Cited by 573Barrier Structure and Function StudiesNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsExtracellular vesicles in disease

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 191 of the 192 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 129 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

The impact of microglial activation on blood-brain barrier in brain diseases

Open access
da Fonseca, Anna Carolina Carvalho, Matias, Diana, Garcia, Celina, Amaral, Rackele, Geraldo, Luiz Henrique, Freitas, Catarina, Lima, Flavia Regina Souza·2014·Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience

Abstract

The blood-brain barrier (BBB), constituted by an extensive network of endothelial cells (ECs) together with neurons and glial cells, including microglia, forms the neurovascular unit (NVU). The crosstalk between these cells guarantees a proper environment for brain function. In this context, changes in the endothelium-microglia interactions are associated with a variety of inflammation-related diseases in brain, where BBB permeability is compromised. Increasing evidences indicate that activated microglia modulate expression of tight junctions, which are essential for BBB integrity and function. On the other hand, the endothelium can regulate the state of microglial activation. Here, we review recent advances that provide insights into interactions between the microglia and the vascular system in brain diseases such as infectious/inflammatory diseases, epilepsy, ischemic stroke and neurodegenerative disorders.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This narrative review synthesizes evidence that activated microglia impair blood-brain barrier (BBB) function through release of inflammatory mediators (ROS, TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6, MMPs, chemokines), while the endothelium can in turn regulate microglial activation. It argues that microglia–endothelium crosstalk within the neurovascular unit is a central, and potentially targetable, mechanism in epilepsy, ischemic stroke, infectious/inflammatory disease, Alzheimer's disease and multiple sclerosis.

Key findings

  • In rat brain microvascular endothelial cell (RBEC)/microglia co-culture, abluminal LPS did not change transendothelial electrical resistance (TEER) in RBEC monolayers alone, but decreased TEER and increased sodium-fluorescein permeability in co-culture, in a manner dependent on microglial cell number; the disrupted ZO-1, claudin-5 and occludin staining was restored by the NADPH oxidase inhibitor DPI (Sumi et al., 2010).
  • In mouse brain capillary endothelial (MBEC4)/microglia co-culture, LPS-activated microglia increased Na-F permeability, an effect blocked by a neutralizing antibody against TNF-α (Nishioku et al., 2010).
  • In CD200-deficient mice, increased BBB permeability was associated with T cell/macrophage entry, elevated IFNγ, and increased TNF-α, promoting classical microglial activation (Denieffe et al., 2013).
  • In rat hippocampus, Aβ1–42 injection caused time-dependent increases in fibrinogen and microgliosis and significantly increased IgG immunoreactivity; anti-Mac-1 reduced IgG, consistent with reduced microglial reactivity and greater BBB preservation (Ryu and McLarnon, 2009).
  • In stroke, BBB disruption is described as biphasic: an early opening (12–48 h) driven mainly by ROS activating latent MMP-2, and a delayed secondary opening (48–72 h) driven by sustained inflammation and microglial MMP-2/3/9 production; activated microglia were reported up to 16 weeks after 2-hour MCAO in rats (Ekdahl et al., 2009), while neutrophil infiltration was more prominent only with longer MCAO periods and few exogenous macrophages infiltrated over the first 72 h (Denes et al., 2007).
  • Minocycline, a microglial inhibitor, preserved BBB constituents in vitro and reduced BBB disruption and hemorrhage in vivo (Yenari et al., 2006), and in two clinical trials in ischemic stroke patients improved neurological functional outcome, alone and combined with fibrinolysis (Fagan et al., 2011).

Methods

  • Design: narrative literature review of "recent advances" on microglia–vascular interactions in brain disease; no systematic search strategy, inclusion criteria, or quantitative synthesis is reported.
  • Scope: developmental microglia–endothelium interaction, mechanisms of microglial activation and BBB impairment, and disease-specific sections on epilepsy, stroke, Alzheimer's disease and multiple sclerosis.
  • Evidence base: cited in vitro co-culture systems (RBEC/microglia, MBEC4/microglia), rodent models (PU.1-deficient mice, clodronate liposome depletion, choroidal neovascularization, Aβ1–42 intra-hippocampal injection, tMCAO, EAE, TMEV-IDD, CD200-deficient mice), human AD and MS tissue, and clinical trial reports; the review also presents one original confocal image (Figure 1) of IBA1-positive microglia and IsolectinB4-positive endothelium in a 1-month-old mouse cortex.

Limitations

  • The paper states no explicit limitations section; it acknowledges that "the mechanisms involved in the multifaceted interactions between the constituents of the NVU are not yet fully uncovered," particularly how microglial activation drives BBB disruption.
  • Evident from the text: as a narrative review it relies on heterogeneous cited studies (in vitro co-cultures, animal models, human tissue, clinical trials) without systematic appraisal, and several mechanistic claims are hedged by the authors as hypotheses or suggestions (e.g., "we can hypothesize," "we suggest") rather than demonstrated findings.
  • Evident from the text: much of the mechanistic evidence is preclinical (rodent and cell-culture), and the authors note uncertainty about the relative contribution of resident microglia versus infiltrating bone-marrow-derived myeloid cells in inflammatory conditions.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fncel.2014.00362

Cites

191 of 191 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 129 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 48 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 4
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 37
40 of 40
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The findings from animal models and in vitro co-culture systems about microglia-endothelium interactions are representative of human brain diseases.

    “Considering all the studies mentioned above, microglial activation impairs BBB function by the release of various molecules leading to a hyperpermeability condition associated with inflammation that is similar to what occurs in certain neurodegenerative disorders, including AD and Multiple Sclerosis (MS).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Microglial activation is a common and comparable process across the different brain diseases discussed (infectious/inflammatory diseases, epilepsy, ischemic stroke and neurodegenerative disorders).

    “Taking all the recent data into consideration, we can suggest that the cells of the NVU, specially glial cells, have an overwhelming importance in epileptogenesis.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    BBB disruption worsens the clinical picture of stroke patients by causing intracerebral vasogenic edema and hemorrhagic transformation.

    “BBB disruption is another key event in the pathogenesis of stroke, as it can worsen the clinical picture of the patients by the formation of intracerebral vasogenic edema and hemorrhagic transformation.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Findings from animal models of ischemic stroke, AD, and MS can be generalized to human patients.

    “In vivo models helped clarifying the kinetics of the immune cells in ischemic stroke”
    “Several studies using animal models have further contributed with in vivo evidences of the importance of microglia during AD progression.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Pharmacological modulation of microglial activation will produce net clinical benefit in AD and MS despite microglia's beneficial roles.

    “Taking into account the literature reviewed about AD and MS, we suggest that pharmacological modulation of microglial activation may control the impairment of BBB in these diseases.”
5 of 5

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Minocycline's effect on remyelination conflicts with a cited reference

    Major

    The review presents microglial inhibition by minocycline as favoring cells responsible for remyelination and cites Li et al. (2005). The cited study's title instead says that minocycline-mediated inhibition impairs progenitor-cell responses and remyelination.

  • Transforming growth factor-β is given inconsistent abbreviations

    Minor

    The Alzheimer's disease section abbreviates transforming growth factor-β as TNF-β, whereas an earlier section calls it TGF-β.

  • Alzheimer's disease progression is described in opposite directions

    Minor

    The review says the deficient mouse model showed disease regression, but the title of its cited El Khoury study says Ccr2 deficiency accelerated progression of Alzheimer-like disease.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 192 references

1 of the 192 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–500 of 573

Metadata

Authors
da Fonseca, A. C. C., Matias, D., Garcia, C., Amaral, R., Geraldo, L. H., Freitas, C., & Lima, F. R. S.
Affiliations
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (BR)
Venue
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
Published
2014-11-03
Volume
8
Pages
362-362
ISSN
1662-5102 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2051140555
Cited by
572
References
192
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 50 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 52 · 2020: 71 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 1
FWCI
2.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Barrier Structure and Function Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Extracellular vesicles in disease
Keywords
microglial activation, blood-brain barrier, neurovascular unit, endothelial cells, tight junctions, blood-brain barrier permeability, neuroinflammation, epilepsy, ischemic stroke, neurodegenerative diseases

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review