analysis,” Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 298, no. 10, pp. 1189–1195, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  106. S. E. Nissen and K. Wolski, “Rosiglitazone revisited: an updated meta-analysis of risk for myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality,” Archives of Internal Medicine, vol. 170, no. 14, pp. 1191–1201, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  107. A. M. Lincoff, K. Wolski, S. J. Nicholls, and S. E. Nissen, “Pioglitazone and risk of cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of randomized trials,” Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 298, no. 10, pp. 1180–1188, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  108. S. Singh, Y. K. Loke, and C. D. Furberg, “Thiazolidinediones and heart failure: a teleo-analysis,” Diabetes Care, vol. 30, no. 8, pp. 2148–2153, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  109. Y. K. Loke, C. S. Kwok, and S. Singh, “Comparative cardiovascular effects of thiazolidinediones: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies,” British Medical Journal, vol. 342, Article ID d1309, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  110. D. Cohen, “Insiders criticise FDA's decision not to withdraw rosiglitazone,” British Medical Journal, vol. 341, Article ID c5333, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus