Alleviation of exhaustion-induced immunosuppression and sepsis by immune checkpoint blockers sequentially administered with antibiotics-analysis of a new mathematical model.
Checkpoint blockers
Dynamic model
Hematopoietic stem cell
Hyper-inflammation
Immunosuppression
PD-1
Pathogen
Programmed cell death protein 1
Simulations
T lymphocyte exhaustion
Journal
Intensive care medicine experimental
ISSN: 2197-425X
Titre abrégé: Intensive Care Med Exp
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101645149
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Jun 2019
11 Jun 2019
Historique:
received:
19
10
2018
accepted:
27
05
2019
entrez:
13
6
2019
pubmed:
13
6
2019
medline:
13
6
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Sepsis-associated immune dysregulation, involving hyper-inflammation and immunosuppression, is common in intensive care patients, often leading to multiple organ dysfunction and death. The aim of this study was to identify the main driving force underlying immunosuppression in sepsis, and to suggest new therapeutic avenues for controlling this immune impairment and alleviating excessive pathogen load. We developed two minimalistic (skeletal) mathematical models of pathogen-associated inflammation, which focus on the dynamics of myeloid, lymphocyte, and pathogen numbers in blood. Both models rely on the assumption that the presence of the pathogen causes a bias in hematopoietic stem cell differentiation toward the myeloid developmental line. Also in one of the models, we assumed that continuous exposure to pathogens induces lymphocyte exhaustion. In addition, we also created therapy models, both by antibiotics and by immunotherapy with PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors. Assuming realistic parameter ranges, we simulated the pathogen-associated inflammation models in silico with or without various antibiotic and immunotherapy schedules. Computer simulations of the two models show that the assumption of lymphocyte exhaustion is a prerequisite for attaining sepsis-associated immunosuppression, and that the ability of the innate and adaptive immune systems to control infections depends on the pathogen's replication rate. Simulation results further show that combining antibiotics with immune checkpoint blockers can suffice for defeating even an aggressive pathogen within a relatively short period. This is so as long as the drugs are administered soon after diagnosis. In contrast, when applied as monotherapies, antibiotics or immune checkpoint blockers fall short of eliminating aggressive pathogens in reasonable time. Our results suggest that lymphocyte exhaustion crucially drives immunosuppression in sepsis, and that one can efficiently resolve both immunosuppression and pathogenesis by timely coupling of antibiotics with an immune checkpoint blocker, but not by either one of these two treatment modalities alone. Following experimental validation, our model can be adapted to explore the potential of other therapeutic options in this field.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Sepsis-associated immune dysregulation, involving hyper-inflammation and immunosuppression, is common in intensive care patients, often leading to multiple organ dysfunction and death. The aim of this study was to identify the main driving force underlying immunosuppression in sepsis, and to suggest new therapeutic avenues for controlling this immune impairment and alleviating excessive pathogen load.
METHODS
METHODS
We developed two minimalistic (skeletal) mathematical models of pathogen-associated inflammation, which focus on the dynamics of myeloid, lymphocyte, and pathogen numbers in blood. Both models rely on the assumption that the presence of the pathogen causes a bias in hematopoietic stem cell differentiation toward the myeloid developmental line. Also in one of the models, we assumed that continuous exposure to pathogens induces lymphocyte exhaustion. In addition, we also created therapy models, both by antibiotics and by immunotherapy with PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors. Assuming realistic parameter ranges, we simulated the pathogen-associated inflammation models in silico with or without various antibiotic and immunotherapy schedules.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Computer simulations of the two models show that the assumption of lymphocyte exhaustion is a prerequisite for attaining sepsis-associated immunosuppression, and that the ability of the innate and adaptive immune systems to control infections depends on the pathogen's replication rate. Simulation results further show that combining antibiotics with immune checkpoint blockers can suffice for defeating even an aggressive pathogen within a relatively short period. This is so as long as the drugs are administered soon after diagnosis. In contrast, when applied as monotherapies, antibiotics or immune checkpoint blockers fall short of eliminating aggressive pathogens in reasonable time.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggest that lymphocyte exhaustion crucially drives immunosuppression in sepsis, and that one can efficiently resolve both immunosuppression and pathogenesis by timely coupling of antibiotics with an immune checkpoint blocker, but not by either one of these two treatment modalities alone. Following experimental validation, our model can be adapted to explore the potential of other therapeutic options in this field.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31187301
doi: 10.1186/s40635-019-0260-3
pii: 10.1186/s40635-019-0260-3
pmc: PMC6560115
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
32Subventions
Organisme : Chai Foundation
ID : -
Références
Nat Immunol. 2001 Aug;2(8):675-80
pubmed: 11477402
J Theor Biol. 2005 Jun 7;234(3):311-27
pubmed: 15784267
Shock. 2005 Jul;24(1):74-84
pubmed: 15988324
World J Gastroenterol. 2006 Sep 7;12(33):5344-51
pubmed: 16981265
Neuroscience. 2009 Feb 6;158(3):1184-93
pubmed: 18722511
Stem Cells Dev. 2009 Apr;18(3):377-85
pubmed: 18752377
Nat Rev Immunol. 2009 Mar;9(3):162-74
pubmed: 19197294
Science. 2010 Feb 5;327(5966):656-61
pubmed: 20133564
Trends Immunol. 2011 Feb;32(2):57-65
pubmed: 21233016
PLoS One. 2011;6(5):e19957
pubmed: 21655273
Nat Immunol. 2011 Jun;12(6):492-9
pubmed: 21739672
Nature. 2011 Dec 21;480(7378):480-9
pubmed: 22193102
Mol Ther. 2012 Jan;20(1):1-2
pubmed: 22215048
Minerva Anestesiol. 2012 Jun;78(6):712-24
pubmed: 22447123
J Crit Care. 2012 Aug;27(4):384-93
pubmed: 22824083
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2012 Aug;16(8):1039-44
pubmed: 22913154
Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Mar;13(3):260-8
pubmed: 23427891
Nat Rev Immunol. 2013 Mar;13(3):159-75
pubmed: 23435331
Crit Rev Immunol. 2013;33(1):23-40
pubmed: 23510024
Shock. 2013 Nov;40(5):352-7
pubmed: 24088992
Science. 2013 Oct 11;342(6155):1242454
pubmed: 24115444
Int Immunopharmacol. 2013 Dec;17(4):1226-32
pubmed: 24144812
Innate Immun. 2015 Jan;21(1):55-64
pubmed: 24398860
Crit Care Med. 2014 Aug;42(8):1749-55
pubmed: 24717459
Nat Rev Immunol. 2014 May;14(5):302-14
pubmed: 24751955
Crit Care. 2014 Jun 24;18(3):R130
pubmed: 24962182
Leukemia. 2015 Apr;29(4):776-82
pubmed: 25486871
Shock. 2015 Apr;43(4):304-16
pubmed: 25565638
Sci Transl Med. 2015 Apr 29;7(285):285ra61
pubmed: 25925680
Nat Rev Immunol. 2015 Aug;15(8):486-99
pubmed: 26205583
Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:504259
pubmed: 26446682
Cent Eur J Immunol. 2015;40(2):206-16
pubmed: 26557036
J Clin Invest. 2016 Jan;126(1):23-31
pubmed: 26727230
Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2016 Feb;37(1):42-50
pubmed: 26820273
Sci Data. 2016 May 24;3:160035
pubmed: 27219127
Crit Care. 2016 Jul 05;20(1):186
pubmed: 27378029
Pharmacol Res. 2016 Sep;111:688-702
pubmed: 27468649
Cell Mol Immunol. 2017 Jan;14(1):1-3
pubmed: 27545072
Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2016 Nov;16(11):1373-1385
pubmed: 27564141
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017 Aug 1;196(3):315-327
pubmed: 28146645
Nat Rev Immunol. 2017 Jul;17(7):407-420
pubmed: 28436424
Nat Rev Nephrol. 2018 Feb;14(2):121-137
pubmed: 29225343
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 11;378(2):158-168
pubmed: 29320654
PLoS Comput Biol. 2018 Feb 15;14(2):e1005876
pubmed: 29447154