Inflammation-induced fever depends on prostaglandin E2 production by brain endothelial cells and EP3 receptors in the median preoptic nucleus of the hypothalamus

IF 5.6 2区 医学 Q1 PHYSIOLOGY Acta Physiologica Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1111/apha.14238
Anders Blomqvist
{"title":"Inflammation-induced fever depends on prostaglandin E2 production by brain endothelial cells and EP3 receptors in the median preoptic nucleus of the hypothalamus","authors":"Anders Blomqvist","doi":"10.1111/apha.14238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>I read with interest the editorial by Bai<span><sup>1</sup></span> on the paper by Yu et al.<span><sup>2</sup></span> on the role of caspase 11 in fever. However, I feel that the author ignores the absolutely critical role that prostaglandin (PG) E<sub>2</sub> production in brain endothelial cells has in generating fever, but rather seems to regard  it as an auxiliary mechanism. Although both peripheral and central cytokine production may contribute to fever, as suggested by the study by Yu et al.,<span><sup>2</sup></span> the critical mechanism is PGE<sub>2</sub> synthesis and its binding to EP<sub>3</sub> receptor expressing neurons in the median preoptic nucleus (MnPO) of the hypothalamus.<span><sup>3, 4</sup></span> If PGE<sub>2</sub> synthesis is blocked or EP<sub>3</sub> receptors are deleted in the MnPO, no fever occurs,<span><sup>5, 6</sup></span> even though there still is increased cytokine production in the periphery and in the brain.<span><sup>7</sup></span> The critical PGE<sub>2</sub> synthesis occurs in brain endothelial cells as shown by the absence of fever when the PGE<sub>2</sub> synthesizing enzymes cyclooxygenase-2 (Cox-2) and microsomal prostaglandin E synthase-1 (mPGES-1) are deleted from these cells.<span><sup>8</sup></span> Cox-2 and mPGES-1 are in turn induced by cytokine binding to receptors on the endothelial cells<span><sup>9-11</sup></span> (Figure 1). If these receptors, such as those for IL-1 and IL-6, or their downstream signaling molecules are selectively deleted from brain endothelial cells, the fever is suppressed.<span><sup>13-16</sup></span></p><p>It should also be pointed out that the evidence for the involvement of microglial cells in inflammation-induced sickness responses, and in particular in fever, is far from clear. Although it is well recognized that peripheral inflammation activates microglial cells,<span><sup>17</sup></span> the mechanism behind this activation is not fully understood. It is unlikely due to direct action of cytokines on the microglial cells, particularly when it comes to interleukin-1, which is a major pyrogen,<span><sup>18</sup></span> because if transport across the blood–brain barrier at all occurs in any significant amount, microglial cells express negligible levels of IL-1 receptors.<span><sup>19</sup></span> The critical IL-1 receptor-expressing cells for IL-1 activation of microglial cells are the endothelial cells, which via an as-yet-unidentified messenger molecule by a paracrine mechanism activate the microglial cells.<span><sup>20</sup></span></p><p>While it is generally assumed that various sickness symptoms and neuropsychiatric disorders are associated with activated microglia,<span><sup>21</sup></span> apart from a study demonstrating a role of striatal microglial cells in negative affect elicited by peripheral inflammation,<span><sup>22</sup></span> there is very little evidence for a causal relationship between these phenomena. It is not even clear which brain cells are responsible for the increased levels of cytokines seen after peripheral inflammation. When microglial cells were depleted, LPS-induced cytokine expression in the brain was unaffected, as were disease symptoms such as body weight loss and suppressed motor activity.<span><sup>23</sup></span> The role of activated microglia in fever has not, to my knowledge, been investigated before.</p><p>Although the study by Yu et al.<span><sup>2</sup></span> suggests that microglial cells contribute to the fever response, there are several caveats that need to be considered. In one set of experiments, the authors used intracerebral injection of clodronate to delete microglial cells. However, clodronate also appears to target perivascular macrophages, as was shown by Schiltz and Sawchenko,<span><sup>24</sup></span> and while the clodronate injection reduced the response to peripheral injection of IL-1, as shown in a subsequent study from the Sawchenko laboratory,<span><sup>25</sup></span> it enhanced the response, including fever, to peripheral injection of LPS, that is, a finding opposite to that reported by Yu et al.<span><sup>2</sup></span> In another set of experiments, Yu et al. injected into the preoptic region an adenovirus expressing shRNA to silence the caspase 11 expression through RNA interference. Although they report reduced caspase 11 expression in microglia but not in neurons (and associated attenuated fever), they do not seem to have examined the extent to which caspase 11 expression was attenuated in other cell types such as perivascular macrophages and endothelial cells.</p><p>In conclusion, I feel that the findings by Yu et al.<span><sup>2</sup></span> and in particular, the idea the febrile response is enhanced by preoptic microglia, although interesting, should be interpreted with caution. Importantly, even if there were indeed such an enhancement of the fever signal, according to the evidence available today, such an enhanced signal would still need to be converted into PGE<sub>2</sub> synthesis by brain endothelial cells in order to augment the fever response. It is in this context of interest to note in the study by Yu et al.<span><sup>2</sup></span> that both the intracerebral chlodronate injection to deplete microglia and the RNA interference to silence caspase 11 were reported to result in decreased concentrations of PGE<sub>2</sub> in the brain, implying that the mechanism described indeed would be upstream of PGE<sub>2</sub> synthesis.</p><p>Anders Blomqvist: Writing – original draft; conceptualization.</p>","PeriodicalId":107,"journal":{"name":"Acta Physiologica","volume":"240 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/apha.14238","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Physiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apha.14238","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I read with interest the editorial by Bai1 on the paper by Yu et al.2 on the role of caspase 11 in fever. However, I feel that the author ignores the absolutely critical role that prostaglandin (PG) E2 production in brain endothelial cells has in generating fever, but rather seems to regard  it as an auxiliary mechanism. Although both peripheral and central cytokine production may contribute to fever, as suggested by the study by Yu et al.,2 the critical mechanism is PGE2 synthesis and its binding to EP3 receptor expressing neurons in the median preoptic nucleus (MnPO) of the hypothalamus.3, 4 If PGE2 synthesis is blocked or EP3 receptors are deleted in the MnPO, no fever occurs,5, 6 even though there still is increased cytokine production in the periphery and in the brain.7 The critical PGE2 synthesis occurs in brain endothelial cells as shown by the absence of fever when the PGE2 synthesizing enzymes cyclooxygenase-2 (Cox-2) and microsomal prostaglandin E synthase-1 (mPGES-1) are deleted from these cells.8 Cox-2 and mPGES-1 are in turn induced by cytokine binding to receptors on the endothelial cells9-11 (Figure 1). If these receptors, such as those for IL-1 and IL-6, or their downstream signaling molecules are selectively deleted from brain endothelial cells, the fever is suppressed.13-16

It should also be pointed out that the evidence for the involvement of microglial cells in inflammation-induced sickness responses, and in particular in fever, is far from clear. Although it is well recognized that peripheral inflammation activates microglial cells,17 the mechanism behind this activation is not fully understood. It is unlikely due to direct action of cytokines on the microglial cells, particularly when it comes to interleukin-1, which is a major pyrogen,18 because if transport across the blood–brain barrier at all occurs in any significant amount, microglial cells express negligible levels of IL-1 receptors.19 The critical IL-1 receptor-expressing cells for IL-1 activation of microglial cells are the endothelial cells, which via an as-yet-unidentified messenger molecule by a paracrine mechanism activate the microglial cells.20

While it is generally assumed that various sickness symptoms and neuropsychiatric disorders are associated with activated microglia,21 apart from a study demonstrating a role of striatal microglial cells in negative affect elicited by peripheral inflammation,22 there is very little evidence for a causal relationship between these phenomena. It is not even clear which brain cells are responsible for the increased levels of cytokines seen after peripheral inflammation. When microglial cells were depleted, LPS-induced cytokine expression in the brain was unaffected, as were disease symptoms such as body weight loss and suppressed motor activity.23 The role of activated microglia in fever has not, to my knowledge, been investigated before.

Although the study by Yu et al.2 suggests that microglial cells contribute to the fever response, there are several caveats that need to be considered. In one set of experiments, the authors used intracerebral injection of clodronate to delete microglial cells. However, clodronate also appears to target perivascular macrophages, as was shown by Schiltz and Sawchenko,24 and while the clodronate injection reduced the response to peripheral injection of IL-1, as shown in a subsequent study from the Sawchenko laboratory,25 it enhanced the response, including fever, to peripheral injection of LPS, that is, a finding opposite to that reported by Yu et al.2 In another set of experiments, Yu et al. injected into the preoptic region an adenovirus expressing shRNA to silence the caspase 11 expression through RNA interference. Although they report reduced caspase 11 expression in microglia but not in neurons (and associated attenuated fever), they do not seem to have examined the extent to which caspase 11 expression was attenuated in other cell types such as perivascular macrophages and endothelial cells.

In conclusion, I feel that the findings by Yu et al.2 and in particular, the idea the febrile response is enhanced by preoptic microglia, although interesting, should be interpreted with caution. Importantly, even if there were indeed such an enhancement of the fever signal, according to the evidence available today, such an enhanced signal would still need to be converted into PGE2 synthesis by brain endothelial cells in order to augment the fever response. It is in this context of interest to note in the study by Yu et al.2 that both the intracerebral chlodronate injection to deplete microglia and the RNA interference to silence caspase 11 were reported to result in decreased concentrations of PGE2 in the brain, implying that the mechanism described indeed would be upstream of PGE2 synthesis.

Anders Blomqvist: Writing – original draft; conceptualization.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
炎症诱发的发热取决于脑内皮细胞和下丘脑正中视前核的 EP3 受体产生的前列腺素 E2。
我饶有兴趣地阅读了 Bai1 就 Yu 等人2 关于 caspase 11 在发热中的作用的论文发表的社论。然而,我觉得作者忽视了脑内皮细胞产生的前列腺素(PG)E2在发热中的绝对关键作用,而似乎将其视为一种辅助机制。虽然外周和中枢细胞因子的产生都可能导致发热,但正如 Yu 等人的研究2 所指出的那样,关键机制是 PGE2 的合成及其与下丘脑视前核正中(MnPO)中表达 EP3 受体的神经元的结合。3, 4 如果 PGE2 合成被阻断或 MnPO 中的 EP3 受体被删除,就不会出现发热,5, 6 尽管外周和大脑中的细胞因子产生仍然增加。关键的 PGE2 合成发生在脑内皮细胞中,当这些细胞中的 PGE2 合成酶环氧化酶-2(Cox-2)和微粒体前列腺素 E 合成酶-1(mPGES-1)被删除时,就不会出现发热现象。8 Cox-2 和 mPGES-1 反过来又通过细胞因子与内皮细胞上的受体结合而被诱导9-11(图 1)。如果选择性地从脑内皮细胞中删除这些受体(如 IL-1 和 IL-6 的受体)或其下游信号分子,发热就会被抑制。尽管外周炎症会激活小胶质细胞17 这一点已得到公认,但这种激活背后的机制还不完全清楚。细胞因子不太可能直接作用于小胶质细胞,尤其是白细胞介素-1,它是一种主要的致热原,18 因为如果通过血脑屏障进行大量转运,小胶质细胞表达的 IL-1 受体水平微乎其微。虽然人们普遍认为各种疾病症状和神经精神障碍与活化的小胶质细胞有关21 ,但除了一项研究表明纹状体小胶质细胞在外周炎症引发的负性情绪中发挥作用22 外,几乎没有证据表明这些现象之间存在因果关系。甚至还不清楚哪种脑细胞对外周炎症后细胞因子水平升高负责。据我所知,以前还没有人研究过活化的小胶质细胞在发热中的作用。虽然 Yu 等人的研究2 表明小胶质细胞对发热反应有贡献,但有几个注意事项需要考虑。在一组实验中,作者使用脑内注射氯屈膦酸钠来删除小胶质细胞。然而,正如 Schiltz 和 Sawchenko 所证明的那样,氯屈膦酸钠似乎也以血管周围的巨噬细胞为靶点24 ,而且正如 Sawchenko 实验室随后的一项研究25 所证明的那样,虽然注射氯屈膦酸钠降低了对外周注射 IL-1 的反应,但却增强了对外周注射 LPS 的反应,包括发热,即与 Yu 等人报告的结果相反。在另一组实验中,Yu 等人向视前区注射了一种表达 shRNA 的腺病毒,通过 RNA 干扰来抑制 caspase 11 的表达。总之,我认为Yu等人2的研究结果,尤其是视前小胶质细胞增强发热反应的观点虽然有趣,但应谨慎解读。重要的是,即使发热信号确实有这种增强作用,根据目前已有的证据,这种增强的信号仍需要由脑内皮细胞转化为 PGE2 合成,以增强发热反应。在这种情况下,值得注意的是,Yu 等人2 的研究发现,脑内注射氯屈膦酸钠以消耗小胶质细胞和 RNA 干扰以沉默 caspase 11 都会导致脑内 PGE2 浓度下降,这意味着所述机制确实是 PGE2 合成的上游:写作-原稿;构思。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Physiologica
Acta Physiologica 医学-生理学
CiteScore
11.80
自引率
15.90%
发文量
182
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Physiologica is an important forum for the publication of high quality original research in physiology and related areas by authors from all over the world. Acta Physiologica is a leading journal in human/translational physiology while promoting all aspects of the science of physiology. The journal publishes full length original articles on important new observations as well as reviews and commentaries.
期刊最新文献
Chloride fluxes and GABA release sustain inhibition in the CNS: The role for Bestrophin 1 anion channels. Correction to "Beneficial effects of MGL-3196 and BAM15 combination in a mouse model of fatty liver disease". Issue Information Impaired suppression of fatty acid release by insulin is a strong predictor of reduced whole-body insulin-mediated glucose uptake and skeletal muscle insulin receptor activation. Differential production of mitochondrial reactive oxygen species between mouse (Mus musculus) and crucian carp (Carassius carassius)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1