BACKGROUND: Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease that is characterized clinically by airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) to bronchoconstricting agents. The physiological response of the asthmatic lung to inhaled allergen is often characterized by two distinct phases: an early-phase response (EPR) within the first hour following exposure that subsides and a late-phase response (LPR) that is more prolonged and may occur several hours later. Mouse models of asthma have become increasingly popular and should be designed to exhibit an EPR, LPR and AHR. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a common model of asthma is capable of demonstrating an EPR, LPR and AHR. METHODS: BALB/c mice were sensitized to ovalbumin (OVA) and challenged with one or three OVA aerosols. Changes in lung mechanics in response to allergen inhalation were assessed using a modification of the low-frequency forced oscillation technique (LFOT). In order to assess AHR, changes in lung mechanics in response to aerosolized methacholine were assessed using LFOT. Inflammatory cell infiltration into the lung was measured via bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL). ELISAs were used to measure inflammatory cytokines in the BAL and levels of IgE in the serum. RESULTS: An EPR was only detectable after three OVA aerosols in approximately half of the mice studied. There was no evidence of an LPR despite a clear increase in cellular infiltration 6 h post-allergen challenge. AHR was present after a single OVA aerosol but not after three OVA aerosols. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of an LPR, limited EPR and the absence of a link between the LPR and AHR highlight the limitations of this mouse model as a complete model of the lung dysfunction associated with asthma.
BACKGROUND:Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease that is characterized clinically by airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) to bronchoconstricting agents. The physiological response of the asthmatic lung to inhaled allergen is often characterized by two distinct phases: an early-phase response (EPR) within the first hour following exposure that subsides and a late-phase response (LPR) that is more prolonged and may occur several hours later. Mouse models of asthma have become increasingly popular and should be designed to exhibit an EPR, LPR and AHR. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a common model of asthma is capable of demonstrating an EPR, LPR and AHR. METHODS: BALB/c mice were sensitized to ovalbumin (OVA) and challenged with one or three OVA aerosols. Changes in lung mechanics in response to allergen inhalation were assessed using a modification of the low-frequency forced oscillation technique (LFOT). In order to assess AHR, changes in lung mechanics in response to aerosolized methacholine were assessed using LFOT. Inflammatory cell infiltration into the lung was measured via bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL). ELISAs were used to measure inflammatory cytokines in the BAL and levels of IgE in the serum. RESULTS: An EPR was only detectable after three OVA aerosols in approximately half of the mice studied. There was no evidence of an LPR despite a clear increase in cellular infiltration 6 h post-allergen challenge. AHR was present after a single OVA aerosol but not after three OVA aerosols. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of an LPR, limited EPR and the absence of a link between the LPR and AHR highlight the limitations of this mouse model as a complete model of the lung dysfunction associated with asthma.
Authors: Shannon L Russell; Matthew J Gold; Martin Hartmann; Benjamin P Willing; Lisa Thorson; Marta Wlodarska; Navkiran Gill; Marie-Renée Blanchet; William W Mohn; Kelly M McNagny; Brett B Finlay Journal: EMBO Rep Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 8.807
Authors: Long Zhu; Lisheng Zhuo; Koji Kimata; Etsuro Yamaguchi; Hideto Watanabe; Mark A Aronica; Vincent C Hascall; Kenji Baba Journal: Int Arch Allergy Immunol Date: 2010-05-18 Impact factor: 2.749
Authors: Steve D Swain; Nicole N Meissner; Dan W Siemsen; Kate McInnerney; Allen G Harmsen Journal: Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol Date: 2011-09-29 Impact factor: 6.914
Authors: David G Chapman; Jane E Tully; James D Nolin; Yvonne M Janssen-Heininger; Charles G Irvin Journal: J Cell Biochem Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 4.429
Authors: Shannon Li; Minara Aliyeva; Nirav Daphtary; Rebecca A Martin; Matthew E Poynter; Shannon F Kostin; Jos L van der Velden; Alexandra M Hyman; Christopher S Stevenson; Jonathan E Phillips; Lennart K A Lundblad Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2013-11-27 Impact factor: 5.464
Authors: Alok S Shah; Sara L Farmen; Thomas O Moninger; Thomas R Businga; Michael P Andrews; Kevin Bugge; Charles C Searby; Darryl Nishimura; Kim A Brogden; Joel N Kline; Val C Sheffield; Michael J Welsh Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-02-25 Impact factor: 11.205