In vivo veritas: (+)-Naltrexone's actions define translational importance

Possible mechanism for improving the endogenous immune system through the blockade of peripheral μ-opioid receptors by treatment with naldemedine

BACKGROUND

It has been considered that activation of peripheral μ-opioid receptors (MORs) induces side effects of opioids. In this study, we investigated the possible improvement of the immune system in tumour-bearing mice by systemic administration of the peripheral MOR antagonist naldemedine.

METHODS

The inhibitory effect of naldemedine on MOR-mediated signalling was tested by cAMP inhibition and β-arrestin recruitment assays using cultured cells. We assessed possible changes in tumour progression and the number of splenic lymphocytes in tumour-bearing mice under the repeated oral administration of naldemedine.

RESULTS

Treatment with naldemedine produced a dose-dependent inhibition of both the decrease in the cAMP level and the increase in β-arrestin recruitment induced by the MOR agonists. Repeated treatment with naldemedine at a dose that reversed the morphine-induced inhibition of gastrointestinal transport, but not antinociception, significantly decreased tumour volume and prolonged survival in tumour-transplanted mice. Naldemedine administration significantly decreased the increased expression of immune checkpoint-related genes and recovered the decreased level of toll-like receptor 4 in splenic lymphocytes in tumour-bearing mice.

CONCLUSIONS

The blockade of peripheral MOR may induce an anti-tumour effect through the recovery of T-cell exhaustion and promotion of the tumour-killing system.

Non-Specific Targets for Correction of Pneumonia Caused by Aerosols Containing Damaging Factors of Various Nature

This review article provides data on the current state of the pathogenesis peculiarities of body and lung inflammation (pneumonia) under the influence of damaging factors of various nature: infectious agents, chemical toxicants, as well as incorporated radionuclides, etc. The peculiarities of inflammation itself, as a typical pathological process, are considered. Information on mediators that induce the so-called pro-resolving phase of inflammation manifestations is given. Approaches to the neuroimmune correction of non-specific inflammation are substantiated. Data on the following alternative approaches to the correction of nonspecific inflammation are summarized: factors of the coagulation system, modulators of the integrated stress response, and modulators of sigma-1 receptors. Based on the data presented, general directions for the treatment of nonspecific pneumonia are formulated, including reflexogenic and anti-inflammatory therapy in combination with multimodal drugs, as well as pro-resolving therapy in combination with drugs that prevent fibrosis.

Interaction of Opioids with TLR4-Mechanisms and Ramifications

Simple Summary

Recent evidence indicates that opioids can be active at a receptor that is abundantly expressed on innate immune cells as well as cancer cells: the receptor is termed toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4). TLR4 is increasingly recognised as playing key roles in tumour biology and anticancer defences. However, the issue of whether TLR4 mediates some of the effects of opioids on tumour growth and metastasis is entirely unknown. We review existing evidence, mechanisms, and functional consequences of the action of opioids at TLR4. This opens new avenues of research on the role of opioids in cancer.

Abstract

The innate immune receptor toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) is known as a sensor for the gram-negative bacterial cell wall component lipopolysaccharide (LPS). TLR4 activation leads to a strong pro-inflammatory response in macrophages; however, it is also recognised to play a key role in cancer. Recent studies of the opioid receptor (OR)-independent actions of opioids have identified that TLR4 can respond to opioids. Opioids are reported to weakly activate TLR4, but to significantly inhibit LPS-induced TLR4 activation. The action of opioids at TLR4 is suggested to be non-stereoselective, this is because OR-inactive (+)-isomers of opioids have been shown to activate or to inhibit TLR4 signalling, although there is some controversy in the literature. While some opioids can bind to the lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-binding cleft of the Myeloid Differentiation factor 2 (MD-2) co-receptor, pharmacological characterisation of the inhibition of opioids on LPS activation of TLR4 indicates a noncompetitive mechanism. In addition to a direct interaction at the receptor, opioids affect NF-κB activation downstream of both TLR4 and opioid receptors and modulate TLR4 expression, leading to a range of in vivo outcomes. Here, we review the literature reporting the activity of opioids at TLR4, its proposed mechanism(s), and the complex functional consequences of this interaction.

Toll-Like Receptor 4 Signaling and Drug Addiction

The emphasis of neuronal alterations and adaptations have long been the main focus of the studies of the mechanistic underpinnings of drug addiction. Recent studies have begun to appreciate the role of innate immune system, especially toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) signaling in drug reward-associated behaviors and physiology. Drugs like opioids, alcohol and psychostimulants activate TLR4 signaling and subsequently induce proinflammatory responses, which in turn contributes to the development of drug addiction. Inhibition of TLR4 or its downstream effectors attenuated the reinforcing effects of opioids, alcohol and psychostimulants, and this effect is also involved in the withdrawal and relapse-like behaviors of different drug classes. However, conflicting results also argue that TLR4-related immune response may play a minimal part in drug addiction. This review discussed the preclinical evidence that whether TLR4 signaling is involved in multiple drug classes action and the possible mechanisms underlying this effect. Moreover, clinical studies which examined the potential efficacy of immune-base pharmacotherapies in treating drug addiction are also discussed.

Role of the δ-Opioid Receptor in 2 Murine Models of Colitis

Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis, collectively referred to as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), are chronic inflammatory disorders of the gastrointestinal tract. Currently, the etiology of IBD is unknown, and immunosuppressive therapies have become the standard of care to reduce the inflammation; however, these agents only induce remission 50% of the time in patients and can have serious side effects. Recently, endogenous opioids and opioid receptors have been shown to play a role in the mediation of inflammation. In addition, opioid receptor blockade with a nonselective antagonist, naltrexone, has been shown to reduce colitis in both murine models and human subjects. The goal of the current study was to determine if the antiinflammatory effects of naltrexone are mediated through the delta (δ) opioid receptor. Male C57BL/6NCrl (6 to 8 wk.; n = 110) and female BALB/cAnNCrl (6-8 wk.; n = 91) mice were studied using 2 animal models of chemically induced colitis: dextran sodium sulfate (DSS) and 2, 4, 6-trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid (TNBS). The selective δ-receptor antagonists naltrindole and 7-benzylidenenaltrexone were administered to examine the role of the δ-opioid receptor in colonic inflammation. The quantitative measurement of colitis activity, colon weight and length, Hct, WBC count, and gross and microscopic aberrations were analyzed. Administration of naltrexone in the DSS colitis model significantly improved overall disease activity indices on day 5 of therapy. The use of δ-antagonists and naltrexone had limited to no effect on TNBS colitis. Similar findings were obtained by using the DSS colitis model. Based on the current findings, the authors conclude that naltrexone therapy has limited effect on the improvement of colitis in 2 murine models; however, the δ-opioid receptor was not responsible for mediating the effects.

The Role of Opioid Receptors in Immune System Function

Research on the effects of opioids on immune responses was stimulated in the 1980s by the intersection of use of intravenous heroin and HIV infection, to determine if opioids were enhancing HIV progression. The majority of experiments administering opioid alkaloids (morphine and heroin) in vivo, or adding these drugs to cell cultures in vitro, showed that they were immunosuppressive. Immunosuppression was reported as down-regulation: of Natural Killer cell activity; of responses of T and B cells to mitogens; of antibody formation in vivo and in vitro; of depression of phagocytic and microbicidal activity of neutrophils and macrophages; of cytokine and chemokine production by macrophages, microglia, and astrocytes; by sensitization to various infections using animal models; and by enhanced replication of HIV in vitro. The specificity of the receptor involved in the immunosuppression was shown to be the mu opioid receptor (MOR) by using pharmacological antagonists and mice genetically deficient in MOR. Beginning with a paper published in 2005, evidence was presented that morphine is immune-stimulating via binding to MD2, a molecule associated with Toll-like Receptor 4 (TLR4), the receptor for bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS). This concept was pursued to implicate inflammation as a mechanism for the psychoactive effects of the opioid. This review considers the validity of this hypothesis and concludes that it is hard to sustain. The experiments demonstrating immunosuppression were carried out in vivo in rodent strains with normal levels of TLR4, or involved use of cells taken from animals that were wild-type for expression of TLR4. Since engagement of TLR4 is universally accepted to result in immune activation by up-regulation of NF-κB, if morphine were binding to TLR4, it would be predicted that opioids would have been found to be pro-inflammatory, which they were not. Further, morphine is immunosuppressive in mice with a defective TLR4 receptor. Morphine and morphine withdrawal have been shown to permit leakage of Gram-negative bacteria and LPS from the intestinal lumen. LPS is the major ligand for TLR4. It is proposed that an occult variable in experiments where morphine is being proposed to activate TLR4 is actually underlying sepsis induced by the opioid.

Lovastatin inhibits Toll-like receptor 4 signaling in microglia by targeting its co-receptor myeloid differentiation protein 2 and attenuates neuropathic pain

There is growing interest in drug repositioning to find new therapeutic indications for drugs already approved for use in people. Lovastatin is an FDA approved drug that has been used clinically for over a decade as a lipid-lowering medication. While lovastatin is classically considered to act as a hydroxymethylglutaryl (HMG)-CoA reductase inhibitor, the present series of studies reveal a novel lovastatin effect, that being as a Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) antagonist. Lovastatin selectively inhibits lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced TLR4-NF-κB activation without affecting signaling by other homologous TLRs. In vitro biophysical binding and cellular thermal shift assay (CETSA) show that lovastatin is recognized by TLR4's coreceptor myeloid differentiation protein 2 (MD-2). This finding is supported by molecular dynamics simulations that lovastatin targets the LPS binding pocket of MD-2 and lovastatin binding stabilizes the MD-2 conformation. In vitro studies of BV-2 microglial cells revealed that lovastatin inhibits multiple effects of LPS, including activation of NFkB; mRNA expression of tumor necrosis factor-a, interleukin-6 and cyclo-oxygenase 2; production of nitric oxide and reactive oxygen species; as well as phagocytic activity. Furthermore, intrathecal delivery of lovastatin over lumbosacral spinal cord of rats attenuated both neuropathic pain from sciatic nerve injury and expression of the microglial activation marker CD11 in lumbar spinal cord dorsal horn. Given the well-established role of microglia and proinflammatory signaling in neuropathic pain, these data are supportive that lovastatin, as a TLR4 antagonist, may be productively repurposed for treating chronic pain.

Human αS1-casein induces IL-8 secretion by binding to the ecto-domain of the TLR4/MD2 receptor complex

BACKGROUND

The milk protein α_S1-casein was recently reported to induce secretion of proinflammatory cytokines via Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4). In this study, α_S1-casein was identified as binder of theTLR4 ecto domain.

METHODS

IL-8 secretion after stimulation of TLR4/MD2 (myeloid differentiation factor 2)/CD14 (cluster of differentiation 14)-transfected HEK293 cells (TLR4⁺) and Mono Mac 6 cells (MM6) with recombinant α_S1-casein, or LPS as control was monitored. Binding of α_S1-casein to TLR4 was quantified by microscale thermophoresis (MST).

RESULTS

α_S1-casein induced secretion of IL-8 in TLR4⁺ cells and in MM6 cells with a six-times higher final IL-8 concentration in supernatants. IL-8 secretion was inhibited by intracellular TLR4-domain antagonist TAK-242 with an IC₅₀-value of 259.6 nM, by ecto-domain TLR4 antagonistic mianserin with 10-51 μM and by anti-CD14-IgA. The binding constants (K_D) of α_S1-casein to the TLR4, MD2, and CD14 were 2.8 μM, 0.3 μM and 2.7 μM, respectively. Finally, α_S1-casein showed a higher affinity to TLR4/MD2 (K_D: 2.2 μM) compared to LPS (K_D: 8.2 μM).

CONCLUSION

Human α_S1-casein induced proinflammatory effects are dependent upon binding to the TLR4 ectodomain and the presence of CD14. α_S1-casein displayed stronger TLR4 agonistic activity than LPS via a different mode of action.

GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE

Breast milk protein α_S1-casein is a proinflammatory cytokine.

Low dose Naltrexone for induction of remission in inflammatory bowel disease patients

BACKGROUND

Around 30% of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are refractory to current IBD drugs or relapse over time. Novel treatments are called for, and low dose Naltrexone (LDN) may provide a safe, easily accessible alternative treatment option for these patients. We investigated the potential of LDN to induce clinical response in therapy refractory IBD patients, and investigated its direct effects on epithelial barrier function.

METHODS

Patients not in remission and not responding to conventional therapy were offered to initiate LDN as a concomitant treatment. In total 47 IBD patients prescribed LDN were followed prospectively for 12 weeks. Where available, endoscopic remission data, serum and biopsies were collected. Further the effect of Naltrexone on wound healing (scratch assay), cytokine production and endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress (GRP78 and CHOP western blot analysis, immunohistochemistry) were investigated in HCT116 and CACO2 intestinal epithelial cells, human IBD intestinal organoids and patient samples.

RESULTS

Low dose Naltrexone induced clinical improvement in 74.5%, and remission in 25.5% of patients. Naltrexone improved wound healing and reduced ER stress induced by Tunicamycin, lipopolysaccharide or bacteria in epithelial barriers. Inflamed mucosa from IBD patients showed high ER stress levels, which was reduced in patients treated with LDN. Cytokine levels in neither epithelial cells nor serum from IBD patients were affected.

CONCLUSIONS

Naltrexone directly improves epithelial barrier function by improving wound healing and reducing mucosal ER stress levels. Low dose Naltrexone treatment is effective and safe, and could be considered for the treatment of therapy refractory IBD patients.

Opioid-induced hyperalgesia: Cellular and molecular mechanisms

Opioids produce strong analgesia but their use is limited by a paradoxical hypersensitivity named opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH) that may be associated to analgesic tolerance. In the last decades, a significant number of preclinical studies have investigated the factors that modulate OIH development as well as the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying OIH. Several factors have been shown to influence OIH including the genetic background and sex differences of experimental animals as well as the opioid regimen. Mu opioid receptor (MOR) variants and interactions of MOR with different proteins were shown important. Furthermore, at the cellular level, both neurons and glia play a major role in OIH development. Several neuronal processes contribute to OIH, like activation of neuroexcitatory mechanisms, long-term potentiation (LTP) and descending pain facilitation. Increased nociception is also mediated by neuroinflammation induced by the activation of microglia and astrocytes. Neurons and glial cells exert synergistic effects, which contribute to OIH. The molecular actors identified include the Toll-like receptor 4 and the anti-opioid systems as well as some other excitatory molecules, receptors, channels, chemokines, pro-inflammatory cytokines or lipids. This review summarizes the intracellular and intercellular pathways involved in OIH and highlights some mechanisms that may be challenged to limit OIH in the future.

Pharmacological characterization of the opioid inactive isomers (+)-naltrexone and (+)-naloxone as antagonists of toll-like receptor 4

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The toll-like receptor TLR4 is involved in neuropathic pain and in drug reward and reinforcement. The opioid inactive isomers (+)-naltrexone and (+)-naloxone act as TLR4 antagonists, reversing neuropathic pain and reducing opioid and cocaine reward and reinforcement. However, how these agents modulate TLR4 signalling is not clear. Here, we have elucidated the molecular mechanism of (+)-naltrexone and (+)-naloxone on TLR4 signalling.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

BV-2 mouse microglial cell line, primary rat microglia and primary rat peritoneal macrophages were treated with LPS and TLR4 signalling inhibitors. Effects were measured using Western blotting, luciferase reporter assays, fluorescence microscopy and ELISA KEY RESULTS: (+)-Naltrexone and (+)-naloxone were equi-potent inhibitors of the LPS-induced TLR4 downstream signalling and induction of the pro-inflammatory factors NO and TNF-α. Similarly, (+)-naltrexone or (+)-naloxone inhibited production of reactive oxygen species and increased microglial phagocytosis, induced by LPS. However, (+)-naltrexone and (+)-naloxone did not directly inhibit the increased production of IL-1β, induced by LPS. The drug interaction of (+)-naloxone and (+)-naltrexone was additive. (+)-Naltrexone or (+)-naloxone inhibited LPS-induced activation of IFN regulatory factor 3 and production of IFN-β. However, they did not inhibit TLR4 signalling via the activation of either NF-κB, p38 or JNK in these cellular models.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

(+)-Naltrexone and (+)-naloxone were TRIF-IFN regulatory factor 3 axis-biased TLR4 antagonists. They blocked TLR4 downstream signalling leading to NO, TNF-α and reactive oxygen species. This pattern may explain, at least in part, the in vivo therapeutic effects of (+)-naltrexone and (+)-naloxone.

Structure-Activity Relationships of (+)-Naltrexone-Inspired Toll-like Receptor 4 (TLR4) Antagonists

Activation of Toll-like receptors has been linked to neuropathic pain and opioid dependence. (+)-Naltrexone acts as a Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) antagonist and has been shown to reverse neuropathic pain in rat studies. We designed and synthesized compounds based on (+)-naltrexone and (+)-noroxymorphone and evaluated their TLR4 antagonist activities by their effects on inhibiting lipopolysaccharide (LPS) induced TLR4 downstream nitric oxide (NO) production in microglia BV-2 cells. Alteration of the N-substituent in (+)-noroxymorphone gave us a potent TLR4 antagonist. The most promising analog, (+)-N-phenethylnoroxymorphone ((4S,4aR,7aS,12bR)-4a,9-dihydroxy-3-phenethyl-2,3,4,4a,5,6-hexahydro-1H-4,12-methanobenzofuro[3,2-e]isoquinolin-7(7aH)-one, 1j) showed ∼75 times better TLR-4 antagonist activity than (+)-naltrexone, and the ratio of its cell viability IC50, a measure of its toxicity, to TLR-4 antagonist activity (140 μM/1.4 μM) was among the best of the new analogs. This compound (1j) was active in vivo; it significantly increased and prolonged morphine analgesia.

Opioid-induced central immune signaling: implications for opioid analgesia

Despite being the mainstay of pain management, opioids are limited in their clinical utility by adverse effects, such as tolerance and paradoxical hyperalgesia. Research of the past 15 years has extended beyond neurons, to implicate central nervous system immune signaling in these adverse effects. This article will provide an overview of these central immune mechanisms in opioid tolerance and paradoxical hyperalgesia, including those mediated by Toll-like receptor 4, purinergic, ceramide, and chemokine signaling. Challenges for the future, as well as new lines of investigation will be highlighted.

Activation of adult rat CNS endothelial cells by opioid-induced toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) signaling induces proinflammatory, biochemical, morphological, and behavioral sequelae

CNS immune signaling contributes to deleterious opioid effects including hyperalgesia, tolerance, reward, and dependence/withdrawal. Such effects are mediated by opioid signaling at toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), presumptively of glial origin. Whether CNS endothelial cells express TLR4 is controversial. If so, they would be well positioned for activation by blood-borne opioids, contributing to opioid-induced pro-inflammatory responses. These studies examined adult primary rat CNS endothelial cell responses to (-)-morphine or its mu opioid receptor (MOR)-inactive metabolite morphine-3-glucuronide (M3G), both known TLR4 agonists. We demonstrate that adult rat CNS endothelial cells express functional TLR4. M3G activated nuclear factor kappaB (NF-κB), increased tumor necrosis factor-α (TNFα) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2) mRNAs, and released prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) from these cells. (-)-Morphine-induced upregulation of TNFα mRNA and PGE2 release were unmasked by pre-treatment with nalmefene, a MOR antagonist without TLR4 activity (unlike CTAP, shown to have both MOR- and TLR4-activity), suggestive of an interplay between MOR and TLR4 co-activation by (-)-morphine. In support, MOR-dependent Protein Kinase A (PKA) opposed TLR4 signaling, as PKA inhibition (H-89) also unmasked (-)-morphine-induced TNFα and COX2 mRNA upregulation. Intrathecal injection of CNS endothelial cells, stimulated in vitro with M3G, produced TLR4-dependent tactile allodynia. Further, cortical suffusion with M3G in vivo induced TLR4-dependent vasodilation. Finally, endothelial cell TLR4 activation by lipopolysaccharide and/or M3G was blocked by the glial inhibitors AV1013 and propentofylline, demonstrating endothelial cells as a new target of such drugs. These data indicate that (-)-morphine and M3G can activate CNS endothelial cells via TLR4, inducing proinflammatory, biochemical, morphological, and behavioral sequelae. CNS endothelial cells may have previously unanticipated roles in opioid-induced effects, in phenomena blocked by presumptive glial inhibitors, as well as TLR4-mediated phenomena more broadly.