| Literature DB >> 30809224 |
Audrey Siew Foong Kow1, Azirah Chik1, Kuan-Meng Soo2, Leng Wei Khoo3, Faridah Abas3,4, Chau Ling Tham1.
Abstract
Background: Anaphylaxis is an acute and life-threatening allergic response. Classically and most commonly, it can be mediated by the crosslinking of allergens to immunoglobulin E (IgE)- high affinity IgE receptor (FcεRI) complex found mostly on mast cells. However, there is another pathway of anaphylaxis that is less well-studied. This pathway known as the alternative pathway is mediated by IgG and its Fc gamma receptor (Fcγ). Though it was not documented in human anaphylaxis, a few studies have found that IgG-mediated anaphylaxis can happen as demonstrated in rodent models of anaphylaxis. In these studies, a variety of soluble mediators were being evaluated and they differ from each study which causes confusion in the suitability, and reliability of choice of soluble mediators to be analyzed for diagnosis or therapeutic purposes. Hence, the objective of this meta-analysis is to identify the potential soluble mediators that are involved in an IgG-mediated anaphylaxis reaction.Entities:
Keywords: IgG; anaphylaxis; histamine; interleukins; meta-analysis; platelet activating factor; soluble mediators
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30809224 PMCID: PMC6379333 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00190
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
Figure 1Different activation pathways of anaphylaxis. Anaphylaxis can be activated immunologically and non-immunologically. Immunologically, anaphylaxis can be either IgE-dependent or non-IgE-dependent while non-immunologically; it can be caused by contact system activation or MRGPRX2 found on mast cells. All of these will eventually lead to the release of soluble mediators that will bring about the symptoms of anaphylaxis.
Figure 2PRISMA flow chart. Only 9 relevant articles were subjected to meta-analysis out of a total of 429 papers retrieved from the five databases. Articles were screened for their relevancy based on the inclusion factors—English article, in vivo, ex vivo/in vitro, all species, IgG anaphylaxis, Fcgamma anaphylaxis, mediator(s).
Characteristics of relevant studies as categorized based on the source of study, institution and year of publication.
| 4 | 44.4 | |
| 7 | 77.8 | |
| Both | 2 | 22.2 |
| 1980 to 1994 | 1 | 11.1 |
| 1994 to 1999 | 3 | 33.3 |
| 2000 to 2009 | 3 | 33.3 |
| 2010 to 2018 | 2 | 22.2 |
List of in vivo studies categorised based on the type of mediator(s) studied, inducer used.
| 1 | Ennis et al., 1983 | Guinea pig (Dunkin Hartley) | Male | NS | Active systemic anaphylaxis (triggering IgG antibodies) | OVA (50 mg, subcutaneously) (and 50 mg, intraperitoneally) | OVA [(50 mg, intraperitoneally) on Day 3]; Isolated ventilated lungs was administered with 500 μg OVA in 0.2 mL Krebs' solution as a bolus injection via pulmonary artery | Histamine from lung perfusates | 8 | ( |
| 2 | Oettgen et al., 1994 | IgE-deficient mice (homozygous null mutation of Cεgene) | NS | 12 week old | Active anaphylaxis | OVA (100 μg), alum (1 mg) and 300 ng pertussis toxin, intra-peritoneal injection | OVA [500 μg, intravenously (after 18–21 days)] | Plasma histamine (Blood obtained 2 min after challenge) | 6 | ( |
| 3 | Wakayama et al., 1998 | CD40+/+ of C57BL/6 background (H-2b) mice | NS | NS | Passive systemic anaphylaxis | Purified IgG fraction of anti-OVA serum (5 mg/mouse, intraperitoneally) | OVA after 24 h | Plasma histamine (Blood obtained 2 min after challenge) | 6 | ( |
| 4 | Strait et al., 2002 | BALB/c mice | Female | 7–12 week old | Antigen-induced anaphylaxis | 1.Affinity-purified GaMD antibody (800 μg/200 μL normal saline, intravenously) 2.GaMD antiserum (200 μL, intraperitoneally) | 1.IgG purified from normal goat serum; antigen (100 μg/200 μL normal saline, intravenously) 2.Rat IgG2b anti-mouse FcγRII/III, 2.4G2 | 1.Serum MMCP-1 (Blood obtained 2 h after challenge) 2.Plasma histamine (Blood obtained 2 min after challenge) | 10 | ( |
| 5 | Falanga et al., 2012 | C57BL/6 × 129sv mice C57BL/6 mice | NS | 9 week age (minimum) | IgG-induced passive systemic anaphylaxis | 500 μg rat anti-mouse CD16/CD32, clone 2.4G2 | None | Serum histamine | 21 | ( |
NS, not stated; GaMD, goat anti-mouse IgD antibody; OVA, ovalbumin; MMCP-1, mouse mast cell protease.
List of ex vivo/in vitro studies categorised based on the type of mediator(s) studied, inducer used.
| 1 | Dombrowicz et al., 1998 | BMMCs from 1.BALB/c FcγRIIIα | NS | FcγRIII-induced degranulation | 2.4G2 antibody (1, 10, 100, 1,000 ng/ml) | Anti-rat IgG (10 μg/ml) | 1.β-hexosaminidase | NS | ( |
| 2.4G2 antibody (1, 10, 100 ng/ml/106 cells) | None | 2.IL-6 (6 h stimulation) | |||||||
| 2 | Yuasa et al., 2001 | 1.Bone marrow-derived mast cells (BMMCs) | 5 × 105/m | Mast cell degranulation and mediator release | 2.4G (5 μg/ml, 30 min) | F(ab')2 fragment of goat anti-rat IgG (0.3–10 μg/ml) | Serotonin (1 h stimulation) | 2 | ( |
| 2.Bone marrow derived mast cells adhered to Swiss 3T3 fibroblast (3T3-BMMCs) | 105/sample | 1.TNF-α (3 h stimulation) 2.IL-4 (12 h stimulation) | 9 | ||||||
| 3 | Strait et al., 2002 | 1.Spleen from BALB/c mice | NS | Antigen-induced anaphylaxis | 1. Affinity-purified GaMD antibody (800 μg/ 200 μL normal saline, intravenously) 2.GaMD antiserum (200 μL, intraperitoneally) | 1.IgG purified from normal goat serum; antigen (100 μg/ 200 μL normal saline, intravenously) 2.Rat IgG2b anti-mouse FcγRII/III, 2.4G2 | Spleen PAF (Spleen removed 15 min after challenge) | 10 | ( |
| 4 | Tsujimura et al., 2008 | 1.Basophil-containing CD49b+ fraction of spleen cells from C57BL/6 mice 2.Basophil-deficient CD49b− fraction of spleen cells from C57BL/6 mice 3.Peritoneal cells from C57BL/6 mice | 2 × 106 cells/0.5 ml | IgG1-mediated systemic anaphylaxis | Anti-PenV IgG1 (0.2 mg/ml) | PenV-BSA, (0.4 mg/ml, 37°C, 20 min) | PAF | 12 | ( |
| 5 | Falanga et al., 2012 | 1.Mouse bone marrow-derived mast cells | NS | IgG-induced systemic anaphylaxis | Rat anti-mouse FcγRII/III 2.4G2 (10 μg/ml) | Goat anti-rat IgG (10 μg/ml) | 1.Histamine and LTC4 1 h stimulation 2.IL-6, IL-13, and MIP-1α (18 h stimulation) | 18 | ( |
| 2.Mouse bone marrow-derived macrophages | 1.IL-6 and MIP-1α (18 h stimulation) | ||||||||
| 3.Mouse bone marrow-derived basophil | 2.IL-6, IL-13, MIP-1α, and TNF-α (18 h stimulation) | ||||||||
| 6 | Olivera et al., 2013 | Peritoneal mast cells from | 106 cells | IgG-mediated mast cell degranulation | Rat 2.4G2 anti-mouse CD16/CD32 antibody (10 μg/ml, incubated 1 h, 37 cC) | Goat anti-rat IgG antibody (5 and 10 μg/ml, 30 min, 37°C) | β-hexosaminidase | NS | ( |
NS, not stated; PAF, platelet activating factor; IL, interleukin; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor alpha; MIP-1α, macrophage inflammatory protein-1 alpha; LTC.
Figure 3Forest plot of histamine from in vivo studies. Increase of histamine level was recorded for each study with a cumulative mean difference of 4964.604 ng/ml.
Figure 4Forest plots of (A) β-hexosaminidase, (B) PAF, (C) MIP-1α, (D) IL-6, (E) IL-13, and (F) TNF-α from ex vivo/in vitro studies. Increase of each mediator level was recorded for each study. The cumulative mean difference for each mediator was (A) 23787093.286 ng/ml (β-hexosaminidase), (B) 3.245 ng/ml (PAF), (C) 0.282 ng/ml (MIP-1α), (D) 2.538 ng/ml (IL-6), (E) 0.88 ng/ml (IL-13), and (F) 22.81 ng/ml (TNF-α).
Compilation of the cumulative mean difference, p-value and 95% confidence level (CI) of each mediator studied in both in vivo and ex vivo/in vitro studies of IgG-mediated anaphylaxis between non-anaphylactic and anaphylactic groups. p<0.05 is considered significant.
| Histamine | 4 | 99% | 4964.6 | <0.001 | 7883.137 | 2046.072 |
| β-hexosaminidase | 2 | 100% | 23787093.286 | <0.001 | 36418200.928 | 11155985.644 |
| PAF | 2 | 100% | 3.245 | <0.001 | 12.345 | 3.245 |
| MIP-1α | 1 | 99% | 0.282 | <0.001 | 0.419 | 0.415 |
| IL−6 | 2 | 97% | 2.538 | <0.001 | 4.009 | 1.056 |
| IL−13 | 1 | 99% | 0.88 | <0.001 | 2.082 | −0.321 |
| TNF-α | 2 | 85% | 22.81 | 0.001 | 51.917 | −7.356 |
Figure 5Funnel plot assessment of publication bias. Asymmetrical funnel plot was present indicative of publication bias based on the effect size and standard error.
Summary and conclusion of publication bias assessment from asymmetry of funnel plot, Egger's regression test, Begg's test, Rosenthal's Fail-safe N, and Trim and Fill (unbiased estimate) analysis.
| Mediator(s) | Present | 5.59 (10.16–85.33) | Publication bias: Yes |