Uric acid is a danger signal activating NALP3 inflammasome in lung injury inflammation and fibrosis.

RATIONALE: Lung injury leads to pulmonary inflammation and fibrosis through myeloid differentiation primary response gene 88 (MyD88) and the IL-1 receptor 1 (IL-1R1) signaling pathway. The molecular mechanisms by which lung injury triggers IL-1beta production, inflammation, and fibrosis remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: To determine if lung injury depends on the NALP3 inflammasome and if bleomycin (BLM)-induced lung injury triggers local production of uric acid, thereby activating the NALP3 inflammasome in the lung. Methods: Inflammation upon BLM administration was evaluated in vivo in inflammasome-deficient mice. Pulmonary uric acid accumulation, inflammation, and fibrosis were analyzed in mice treated with the inhibitor of uric acid synthesis or with uricase, which degrades uric acid. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Lung injury depends on the NALP3 inflammasome, which is triggered by uric acid locally produced in the lung upon BLM-induced DNA damage and degradation. Reduction of uric acid levels using the inhibitor of uric acid synthesis allopurinol or uricase leads to a decrease in BLM-induced IL-1beta production, lung inflammation, repair, and fibrosis. Local administration of exogenous uric acid crystals recapitulates lung inflammation and repair, which depend on the NALP3 inflammasome, MyD88, and IL-1R1 pathways and Toll-like receptor (TLR)2 and TLR4 for optimal inflammation but are independent of the IL-18 receptor. CONCLUSIONS: Uric acid released from injured cells constitutes a major endogenous danger signal that activates the NALP3 inflammasome, leading to IL-1beta production. Reducing uric acid tissue levels represents a novel therapeutic approach to control IL-1beta production and chronic inflammatory lung pathology.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," published in 2004. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS: We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSIONS: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Extracellular cyclophilins contribute to the regulation of inflammatory responses.

The main regulators of leukocyte trafficking during inflammatory responses are chemokines. However, another class of recently identified chemotactic agents is extracellular cyclophilins, the proteins mostly known as receptors for the immunosuppressive drug, cyclosporine A. Cyclophilins can induce leukocyte chemotaxis in vitro and have been detected at elevated levels in inflamed tissues, suggesting that they might contribute to inflammatory responses. We recently identified CD147 as the main signaling receptor for cyclophilin A. In the current study we examined the contribution of cyclophilin-CD147 interactions to inflammatory responses in vivo using a mouse model of acute lung injury. Blocking cyclophilin-CD147 interactions by targeting CD147 (using anti-CD147 Ab) or cyclophilin (using nonimmunosuppressive cyclosporine A analog) reduced tissue neutrophilia by up to 50%, with a concurrent decrease in tissue pathology. These findings are the first to demonstrate the significant contribution of cyclophilins to inflammatory responses and provide a potentially novel approach for reducing inflammation-mediated diseases.

Enhanced expression of 70-kilodalton heat shock protein limits cell division in a sepsis-induced model of acute respiratory distress syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Fibrotic changes are initiated early in acute respiratory distress syndrome. This may involve overproliferation of alveolar type II cells. In an animal model of acute respiratory distress syndrome, we have shown that the administration of an adenoviral vector overexpressing the 70-kd heat shock protein (AdHSP) limited pathophysiological changes. We hypothesized that this improvement may be modulated, in part, by an early AdHSP-induced attenuation of alveolar type II cell proliferation. DESIGN: Laboratory investigation. SETTING: Hadassah-Hebrew University and University of Pennsylvania animal laboratories. SUBJECTS: Sprague-Dawley Rats (250 g). INTERVENTIONS: Lung injury was induced in male Sprague-Dawley rats via cecal ligation and double puncture. At the time of cecal ligation and double puncture, we injected phosphate-buffered saline, AdHSP, or AdGFP (an adenoviral vector expressing the marker green fluorescent protein) into the trachea. Rats then received subcutaneous bromodeoxyuridine. In separate experiments, A549 cells were incubated with medium, AdHSP, or AdGFP. Some cells were also stimulated with tumor necrosis factor-alpha. After 48 hrs, cytosolic and nuclear proteins from rat lungs or cell cultures were isolated. These were subjected to immunoblotting, immunoprecipitation, electrophoretic mobility shift assay, fluorescent immunohistochemistry, and Northern blot analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Alveolar type I cells were lost within 48 hrs of inducing acute respiratory distress syndrome. This was accompanied by alveolar type II cell proliferation. Treatment with AdHSP preserved alveolar type I cells and limited alveolar type II cell proliferation. Heat shock protein 70 prevented overexuberant cell division, in part, by inhibiting hyperphosphorylation of the regulatory retinoblastoma protein. This prevented retinoblastoma protein ubiquitination and degradation and, thus, stabilized the interaction of retinoblastoma protein with E2F1, a key cell division transcription factor. CONCLUSIONS: : Heat shock protein 70-induced attenuation of cell proliferation may be a useful strategy for limiting lung injury when treating acute respiratory distress syndrome if consistent in later time points.

Novel strategies for targeting innate immune responses to influenza.

NlmCategory="UNASSIGNED">We previously reported that TLR4(-/-) mice are refractory to mouse-adapted A/PR/8/34 (PR8) influenza-induced lethality and that therapeutic administration of the TLR4 antagonist Eritoran blocked PR8-induced lethality and acute lung injury (ALI) when given starting 2 days post infection. Herein we extend these findings: anti-TLR4- or -TLR2-specific IgG therapy also conferred significant protection of wild-type (WT) mice from lethal PR8 infection. If treatment is initiated 3 h before PR8 infection and continued daily for 4 days, Eritoran failed to protect WT and TLR4(-/-) mice, implying that Eritoran must block a virus-induced, non-TLR4 signal that is required for protection. Mechanistically, we determined that (i) Eritoran blocks high-mobility group B1 (HMGB1)-mediated, TLR4-dependent signaling in vitro and circulating HMGB1 in vivo, and an HMGB1 inhibitor protects against PR8; (ii) Eritoran inhibits pulmonary lung edema associated with ALI; (iii) interleukin (IL)-1β contributes significantly to PR8-induced lethality, as evidenced by partial protection by IL-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra) therapy. Synergistic protection against PR8-induced lethality was achieved when Eritoran and the antiviral drug oseltamivir were administered starting 4 days post infection. Eritoran treatment does not prevent development of an adaptive immune response to subsequent PR8 challenge. Overall, our data support the potential of a host-targeted therapeutic approach to influenza infection.Mucosal Immunology advance online publication 27 January 2016; doi:10.1038/mi.2015.141.