Non-genomic inhibitory effect of glucocorticoids on activated peripheral blood basophils through suppression of lipid raft formation

Methylprednisolone-induced anaphylaxis diagnosed by intradermal skin test: a case report

Background

Glucocorticoids rarely cause anaphylaxis. Common methods for the determination of allergens include in vivo skin prick test (SPT) and intradermal skin test (IDST) and the in vitro basophil activation test (BAT). However, to our knowledge, the best strategy for diagnosing glucocorticoid-induced anaphylaxis has not been elucidated.

Case presentation

A 10-year-old boy was admitted to our hospital because of 2 weeks of fever and arthralgia. He had not been treated with glucocorticoids before, including methylprednisolone (mPSL). He was suspected to have bacterial myositis and was treated with ceftriaxone. However, his symptoms persisted for > 2 weeks. Autoinflammatory arthritis was suspected, and he was treated with mPSL sodium succinate (MPS) pulse therapy (30 mg/kg). After 15 min of mPSL injection, he had wheezing and generalized wheal formation with decreased oxygen saturation. As anaphylaxis was suspected, mPSL was discontinued, and olopatadine and oxygen were administered. The symptoms improved considerably without the use of epinephrine and disappeared in 30 min. One month after discharge, SPT, IDST, and BAT were performed without discontinuing his prescribed oral prednisolone. SPTs for MPS, hydrocortisone sodium succinate (HCS), prednisolone sodium succinate (PSS), dexamethasone sodium phosphate (DSP), and betamethasone sodium phosphate (BSP) were negative. IDSTs for MPS, HCS, and PSS were positive, whereas those for DSP and BSP were negative. By contrast, BATs for MPS, HCS, and PSS were negative. Although glucocorticoid-induced hypersensitivity caused by nonmedicinal ingredients such as lactose, carboxymethylcellulose, polyethylene glycol, and hexylene glycol has been reported; the glucocorticoids tested in this patient did not contain any of these nonmedicinal ingredients. As the glucocorticoids that were positive on IDST share a succinate ester, this might have caused MPS-induced anaphylaxis.

Conclusions

We report the case of MPS-induced anaphylaxis diagnosed by IDST but not BAT. In case reports of glucocorticoid-induced anaphylaxis in the literature, most patients were diagnosed with SPT or IDST. These results suggest that BAT should be considered when IDST and SPT are negative. Further studies are necessary to clarify the best strategy for diagnosing glucocorticoid-induced anaphylaxis.

C-reactive protein isoforms differentially affect outer blood-retinal barrier integrity and function

The retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) forms the outer blood-retinal barrier (oBRB) and is the prime target of early age-related macular degeneration (AMD). C-reactive protein (CRP), a serum biomarker for chronic inflammation and AMD, presents two different isoforms, monomeric (mCRP) and pentameric (pCRP), that may have a different effect on inflammation and barrier function in the RPE. The results reported in this study suggest that mCRP but not pCRP impairs RPE functionality by increasing paracellular permeability and disrupting the tight junction proteins ZO-1 and occludin in RPE cells. Additionally, we evaluated the effect of drugs commonly used in clinical settings on mCRP-induced barrier dysfunction. We found that a corticosteroid (methylprednisolone) and an anti-VEGF agent (bevacizumab) prevented mCRP-induced ARPE-19 barrier disruption and IL-8 production. Furthermore, bevacizumab was also able to revert mCRP-induced IL-8 increase after mCRP stimulation. In conclusion, the presence of mCRP within retinal tissue may lead to disruption of the oBRB, an effect that may be modified in the presence of corticosteroids or anti-VEGF drugs.

Heterogeneity in mechanisms influencing glucocorticoid sensitivity: the need for a systems biology approach to treatment of glucocorticoid-resistant inflammation

Glucocorticoids (GCs) have impressive anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive effects and show a diversity of actions across a variety of cell phenotypes. Implicit in efforts to optimize GCs as anti-inflammatory agents for any or all indications is the notion that the relevant mechanism(s) of action of GCs are fully elucidated. However, recent advances in understanding GC signalling mechanisms have revealed remarkable complexity and contextual dependence, calling into question whether the mechanisms of action are sufficiently well-described to embark on optimization. In the current review, we address evidence for differences in the mechanism of action in different cell types and contexts, and discuss contrasts in mechanisms of glucocorticoid insensitivity, with a focus on asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Given this complexity, we consider the potential breadth of impact and selectivity of strategies directed to reversing the glucocorticoid insensitivity.

Effects of Glucocorticoids in the Immune System

Glucocorticoids (GCs) are steroid hormones with widespread effects. They control intermediate metabolism by stimulating gluconeogenesis in the liver, mobilize amino acids from extra hepatic tissues, inhibit glucose uptake in muscle and adipose tissue, and stimulate fat breakdown in adipose tissue. They also mediate stress response. They exert potent immune-suppressive and anti-inflammatory effects particularly when administered pharmacologically. Understanding these diverse effects of glucocorticoids requires a detailed knowledge of their mode of action. Research over the years has uncovered several details on the molecular action of this hormone, especially in immune cells. In this chapter, we have summarized the latest findings on the action of glucocorticoids in immune cells with a view of identifying important control points that may be relevant in glucocorticoid therapy.

Non-genomic effects of spironolactone and eplerenone in cardiomyocytes of neonatal Wistar rats: do they evoke cardioprotective pathways?

Mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) antagonists of aldosterone (spironolactone and eplerenone) display beneficial effects in the treatment of cardiopathies; however, many of these responses are independent of this antagonism. The mechanisms of action of these drugs are not well known; few studies have comparatively evaluated whether eplerenone as well as spironolactone display cardioprotective effects independent of the blockade of aldosterone. To study these mechanisms, which lead to cardioprotective responses, and to evaluate comparatively their effects in vitro, we have evaluated the proliferative effect of spironolactone and eplerenone in primary culture of cardiomyocytes and fibroblasts of neonatal Wistar rats in the presence and absence of aldosterone. Spironolactone and eplerenone promoted proliferation of cardiomyocyte even in the absence of aldosterone, suggesting a signaling pathway independent of the antagonism over aldosterone. Spironolactone was able to reduce the proliferation of fibroblasts and to reverse the proliferation promoted by aldosterone, which was also displayed by eplerenone. To elucidate the biochemical pathways evoked by these drugs, we sought to analyze Ca(2+), cAMP, and cGMP, and the activity of PKC and ERK1/2. Spironolactone and eplerenone increased the levels of Ca(2+), cGMP and activity of ERK 1/2, and reversed the action of aldosterone on the activity of PKC and ERK1/2. Interestingly, only spironolactone increased the levels of cAMP. Our data support the fact that in addition to aldosterone, both spironolactone and eplerenone display rapid responses (non-genomic) such as an increase on cAMP, Ca(2+), and cGMP by spironolactone, and Ca(2+) and cGMP by eplerenone. We have observed a more consistent cardioprotection promoted by spironolactone; however, these effects have yet to be tested clinically. Therefore, our data show that these drugs do not only act as an antagonist of MR, but could lead to a new pharmacological classification of these drugs.

The HPA - Immune Axis and the Immunomodulatory Actions of Glucocorticoids in the Brain

In response to physiological and psychogenic stressors, the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis orchestrates the systemic release of glucocorticoids (GCs). By virtue of nearly ubiquitous expression of the GC receptor and the multifaceted metabolic, cardiovascular, cognitive, and immunologic functions of GCs, this system plays an essential role in the response to stress and restoration of an homeostatic state. GCs act on almost all types of immune cells and were long recognized to perform salient immunosuppressive and anti-inflammatory functions through various genomic and non-genomic mechanisms. These renowned effects of the steroid hormone have been exploited in the clinic for the past 70 years and synthetic GC derivatives are commonly used for the therapy of various allergic, autoimmune, inflammatory, and hematological disorders. The role of the HPA axis and GCs in restraining immune responses across the organism is however still debated in light of accumulating evidence suggesting that GCs can also have both permissive and stimulatory effects on the immune system under specific conditions. Such paradoxical actions of GCs are particularly evident in the brain, where substantial data support either a beneficial or detrimental role of the steroid hormone. In this review, we examine the roles of GCs on the innate immune system with a particular focus on the CNS compartment. We also dissect the numerous molecular mechanisms through which GCs exert their effects and discuss the various parameters influencing the paradoxical immunomodulatory functions of GCs in the brain.