| Literature DB >> 32922401 |
Lina Jegodzinski1, Tanya Sezin1, Karin Loser2, Sadegh Mousavi1, Detlef Zillikens1,3, Christian D Sadik1,3.
Abstract
The G protein-coupled receptor 15 (GPR15) has recently been highlighted as an important regulator of T cell trafficking into the gut under physiological and pathophysiological conditions. Additionally, circumstantial evidence has accumulated that GPR15 may also play a role in the regulation of chronic inflammation. However, the (patho)physiological significance of GPR15 has, in general, remained rather enigmatic. In the present study, we have addressed the role of GPR15 in the effector phase of autoantibody-mediated skin inflammation, specifically in the antibody transfer mouse model of bullous pemphigoid-like epidermolysis bullosa acquisita (BP-like EBA). Subjecting Gpr15 -/- mice to this model, we have uncovered that GPR15 counteracts skin inflammation. Thus, disease was markedly aggravated in Gpr15 -/- mice, which was associated with an increased accumulation of γδ T cells in the dermis. Furthermore, GPR15L, the recently discovered cognate ligand of GPR15, was markedly upregulated in inflamed skin. Collectively, our results highlight GPR15 as counter-regulator of neutrophilic, antibody-mediated cutaneous inflammation. Enhancing the activity of GPR15 may therefore constitute a novel therapeutic principle in the treatment of pemphigoid diseases, such as BP-like EBA.Entities:
Keywords: GPR15; GPR15L; autoantibodies; epidermolysis bullosa acquisita; pemphigoid disease; skin inflammation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32922401 PMCID: PMC7456807 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01858
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
Figure 1GPR15 counteracts BP-like EBA. The course of skin inflammation in the BP-like EBA mouse model was contrasted in wild-type and Gpr15−/− mice. (A) Progression of disease severity benchmarked as percentage of the total body surface affected by skin lesions (ABSA) over the course of 14 days. (B) Representative pictures of the clinical presentation of wild-type and Gpr15−/− mice on days 4 and 9 of the experiment. (C) Direct immunofluorescence microscopy of perilesional skin for IgG (upper panel) and C3 (lower panel) with white arrows indicating linear depositions of IgG and C3, respectively. Results are presented as mean ± SEM of the ABSA (n = 10 mice/group; pooled from three independent experiments). Results were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Holm-Sidak's multiple comparison test. *p < 0.05 and ***p < 0.001 for the comparison between wild-type vs. Gpr15−/− mice on the day indicated.
Figure 2GPR15 deficiency exacerbates subepidermal cleft formation. Histopathological analysis of skin harvested on day 14 in the BP-like EBA model. (A) Representative pictures of H&E stainings of lesional skin. Yellow arrows indicate sites of dermal-epidermal clefts. (B) Frequency of dermal-epidermal separation (DES) in skin lesions in wild-type and Gpr15−/− mice (n = 6–7 mice per group; pooled from three independent experiments). Results were compared by Fisher's exact test. ***p < 0.001.
Figure 3Quantification of cellular infiltration of perilesional skin. Infiltration of perilesional skin by Ly-6G+, δTCR+, and FOXP3+ cells on day 14 of the BP-like EBA mouse model was evaluated. (A) Representative pictures of stainings for Ly-6G+ (upper panel), δTCR+ (middle panel), and FOXP3+ cells (lower panel). Inserts in dashed lines represent 3× digital magnifications of selected areas of the dermis. White arrows indicate examples for positively stained cells. Scale bar represents 50 μm. Quantification of (B) Ly-6G+ cells (C) δTCR+, and (D) FOXP3+ cells. Results are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 7–10 mice per group, pooled from three independent experiments) and were compared by Mann-Whitney test. *p < 0.05.
Figure 4GPR15 and GPR15L mRNA expression in perilesional skin. mRNA expression levels were determined in naïve skin of healthy mice and of perilesional skin of mice suffering from BP-like EBA on day 14 of the experiment. (A) GPR15 mRNA levels in wild-type mice. (B) GPR15L mRNA levels in wild-type and Gpr15−/− mice. Results are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 6–12 mice per group, pooled from three independent experiments) and were compared in (A) by Mann-Whitney test and in (B) by Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunnett's multiple comparison test. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.
Figure 5Systemic expression of GFP in BP-like EBA. Quantification of GFP+ cells in (A) inguinal lymph nodes and (B) the spleen of control (Ctrl.) and diseased Gpr15−/− mice on day 14 following induction of BP-like EBA as assessed by flow cytometry. Relative distribution of GFP+ cells among T (CD3+) cells, B (CD19+) cells, and non-lymphocyte cells (CD3−CD19−) in control and diseased Gpr15−/− mice on day 14 of the experiment in (C) inguinal lymph nodes and (D) the spleen. Relative distribution of GFP+ cells among CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in control and diseased Gpr15−/− mice on day 14 of the experiment in (E) lymph nodes and (F) the spleen. Results are presented as mean ± SEM (n = 3–4 mice per group). Results in (A,B) were compared by Mann-Whitney test. *p < 0.05.