An Insight into the Diverse Roles of Surfactant Proteins, SP-A and SP-D in Innate and Adaptive Immunity

Surfactant proteins, SP-A and SP-D, are collagen-containing C-type (calcium dependent) lectins called collectins, which contribute significantly to surfactant homeostasis and pulmonary immunity. These highly versatile innate immune molecules are involved in a range of immune functions including viral neutralization, clearance of bacteria, fungi and apoptotic and necrotic cells, down regulation of allergic reaction and resolution of inflammation. Their basic structures include a triple-helical collagen region and a C-terminal homotrimeric lectin or carbohydrate recognition domain (CRD). The trimeric CRDs can recognize carbohydrate or charge patterns on microbes, allergens and dying cells, while the collagen region can interact with receptor molecules present on a variety of immune cells in order to initiate clearance mechanisms. Studies involving gene knock-out mice, murine models of lung hypersensitivity and infection, and functional characterization of cell surface receptors have revealed the diverse roles of SP-A and SP-D in the control of lung inflammation. A recently proposed model based on studies with the calreticulin-CD91 complex as a receptor for SP-A and SP-D has suggested an anti-inflammatory role for SP-A and SP-D in naïve lungs which would help minimise the potential damage that continual low level exposure to pathogens, allergens and apoptosis can cause. However, when the lungs are overwhelmed with exogenous insults, SP-A and SP-D can assume pro-inflammatory roles in order to complement pulmonary innate and adaptive immunity. This review is an update on the structural and functional aspects of SP-A and SP-D, with emphasis on their roles in controlling pulmonary infection, allergy and inflammation. We also try to put in perspective the controversial subject of the candidate receptor molecules for SP-A and SP-D.

More timely and effective therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has contributed to increasing rates of clinical remission. However, progression of structural damage may still occur in patients who have satisfied remission criteria, which suggests that there is ongoing disease activity. This questions the validity of current methods of assessing remission in RA. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that modern joint imaging improves the accuracy of remission measurement in RA. We studied 107 RA patients receiving disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy who were judged by their consultant rheumatologist to be in remission and 17 normal control subjects. Patients underwent clinical, laboratory, functional, and quality of life assessments. The Disease Activity Score 28-joint assessment and the American College of Rheumatology remission criteria, together with strict clinical definitions of remission, were applied. Imaging of the hands and wrists using standardized acquisition and scoring techniques with conventional 1.5T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography (US) were performed. Irrespective of which clinical criteria were applied to determine remission, the majority of patients continued to have evidence of active inflammation, as shown by findings on the imaging assessments. Even in asymptomatic patients with clinically normal joints, MRI showed that 96% had synovitis and 46% had bone marrow edema, and US showed that 73% had gray-scale synovial hypertrophy and 43% had increased power Doppler signal. Only mild synovial thickening was seen in 3 of the control subjects (18%), but no bone marrow edema. Most RA patients who satisfied the remission criteria with normal findings on clinical and laboratory studies had imaging-detected synovitis. This subclinical inflammation may explain the observed discrepancy between disease activity and outcome in RA. Imaging assessment may be necessary for the accurate evaluation of disease status and, in particular, for the definition of true remission.