Comparison of host immune responses to LPS in human using an immune profiling panel, in vivo endotoxemia versus ex vivo stimulation.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 06 2020
18 06 2020
Historique:
received:
28
10
2019
accepted:
29
04
2020
entrez:
20
6
2020
pubmed:
20
6
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Patients that suffer from sepsis exhibit an early hyper-inflammatory immune response which can lead to organ failure and death. In our study, we assessed the immune modulation in the human in vivo endotoxemia model and compared it to ex vivo LPS stimulation using 38 transcriptomic markers. Blood was collected before and after 4 hours of LPS challenge and tested with the Immune Profiling Panel (IPP) using the FilmArray system. The use of IPP showed that markers from the innate immunity dominated the response to LPS in vivo, mainly markers related to monocytes and neutrophils. Comparing the two models, in vivo and ex vivo, revealed that most of the markers were modulated in a similar pattern (68%). Some cytokine markers such as TNF, IFN-γ and IL-1β were under-expressed ex vivo compared to in vivo. T-cell markers were either unchanged or up-modulated ex vivo, compared to a down-modulation in vivo. Interestingly, markers related to neutrophils were expressed in opposite directions, which might be due to the presence of cell recruitment and feedback loops in vivo. The IPP tool was able to capture the early immune response in both the human in vivo endotoxemia model, a translational model mimicking the immune response observed in septic patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32555232
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-66695-2
pii: 10.1038/s41598-020-66695-2
pmc: PMC7303162
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers
0
Lipopolysaccharides
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
9918Références
Hotchkiss, R. S., Monneret, G. & Payen, D. Sepsis-induced immunosuppression: from cellular dysfunctions to immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 13, 862–874, https://doi.org/10.1038/nri3552 (2013).
doi: 10.1038/nri3552
pmcid: 24232462
Fleischmann, C. et al. Assessment of Global Incidence and Mortality of Hospital-treated Sepsis. Current Estimates and Limitations. Am. J. Resp. Crit. Care Med. 193, 259–272, https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201504-0781OC (2016).
doi: 10.1164/rccm.201504-0781OC
Scicluna, B. P. et al. Classification of patients with sepsis according to blood genomic endotype: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Resp. Med. 5, 816–826, https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-2600(17)30294-1 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/s2213-2600(17)30294-1
Monneret, G., Gossez, M., Aghaeepour, N., Gaudilliere, B. & Venet, F. How Clinical Flow Cytometry Rebooted Sepsis Immunology. Cytometry Part. A. 95, 431–441, https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.a.23749 (2019).
doi: 10.1002/cyto.a.23749
Shakoory, B. et al. Interleukin-1 Receptor Blockade Is Associated With Reduced Mortality in Sepsis Patients With Features of Macrophage Activation Syndrome: Reanalysis of a Prior Phase III Trial. Crit. Care Med. 44, 275–281, https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0000000000001402 (2016).
doi: 10.1097/ccm.0000000000001402
pmcid: 5378312
Francois, B. et al. Interleukin-7 restores lymphocytes in septic shock: the IRIS-7 randomized clinical trial. JCI insight. 3, e98960, https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.98960 (2018).
doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.98960
pmcid: 5922293
Peters van Ton, A. M., Kox, M., Abdo, W. F. & Pickkers, P. Precision Immunotherapy for Sepsis. Front. Immunol. 9, 1926–1926, https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.01926 (2018).
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01926
pmcid: 6133985
Delsing, C. E. et al. Interferon-gamma as adjunctive immunotherapy for invasive fungal infections: a case series. BMC Infect. Dis. 14, 166, https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-166 (2014).
doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-14-166
pmcid: 3987054
Docke, W. D. et al. Monocyte deactivation in septic patients: restoration by IFN-gamma treatment. Nat. Med. 3, 678–681, https://doi.org/10.1038/nm0697-678 (1997).
doi: 10.1038/nm0697-678
Albert-Vega, C. et al. Immune Functional Assays, From Custom to Standardized Tests for Precision Medicine. Frontiers Immol. 9 https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.02367 (2018).
Davies, R., O’Dea, K. & Gordon, A. Immune therapy in sepsis: Are we ready to try again? JICS. 19, 326–344, https://doi.org/10.1177/1751143718765407 (2018).
doi: 10.1177/1751143718765407
Rosadini, C. V. & Kagan, J. C. Early innate immune responses to bacterial LPS. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 44, 14–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coi.2016.10.005 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.coi.2016.10.005
Rodriguez-Rosales, Y. A. et al. Long-Term Effects of Experimental Human Endotoxemia on Immune Cell Function: Similarities and Differences With Sepsis. Shock. 51, 678–689, https://doi.org/10.1097/shk.0000000000001222 (2019).
doi: 10.1097/shk.0000000000001222
Lankelma, J. M. et al. Antibiotic-induced gut microbiota disruption during human endotoxemia: a randomised controlled study. Gut. 66, 1623, https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2016-312132 (2017).
doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2016-312132
van Lier, D., Geven, C., Leijte, G. P. & Pickkers, P. Experimental human endotoxemia as a model of systemic inflammation. Biochimie. 159, 99–106, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biochi.2018.06.014 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.biochi.2018.06.014
Segre, E. & Fullerton, J. N. Stimulated Whole Blood Cytokine Release as a Biomarker of Immunosuppression in the Critically Ill: The Need for a Standardized Methodology. Shock. 45, 490–494, https://doi.org/10.1097/SHK.0000000000000557 (2016).
doi: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000000557
pmcid: 4836558
Dorresteijn, M. J., Draisma, A., van der Hoeven, J. G. & Pickkers, P. Lipopolysaccharide-stimulated whole blood cytokine production does not predict the inflammatory response in human endotoxemia. Innate Imm. 16, 248–253, https://doi.org/10.1177/1753425909339923 (2010).
doi: 10.1177/1753425909339923
Tawfik, D. M. et al. Immune Profiling Panel: a proof of concept study of a new multiplex molecular tool to assess the immune status of critically-ill patients. bioRxiv, 636522 (2019).
Brunet, L. R., LaBrie, S. & Hagemann, T. Immune monitoring technology primer: immunoprofiling of antigen-stimulated blood. J. Immunotherapy Cancer. 4, 18, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40425-016-0122-4 (2016).
doi: 10.1186/s40425-016-0122-4
Duffy, D. et al. Functional analysis via standardized whole-blood stimulation systems defines the boundaries of a healthy immune response to complex stimuli. Immunity. 40, 436–450, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2014.03.002 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2014.03.002
Josse, J. & Husson, F. missMDA: A Package for Handling Missing Values in Multivariate Data Analysis. J STAT SOFTW. 1 (2016).
Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. STAT. SOC. B . 57, 289–300 (1995).
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria (2018). https://www.R-project.org/ .
Murphy, K. & Weaver, C. in Janeway’s Immunobiology Ch. Part V, 533-748 (Garland Science Taylor & Francis Group (2018).
de Kleijn, S. et al. Transcriptome Kinetics of Circulating Neutrophils during Human Experimental Endotoxemia. Plos One. 7, e38255, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038255 (2012).
Tak, T., van Groenendael, R., Pickkers, P. & Koenderman, L. Monocyte Subsets Are Differentially Lost from the Circulation during Acute Inflammation Induced by Human Experimental Endotoxemia. J. Innate Immun. 9, 464–474, https://doi.org/10.1159/000475665 (2017).
doi: 10.1159/000475665
pmcid: 6738874
Hassani, M. et al. Differentiation and activation of eosinophils in the human bone marrow during experimental human endotoxemia. J Leukoc Biol. n/a, https://doi.org/10.1002/jlb.1ab1219-493r (2020).
Brinkhoff, A. et al. Pro-Inflammatory Th1 and Th17 Cells Are Suppressed During Human Experimental Endotoxemia Whereas Anti-Inflammatory IL-10 Producing T-Cells Are Unaffected. Front Immunol. 9 https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.01133 (2018).
Demaret, J. et al. Identification of CD177 as the most dysregulated parameter in a microarray study of purified neutrophils from septic shock patients. Immunol. Lett. 178, 122–130, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imlet.2016.08.011 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.imlet.2016.08.011
Cazalis, M. A. et al. Decreased HLA-DR antigen-associated invariant chain (CD74) mRNA expression predicts mortality after septic shock. Crit. Care. 17, R287, https://doi.org/10.1186/cc13150 (2013).
doi: 10.1186/cc13150
pmcid: 4056003
Davies, M. G. & Hagen, P.-O. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome. BJS. 84, 920–935, https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800840707 (1997).
doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800840707
Khan, H. N. et al. Leukocyte transcriptional signatures dependent on LPS dosage in human endotoxemia. J Leukoc Biol. 0 https://doi.org/10.1002/jlb.4a0219-050r (2019).
Janicki-Deverts, D., Cohen, S., Doyle, W. J., Turner, R. B. & Treanor, J. J. Infection-induced proinflammatory cytokines are associated with decreases in positive affect, but not increases in negative affect. Brain Behav. Immun. 21, 301–307, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2006.09.002 (2007).
doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2006.09.002
Mueller, L. P. et al. Endotoxin-adapted septic shock leukocytes selectively alter production of sIL-1RA and IL-1beta. Shock. 16, 430–437 (2001).
doi: 10.1097/00024382-200116060-00005
Poujol, F. et al. Lymphocyte Proliferation upon Lipopolysaccharide Challenge Ex Vivo. Plos One. 10, e0144375, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0144375 (2015).
Wegner, A. et al. Sex differences in the pro-inflammatory cytokine response to endotoxin unfold in vivo but not ex vivo in healthy humans. Innate Immun. 23, 432–439, https://doi.org/10.1177/1753425917707026 (2017).
doi: 10.1177/1753425917707026
Rol, M.-L. et al. The REAnimation Low Immune Status Markers (REALISM) project: a protocol for broad characterisation and follow-up of injury-induced immunosuppression in intensive care unit (ICU) critically ill patients. BMJ Open. 7 (2017).
Marshall, J. C. Why have clinical trials in sepsis failed? Trends Mol. Med. 20, 195–203, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmed.2014.01.007 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2014.01.007