IRE1 and PERK signaling regulates inflammatory responses in a murine model of contact hypersensitivity.
allergic contact dermatitis
contact hypersensitivity
inflammation
unfolded protein response
Journal
Allergy
ISSN: 1398-9995
Titre abrégé: Allergy
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 7804028
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2022
03 2022
Historique:
received:
10
02
2021
accepted:
18
07
2021
pubmed:
28
7
2021
medline:
9
4
2022
entrez:
27
7
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Contact sensitizers may interfere with correct protein folding. Generation of un-/misfolded proteins can activate the IRE-1 or PERK signaling pathways initiating the unfolded protein response (UPR) and thereby determine inflammatory immune responses. We have analyzed the effect of sensitizers with different potencies on the induction of UPR activation/inhibition and the subsequent generation of a pro-inflammatory micromilieu in vitro as well as the effect of UPR modulation on the inflammatory response in the murine contact hypersensitivity (CHS) in vivo. Semi-quantitative and quantitative PCR, fluorescence microscopy, ELISA, NF-κB activation and translocation assays, DC/keratinocyte co-culture assay, FACS, and in vivo CHS experiments were performed. Sensitizers and irritants activate IRE-1 and PERK in murine and human keratinocytes. Synergistic effects occur after combination of different weak sensitizers / addition of irritants. Moreover, tolerogenic dinitrothiocyanobenzene can be converted into a strong sensitizer by pre-activation of the UPR. Blocking UPR signaling results in decreased NF-κB activation and cytokine production in keratinocytes and in activation marker downregulation in a HaCaT/THP-1 co-culture. Interestingly, not only systemic but also topical application of UPR inhibitors abrogates CHS responses in vivo. These observations highlight an important role of the UPR in determination of the inflammatory response in vitro and in vivo further underlining the importance of tissue stress and damage responses in the development of ACD and provide mechanistically based concepts as a basis for the development of new therapeutic approaches to treat allergic contact dermatitis.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Contact sensitizers may interfere with correct protein folding. Generation of un-/misfolded proteins can activate the IRE-1 or PERK signaling pathways initiating the unfolded protein response (UPR) and thereby determine inflammatory immune responses. We have analyzed the effect of sensitizers with different potencies on the induction of UPR activation/inhibition and the subsequent generation of a pro-inflammatory micromilieu in vitro as well as the effect of UPR modulation on the inflammatory response in the murine contact hypersensitivity (CHS) in vivo.
METHODS
Semi-quantitative and quantitative PCR, fluorescence microscopy, ELISA, NF-κB activation and translocation assays, DC/keratinocyte co-culture assay, FACS, and in vivo CHS experiments were performed.
RESULTS
Sensitizers and irritants activate IRE-1 and PERK in murine and human keratinocytes. Synergistic effects occur after combination of different weak sensitizers / addition of irritants. Moreover, tolerogenic dinitrothiocyanobenzene can be converted into a strong sensitizer by pre-activation of the UPR. Blocking UPR signaling results in decreased NF-κB activation and cytokine production in keratinocytes and in activation marker downregulation in a HaCaT/THP-1 co-culture. Interestingly, not only systemic but also topical application of UPR inhibitors abrogates CHS responses in vivo.
CONCLUSION
These observations highlight an important role of the UPR in determination of the inflammatory response in vitro and in vivo further underlining the importance of tissue stress and damage responses in the development of ACD and provide mechanistically based concepts as a basis for the development of new therapeutic approaches to treat allergic contact dermatitis.
Substances chimiques
Irritants
0
NF-kappa B
0
Protein Serine-Threonine Kinases
EC 2.7.11.1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
966-978Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Esser PR, Martin SF. Pathomechanisms of contact sensitization. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2017;17(12):83.
Peiser M, Tralau T, Heidler J, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis: Epidemiology, molecular mechanisms, in vitro methods and regulatory aspects. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2011;69(5):763-781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-011-0846-8.
Bauer A, Geier J, Mahler V, Uter W. Contact allergies in the German workforce: Data of the IVDK network from 2003-2013. Hautarzt. Published Online July 31, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00105-015-3660-7
Diepgen TL, Ofenloch RF, Bruze M, et al. Prevalence of contact allergy in the general population in different European regions. Br J Dermatol. 2016;174(2):319-329. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.14167
de Groot AC. Patch Testing: Test Concentrations and Vehicles for 4350 Chemicals, 3rd edn. Acdegroot Publishing; 2008.
Fitzpatrick JM, Roberts DW, Patlewicz G. What determines skin sensitization potency: Myths, maybes and realities. The 500 molecular weight cut-off: An updated analysis. J Appl Toxicol. 2017;37(1):105-116. https://doi.org/10.1002/jat.3348
Abraham A, Roga G. Topical steroid-damaged skin. Indian J Dermatol. 2014;59(5):456-459. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5154.139872
Dhar S, Seth J, Parikh D. Systemic Side-Effects of Topical Corticosteroids. Indian J Dermatol. 2014;59(5):460-464. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5154.139874
Martin SF. Adaptation in the innate immune system and heterologous innate immunity. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2014;71(21):4115-4130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-014-1676-2
Bonefeld CM, Nielsen MM, Rubin IMC, et al. Enhanced sensitization and elicitation responses caused by mixtures of common fragrance allergens. Contact Dermatitis. 2011;65(6):336-342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2011.01945.x
Bonefeld CM, Nielsen MM, Vennegaard MT, Johansen JD, Geisler C, Thyssen JP. Nickel acts as an adjuvant during cobalt sensitization. Exp Dermatol. 2015;24(3):229-231. https://doi.org/10.1111/exd.12634
Bonefeld CM, Geisler C, Gimenéz-Arnau E, Lepoittevin J-P, Uter W, Johansen JD. Immunological, chemical and clinical aspects of exposure to mixtures of contact allergens. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;77(3):133-142. https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12847
Kaplan DH, Igyártó BZ, Gaspari AA. Early immune events in the induction of allergic contact dermatitis. Nat Rev Immunol. 2012;12(2):114-124. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri3150
Martin SF. Immunological mechanisms in allergic contact dermatitis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2015;15(2):124-130. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACI.0000000000000142
Natsch A, Günthardt BF, Corbi E, et al. Interlaboratory evaluation of methods to quantify skin sensitizing hydroperoxides potentially formed from linalool and limonene in perfumes. Flavour Fragr J. 2017;32(4):277-285. https://doi.org/10.1002/ffj.3384
Malmberg P, Guttenberg T, Ericson MB, Hagvall L. Imaging mass spectrometry for novel insights into contact allergyâ A proof-of-concept study on nickel. Contact Derm 2018;78(2):109-116. https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12911
Nestle FO, Meglio PD, Qin J-Z, Nickoloff BJ. Skin immune sentinels in health and disease. Nat Rev Immunol. 2009;9(10):679-691. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri2622
Martin SF. Contact dermatitis: From pathomechanisms to immunotoxicology. Exp Dermatol. 2012;21(5):382-389. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0625.2012.01471.x
Martin SF, Esser PR. Chemical Allergen-Induced Skin Cell Activation. In: E Corsini, H van Loveren, eds. Molecular Immunotoxicology. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA; 2014:91-116. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com. Accessed August 19, 2015
Esser PR, Wolfle U, Durr C, et al. Contact sensitizers induce skin inflammation via ROS production and hyaluronic acid degradation. PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e41340. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041340.
Migdal C, Foggia L, Tailhardat M, Courtellemont P, Haftek M, Serres M. Sensitization effect of thimerosal is mediated in vitro via reactive oxygen species and calcium signaling. Toxicology. 2010;274(1-3):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2010.04.016
Janssens S, Pulendran B, Lambrecht BN. Emerging functions of the unfolded protein response in immunity. Nat Immunol. 2014;15(10):910-919. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.2991
Hetz C, Chevet E, Harding HP. Targeting the unfolded protein response in disease. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2013;12(9):703-719. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd3976
Oakes SA, Papa FR. The role of endoplasmic reticulum stress in human pathology. Annu Rev Pathol. 2015;10:173-194. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-pathol-012513-104649
Iwakoshi NN, Lee A-H, Vallabhajosyula P, Otipoby KL, Rajewsky K, Glimcher LH. Plasma cell differentiation and the unfolded protein response intersect at the transcription factor XBP-1. Nat Immunol. 2003;4(4):321-329. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni907
Sugiura K, Muro Y, Futamura K, et al. The unfolded protein response is activated in differentiating epidermal keratinocytes. J Invest Dermatol. 2009;129(9):2126-2135. https://doi.org/10.1038/jid.2009.51
Bettigole SE, Lis R, Adoro S, et al. The transcription factor XBP1 is selectively required for eosinophil differentiation. Nat Immunol. 2015;16(8):829-837. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.3225
Maly DJ, Papa FR. Druggable sensors of the unfolded protein response. Nat Chem Biol. 2014;10(11):892-901. https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.1664
Hetz C. The unfolded protein response: Controlling cell fate decisions under ER stress and beyond. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2012;13(2):89-102. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm3270
Lee A-H, Iwakoshi NN, Glimcher LH. XBP-1 regulates a subset of endoplasmic reticulum resident chaperone genes in the unfolded protein response. Mol Cell Biol. 2003;23(21):7448-7459.
Luís A, Martins JD, Silva A, Ferreira I, Cruz MT, Neves BM. Oxidative stress-dependent activation of the eIF2α-ATF4 unfolded protein response branch by skin sensitizer 1-fluoro-2,4-dinitrobenzene modulates dendritic-like cell maturation and inflammatory status in a biphasic manner [corrected]. Free Radic Biol Med. 2014;77:217-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2014.09.008
Iwawaki T, Akai R, Kohno K, Miura M. A transgenic mouse model for monitoring endoplasmic reticulum stress. Nat Med. 2004;10(1):98-102. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm970
Libermann TA, Baltimore D. Activation of interleukin-6 gene expression through the NF-kappa B transcription factor. Mol Cell Biol. 1990;10(5):2327-2334.
Hennen J, Blömeke B. Assessment of skin sensitization potency of hair dye molecules in vitro. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;77(3):179-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12780
Watanabe H, Gehrke S, Contassot E, et al. Danger Signaling through the Inflammasome Acts as a Master Switch between Tolerance and Sensitization. J Immunol. 2008;180(9):5826-5832. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.180.9.5826
Pickard C, Louafi F, McGuire C, et al. The cutaneous biochemical redox barrier: A component of the innate immune defenses against sensitization by highly reactive environmental xenobiotics. J Immunol. 2009;183(11):7576-7584. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.0901064
Yoshida H, Matsui T, Yamamoto A, Okada T, Mori K. XBP1 mRNA is induced by ATF6 and spliced by IRE1 in response to ER stress to produce a highly active transcription factor. Cell. 2001;107(7):881-891.
Walter F, O’Brien A, Concannon CG, Düssmann H, Prehn JHM. ER stress signaling has an activating transcription factor 6α (ATF6)-dependent “off-switch”. J Biol Chem. 2018;293(47):18270-18284. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.RA118.002121
Zhang K, Kaufman RJ. From endoplasmic-reticulum stress to the inflammatory response. Nature. 2008;454(7203):455-462. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07203
Martin SF. New concepts in cutaneous allergy. Contact Derm. 2015;72(1):2-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12311
Corsini E, Galbiati V, Esser PR, et al. Role of PKC-beta in chemical allergen-induced CD86 expression and IL-8 release in THP-1 cells. Arch Toxicol 2014;88(2):415-424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00204-013-1144-z
Pedersen LK, Johansen JD, Held E, Agner T. Augmentation of skin response by exposure to a combination of allergens and irritants: A review. Contact Derm. 2004;50(5):265-273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2004.00342.x
Agner T, Johansen JD, Overgaard L, Vølund A, Basketter D, Menné T. Combined effects of irritants and allergens. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;47(1):21-26. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0536.2002.470105.x
Schmidt M, Raghavan B, Müller V, et al. Crucial role for human Toll-like receptor 4 in the development of contact allergy to nickel. Nat Immunol. 2010;11(9):814-819. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.1919
El Ali Z, Gerbeix C, Hemon P, et al. Allergic skin inflammation induced by chemical sensitizers is controlled by the transcription factor Nrf2. Toxicol Sci 2013;134(1):39-48. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kft084
Weber FC, Németh T, Csepregi JZ, et al. Neutrophils are required for both the sensitization and elicitation phase of contact hypersensitivity. J Exp Med. 2015;212(1):15-22. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.20130062
Dudeck A, Dudeck J, Scholten J, et al. Mast Cells Are Key Promoters of Contact Allergy that Mediate the Adjuvant Effects of Haptens. Immunity. 2011;34(6):973-984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2011.03.028