Eokines: synthesis, storage and release from human eosinophils

Eosinophils are prominent inflammatory cells in asthma and other allergic disorders, as well as in helminthic parasite infections. Recently, eosinophils have been reported to synthesize and store a range of regulatory proteins within their secretory granules (eokines). Eokines comprise a group of cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors which are elaborated by eosinophils. These proteins, and the messages which encode them, appear to be identical to those produced by lymphocytes and other tissues. Interestingly, immunoreactivity to many of these eokines has been found to co-localize to the eosinophil´s secretory granules. In this review, we have discussed the repertoire of 18 eokines so far identified in eosinophils, and focused on four of these, namely, interleukin-2 (IL-2), IL-4, granulocyte/macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), and RANTES. These four eokines co-localize to the crystalloid granules in eosinophils, as shown in studies using subcellular fractionation and immunogold labeling in electron microscopy. During stimulation by physiological triggers, for example, with serum-coated particles, eosinophils release these mediators into the surrounding supernatant. In addition, eokines are likely to be synthesized within eosinophils rather than taken up by endocytosis, as show in detection of mRNA for each of these proteins using in situ hybridization, RT-PCR, and in the case of RANTES, in situ RT-PCR. Eokines synthesis and release from eosinophils challenges the commonly held notion that these cells act downstream of key elements in immune system, and indicate that they may instead belong to the afferent arm of immunity.

Human eosinophil-lymphocyte interactions

While the eosinophil's effector functions clearly can contribute to the pathogenesis of allergic diseases, the evolutionary benefit to having eosinophils as a distinct class of leukocytes is not clear, especially if one must reconsider the nominally beneficial role of eosinophils in parasite host defense. Eosinophils are equipped to respond to lymphocytes and their cytokines (and not solely the eosinophil growth factor cytokines), but the functional consequences of such eosinophil responses need to be defined. Conversely, eosinophils, as antigen-presenting cells (APCs) or sources of lymphocyte-active cytokines, may stimulate and effect lymphocyte functioning. Eosinophils share with CD4+ lymphocytes expression of a number of receptors, including CD4 and IL-2R, and specific alpha4 integrins that may help in their common recruitment and activation. Further, elucidation of the interactions between lymphocytes and eosinophils will contribute to a broader understanding of the functioning of eosinophils in "normal" ongoing immune responses and in allergic disorders.

Participation of interleukin-5, interleukin-8 and leukotriene B4 in eosinophil accumulation in two different experimental models

There are several experimental models describing in vivo eosinophil (EO) migration, including ip injection of a large volume of saline (SAL) or Sephadex beads (SEP). The aim of this study was to investigate the mechanisms involved in the EO migration in these two models. Two consecutive injections of SAL given 48 hr apart, induced a selective recruitment of EO into peritoneal cavity of rats, which peaked 48 hr after the last injection. SEP, when injected ip, promoted EO accumulation in rats. The phenomenom was dose-related and peaked 48 hr after SEP injection. To investigate the mediators involved in this process we showed that BW A4C, MK 886 and dexamethasone (DXA) inhibited the EO migration induced by SAL and SEP. To investigate the source of the EO chemotactic factor we showed that mast cells, macrophages (MO), but not lymphocytes, incubated in vitro in presence of SAL released a factor which induced EO migration. With SEP, only mast cells release a factor that induced EO migration, which was inhibited by BW A4C, MK 886 and DXA. Furthermore, the chemotactic activity of SAL-stimulated mast cells was inhibited by antisera against IL-5 and IL-8 (interleukin). SAL-stimulated MO were only inhibited by anti-IL-8 antibodies as well SEP-stimulated mast cells. These results suggest that the EO migration induced by SAL may be dependent on resident mast cells and MO and mediated by LTB4, IL-5 and IL-8. SEP-induced EO migration was dependent on mast cells and may be mediated by LTB4 and IL-8. Furthermore, IL-5 and IL-8 induced EO migration, which was also dependent on resident cells and mediated by LTB4 . In conclusion, EO migration induced by SAL is dependent on mast cells and MO, whereas that induced by SEP is dependent on mast cells alone. Stimulated mast cells release LTB4, IL-5 and IL-8 while MO release LTB4 and IL-8. The IL-5 and IL-8 release by the SAL or SEP-stimulated resident cells may act in an autocrine fashion, thus potentiating LTB4 release.