| Literature DB >> 35634310 |
Lin Chen1, Senjun Jin2, Min Yang3, Chunmei Gui4, Yingpu Yuan4, Guangtao Dong5, Weizhong Zeng6, Jing Zeng6, Guoxin Hu7, Lujun Qiao7, Jinhua Wang8, Yonglin Xi8, Jian Sun9, Nan Wang10, Minmin Wang10, Lifeng Xing11, Yi Yang12, Yan Teng13, Junxia Hou13, Qiaojie Bi14, Huabo Cai11, Gensheng Zhang15, Yucai Hong16, Zhongheng Zhang16.
Abstract
Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the intensive care unit, which is caused by unregulated inflammatory response leading to organ injuries. Ulinastatin (UTI), an immunomodulatory agent, is widely used in clinical practice and is associated with improved outcomes in sepsis. But its underlying mechanisms are largely unknown. Our study integrated bulk and single cell RNA-seq data to systematically explore the potential mechanisms of the effects of UTI in sepsis. After adjusting for potential confounders in the negative binomial regression model, there were more genes being downregulated than being upregulated in the UTI group. These down-regulated genes were enriched in the neutrophil involved immunity such as neutrophil activation and degranulation, indicating the immunomodulatory effects of UTI is mediated via regulation of neutrophil activity. By deconvoluting the bulk RNA-seq samples to obtain fractions of cell types, the Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) were significantly expanded in the UTI treated samples. Further cell-cell communication analysis revealed some signaling pathways such as ANEEXIN, GRN and RESISTIN that might be involved in the immunomodulatory effects of UTI. The study provides a comprehensive reference map of transcriptional states of sepsis treated with UTI, as well as a general framework for studying UTI-related mechanisms.Entities:
Keywords: RNA-seq; immunosuppression; sepsis; single cell; ulinastatin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35634310 PMCID: PMC9130465 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.882774
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 8.786
Baseline characteristics of the UTI and control groups.
| Variables | Total (n = 145) | Control (n = 123) | UTI (n = 22) | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 72 (62, 81) | 74 (63.5, 82) | 67 (53, 72) | 0.009 |
|
| 87 (60) | 74 (60) | 13 (59) | 1 |
|
| 0.457 | |||
|
| 39 (27) | 35 (28) | 4 (18) | |
|
| 16 (11) | 13 (11) | 3 (14) | |
|
| 3 (2) | 3 (2) | 0 (0) | |
|
| 8 (6) | 7 (6) | 1 (5) | |
|
| 33 (23) | 30 (24) | 3 (14) | |
|
| 6 (4) | 4 (3) | 2 (9) | |
|
| 8 (6) | 7 (6) | 1 (5) | |
|
| 32 (22) | 24 (20) | 8 (36) | |
|
| 7 (5, 9) | 7 (5, 8) | 7 (6, 13) | 0.033 |
|
| 165 (159.5, 172) | 165 (160, 171) | 164.5 (158.25, 174.25) | 0.981 |
|
| 62 (56, 70) | 61 (57, 70) | 65 (56.75, 70) | 0.492 |
|
| 33 (23) | 30 (24) | 3 (14) | 0.405 |
|
| 64 (44) | 55 (45) | 9 (41) | 0.922 |
|
| 14 (10) | 12 (10) | 2 (9) | 1 |
|
| 71 (49) | 62 (50) | 9 (41) | 0.556 |
|
| 2.7 (1.6, 4.53) | 2.5 (1.6, 3.86) | 5.18 (2.92, 7.28) | 0.001 |
|
| 128.56 (60.87, 200.68) | 122.88 (62.56, 198.5) | 176.04 (59.16, 250.44) | 0.171 |
|
| 2 (0, 7) | 2 (0, 8) | 1.5 (0, 5.75) | 0.352 |
|
| 0 (0, 0) | 0 (0, 0) | 0 (0, 3.75) | 0.021 |
|
| 2 (0, 6) | 2 (0, 5) | 3.5 (0, 6) | 0.422 |
Q1, the first quartile; Q3, the third quartile; MV, mechanical ventilation; CRP, C-reactive protein; UTI, ulinastatin; SOFA, sequential organ failure assessment; CRRT, continuous renal replacement therapy.
Figure 2Differential gene expression analysis of bulk RNA-seq data. (A) Volcano plot showing the differentially expressed genes between UTI and control samples, while adjusting for SOFA, age, sex and days. P values were adjusted for multiple comparisons. Genes with adjusted p < 0.01 and log2 fold change > 1 were labelled. (B) gene set enrichment analysis of suppressed genes for GO terms. (C) network visualization of enriched terms and associated genes. (D) tree plot showing the hierarchical clustering of enriched terms by using Jaccard’s similarity index. (E) The GSEA enrichment score for several sample pathways. The running sum deviated in the negative direction suggesting suppressed pathways. (F) Heatmap showing the coefficient matrix of the negative binomial regression model, with an interaction term between days and UTI. Top 70 genes of the largest absolute values of coefficients were displayed. (G, H) Example genes with significant interaction effects between days and UTI groups are displayed with box plots. (I) publication trends of the top enriched terms extracted from PubMed search engine.
Figure 3Weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) of bulk RNA-seq samples. (A) Dendrogram clustering of the co-expressed genes into modules. Modules were labeled by different colors. (B) module-trait relationship in sepsis samples. The blue color indicates negative correlation and the red color indicates the positive correlation. The numbers in each cell are Pearson’s correlation coefficients between module eigengene and trait values, with p values shown in the parenthesis. (C) Correlation between module membership and gene significance for UTI. Each dot represents a gene. Gene significance was quantified by comparing gene expression between UTI and control groups. Module membership of a given gene was quantified by correlating its expression profile with the module eigengene. (D) Gene set enrichment analysis of the turquoise module with GO terms.
Figure 1Schematic illustration of the integrated analysis of bulk and single cell RNA-seq analysis. PBMC, peripheral blood mononuclear cells; UTI, ulinastatin; SOFA, sequential organ failure assessment; GO, gene ontology; PS, propensity score; MDSC, Myeloid-derived suppressor cells; WGCNA, Weighted correlation network analysis; UMAP, Uniform manifold approximation and projection; pDC, Plasmacytoid dendritic cells; DC, dendritic cells; NK, natural killer.
Figure 4Regulatory drivers of the turquoise module. (A) Network visualization of the enriched motifs and genes. (B) Cumulative recovery curve for several example motifs. The red line represents the global mean of the number of recovered genes and the green line represents the third standard deviation (3SD). Motifs greater than the 3SD were considered statistically significant. (C) Sequence logo of enriched motifs, the relative width of a position is represented by the information content matrix. (D) Results of the top six enrichment motifs. (E) Network visualization of the top 5 miRNA and their target genes identified from the “mirtarbase” table.
Figure 5Single cell RNA-seq analysis in UTI and control samples. (A) balance diagnostics of propensity score matching for samples with and without UTI administration. (B) Uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP) of single cell gene expression profile, stratified by UTI groups. Twelve cell types were identified for the 103,870 cells. (C) Comparisons of the cell type fractions between UTI and control groups. Cell type fractions of the bulk RNA-seq samples were inferred by deconvolution methods. The effect size of is calculated by dividing the mean difference with pooled standard deviation. (D) Heatmap and (E) dot plot showing the marker genes of each cell type. (F) Gene set enrichment analysis of the differentially expressed genes between UTI and control groups across all cell types.
Figure 6Comparisons of cell-cell communications between UTI and control groups. (A) The number and strength of inferred communication links between UTI and control groups. (B) Circle plot showing differential cell-cell communication networks between UTI and control groups. The width of edges represents the relative number of interactions or interaction strength. Red (or blue) colored edges represent increased (or decreased) signaling in the UTI compared to control. (C) Heatmap showing differential number of interactions or interaction strength in the cell-cell communication network between control and UTI groups; red color indicates increased signaling in the UTI compared to control. The top colored bar plot represents the sum of column of values displayed in the heatmap. The right colored bar plot represents the sum of row of values. (D) Scatter plots showing the dominant senders (sources) and receivers (targets) in a 2D space. x-axis and y-axis are respectively the total outgoing or incoming communication probability associated with each cell group. Dot size is proportional to the number of inferred links (both outgoing and incoming) associated with each cell group. Dot colors indicate different cell groups. (E) 2D visualization of differential outgoing and incoming signaling associated with one cell group. Positive values indicate the increase in the UTI dataset while negative values indicate the increase in the control dataset. (F) Ranking signaling networks based on the information flow. Significant signaling pathways were ranked based on differences in the overall information flow within the inferred networks between sepsis and septic shock. The top signaling pathways colored red are enriched in control, and these colored green were enriched in UTI. (G) 2D visualization of the joint manifold learning of signaling networks from UTI and control datasets. Each dot represents the communication network of one signaling pathway. Dot size is proportional to the overall communication probability. (H) Circle plot showing the inferred signaling network at UTI and control groups. Edge width represents the communication probability, and the edge colors are consistent with the color of the sender cell type. (I) Comparisons of significant interactions (Ligand-Receptor pairs) between UTI and control, which contribute to the signaling from MDSC to M2 macrophage, monocyte, megakaryocytes, and neutrophil subpopulations. Dot color reflects communication probabilities and dot size represents computed p-values. Empty space means the communication probability is zero. p-values are computed from one-sided permutation test.