Whilst BCG inhibits allergic airway responses in murine models, IL-18 has adversary effects depending on its environment. We therefore constructed a BCG strain producing murine IL-18 (BCG-IL-18) and evaluated its efficiency to prevent an asthma-like reaction in mice. BALB/cByJ mice were sensitized (day (D) 1 and D10) by intraperitoneal injection of ovalbumin (OVA)-alum and primary (D20-22) and secondary (D62, 63) challenged with OVA aerosols. BCG or BCG-IL-18 were intraperitonealy administered 1 hour before each immunization (D1 and D10). BCG-IL-18 and BCG were shown to similarly inhibit the development of AHR, mucus production, eosinophil influx, and local Th2 cytokine production in BAL, both after the primary and secondary challenge. These data show that IL-18 did not increase allergic airway responses in the context of the mycobacterial infection, and suggest that BCG-IL-18 and BCG are able to prevent the development of local Th2 responses and therefore inhibit allergen-induced airway responses even after restimulation.
Whilst BCG inhibits allergic airway responses in murine models, IL-18 has adversary effects depending on its environment. We therefore constructed a BCG strain producing murineIL-18 (BCG-IL-18) and evaluated its efficiency to prevent an asthma-like reaction in mice. BALB/cByJ mice were sensitized (day (D) 1 and D10) by intraperitoneal injection of ovalbumin (OVA)-alum and primary (D20-22) and secondary (D62, 63) challenged with OVA aerosols. BCG or BCG-IL-18 were intraperitonealy administered 1 hour before each immunization (D1 and D10). BCG-IL-18 and BCG were shown to similarly inhibit the development of AHR, mucus production, eosinophil influx, and local Th2 cytokine production in BAL, both after the primary and secondary challenge. These data show that IL-18 did not increase allergic airway responses in the context of the mycobacterial infection, and suggest that BCG-IL-18 and BCG are able to prevent the development of local Th2 responses and therefore inhibit allergen-induced airway responses even after restimulation.
Airway inflammation and hyperresponsiveness, increased Th2
cytokine production in bronchoalveolar lavage, and enhanced IgE secretion in
serum are the hallmarks of allergic asthma. Increased prevalence of asthma has
been related to decreased microbial infection or immunization during early
infancy. In particular, MycobacteriumbovisBacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccination have been suggested to
decrease the risk of asthma in a population with family history of rhinitis or
eczema [1, 2].
Studies in mouse models have shown that BCG immunization inhibits the
development of asthma features in ovalbumin (OVA)-sensitized mice [3-8].
Several authors reported a switch toward a Th1 pattern of response [3, 5, 9],
with little evidence of increased regulatory cell activity, since production of
the regulatory cytokine IL-10 as well as production of IL-4 was suppressed [3, 9].Originally named IFN-γ-inducing
factor, IL-18 is important for the generation of protective immunity
to mycobacteria. IL-18-deficient mice infected with Mycobacteriumtuberculosis and Mycobacterium bovis BCG developed increased granulomatous lesions while IFN-γ
production decreased [10].
IL-18 role on allergic inflammation is complex, as it can promote both Th1 and
Th2 responses depending on its environment, the time of its administration
and/or the response assessment. IL-18 deficiency selectively enhances
OVA-induced eosinophilia in mice, whereas IL-18 gene transfer by adenovirus
into the respiratory tract at the time of OVA airway challenge prevents the
development of airway
hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and decreases
allergen-specific IL-4 production, airway eosinophilia, mucus production, and
increases IFN-γ production [11, 12].
In contrast, high doses of IL-18 administered alone or concomitantly with the
antigen have been shown to increase allergic sensitization including serum IgE,
Th2 cytokines and airway eosinophilia, especially 3 weeks after IL-18 injection
[13].
Intraperitoneal coadministration of IL-18 and IL-12 or IL-18 and IL-2 during
the airway challenge period inhibits AHR, eosinophilia, and serum IgE levels [14, 15],
whilst intranasal of IL-18 plus IL-2 induced allergic airway disease in naïve
mice [16].A BCG producing IL-18 was shown to exhibit enhanced
antimicrobial immunity compared to nonrecombinant BCG due to increased
production of IFN-γ [17].
Therefore, we constructed a recombinant BCG producing IL-18 (BCG-IL-18) in
order to increase the efficiency of intraperitoneally injected BCG in preventing
allergic reactions. This strain produces low doses of IL-18 and increases Th1
response [18].
We previously showed that intraperitoneal (i.p.) BCG-IL-18 immunization
at the time of OVA sensitization decreases bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL)
eosinophilia, IL-5 production by lymph node cells, but increases IFN-γ production by lymph node cells [19].
The aim of the present work was firstly to evaluate the effect of nonrecombinant
BCG and BCG-IL-18 immunization on AHR, and secondly to analyze BCG and
BCG-IL-18 effects in the long term, that is, after a secondary challenge occurring
6 weeks after the primary OVA challenge. We showed that both BCG and BCG-IL-18
were able to similarly prevent AHR and airway inflammation (BAL eosinophilia,
Th2 cytokine production in BAL, and mucus production) after primary and
secondary challenges.
2. MATERIAL AND METHODS
2.1. Sensitization and airway challenge for acute and chronic inflammatory reaction
10–12-week-old
female BALB/c mice () (Iffa
Credo, l’Arbresle, France) were sensitized by i.p. injection of 20 g ovalbumin
(OVA) (Grade V, Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis, Mo, USA) emulsified in 2.25 mg
aluminum hydroxide (AlumImject: Pierce, Rockford, Ill, USA) in a total volume
of 100 L on days (D)1 and 10. Mice were challenged (20 minutes) via the
airways with OVA (1% in saline) for 3 days (D20, 21, and 22) using ultrasonic
nebulization. Mice were divided into 2 groups: the groups of OVA-sensitized
mice were i.p. injected with OVA and received OVA challenges aerosols. The
groups of nonsensitized mice only received OVA challenges by aerosols.In the primary
challenge protocol, 48 hours after the last OVA challenge (D24), AHR and
tissues were assessed. For the secondary challenge protocol, 6 weeks after the
first challenge, mice were exposed to OVA challenges (1% in saline on D62, 5%
in saline on D63), and airway reactivity and tissues were assessed on D64. Nonsensitized
control groups only received OVA challenges by aerosols.
2.2. Immunization with BCG or IL-18-producing recombinant BCG
Nonsensitized and sensitized mice were or
were not treated with BCG or BCG-IL-18. Mycobacterium bovis BCG (Pasteur strain 1173P2; WHO Stockholm,
Sweden) and the recombinant BCG producing IL-18 (BCG-IL-18) [18] were grown, using stationary
flasks, at 37°C in Sauton medium containing 10 g/mL HgCl2 when
required and frozen until use. Nonrecombinant BCG or rBCG producing IL-18 were
administered intraperitoneally on D0 and D10 (5 106CFU in a final volume of 100 L).
2.3. Airway Hyperresponsivness
Airway responsiveness was assessed using
single-chamberwhole body plethysmography (Buxco Electronics, Sharon, Conn, USA), as described previously [20]. Enhanced pause (Penh) was used as the
measure of airway responsiveness in this study. In the plethysmography, mice
were exposed for 2 minutes to nebulized PBS and followed by increasing
concentrations of nebulized methacholine (MCh) (1,5–12 mg/mL
in PBS) (Sigma-Aldrich) using an Aerosonic ultrasonic nebulizer (Systam, Villeneuve sur Lot, France). After each nebulization, recordings were taken for 3 minutes. The Penh values measured during each 3-minute sequence were averaged and were expressed for each MCh concentration as the
percentage of baseline Penh values was measured after PBS exposure. There were no significant differences in any of the treatment groups
for baseline(PBS) Penh.
2.4. Bronchoalveolar Lavage
Immediately
after assessment of AHR, lungs were lavaged via the tracheal tube with PBS (1
1 mL). Total leukocyte numbers were counted
with a hemocytometer. Differential
cell counts were performed on bronchoalveolar lavages by counting at least 200
cells on cytocentrifuged preparations, stained with Diff Quick (Dade Behring, Deerfield, Ill, USA), and differentiated by standard
hematological procedures.
2.5. Histochemistry
Lungs were fixed
by inflation (1 mL) and immersion in Immunohistofix (Aphase, Gosselies,
Belgium) and
embedded in Immunohistowax
(Aphase). For detection of mucus containing cells in fixed airway
tissue, 5 μm sections were stained with Periodic Acid Schiff (PAS) (Sigma Aldrich) and hematoxylin
(Labonord, Templemars, France) as previously described [21].
2.6. Measurement of cytokines
IFN-γ, IL-5, IL-12, and IL-13 levels in the
bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) were measured by ELISA according to the
manufacturer direction (Pharmingen, San Diego, Calif,
USA) for IFN-γ, IL-5,
IL-12 and (R&D systems, Mineapolis, Mn, USA)
for IL-13. The limits of detection were 4 pg/mL for IL-5, 10 pg/mL for IL-12
and IFN-γ,
and 1.5 pg/mL for IL-13.
2.7. Measurement of total and OVA-specific serum IgE
Serum levels of total IgE, and OVA-specific IgE were measured
by ELISA as previously described [19]. Briefly, 96-well plates (Immulon 2,
Dynatech, Chantilly, Va, USA) were coated with
either OVA (5 g/mL) or
purified anti-IgE (clone 02111D, Pharmingen). After addition of serum samples,
a biotinylated anti-IgE antibody (clone 02122D, Pharmingen) was used as
detecting antibody, and the reaction amplified with avidin-horseradish
peroxidase (Sigma Aldrich). The OVA-specific antibody titers of the samples
were related to pooled standards that were generated in the laboratory and
expressed as ELISA units per mL (EU/mL). Total IgE levels were calculated by
comparison with known mouseIgE standards (Pharmingen). The limit of detection
was 100 pg/mL for total IgE.
2.8. Statistical analysis
Values for all
measurements were expressed as the mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM).
Statistical analyses were done using STATVIEW 5 software. Differences within
all groups were first evaluated for each parameter using the Kruskal Wallis
test. When statistical significance was observed, differences were subsequently
analyzed by using the Mann Whitney test. P values for significance were
set to .05.
3. RESULTS
3.1. BCG and BCG-IL-18 prevented airway hyperresponsiveness following primary and secondary challenge
OVA-sensitized
mice developed airway hyperresponsiveness compared to the nonsensitized mice after
primary (see Figure 1(a)) and secondary (see Figure 1(b)) challenge. Mouse treatment by intraperitoneal
injections with BCG or IL-18-producing-BCG (BCG-IL-18) before and during
sensitization significantly inhibited airway hyperresponsiveness (see Figure
1(a)). In order to evaluate the long-term effect of BCG and BCG-IL-18 on AHR,
we waited 6 weeks after the primary challenge and then rechallenged the
animals. It has previously been shown that at this time point, the inflammatory
reaction and AHR developing after primary challenge are resolved but that a
secondary airway challenge induces a strong inflammatory reaction with concomitant
development of AHR [22]. Under these conditions, BCG
and BCG-IL-18 treatment inhibited
the increase in airway reactivity (see Figure 1(b)). Baseline airway reactivity
was not affected by OVA, BCG or BCG-IL-18 treatment (data not shown).
Figure 1
BCG and BCG-IL-18 prevent the development of AHR. OVA-sensitized mice were OVA-sensitized and challenged, whereas nonsensitized mice were challenged only. At the time of
each OVA sensitization, treated mice were injected either with BCG or
BCG-IL-18. Airway reactivity was evaluated after inhalation of increasing doses
of metacholine by whole body plethysmography and penh (enhanced pause)
measurement after primary (a) or secondary (b) challenge. Results are expressed
as mean ± SEM of penh percentage increase above PBS inhalation. Statistical
analysis was performed and showed P < .04 for differences between OVA-challenged and OVA-sensitized and
challenged mice (1), between OVA-sensitized and challenged mice and
OVA-sensitized and challenged mice + BCG treatment (2), and between OVA-sensitized and challenged mice and
OVA-sensitized and challenged mice + BCG-IL-18 treatment (3).
3.2. BCG and BCG-IL-18 decreased BAL inflammation and goblet cell hyperplasia following primary and secondary challenge
In OVA-sensitized
mice, inflammatory cell recruitment into the airways was increased after
primary as well as secondary airway challenge (see Figure 2). Increased total
cell numbers in BAL were largely due to increased numbers of eosinophils. There
was also a small but significant (P = .0005) increase in the number of
lymphocytes compared to the nonsensitized mice (see Figure 2). Administration
of BCG or BCG-IL-18 led to a significant (P < .05) decrease in total
cell numbers, macrophage, lymphocyte, and eosinophil numbers, in the primary challenge
protocol compared to OVA-sensitized mice (see Figure 2(a)). In the secondary
challenge protocol, administration of BCG or BCG-IL-18 significantly decreased
eosinophil numbers only (see Figure 2(b)).
Figure 2
BCG and BCG-IL-18 effect on BAL composition after primary and secondary challenge. BAL infiltrate
was analyzed after primary (a) or secondary (b) challenge. Results are
expressed as mean ± sem of cell number. * P < .05.
Lung tissue was
obtained and processed 48 hours after allergen provocation. To assess the
degree of goblet cell hyperplasia, tissue sections were stained with PAS. After
primary (see Figures 3(a)–3(d)) and secondary (see Figures 3(e)–3(h)) challenge,
nonsensitized mice showed no PAS-positive cells, whereas nontreated OVA-sensitized
mice showed many PAS-positive cells (92% and 81% of PAS positive cells/mm
basement membrane for the primary and secondary challenge protocol,
resp.). In contrast, sensitized and BCG- or BCG-IL-18-treated mice
showed only scattered PAS-positive cells (71% and 66% of PAS-positive cells/mm
basement membrane for BCG-treated mice in the primary and secondary challenge
protocol, resp., and 48% and 40% of PAS-positive cells/mm basement
membrane for BCG-IL-18-treated mice in the primary and secondary challenge
protocol, resp.), with a stronger inhibition for BCG-IL-18 treatment
after the secondary challenge (Figure 3(h)).
Figure 3
BCG and BCG-IL-18 effect on mucus
hyperplasia after primary and secondary challenge. Mucus production was detected using Periodic
Acid Schiff staining on lung section
from nonsensitized mice (a), (e), sensitized mice (b), (f), sensitized mice treated
with BCG (c), (g), or BCG-IL-18 (d), (h), after primary (a)–(d) or secondary (e)–(h) OVA
challenge.
3.3. Effect of BCG and BCG-IL-18 on cytokine production following primary and secondary challenges
BAL fluid was
obtained in order to assess Th1 (IFN-γ), pro-Th1 (IL-12), and Th2 (IL-5, IL-13)
cytokine levels, 48 or 24 hours after primary or secondary allergen challenge,
respectively. Th1 (IFN-γ) and pro-Th1 (IL-12) cytokines were
decreased in OVA-sensitized mice compared to nonsensitized mice, significantly
after the primary challenge, and nonsignificantly after the secondary challenge
(see Figure 4). IL-5 and IL-13 production was significantly increased in OVA-sensitized
mice after the primary and the secondary challenge. Treatment of OVA-sensitized
mice with BCG or BCG-IL-18 did not significantly affect IFN-γ, IL-12
(see Figure 4) or IL-10 (data not shown) production, but significantly
inhibited IL-5 and IL-13 production both in primary and secondary challenge
protocols.
Figure 4
BCG and BCG-IL-18 effect on BAL
cytokine production after primary and secondary challenge. BAL cytokines
were measured after primary (a) or secondary (b) challenge. Results are
expressed as mean ± sem pg/mL. * P < .03.
3.4. BCG and BCG-IL-18 treatment did not modify total IgE production but inhibited OVA-specific IgE
Serum from OVA-sensitized
mice showed elevated total IgE levels and OVA-specific IgE antibodies compared
to nonsensitized mice following the primary and the secondary challenge
protocol (see Figure 5). Treatment with BCG and BCG-IL-18 did not affect total
IgE measured after the primary and the secondary challenge (see Figures 5(a) and 5(b)). OVA-specific IgE measured after the primary or the secondary
challenge were not modified after BCG treatment (see Figures 5(c) and 5(d)). In
contrast, treatment with BCG-IL-18 significantly increased levels of
OVA-specific IgE after the primary and decreased them after the secondary
challenge compared to OVA-sensitized mice (see Figures 5(c), 5(d)).
Figure 5
BCG and BCG-IL-18 decrease
OVA-specific IgE, but do not modify serum total IgE. IgE were
measured after primary (a), (c) or secondary (b), (d) challenge. Results are
expressed as mean ± SEM ng/mL for total IgE (a), (b), and mean ± sem ELISA units/mL
(EU/mL) for OVA-specific IgE (c), (d). *P < .01.
4. DISCUSSION
In this study we showed that BCG and BCG-IL-18 given at the time of OVA sensitization were
efficient to prevent AHR even after a secondary challenge performed 6 weeks
after the initial allergen challenge. This effect is related to the decrease in
the local Th2 immune response, as seen with the decreased BAL IL-5 and IL-13
production. In human as well as in mouse models, Th2 cells are indeed
considered as the central cells involved in the development of asthma [23, 24]. Others have shown that BCG
was effective in attenuating allergic airway inflammation and associated
changes in pulmonary function in animal models. Administered before OVA
sensitization, BCGdecreases BAL eosinophilia and IL-5 production in the
draining lymph nodes in an IFN-γ-dependent manner [4]. In our hands, in a previous
study, similar effects were found both with intraperitoneal and intranasal
administration at the dose of 5 106 CFU, when BCG was given at the
time of OVA sensitization [19]. Systemically injected (by
intravenous injection) 14 days before the challenge, BCG also suppressed
OVA-induced airway responses [9]. In the present study, BCG
was injected i.p. at the time of sensitization, and inhibition of airway
responses was still observed 10 weeks after the first injection. Only few
studies investigated BCG long-term effects: similar results to ours were obtained
although BCG was always given long before OVA sensitization. Given from 4 to 16 weeks before OVA sensitization
by i.n. immunization, BCG prevented airway allergic inflammation [7, 8].After primary
and secondary challenge, BCG and BCG-IL-18 treatment locally decreased the
production of IL-5 and IL-13, in parallel to decreased mucus hyperplasia, arguing
for a role, in this process, of IL-13, the main cytokine involved in mucus
production [25, 26]. However, BCG treatment did
not modify IFN-γ and IL-12 production in BAL, in
contrast to decreased IFN-γ production seen in the spleen [9] or the draining lymph nodes [19]. This absence of effect on
IFN-γ
production in BAL may be due to the way of injection (i.p. instead i.n. route
of administration) and the analyzed tissue. Another hypothesis, pointed out by
Trujillo and colleagues [27] suggests that the treatment
before sensitization may inhibit the onset and consequently the recruitment of
Th2 cells thus preventing from allergic reaction. Our previous studies are in
favor of this hypothesis as we showed that i.p. administration of BCG or
BCG-IL-18 increased in vitro production of IFN-γ by
splenocytes or lymph node cells, whilst decreasing IL-5 production [18, 19].In the present
work, total IgE production was unchanged after BCG treatment either following
primary or secondary challenge, suggesting that BCG was not able to totally
prevent Th2 responses. Although Mycobacterium tuberculosis has been
shown to induce IgE production [28], BCG was shown to prevent OVA-specific
IgE production after systemic (intravenous), but not local (i.n.)
administration [4, 7, 9]. In our study, BCG does not
seem to induce total IgE either as nonsensitized mice treated with BCG-IL-18
did not develop total IgE response, either in the primary or the secondary
challenge protocol. However, BCG and BCG-IL-18 treatment decreased OVA-specific
IgE after the secondary challenge, as well as OVA-specific IgG1 (data not
shown). Only BCG-IL-18 treatment effect was significant suggesting a potentiating
effect of IL-18 produced by BCG and a long-term effect of BCG-IL-18.However, BCG-IL-18
did not demonstrate a stronger ability to prevent airway inflammation and hyperresponsiveness
than BCG alone, in contrast to what we previously showed [19]. The protocol used to
sensitize mice in this first study was much weaker (sensitizing doses were
twice lesser and OVA aerosol concentration were 0.1% OVA instead of 1% in the
present study) and did not allow the measurement of significant AHR. The
absence of a differential effect between BCG and BCG-IL-18 may therefore be
related to the strength of the sensitization protocol and the already maximal
effect of the nonrecombinant BCG on AHR. We previously showed that BCG and
BCG-IL-18 were still viable and detected after 94 days. Moreover, although
undetectable, IL-18 was efficiently produced in vivo by the recombinant BGC, as
suggested by its potentiating effect over nonrecombinant BCG [18, 19]. In the present study,
BCG-IL-18 significantly modified OVA-specific IgE production in contrast to nonrecombinant
BCG, suggesting that IL-18 is really produced in vivo, probably in low
concentration.Finally, after
the primary and secondary OVA challenge, BCG or BCG-IL-18 treatment inhibits
BAL eosinophilia. BCG was already known to inhibit this feature of asthma when
given before sensitization [7]. Interestingly BCG-IL-18 increased
the number of BAL lymphocytes compared to BCG-treated mice and BCG-nontreated
mice. This was not accompanied with decreased or increased airway responses, in
contrast to the increased Th2 response induced by IL-18 as previously shown [13]. The only parameter increased
after BCG-IL-18 treatment compared to BCG treatment or no treatment was the
OVA-specific IgE after the primary challenge. These data suggest a systemic
transient effect of IL-18 produced by BCG. IL-18 has been shown previously to
increase Th2 responses and more particularly IgE production [13, 29, 30]. The modulation of the
production of Th1/Th2 cytokines by IL-18 was suggested to be time-dependent [31], which might relate to our
observation that OVA-specific IgE transiently increased due to IL-18 produced
by intraperitoneally injected BCG. This increase in IgE production was not
accompanied by effect on airway inflammation and function. Dissociation of
serum IgE and airway inflammation and hyperresponsiveness was previously
demonstrated in the same model [32]. Conflicting data have been
reported on the role of IL-18 in airway inflammation. In the presence of IL-12,
IL-18 administered i.p. before the allergen challenge has been reported to
attenuate eosinophil accumulation [14]. OVA-sensitized IL-18
deficient mice exhibit greater BAL eosinophilia than wild-type mice [11]. In contrast, local
instillation of recombinant IL-18 was reported to favor the eosinophil recruitment through
the release of eotaxin from bronchial epithelial cells without any effect on
AHR [33]. Moreover, i.p. injection of
large quantities of IL-18, in the absence of IL-12, also increases the
recruitment of eosinophils in the airways [34]. Finally, lower doses of
IL-18 regularly administered intraperitoneally increase eosinophil recruitment
in the airways 3 weeks after the last injection [13]. BCG-IL-18 administered in
our study produces only low doses of IL-18 as previously demonstrated [18] and no IL-18 could be
detected in BAL (data not shown). Moreover, BCG has been shown to favor IL-12
production by macrophages [6]. The low dose of IL-18 released
and the cytokine environment may explain the absence of an increased AHR and
eosinophilia in BCG-IL-18-treated mice even after OVA restimulation.In conclusion,
we showed that BCG as well as BCG producing IL-18 administered at the time of
sensitization prevents airway responses after primary as well as secondary OVA challenge,
suggesting their effect after systemic injection, which had not been
demonstrated yet. Moreover, our study suggests that, thank to the environment
induced by BCG, low doses of IL-18 do not increase Th2 responses, even after
secondary allergen challenge.
Authors: A Kanehiro; T Ikemura; M J Mäkelä; M Lahn; A Joetham; A Dakhama; E W Gelfand Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: T Kodama; T Matsuyama; K Kuribayashi; Y Nishioka; M Sugita; S Akira; K Nakanishi; H Okamura Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: M A Nahori; M Lagranderie; J Lefort; F Thouron; D Joseph; N Winter; B Gicquel; J R Lapa e Silva; B B Vargaftig Journal: Vaccine Date: 2001-01-08 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: C M Trujillo-Vargas; K D Mayer; T Bickert; A Palmetshofer; S Grunewald; J R Ramirez-Pineda; T Polte; G Hansen; G Wohlleben; K J Erb Journal: Clin Exp Allergy Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 5.018