Cited by 249Retinal Diseases and TreatmentsComplement system in diseasesOcular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Role of Complement and Complement Membrane Attack Complex in Laser-Induced Choroidal Neovascularization

Abstract

Choroidal neovascularization (CNV), or choroidal angiogenesis, is the hallmark of age-related macular degeneration and a leading cause of visual loss after age 55. The pathogenesis of new choroidal vessel formation is poorly understood. Although inflammation has been implicated in the development of CNV, the role of complement in CNV has not been explored experimentally. A reliable way to produce CNV in animals is to rupture Bruch’s membrane with laser photocoagulation. A murine model of laser-induced CNV in C57BL/6 mice revealed the deposition of C3 and membrane attack complex (MAC) in the neovascular complex. CNV was inhibited by complement depletion using cobra venom factor and did not develop in C3−/− mice. Anti-murine C6 Abs in C57BL/6 mice inhibited MAC formation and also resulted in the inhibition of CNV. Vascular endothelial growth factor, TGF-β2, and β-fibroblast growth factor were elevated in C57BL/6 mice after laser-induced CNV; complement depletion resulted in a marked reduction in the level of these angiogenic factors. Thus, activation of complement, specifically the formation of MAC, is essential for the development of laser- induced choroidal angiogenesis in mice. It is possible that a similar mechanism may be involved in the pathophysiology of other angiogenesis essential diseases.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4049/jimmunol.174.1.491

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 48 references

Research works printed but not linked: 51

  1. 1984, Arch. Ophthalmol., 1640
  2. 2000, N. Engl. J. Med., 483
  3. 2000, J. Cell. Physiol., 301
  4. 1995, Ophthalmology, 1380
  5. 2001, Ophthalmology, 697
  6. 1991, Arch. Ophthalmol., 1109
  7. 2001, Prog. Retinal Eye Res., 227
  8. 1999, Mol. Vis., 26
  9. 2002, Drugs Aging, 101
  10. 2002, Ophthalmol. Clin. North Am., 87
  11. 2000, J. Med. Genet., 83
  12. 1997, FASEB J., 457
  13. 1994, Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 3874
  14. 2001, Prog. Retinal Eye Res., 385
  15. 1997, Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol., 313
  16. 1995, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 905
  17. 2003, Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 3578
  18. 2003, Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 3586
  19. 2003, Nat. Med., 1390
  20. 1980, Clinical Immunology, 219
  21. 1991, Immunol. Today, 322
  22. 1993, Curr. Opin. Immunol., 83
  23. 1992, Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol., 115
  24. 1993, J. Clin. Invest., 1974
  25. 1994, J. Exp. Med., 985
  26. 1999, Am. J. Pathol., 1701
  27. 1990, Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 899
  28. 1995, Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 2110
  29. 1999, Nat. Med., 292
  30. 2003, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2679
  31. 2003, Nat. Med., 206
  32. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 3492
  33. 1961, Experimental Immunochemistry, 133
  34. 2001, Biochem. Pharm., 253
  35. 1999, Mol. Endocrinol., 806
  36. 1983, J. Exp. Med., 1885
  37. 2000, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 5450
  38. 2002, Invest. Opthalmol. Vis. Sci., 1104
  39. 1989, J. Immunol., 2654
  40. 1995, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 8955
  41. 1996, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 8563
  42. 1994, Invest. Opthalmol. Vis. Sci., 3178
  43. 1996, Curr. Eye Res., 1008
  44. 1996, Jpn. J. Ophthalmol., 329
  45. 1997, Curr. Eye Res., 9
  46. 2000, Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., 3158
  47. 2002, Arch. Ophthalmol., 338
  48. 2000, Exp. Eye Res., 441
  49. 2000, FASEB J., 835
  50. 2002, Am. J. Ophthalmol., 411
  51. 1998, Arch. Ophthalmol., 1629

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 249

Metadata

Authors
Bora, P. S., Sohn, J.-H., Cruz, J. M. C., Jha, P., Nishihori, H., Wang, Y., Kaliappan, S., Kaplan, H. J., & Bora, N. S.
Affiliations
University of Louisville (US)
Venue
The Journal of Immunology
Published
2005-01-01
Volume
174
Issue
1
Pages
491-497
ISSN
  • 0022-1767 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-6606
OpenAlex
W1901360874
Cited by
249
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 15
FWCI
18.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Immunology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (7r01ey009730-07)
  • National Eye Institute (R01 EY009730-07, R01EY013335, R01EY014623, EY 014623, EY-13335)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Complement system in diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ocular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
Keywords
choroidal neovascularization, complement system, membrane attack complex, choroidal angiogenesis, age-related macular degeneration, laser photocoagulation, Bruch's membrane rupture, complement C3, complement depletion, cobra venom factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, TGF-beta2, basic fibroblast growth factor, angiogenic factors, mouse model
MeSH terms
Animals, Choroid, Complement Activation, Complement C3, Disease Models, Animal, Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay, Fibroblast Growth Factors, Immunohistochemistry, Lasers, Male, Complement Membrane Attack Complex, Transforming Growth Factor beta, Microscopy, Confocal, Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction, Choroidal Neovascularization, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A, Mice, Transforming Growth Factor beta2

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