Jake A Gertie1, Biyan Zhang2, Elise G Liu3, Laura R Hoyt1, Xiangyun Yin1, Lan Xu1, Lauren L Long4, Arielle Soldatenko1, Uthaman Gowthaman5, Adam Williams6, Stephanie C Eisenbarth7. 1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn; Department of Immunobiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn. 2. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn; Department of Immunobiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn; Singapore Immunology Network (SIgN), Singapore. 3. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn; Department of Immunobiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn; Section of Rheumatology, Allergy & Immunology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn. 4. The Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, Conn. 5. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn; Department of Immunobiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn; Department of Pathology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass. 6. The Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, Conn; Department of Genetics and Genome Sciences, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Conn. Electronic address: adam.williams@jax.org. 7. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn; Department of Immunobiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn; Section of Rheumatology, Allergy & Immunology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn. Electronic address: stephanie.eisenbarth@yale.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The etiology of food allergy is poorly understood; mouse models are powerful systems to discover immunologic pathways driving allergic disease. C3H/HeJ mice are a widely used model for the study of peanut allergy because, unlike C57BL/6 or BALB/c mice, they are highly susceptible to oral anaphylaxis. However, the immunologic mechanism of this strain's susceptibility is not known. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the mechanism underlying the unique susceptibility to anaphylaxis in C3H/HeJ mice. We tested the role of deleterious Toll-like receptor 4 (Tlr4) or dedicator of cytokinesis 8 (Dock8) mutations in this strain because both genes have been associated with food allergy. METHODS: We generated C3H/HeJ mice with corrected Dock8 or Tlr4 alleles and sensitized and challenged them with peanut. We then characterized the antibody response to sensitization, anaphylaxis response to both oral and systemic peanut challenge, gut microbiome, and biomarkers of gut permeability. RESULTS: In contrast to C3H/HeJ mice, C57BL/6 mice were resistant to anaphylaxis after oral peanut challenge; however, both strains undergo anaphylaxis with intraperitoneal challenge. Restoring Tlr4 or Dock8 function in C3H/HeJ mice did not protect from anaphylaxis. Instead, we discovered enhanced gut permeability resulting in ingested allergens in the bloodstream in C3H/HeJ mice compared to C57BL/6 mice, which correlated with an increased number of goblet cells in the small intestine. CONCLUSIONS: Our work highlights the potential importance of gut permeability in driving anaphylaxis to ingested food allergens; it also indicates that genetic loci outside of Tlr4 and Dock8 are responsible for the oral anaphylactic susceptibility of C3H/HeJ mice.
BACKGROUND: The etiology of food allergy is poorly understood; mouse models are powerful systems to discover immunologic pathways driving allergic disease. C3H/HeJ mice are a widely used model for the study of peanut allergy because, unlike C57BL/6 or BALB/c mice, they are highly susceptible to oral anaphylaxis. However, the immunologic mechanism of this strain's susceptibility is not known. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the mechanism underlying the unique susceptibility to anaphylaxis in C3H/HeJ mice. We tested the role of deleterious Toll-like receptor 4 (Tlr4) or dedicator of cytokinesis 8 (Dock8) mutations in this strain because both genes have been associated with food allergy. METHODS: We generated C3H/HeJ mice with corrected Dock8 or Tlr4 alleles and sensitized and challenged them with peanut. We then characterized the antibody response to sensitization, anaphylaxis response to both oral and systemic peanut challenge, gut microbiome, and biomarkers of gut permeability. RESULTS: In contrast to C3H/HeJ mice, C57BL/6 mice were resistant to anaphylaxis after oral peanut challenge; however, both strains undergo anaphylaxis with intraperitoneal challenge. Restoring Tlr4 or Dock8 function in C3H/HeJ mice did not protect from anaphylaxis. Instead, we discovered enhanced gut permeability resulting in ingested allergens in the bloodstream in C3H/HeJ mice compared to C57BL/6 mice, which correlated with an increased number of goblet cells in the small intestine. CONCLUSIONS: Our work highlights the potential importance of gut permeability in driving anaphylaxis to ingested food allergens; it also indicates that genetic loci outside of Tlr4 and Dock8 are responsible for the oral anaphylactic susceptibility of C3H/HeJ mice.
Authors: Andrew T Stefka; Taylor Feehley; Prabhanshu Tripathi; Ju Qiu; Kathy McCoy; Sarkis K Mazmanian; Melissa Y Tjota; Goo-Young Seo; Severine Cao; Betty R Theriault; Dionysios A Antonopoulos; Liang Zhou; Eugene B Chang; Yang-Xin Fu; Cathryn R Nagler Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-08-25 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: X M Li; D Serebrisky; S Y Lee; C K Huang; L Bardina; B H Schofield; J S Stanley; A W Burks; G A Bannon; H A Sampson Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Jayendra Kumar Krishnaswamy; Arpita Singh; Uthaman Gowthaman; Renee Wu; Pavane Gorrepati; Manuela Sales Nascimento; Antonia Gallman; Dong Liu; Anne Marie Rhebergen; Samuele Calabro; Lan Xu; Patricia Ranney; Anuj Srivastava; Matthew Ranson; James D Gorham; Zachary McCaw; Steven R Kleeberger; Leonhard X Heinz; André C Müller; Keiryn L Bennett; Giulio Superti-Furga; Jorge Henao-Mejia; Fayyaz S Sutterwala; Adam Williams; Richard A Flavell; Stephanie C Eisenbarth Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-02-23 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: A C Boos; B Hagl; A Schlesinger; B E Halm; N Ballenberger; M Pinarci; V Heinz; D Kreilinger; B D Spielberger; L F Schimke-Marques; J Sawalle-Belohradsky; B H Belohradsky; B Przybilla; B Schaub; A Wollenberg; E D Renner Journal: Allergy Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 13.146
Authors: Stephan C Bischoff; Giovanni Barbara; Wim Buurman; Theo Ockhuizen; Jörg-Dieter Schulzke; Matteo Serino; Herbert Tilg; Alastair Watson; Jerry M Wells Journal: BMC Gastroenterol Date: 2014-11-18 Impact factor: 3.067
Authors: Kelly Orgel; Johanna M Smeekens; Ping Ye; Lauren Fotsch; Rishu Guo; Darla R Miller; Fernando Pardo-Manuel de Villena; A Wesley Burks; Martin T Ferris; Michael D Kulis Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2018-10-19 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Paul J Turner; Stefania Arasi; Barbara Ballmer-Weber; Alessia Baseggio Conrado; Antoine Deschildre; Jennifer Gerdts; Susanne Halken; Antonella Muraro; Nandinee Patel; Ronald Van Ree; Debra de Silva; Margitta Worm; Torsten Zuberbier; Graham Roberts Journal: Allergy Date: 2022-04-28 Impact factor: 14.710