4.4 Article

Mucosal Administration of Flagellin Protects Mice from Streptococcus pneumoniae Lung Infection

期刊

INFECTION AND IMMUNITY
卷 78, 期 10, 页码 4226-4233

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/IAI.00224-10

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Community [INCO-CT-2006-032296]
  2. ECOS-Sud [U08S02]
  3. ANII and PEDECIBA, School of Chemistry
  4. INSERM
  5. Institut Pasteur de Lille
  6. Region Nord Pas-de-Calais (ARCir Europe and Bourse INSERM-Region)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Streptococcus pneumoniae is a major cause of pneumonia in infants and the elderly. Innate defenses are essential to the control of pneumococcal infections, and deficient responses can trigger disease in susceptible individuals. Here we showed that flagellin can locally activate innate immunity and thereby increase the resistance to acute pneumonia. Flagellin mucosal treatment improved S. pneumoniae clearance in the lungs and promoted increased survival of infection. In addition, lung architecture was fully restored after the treatment of infected mice, indicating that flagellin allows the reestablishment of steady-state conditions. Using a flagellin mutant that is unable to signal through Toll-like receptor 5 (TLR5), we established that TLR5 signaling is essential for protection. In the respiratory tract, flagellin induced neutrophil infiltration into airways and upregulated the expression of genes coding for interleukin 6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha), CXCL1, CXCL2, and CCL20. Using depleting antibodies, we demonstrated that neutrophils are major effectors of protection. Further, we found that B- and T-cell-deficient SCID mice clear S. pneumoniae challenge to the same extent as immunocompetent animals, suggesting that these cell populations are not required for flagellin-induced protection. In conclusion, this study emphasizes that mucosal stimulation of innate immunity by a TLR not naturally engaged by S. pneumoniae can increase the potential to cure pneumococcal pneumonia.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据