Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 386

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 119 of the 119 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microglia Responses to Pro-inflammatory Stimuli (LPS, IFNγ+TNFα) and Reprogramming by Resolving Cytokines (IL-4, IL-10)

Open access
Lively, Starlee, Schlichter, Lyanne C.·2018·Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience

Abstract

Microglia respond to CNS injuries and diseases with complex reactions, often called ‘activation’. A pro-inflammatory phenotype (also called classical or M1 activation) lies at one extreme of the reactivity spectrum. There were several motivations for this study. First, bacterial endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide, LPS) is the most commonly used pro-inflammatory stimulus for microglia, both in vitro and in vivo; however, pro-inflammatory cytokines (e.g., IFNTNF) rather than LPS will be encountered with sterile CNS damage and disease. We lack direct comparisons of responses between LPS and such cytokines. Second, while transcriptional profiling is providing substantial data on microglial responses to LPS, these studies mainly use mouse cells and models, and there is increasing evidence that responses of rat microglia can differ. Third, the cytokine milieu is dynamic after acute CNS damage, and an important question in microglial biology is: How malleable are their responses? There are very few studies of effects of resolving cytokines, particularly for rat microglia, and much of the work has focused on pro-inflammatory outcomes. Here, we first exposed primary rat microglia to LPS or to IFN TNF(I+T) and compared hallmark functional (nitric oxide production, migration) and molecular responses (almost 100 genes), including surface receptors that can be considered part of the sensome. Protein changes for exemplary molecules were also quantified: ARG1, CD206/MRC1, COX-2, iNOS, PYK2. Despite some similarities, there were notable differences in responses to LPS and I+T. For instance, LPS often evoked higher pro-inflammatory gene expression and also increased several anti-inflammatory genes. Second, we compared the ability of two anti-inflammatory, resolving cytokines (IL-4, IL-10), to counteract responses to LPS and I+T. IL-4 was more effective after I+T than after LPS, and IL-10 was surprisingly ineffective after either stimulus. These results should prove useful in modeling microglial reactivity in vitro; and comparing transcriptional responses to sterile CNS inflammation in vivo.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fncel.2018.00215

Cites

119 of 119 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 119 references

Cited by

See all 386

Metadata

Authors
Lively, S., & Schlichter, L. C.
Venue
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
Published
2018-07-24
Volume
12
Pages
215-215
ISSN
1662-5102 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2811102541
Cited by
386
References
119
FWCI
10.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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.

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Microglia Responses to Pro-inflammatory Stimuli (LPS, IFNγ+TNFα) and Reprogramming by Resolving Cytokines (IL-4, IL-10). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fncel.2018.00215
The paper
Lively, S., & Schlichter, L. C. (2018). Microglia Responses to Pro-inflammatory Stimuli (LPS, IFNγ+TNFα) and Reprogramming by Resolving Cytokines (IL-4, IL-10). Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2018.00215

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.