9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Time Response of Oxidative/Nitrosative Stress and Inflammation in LPS-Induced Endotoxaemia—A Comparative Study of Mice and Rats

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Sepsis is a severe and multifactorial disease with a high mortality rate. It represents a strong inflammatory response to an infection and is associated with vascular inflammation and oxidative/nitrosative stress. Here, we studied the underlying time responses in the widely used lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced endotoxaemia model in mice and rats. LPS (10 mg/kg; from Salmonella Typhosa) was intraperitoneally injected into mice and rats. Animals of every species were divided into five groups and sacrificed at specific points in time (0, 3, 6, 9, 12 h). White blood cells (WBC) decreased significantly in both species after 3 h and partially recovered with time, whereas platelet decrease did not recover. Oxidative burst and iNOS-derived nitrosyl-iron hemoglobin (HbNO) increased with time (maxima at 9 or 12 h). Immune cell infiltration (CD68 and F4/80 content) showed an increase with time, which was supported by increased vascular mRNA expression of VCAM-1, P-selectin, IL-6 and TNF-α. We characterized the time responses of vascular inflammation and oxidative/nitrosative stress in LPS-induced endotoxaemic mice and rats. The results of this study will help to interpret and compare data from different animal species in LPS-induced endotoxaemia models for the identification of new drug targets.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Of mice and not men: differences between mouse and human immunology.

          Mice are the experimental tool of choice for the majority of immunologists and the study of their immune responses has yielded tremendous insight into the workings of the human immune system. However, as 65 million years of evolution might suggest, there are significant differences. Here we outline known discrepancies in both innate and adaptive immunity, including: balance of leukocyte subsets, defensins, Toll receptors, inducible NO synthase, the NK inhibitory receptor families Ly49 and KIR, FcR, Ig subsets, the B cell (BLNK, Btk, and lambda5) and T cell (ZAP70 and common gamma-chain) signaling pathway components, Thy-1, gammadelta T cells, cytokines and cytokine receptors, Th1/Th2 differentiation, costimulatory molecule expression and function, Ag-presenting function of endothelial cells, and chemokine and chemokine receptor expression. We also provide examples, such as multiple sclerosis and delayed-type hypersensitivity, where complex multicomponent processes differ. Such differences should be taken into account when using mice as preclinical models of human disease.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Genomic responses in mouse models greatly mimic human inflammatory diseases.

            The use of mice as animal models has long been considered essential in modern biomedical research, but the role of mouse models in research was challenged by a recent report that genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases. Here we reevaluated the same gene expression datasets used in the previous study by focusing on genes whose expression levels were significantly changed in both humans and mice. Contrary to the previous findings, the gene expression levels in the mouse models showed extraordinarily significant correlations with those of the human conditions (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient: 0.43-0.68; genes changed in the same direction: 77-93%; P = 6.5 × 10(-11) to 1.2 × 10(-35)). Moreover, meta-analysis of those datasets revealed a number of pathways/biogroups commonly regulated by multiple conditions in humans and mice. These findings demonstrate that gene expression patterns in mouse models closely recapitulate those in human inflammatory conditions and strongly argue for the utility of mice as animal models of human disorders.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Immunological variation between inbred laboratory mouse strains: points to consider in phenotyping genetically immunomodified mice.

              Inbred laboratory mouse strains are highly divergent in their immune response patterns as a result of genetic mutations and polymorphisms. The generation of genetically engineered mice (GEM) has, in the past, used embryonic stem (ES) cells for gene targeting from various 129 substrains followed by backcrossing into more fecund mouse strains. Although common inbred mice are considered "immune competent," many have variations in their immune system-some of which have been described-that may affect the phenotype. Recognition of these immune variations among commonly used inbred mouse strains is essential for the accurate interpretation of expected phenotypes or those that may arise unexpectedly. In GEM developed to study specific components of the immune system, accurate evaluation of immune responses must take into consideration not only the gene of interest but also how the background strain and microbial milieu contribute to the manifestation of findings in these mice. This article discusses points to consider regarding immunological differences between the common inbred laboratory mouse strains, particularly in their use as background strains in GEM.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Mol Sci
                Int J Mol Sci
                ijms
                International Journal of Molecular Sciences
                MDPI
                1422-0067
                18 October 2017
                October 2017
                : 18
                : 10
                : 2176
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Center for Cardiology, Cardiology I, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, D-55131 Mainz, Germany; sebastiansteven@ 123456gmx.de (S.S.); mobindib@ 123456yahoo.com (M.D.); SiyerRoohani@ 123456gmx.de (S.R.); fatemehkashani_91@ 123456yahoo.com (F.K.); tmuenzel@ 123456uni-mainz.de (T.M.)
                [2 ]Center for Thrombosis and Hemostasis, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, D-55131 Mainz, Germany
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: daiber@ 123456uni-mainz.de ; Tel.: +49-(0)6131-17-6280
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6507-0339
                Article
                ijms-18-02176
                10.3390/ijms18102176
                5666857
                29057830
                97c9098c-520f-4237-b8bc-00c91caa7feb
                © 2017 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 06 September 2017
                : 09 October 2017
                Categories
                Article

                Molecular biology
                sepsis,time response,inflammation,oxidative stress,endotoxaemia,mouse,rat
                Molecular biology
                sepsis, time response, inflammation, oxidative stress, endotoxaemia, mouse, rat

                Comments

                Comment on this article