Ryan M Carey1, Bei Chen2, Nithin D Adappa2, James N Palmer2, David W Kennedy2, Robert J Lee2, Noam A Cohen2,3. 1. Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 2. Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA. 3. Philadelphia Veterans Administration Medical Center Surgical Services, Philadelphia, PA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nitric oxide (NO) is produced by sinonasal epithelial cells as part of the innate immune response against bacteria. We previously described bitter-taste-receptor-dependent and -independent NO responses to product(s) secreted by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus, respectively. We hypothesized that sinonasal epithelium would be able to detect the gram-positive, coagulase-negative bacteria Staphylococcus epidermidis and mount a similar NO response. METHODS: Sinonasal air-liquid interface cultures were treated with conditioned medium (CM) from lab strains and clinical isolates of coagulase-negative staphylococci and S aureus. NO production was quantified by fluorescence imaging. Bitter taste receptor signaling inhibitors were utilized to characterize the pathway responsible for NO production in response to S epidermidis CM. RESULTS: S epidermidis CM contains a low-molecular-weight, heat, and protease-stabile product that induces an NO synthase (NOS)-mediated NO production that is less robust than the response triggered by S aureus CM. The S epidermidis CM-stimulated NO response is not inhibited by antagonists of phospholipase C isoform β-2 nor the transient receptor potential melastatin isoform 5 ion channel, both critical to bitter taste signaling. CONCLUSION: This study identifies an NO-mediated innate defense response in sinonasal epithelium elicited by S epidermidis product(s). The active bacterial product is likely a small, nonpeptide molecule that stimulates a pathway independent of bitter taste receptors. Although the NO response to S epidermidis is less vigorous compared with S aureus, the product(s) share similar characteristics. Together, the responses to staphylococci species may help explain the pathophysiology of upper respiratory infections.
BACKGROUND:Nitric oxide (NO) is produced by sinonasal epithelial cells as part of the innate immune response against bacteria. We previously described bitter-taste-receptor-dependent and -independent NO responses to product(s) secreted by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus, respectively. We hypothesized that sinonasal epithelium would be able to detect the gram-positive, coagulase-negative bacteria Staphylococcus epidermidis and mount a similar NO response. METHODS: Sinonasal air-liquid interface cultures were treated with conditioned medium (CM) from lab strains and clinical isolates of coagulase-negative staphylococci and S aureus. NO production was quantified by fluorescence imaging. Bitter taste receptor signaling inhibitors were utilized to characterize the pathway responsible for NO production in response to S epidermidis CM. RESULTS:S epidermidis CM contains a low-molecular-weight, heat, and protease-stabile product that induces an NO synthase (NOS)-mediated NO production that is less robust than the response triggered by S aureus CM. The S epidermidis CM-stimulated NO response is not inhibited by antagonists of phospholipase C isoform β-2 nor the transient receptor potential melastatin isoform 5 ion channel, both critical to bitter taste signaling. CONCLUSION: This study identifies an NO-mediated innate defense response in sinonasal epithelium elicited by S epidermidis product(s). The active bacterial product is likely a small, nonpeptide molecule that stimulates a pathway independent of bitter taste receptors. Although the NO response to S epidermidis is less vigorous compared with S aureus, the product(s) share similar characteristics. Together, the responses to staphylococci species may help explain the pathophysiology of upper respiratory infections.
Authors: Yinyan Lai; Bei Chen; Jianbo Shi; James N Palmer; David W Kennedy; Noam A Cohen Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2011-10-07 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Ryan M Carey; Alan D Workman; Bei Chen; Nithin D Adappa; James N Palmer; David W Kennedy; Robert J Lee; Noam A Cohen Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2015-06-22 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Ryan M Carey; Alan D Workman; Carol H Yan; Bei Chen; Nithin D Adappa; James N Palmer; David W Kennedy; Robert J Lee; Noam A Cohen Journal: Am J Rhinol Allergy Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 2.467
Authors: Alan D Workman; Ryan M Carey; Michael A Kohanski; David W Kennedy; James N Palmer; Nithin D Adappa; Noam A Cohen Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2017-05-25 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Mao Wang; Alex G Gauthier; Thomas P Kennedy; Haichao Wang; Uday Kiran Velagapudi; Tanaji T Talele; Mosi Lin; Jiaqi Wu; LeeAnne Daley; Xiaojing Yang; Vivek Patel; Sung Soo Mun; Charles R Ashby; Lin L Mantell Journal: Mol Med Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 6.354