Elise E Crame, Joanne M Bowen, Kate R Secombe, Janet K Coller, Maxime François, Wayne Leifert, Hannah R Wardill
{"title":"上皮特异性TLR4敲除挑战了目前关于TLR4稳态控制肠道通透性的证据。","authors":"Elise E Crame, Joanne M Bowen, Kate R Secombe, Janet K Coller, Maxime François, Wayne Leifert, Hannah R Wardill","doi":"10.1159/000519200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) is a highly conserved immunosurveillance protein of innate immunity, displaying well-established roles in homeostasis and intestinal inflammation. Current evidence shows complex relationships between TLR4 activation, maintenance of health, and disease progression; however, it commonly overlooks the importance of site-specific TLR4 expression. This omission has the potential to influence translation of results as previous evidence shows the differing and distinct roles that TLR4 exhibits are dependent on its spatiotemporal expression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An intestinal epithelial TLR4 conditional knockout (KO) mouse line (<i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup>, <i>n</i> = 6-8) was utilized to dissect the contribution of epithelial TLR4 expression to intestinal homeostasis with comparisons to wild-type (WT) (<i>n</i> = 5-7) counterparts. Functions of the intestinal barrier in the ileum and colon were assessed with tissue resistance in Ussing chambers. Molecular and structural comparisons in the ileum and colon were assessed via histological staining, expression of tight junction proteins (occludin and zonular occludin 1 [ZO-1]), and presence of CD11b-positive immune cells.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no impact of the intestinal epithelial TLR4 KO, with no differences in (1) tissue resistance-ileum (mean ± standard error of mean [SEM]): WT 22 ± 7.2 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 20 ± 5.6 (Ω × cm<sup>2</sup>) <i>p</i> = 0.831, colon WT 30.8 ± 3.6 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 45.1 ± 9.5 <i>p</i> = 0.191; (2) histological staining (overall tissue structure); and (3) tight junction protein expression (% area stain, mean ± SEM)-ZO-1: ileum-WT 1.49 ± 0.155 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 1.17 ± 0.07, <i>p</i> = 0.09; colon-WT 1.36 ± 0.26 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 1.12 ± 0.18 <i>p</i> = 0.47; occludin: ileum-WT 1.07 ± 0.12 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 0.95 ± 0.13, <i>p</i> = 0.53; colon-WT 1.26 ± 0.26 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 1.02 ± 0.16 <i>p</i> = 0.45. CD11b-positive immune cells (% area stain, mean ± SEM) in the ileum were mildly decreased in WT mice: WT 0.14 ± 0.02 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 0.09 ± 0.01 <i>p</i> = 0.04. However, in the colon, there was no difference in CD11b-positive immune cells between strains: WT 0.53 ± 0.08 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 0.49 ± 0.08 <i>p</i> = 0.73.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These data have 2 important implications. First, these data refute the assumption that epithelial TLR4 exerts physiological control of intestinal physiology and immunity in health. Second, and most importantly, these data support the use of the <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> line in future models interrogating health and disease, confirming no confounding effects of genetic manipulation.</p>","PeriodicalId":13605,"journal":{"name":"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases","volume":"6 4","pages":"199-209"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8739639/pdf/iid-0006-0199.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Epithelial-Specific TLR4 Knockout Challenges Current Evidence of TLR4 Homeostatic Control of Gut Permeability.\",\"authors\":\"Elise E Crame, Joanne M Bowen, Kate R Secombe, Janet K Coller, Maxime François, Wayne Leifert, Hannah R Wardill\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000519200\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) is a highly conserved immunosurveillance protein of innate immunity, displaying well-established roles in homeostasis and intestinal inflammation. Current evidence shows complex relationships between TLR4 activation, maintenance of health, and disease progression; however, it commonly overlooks the importance of site-specific TLR4 expression. This omission has the potential to influence translation of results as previous evidence shows the differing and distinct roles that TLR4 exhibits are dependent on its spatiotemporal expression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An intestinal epithelial TLR4 conditional knockout (KO) mouse line (<i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup>, <i>n</i> = 6-8) was utilized to dissect the contribution of epithelial TLR4 expression to intestinal homeostasis with comparisons to wild-type (WT) (<i>n</i> = 5-7) counterparts. Functions of the intestinal barrier in the ileum and colon were assessed with tissue resistance in Ussing chambers. Molecular and structural comparisons in the ileum and colon were assessed via histological staining, expression of tight junction proteins (occludin and zonular occludin 1 [ZO-1]), and presence of CD11b-positive immune cells.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no impact of the intestinal epithelial TLR4 KO, with no differences in (1) tissue resistance-ileum (mean ± standard error of mean [SEM]): WT 22 ± 7.2 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 20 ± 5.6 (Ω × cm<sup>2</sup>) <i>p</i> = 0.831, colon WT 30.8 ± 3.6 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 45.1 ± 9.5 <i>p</i> = 0.191; (2) histological staining (overall tissue structure); and (3) tight junction protein expression (% area stain, mean ± SEM)-ZO-1: ileum-WT 1.49 ± 0.155 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 1.17 ± 0.07, <i>p</i> = 0.09; colon-WT 1.36 ± 0.26 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 1.12 ± 0.18 <i>p</i> = 0.47; occludin: ileum-WT 1.07 ± 0.12 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 0.95 ± 0.13, <i>p</i> = 0.53; colon-WT 1.26 ± 0.26 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 1.02 ± 0.16 <i>p</i> = 0.45. CD11b-positive immune cells (% area stain, mean ± SEM) in the ileum were mildly decreased in WT mice: WT 0.14 ± 0.02 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 0.09 ± 0.01 <i>p</i> = 0.04. However, in the colon, there was no difference in CD11b-positive immune cells between strains: WT 0.53 ± 0.08 versus <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> 0.49 ± 0.08 <i>p</i> = 0.73.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These data have 2 important implications. First, these data refute the assumption that epithelial TLR4 exerts physiological control of intestinal physiology and immunity in health. Second, and most importantly, these data support the use of the <i>Tlr4</i><sup><i>ΔIEC</i></sup> line in future models interrogating health and disease, confirming no confounding effects of genetic manipulation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13605,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases\",\"volume\":\"6 4\",\"pages\":\"199-209\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8739639/pdf/iid-0006-0199.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000519200\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inflammatory Intestinal Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000519200","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
摘要
toll样受体4 (TLR4)是一种高度保守的先天免疫免疫监视蛋白,在体内平衡和肠道炎症中发挥着重要作用。目前的证据表明,TLR4激活、健康维持和疾病进展之间存在复杂的关系;然而,它通常忽略了位点特异性TLR4表达的重要性。这一遗漏有可能影响结果的翻译,因为先前的证据表明,TLR4所表现出的不同和独特的作用取决于其时空表达。方法:利用肠上皮TLR4条件敲除(KO)小鼠系(Tlr4ΔIEC, n = 6-8),分析上皮TLR4表达对肠道稳态的贡献,并与野生型(WT) (n = 5-7)进行比较。回肠和结肠的肠屏障功能用Ussing腔进行组织阻力评估。通过组织学染色、紧密连接蛋白(occludin和zular occludin 1 [ZO-1])的表达以及cd11b阳性免疫细胞的存在来评估回肠和结肠的分子和结构比较。结果:肠道上皮TLR4 KO无影响,(1)组织阻力-回肠(平均±标准误差平均值[SEM]): WT 22±7.2 vs Tlr4ΔIEC 20±5.6 (Ω × cm2) p = 0.831,结肠WT 30.8±3.6 vs Tlr4ΔIEC 45.1±9.5 p = 0.191;(2)组织学染色(组织整体结构);(3)紧密连接蛋白表达(%面积染色,平均值±SEM)-ZO-1:回肠- wt 1.49±0.155 vs Tlr4ΔIEC 1.17±0.07,p = 0.09;结肠- wt 1.36±0.26 vs Tlr4ΔIEC 1.12±0.18 p = 0.47;occludin:回肠wt 1.07±0.12 vs Tlr4ΔIEC 0.95±0.13,p = 0.53;冒号- wt = 1.26±0.26 vs . Tlr4ΔIEC = 1.02±0.16 p = 0.45。WT小鼠回肠cd11b阳性免疫细胞(%面积染色,平均±SEM)轻度减少:WT 0.14±0.02 vs Tlr4ΔIEC 0.09±0.01 p = 0.04。然而,在结肠中,不同菌株之间cd11b阳性免疫细胞没有差异:WT为0.53±0.08,Tlr4ΔIEC为0.49±0.08,p = 0.73。结论:这些数据有两个重要的含义。首先,这些数据驳斥了上皮TLR4在健康状态下对肠道生理和免疫进行生理控制的假设。其次,最重要的是,这些数据支持在未来的模型中使用Tlr4ΔIEC线来询问健康和疾病,确认没有基因操作的混淆效应。
Epithelial-Specific TLR4 Knockout Challenges Current Evidence of TLR4 Homeostatic Control of Gut Permeability.
Introduction: Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) is a highly conserved immunosurveillance protein of innate immunity, displaying well-established roles in homeostasis and intestinal inflammation. Current evidence shows complex relationships between TLR4 activation, maintenance of health, and disease progression; however, it commonly overlooks the importance of site-specific TLR4 expression. This omission has the potential to influence translation of results as previous evidence shows the differing and distinct roles that TLR4 exhibits are dependent on its spatiotemporal expression.
Methods: An intestinal epithelial TLR4 conditional knockout (KO) mouse line (Tlr4ΔIEC, n = 6-8) was utilized to dissect the contribution of epithelial TLR4 expression to intestinal homeostasis with comparisons to wild-type (WT) (n = 5-7) counterparts. Functions of the intestinal barrier in the ileum and colon were assessed with tissue resistance in Ussing chambers. Molecular and structural comparisons in the ileum and colon were assessed via histological staining, expression of tight junction proteins (occludin and zonular occludin 1 [ZO-1]), and presence of CD11b-positive immune cells.
Results: There was no impact of the intestinal epithelial TLR4 KO, with no differences in (1) tissue resistance-ileum (mean ± standard error of mean [SEM]): WT 22 ± 7.2 versus Tlr4ΔIEC 20 ± 5.6 (Ω × cm2) p = 0.831, colon WT 30.8 ± 3.6 versus Tlr4ΔIEC 45.1 ± 9.5 p = 0.191; (2) histological staining (overall tissue structure); and (3) tight junction protein expression (% area stain, mean ± SEM)-ZO-1: ileum-WT 1.49 ± 0.155 versus Tlr4ΔIEC 1.17 ± 0.07, p = 0.09; colon-WT 1.36 ± 0.26 versus Tlr4ΔIEC 1.12 ± 0.18 p = 0.47; occludin: ileum-WT 1.07 ± 0.12 versus Tlr4ΔIEC 0.95 ± 0.13, p = 0.53; colon-WT 1.26 ± 0.26 versus Tlr4ΔIEC 1.02 ± 0.16 p = 0.45. CD11b-positive immune cells (% area stain, mean ± SEM) in the ileum were mildly decreased in WT mice: WT 0.14 ± 0.02 versus Tlr4ΔIEC 0.09 ± 0.01 p = 0.04. However, in the colon, there was no difference in CD11b-positive immune cells between strains: WT 0.53 ± 0.08 versus Tlr4ΔIEC 0.49 ± 0.08 p = 0.73.
Conclusions: These data have 2 important implications. First, these data refute the assumption that epithelial TLR4 exerts physiological control of intestinal physiology and immunity in health. Second, and most importantly, these data support the use of the Tlr4ΔIEC line in future models interrogating health and disease, confirming no confounding effects of genetic manipulation.