| Literature DB >> 34556145 |
Rachel H McMahan1,2, Kevin M Najarro3, Juliet E Mullen3, Madison T Paul3, David J Orlicky4, Holly J Hulsebus3,5, Elizabeth J Kovacs3,6,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are currently > 600 million people over the age of 65 globally and this number is expected to double by the year 2050. Alcohol use among this population is on the rise, which is concerning as aging is associated with increased risk for a number of chronic illnesses. As most studies investigating the effects of alcohol have focused on young/middle-aged populations, there is a dearth of information regarding the consequences of alcohol use in older consumers. In addition, most murine ethanol models have concentrated on exposure to very high levels of ethanol, while the vast majority of elderly drinkers do not consume alcohol in excess; instead, they drink on average 2 alcoholic beverages a day, 3-4 days a week.Entities:
Keywords: Aging; Alcohol; Antimicrobial peptide; Gut barrier; Liver
Year: 2021 PMID: 34556145 PMCID: PMC8459518 DOI: 10.1186/s12979-021-00247-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Immun Ageing ISSN: 1742-4933 Impact factor: 6.400
Fig. 1Moderate ethanol exposure induces increased bacteria within the mesenteric lymph node (MLN) and impaired barrier function in the intestine of aged, but not young mice. A Colony forming units (CFU) from MLNs isolated from young and aged mice following 4 weeks of ethanol or vehicle treatment. n = 4 mice per group. B Intestinal fatty acid binding protein (iFABP) levels in serum, measured by ELISA. C Concentration of 4 kDa FITC-dextran in serum of young and aged mice. n = 4–8 mice per group. Data are shown as mean values ± SEM. *p < 0.05 from all other groups, #p < 0.05 from young groups by two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test
Fig. 2Moderate ethanol fails to induce ileal Cldn1 and Reg3 gene expression in aged mice. Quantitative RT-PCR of tight junction (A-C, n = 4) and AMP (D-E, n = 6–10) gene expression in intestinal epithelial cells (IECs) isolated from young and aged mice given vehicle or ethanol. 18 s was used as the endogenous control. Data are shown as mean fold change ± SEM relative to young vehicle group. *p < 0.05 from all other groups, #p < 0.05 from young vehicle and aged ethanol by two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test
Fig. 3Moderate ethanol exposure in aged mice leads to increased hepatic inflammation and pro-inflammatory gene expression. A Representative H&E staining (200x) of livers from young and aged mice given vehicle or ethanol showing dilated sinusoids (yellow arrows and inset representing magnification of the upper right yellow arrow) in aged mice and increased foci of inflammatory cells (black arrows and inset showing magnification of the upper left black arrow) in aged mice given ethanol. Scale bars, 100 µM. PT = portal tract, CV = central vein. B Quantitative scoring of average number of inflammatory foci per 200x field for each group (0 = no foci, 1 = 1–2 foci, 3 = 3–4 foci). n = 4 per group and is representative of 3 individual experiments. C-F. Quantitative RT-PCR of pro-inflammatory and chemokine gene expression from the livers of mice with Hmbs as the endogenous control. Data are shown as mean fold change ± SEM relative to the young vehicle group unless otherwise indicated. n = 6 per group; *p < 0.05 from all other groups, #p < 0.05 from young groups by two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test
Fig. 4Moderate ethanol exposure in aged mice leads to increased neutrophils and monocytes in the liver.Flow cytometric analysis of hepatic non-parenchymal cells from aged and young mice given vehicle or ethanol. A Representative density plots showing gating strategy to define hepatic neutrophil, Kupffer Cell (KC), and infiltrating macrophage (IM) and monocyte populations. B Representative density plots showing the percent of hepatic CD45+ cells that are neutrophils. C-F. Bar charts showing the percent of CD45+ cells that are neutrophils, Kupffer cells, infiltrating macrophages and monocytes in the indicated treatment groups. n = 4–8 mice per group. Data shown are mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05 from all other groups by two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test