Cytokine release does not improve the sensitivity and specificity of the direct popliteal lymph node assay

Alterations in the transcriptome and antibiotic susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus grown in the presence of diclofenac

Background

Diclofenac is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) which has been shown to increase the susceptibility of various bacteria to antimicrobials and demonstrated to have broad antimicrobial activity. This study describes transcriptome alterations in S. aureus strain COL grown with diclofenac and characterizes the effects of this NSAID on antibiotic susceptibility in laboratory, clinical and diclofenac reduced-susceptibility (Dc^RS) S. aureus strains.

Methods

Transcriptional alterations in response to growth with diclofenac were measured using S. aureus gene expression microarrays and quantitative real-time PCR. Antimicrobial susceptibility was determined by agar diffusion MICs and gradient plate analysis. Ciprofloxacin accumulation was measured by fluorescence spectrophotometry.

Results

Growth of S. aureus strain COL with 80 μg/ml (0.2 × MIC) of diclofenac resulted in the significant alteration by ≥2-fold of 458 genes. These represented genes encoding proteins for transport and binding, protein and DNA synthesis, and the cell envelope. Notable alterations included the strong down-regulation of antimicrobial efflux pumps including mepRAB and a putative emrAB/qacA-family pump. Diclofenac up-regulated sigB (σ^B), encoding an alternative sigma factor which has been shown to be important for antimicrobial resistance. Staphylococcus aureus microarray metadatabase (SAMMD) analysis further revealed that 46% of genes differentially-expressed with diclofenac are also σ^B-regulated. Diclofenac altered S. aureus susceptibility to multiple antibiotics in a strain-dependent manner. Susceptibility increased for ciprofloxacin, ofloxacin and norfloxacin, decreased for oxacillin and vancomycin, and did not change for tetracycline or chloramphenicol. Mutation to Dc^RS did not affect susceptibility to the above antibiotics. Reduced ciprofloxacin MICs with diclofenac in strain BB255, were not associated with increased drug accumulation.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that diclofenac influences antibiotic susceptibility in S. aureus, in part, by altering the expression of regulatory and structural genes associated with cell wall biosynthesis/turnover and transport.

The anti-inflammatory non-antibiotic helper compound diclofenac: an antibacterial drug target

Diclofenac sodium (Dc) was found to possess antibacterial activity against both drug-sensitive and drug-resistant clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli, and Mycobacterium spp., in addition to its potent anti-inflammatory activity. The time-kill curve study indicates that this non-steroidal drug exhibits bactericidal activity against Listeria, E. coli, and M. tuberculosis. The antibacterial activity of Dc comes, in part, from its ability to inhibit the DNA synthesis of E. coli and L. monocytogenes. Dc could protect murine listeriosis, salmonellosis, and tuberculosis at doses ranged within its maximum recommended human or non-toxic ex-vivo dose. Dc possesses anti-plasmid activity and acts as a 'helper compound' in synergistic combination with streptomycin against E. coli and Mycobacterium or gentamicin against Listeria. This review focuses on the possible use of Dc, a non-antibiotic helper compound, in infections and inflammatory conditions, rationalized on the basis of the activities of the compounds.

The anti-inflammatory drug Diclofenac retains anti-listerial activity in vivo

AIMS

The interactions between nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) and Listeria monocytogenes have not been sufficiently documented to date. The aim of this study was to investigate the possible effects of Diclofenac (Dc) in a murine listerial infection model.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Dc was administered orally at 2.5 mug g(-1) to female albino strain of laboratory mouse (BALB/c) thrice postinfection (1 x 10(8) CFU ml(-1) oral challenge with L. monocytogenes ATCC 51774), which resulted in significantly (P < 0.01) reduced bacterial counts in liver and spleen, decreased (10-fold, P < 0.05) hepatic colonization and necrosis, and caused up-regulation of the expression of inflammatory cytokines (interferon-gamma, interleukin-1beta, tumour necrosis factor-alpha), compared with drug-free control.

CONCLUSIONS

Dc may be useful as a promising adjuvant to the existing therapies in controlling systemic listerial infection. Further, quantitative structure-activity relationship studies might contribute in manipulating it as a lead compound for the synthesis of new, more effective nonantibiotics, perhaps, devoid of side-effects that could be recommended as a compassionate therapy for listeriosis.

SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY

This is the first in vivo study designed to evaluate the antilisterial effect of the NSAID Dc with special emphasis on the immunological mechanism of action of the drug.

Popliteal lymph node (PLN) assay to study adjuvant effects on respiratory allergy

Different variants of the popliteal lymph node (PLN) assay have been published. Here we describe the adjuvant popliteal lymph node assay, an immune response assay to study the adjuvant activity of soluble substances as well as particulate matter. The substance to be studied for adjuvant activity is injected into the hind footpad of mice or rats together with an antigen. Adjuvant activity is determined as the increase in PLN weight and cell numbers in animals receiving antigen together with the substance under study, compared with PLN weight and cell numbers in animals given the antigen without the substance in question, and animals given the putative adjuvant alone. Because lymph node weight and cell numbers are immunologically non-specific parameters, specific immune response assays like serum antibody responses or antibody-forming cell numbers should additionally be performed. Different antigens and immune response assays may be used, depending on the research question asked. In relation to respiratory (or food) allergy, the assays should as a minimum include determination of specific IgE in serum, and preferably also IgG1 (mouse). Serum specific IgG2a antibody determination may be added to get an indication of the Th1-Th2-balance of the response. The adjuvant PLN assay, with cellular response assays performed in the draining popliteal lymph node and antibody determinations in serum, requires small amounts of test material. The assay offers a practical, sensitive and reproducible method to determine the adjuvant activity of soluble substances as well as particulate material, with the possibility to also perform mechanistic studies.

Popliteal lymph node assay: facts and perspectives

The popliteal lymph node assay (PLNA) derives from the hypothesis that some supposedly immune-mediated adverse effects induced by certain pharmaceuticals involve a mechanism resembling a graft-versus-host reaction. The injection of many but not all of these compounds into the footpad of mice or rats produces an increase in the weight and/or cellularity of the popliteal lymph node in the treated limb (direct PLNA). Some of the compounds known to cause these adverse effects in humans, however, failed to induce a positive PLNA response, leading to refinements of the technique to include pretreatment with enzyme inducers, depletion of CD4(+) T cells or additional endpoints such as histological examination, lymphocyte subset analysis and cytokine fingerprinting. Alternative approaches have been used to improve further the predictability of the assay. In the secondary PLNA, the test compound is injected twice in order to illicit a greater secondary response, thus suggesting a memory-specific T cell response. In the adoptive PLNA, popliteal lymph node cells from treated mice are injected into the footpad of naive mice; a marked response to a subsequent footpad challenge demonstrates the involvement of T cells. Finally, the reporter antigens TNP-Ficoll and TNP-ovalbumin are used to differentiate compounds that induce responses involving neo-antigen help or co-stimulatory signals (modified PLNA). The PLNA is increasingly considered as a tool for detection of the potential to induce both sensitization and autoimmune reactions. A major current limitation is validation. A small inter-laboratory validation study of the direct PLNA found consistent results. No such study has been performed using an alternative protocol. Other issues include selection of the optimal protocol for an improved prediction of sensitization vs autoimmunity, and the elimination of false-positive responses due to primary irritation. Finally, a better understanding of underlying mechanisms is essential to determine the most relevant endpoints. The confusion resulting from use of the PLNA to predict autoimmune-like reactions as well as sensitization should be clarified. Interestingly, most drugs that were positive in the direct PLNA are also known to cause drug hypersensitivity syndrome in treated patients. This observation is expected to open new avenues of research.

Murine models of drug hypersensitivity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Drug hypersensitivity reactions are relatively rare but may result in severe morbidity and fatalities. Due to the idiosyncratic nature and multifactorial etiology of these reactions, development of a single animal model to study the immunosensitizing mechanisms of all drugs is impossible. This hampers the development of predictive screening models that are urgently needed to assess the immunostimulating capacity of newly developed drugs. The present review will focus on recent findings on mechanisms of drug hypersensitivity reactions obtained with murine models, and on the use of these models as potential screening tools to assess the immunostimulating capacity of drugs.

RECENT FINDINGS

Mechanisms of drug-induced sensitization versus tolerance appear dependent on generally accepted immunological paradigms. For instance, co-stimulatory signaling by antigen-presenting cells is decisive in drug-induced immunosensitization and both T cells and antigen-presenting cells are important for the induction of tolerance to orally administered drugs. From recent studies it has been hypothesized that expression of stress-associated transcription factors and the expression of costimulatory molecules or cytokine production within hours or days after the initial exposure may be representative of drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions and may thus be used as predictive parameters to screen for immunosensitizing drugs.

SUMMARY

The development of animal models to study mechanisms of drug hypersensitivity reactions is still in its infancy. Much effort has been made, however, to search for early indicators of immunostimulation in murine animal models that may eventually appear useful in a tiered strategy to assess drug-induced sensitization.

Use of the local lymph node assay in assessment of immune function

The murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) was originally developed as a predictive test method for the identification of chemicals with sensitizing potential. In this study we demonstrated that an adapted LLNA can also be used as an immune function assay by studying the effects of orally administered immunomodulating compounds on the T-cell-dependent immune response induced by the contact sensitizer 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB). C57Bl/6 mice were treated with the immunotoxic compounds cyclosporin A (CsA), bis(tri-n-butyltin)oxide (TBTO) or benzo[a]pyrene, (B[a]P). Subsequently, cell proliferation and interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) and interleukin (IL)-4 release were determined in the auricular lymph nodes (LNs) after DNCB application on both ears. Immunosuppression induced by CsA, TBTO and B[a]P was clearly detectable in this application of the LLNA. Cytokine release measurements proved valuable to confirm the results of the cell proliferation assay and to obtain an indication of the effect on Th1/Th2 balance. We believe to have demonstrated the applicability of an adapted LLNA as an immune function assay in the mouse.

Genetic aspects of immune-mediated adverse drug effects

Adverse drug effects (ADEs) are of great importance in medicine and account for up to 5% of all hospital admissions. ADEs can arise from several mechanisms and a wide range of drugs can cause immune-mediated ADEs (IMADEs). For a drug to elicit an IMADE, it must be both immunogenic (that is, able to sensitize the immune system) and antigenic (that is, able to evoke a response from a sensitized immune system). Unlike protein therapeutics, small-molecule drugs (or xenobiotics) are usually neither immunogenic nor antigenic. IMADEs are therefore the result of complex interactions between drug-metabolizing enzymes, immune sensitization and immune effectors. The genetic aspects of this interplay are discussed in this review.