| Literature DB >> 33391628 |
Carina Mikolai1, Katja Branitzki-Heinemann2, Alexandra Ingendoh-Tsakmakidis1, Meike Stiesch1, Maren von Köckritz-Blickwede2, Andreas Winkel1.
Abstract
Oral innate immunity is led by neutrophils. It is still unclear how their main antimicrobial mechanisms against different biofilms may contribute to balance or dysregulation in the oral cavity. We investigated the capacity of commensal (Streptococcus oralis) and pathogenic (Porphyromonas gingivalis or Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans) monospecies biofilms to induce or to inhibit selected antimicrobial mechanisms of neutrophils. S. oralis induced neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) formation, reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) 8 and 9 secretion. However, these responses were partially reduced in PMA-activated neutrophils indicating a balance-like neutrophil response, which might be important for the maintenance of oral health. P. gingivalis generally induced ROS. Reduced NET formation and significantly decreased MMP secretion were detectable in activated neutrophils highlighting P. gingivalis' nucleolytic and proteolytic activity, which might support bacterial colonization and pathogenesis of periodontitis. In contrast, A. actinomycetemcomitans did not affect the levels of antimicrobial factors in activated neutrophils and induced NET formation, ROS production, and secretion of MMP-8 and -9 in neutrophils alone, which might contribute to tissue destruction and disease progression. In summary, neutrophil responses to biofilms were species-specific and might support either maintenance of oral health or pathogenesis of periodontitis depending on the species.Entities:
Keywords: Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans; NETs; Porphyromonas gingivalis; ROS; Streptococcus oralis; neutrophils; oral innate immunity; periodontitis
Year: 2020 PMID: 33391628 PMCID: PMC7733916 DOI: 10.1080/20002297.2020.1856565
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Oral Microbiol ISSN: 2000-2297 Impact factor: 5.474
Figure 1.NET formation by neutrophils after challenge with the different biofilms in the presence or absence of PMA. (a) Biofilms before the cultivation with neutrophils. Representative 3D image of different biofilms (Streptococcus oralis, Porphyromonas gingivalis and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans) stained by live/dead. Viable bacteria are visualized in green and dead in orange/red. Scale bars: 40 µm. (b) The neutrophils associated with the different biofilms were fixed after incubation for 3.5 h. Immunocytochemistry was performed to visualize cell nuclei (blue; DAPI) and NETs, which were double-stained (red; anti-human MPO antibody and blue; DAPI). No NETs formation, which is illustrated by a clear nuclei-located DAPI-staining and MPO signal closely surrounding the nuclei, was observed in untreated neutrophils. NETs formation indicated by arrows, was observed after cultivation with A. actinomycetemcomitans biofilm in absence of PMA as well as in all samples treated with PMA. Representative images are shown. Scale bars: 50 µm. (c) The samples were fixed, dried, and sputtered after incubation. Representative SEM images from four donors show the bacteria, neutrophils and any formed NETs, which are indicated by arrows. Scale bars: 5 µm; Ctr = control without biofilm; So = S. oralis; Pg = P. gingivalis; Aa = A. actinomycetemcomitans.
Figure 2.Nuclease activity in the collected supernatants after 3.5 h cultivation of the neutrophils with the different biofilms. (a) The graph shows the typical kinetics of the nuclease assay for 60 min. Km values were determined in relation to the threshold value (red line) and (b) the mean values of four samples are listed in the table. Statistical differences to S. aureus nuclease knock-out (Sa^nuc) were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction and were considered significant at *p < 0.05. Aa = A. actinomycetemcomitans; Pg = P. gingivalis; So = S. oralis; Sa wt = S. aureus wildtype; Sa ^nuc = S. aureus nuclease knock-out
Figure 3.ROS production and MMP secretion of neutrophils in response to the different biofilms in the presence or absence of PMA. (a) ROS was determined for 3 h by DCF-DA and means (± SEM) of the 3 h time point are shown in the bar graph. (b) MMP-8 and (c) MMP-9 were measured by ELISAs in the supernatants collected after biofilm incubation for 3.5 h. The bar graphs represent the means (± SEM). ROS production and MMP secretion were determined from four donors in technical triplicates. Differences between the groups were analyzed using two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001
Evaluation of the antimicrobial response of neutrophils to the different biofilms in the absence or presence of PMA
| | Control | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - PMA | + PMA | - PMA | + PMA | - PMA | + PMA | - PMA | + PMA | |
| ND | D | D | D | ND | D | D | D | |
| - | +++ | ++ | ++ | +++ | +++ | +++ | ++ | |
| - | +++ | + | + | - | + | +++ | +++ | |
| - | ++ | + | + | - | ++ | +++ | +++ | |
- no/slight neutrophil response; + moderate neutrophil response; ++ high neutrophil response; +++ excessive neutrophil response; ND not detected; D detected