https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9533-7516
Figures
Abstract
Leptospirosis is an important global zoonosis caused by pathogenic Leptospira. It is estimated that more than 1 million people are infected by Leptospira each year, and the death toll is about 60,000. Some studies showed that delayed immune response was associated with severe leptospirosis, and TLR4 was very important in the control of leptospirosis. In this study, we aimed to explore the effect of the classical activator (LPS) of TLR4 on leptospirosis in susceptible and resistant hosts. The results showed that LPS pretreatment increased the survival rate of hamsters to 80%. And LPS pre-treatment also significantly reduced the leptospiral load and alleviated the pathological injury in organs of hamsters and mice. The result detected by ELISA in mice showed that the levels of TNF-α and IL-1β were increased in the LPS-treated group compared to the control group before infection. However, two days after infection, the level of cytokines in LPS group was down-regulated compared with that in control group. In addition, in vitro results showed that LPS pre-treatment enhanced the phagocytosis and bactericidal ability of macrophages on Leptospira. Collectively, our results indicated that the pre-activated immune response induced by LPS enhanced the ability of host against leptospirosis.
Citation: Chen X, Xie X, Wu D, Zhang S, Zhang W, Cao Y (2020) The pre-activated immune response induced by LPS protects host from leptospirosis. PLoS ONE 15(11): e0242742. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242742
Editor: Partha Mukhopadhyay, National Institutes of Health, UNITED STATES
Received: June 23, 2020; Accepted: November 6, 2020; Published: November 24, 2020
Copyright: © 2020 Chen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript.
Funding: This work was supported by the Key Project of Chinese National Programs for Research and Development (No.2016YFD0501005), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31802261). The URLs are http://www.nsfc.gov.cn/ and http://program.most.gov.cn/.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Leptospirosis is a widespread zoonosis caused by pathogenic Leptospira [1]. It is estimated that more than 1 million people are infected with Leptospira each year, and the death toll is about 60,000. Humans and animals can be infected by direct or indirect contact with infected animals or with Leptospira-contaminated soil and water [2]. Then, Leptospira invade the body through damaged mucosa and skin, and diffuse into internal organs, causing clinical symptoms such as jaundice, liver and kidney damage, pulmonary hemorrhage and even death [3]. Currently, the treatment of leptospirosis mainly depends on antibiotic therapy [4]. However, the early symptoms of leptospirosis are easily confused with other diseases, and the optimal treatment period is often missed [5]. Antibiotics can effectively treat leptospirosis, but improper use of antibiotics can aggravate leptospirosis [6,7]. Besides, antibiotics not only have toxic effects and side effects, but also long-term use of antibiotics may promote bacteria to develop drug resistance. Therefore, it is urgent to explore a new and effective way to prevent and cure leptospirosis.
Leptospirosis is tightly associated with inflammatory storms [8]. However, the therapeutic effect of immunosuppressant did not achieve the desired effect [9]. Combined with the gene expression profiles of golden hamsters and mice, we found that after infection with Leptospira, the gene expression of hamster’s lags that of tolerant mice [10]. Therefore, we suspect that early activation of the host immune response can resist leptospirosis.
Toll-like receptors (TLRs) play important roles in resisting pathogen [11]. In tolerant animals, macrophages recognize Leptospira through TLR2 and TLR4 [12]. And TLR4-deficient tolerant animals showed severe pathological changes after infection with Leptospira [13]. Thus, activating host TLR4 may be the key to the treatment of leptospirosis. Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) is a component of the outer wall of Gram-negative bacteria, and it is the classical ligand of TLR4 [14]. Therefore, we speculate that LPS can effectively protect the host from leptospirosis.
In this experiment, we found that LPS plays an effective role in the preventive of leptospirosis. The survival rate of hamsters pre-treated with LPS was significantly increased. In addition, the load of Leptospira and the degree of pathological injury of kidney, liver, lung significantly decreased compared with the control group. In addition, LPS pre-treatment enhanced the phagocytosis and bactericidal ability of macrophages on Leptospira. Our study provides a new direction for the prevention of leptospirosis in the future.
Methods and materials
Ethics statement
Eight- to ten-week-old mice and four-week-old Syrian golden hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus) were provided by the Liaoning Changsheng biotechnology co. LTD. During the experiment, all mice and hamsters were fed with standard feed, free water supply, 12h light/12h dark cycle. All animal experiments are carried out in accordance with the regulations of China on the Administration of Experimental Animals. The protocol was approved by the Animal Protection and Utilization Committee of Jilin University (20170318).
Bacterial strain
Pathogenic Leptospira interrogans serovar Lai strain Lai (56601) was grown in liquid Ellinghausen–McCullough–Johnson–Harris (EMJH) medium at 29°C. And Leptospira used in the infection test were cultured for no more than three generations.
Cell culture and stimulation
Bone marrow macrophages cells (BMDM) derived from mice which were treated with LPS 24 h in advance or the controls were seeded at 106 cells in six-well plates cultured in DMEM media (HyClone, USA) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS; HyClone, USA), 100 U/ml penicillin and 100 μg/ml streptomycin, 20% L929 supernatant in 5% CO2 atmosphere at 37°C. On the 7th day, cells were washed with sterilized PBS and then cultured in antibiotic-free medium. One hour after infection with Leptospira, the phagocytosis rate of Leptospira was detected. BMDM were extensively washed with RPMI to remove extracellular bacteria and then incubated for 1 h in a medium containing gentamicin (25 mg ml-1), to kill the remaining extracellular bacteria. Then, the infected BMDM were incubated in a gentamicin-free medium. After four hours, BMDMs were lysed at the indicated times with 1 ml of distilled water and 100 ml aliquots were used to inoculate 2 ml of EMJH broth. The tubes were incubated after 6–7 days in EMJH broth, the number of bacteria was determined with a Petroff-Hauser chamber under dark-field microscopy.
Experimental infections
Mice (2 μg/100 g) and hamsters (10 μg/100 g) were intraperitoneally injected with LPS (derived from E. coli) prior 2 hours or 24 hours to infection. Then, hamsters were injected intraperitoneally with 107 Leptospira, and mice were injected intraperitoneally with 108 Leptospira. Four hamsters of each group were humanely euthanized by using CO2 and organs (liver, kidney and lung) of hamsters were collected. The organs were stored at -80°C for follow-up detection.
For survival assay, animals were monitored daily for signs of illness including weight loss and mobility loss and were euthanized when they appeared moribund. For the other experiments, hamsters were euthanized at the indicated days. All mice were euthanized the day after infection. Before sacrifice, all animals were anesthetized with isoflurane 3% to alleviate suffering.
Histopathological examination
Hamster kidneys, livers and lungs were taken and placed in 10% neutral buffer formalin, dehydrated, embedded in paraffin, sliced and stained with hematoxylin eosin. The pathological changes were examined by microscope [15].
Real-time qPCR (RT-qPCR)
According to the manufacturer’s instructions, use TRIzol (Invitrogen, USA) to extract total DNA from 0.1g of organs. Applied Bioscience 7500 Thermal Cycling instrument and FastStart Universal SYBR GREEN Master (Roche Applied Science, Germany) were used to quantify the DNA concentration of Leptospira [16].
Results
Pre-treatment with LPS significantly increased the survival rate of hamsters
In order to explore the protective effect of LPS on the leptospirosis of hamsters, we injected LPS or normal saline, intraperitoneally to hamsters prior to infection. The results showed that all the hamsters in the control group died within one week (Fig 1). However, the survival rate of LPS pre-treatment hamsters infected with leptospira was increased to 80%. These results suggest that LPS pre-treatment is helpful to resist leptospirosis.
Survival differences between study groups were compared using the log-rank test. *P<0.05, **P<0.01 vs. the control group.
LPS pre-treatment alleviated pathological damage and reduced Leptospira load in hamsters
As 24 h in advance LPS treatment exhibited the best protective effect, we chose this time point as subsequent experiments. The infection model in Fig 1 was followed. Hemorrhagic damage was obvious in the renal tissue of the infection control group. By contrast, there was little evidence of bleeding in the kidneys of the LPS group (Fig 2Aa and 2Ab). Compared with LPS group, there were more inflammatory lesions in liver tissue and wider intercellular space in infection control group (Fig 2Ac and 2Ad). Severe pulmonary hemorrhage occurred in the infection control group, but no bleeding focus was found in the early LPS injection group (Fig 2Ae and 2Af). The histopathological score (kidneys, livers and lungs) was consistent with the histopathological examination (Fig 2B). The load of Leptospira in kidney, liver and lung tissues of mice in control group and LPS group was detected by qPCR. The result showed that the Leptospira load in control group was significantly higher than that in LPS group (Fig 2C). The results showed that pre-treatment of LPS could reduce organ injury and Leptospira load in golden hamsters.
(A) Histopathology of Kidney (a and b), Liver (c and d), and Lung (e and f) of hamsters in the infected control group and the LPS-treated group. Samples were collected at 2 d p.i., and representative photographs are presented (B) Histopathology scores for kidneys, livers, and lungs of hamsters. The data represent the mean histopathology scores for the two groups of hamsters. Statistical analysis of the results for infected controls (n = 3) and the LPS-treated group (n = 3) was performed by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. *P < 0.05, **P<0.01. (C) Leptospiral burdens in the kidneys, livers, and lungs of hamsters in the infected control group (n = 4) and the LPS-treated group (n = 4) was determined by qPCR. Samples were collected at 2 d p.i. The results are presented as numbers of genome equivalents per microgram of tissue DNA, and the differences were compared by t-test. *P < 0.05, **P<0.01 and ***P<0.001.
Pre-treatment with LPS reduced the load of Leptospira in mice
In order to verify the anti-leptospirosis effect of LPS in mice, LPS was injected 2 days in advance, and mice were infected with 108 Leptospira. The load of Leptospira was observed 2 days after infection. The result showed that the Leptospira burden in control group was significantly higher than that in LPS group (Fig 3). It is suggested that LPS pre-treatment can also prevent Leptospira infection in mice.
Values represent the means ± standard errors of the means (SEMs), and differences between the mean values were analyzed by t-test. *p < 0.05, **P<0.01 and ***P<0.001.
LPS pre-treatment reduced the level of inflammation after Leptospira infection
In order to verify the effect of LPS on the early inflammatory response induced by Leptospira, 2 days after Leptospira infection, the samples were collected and detected by ELISA. The protein levels of TNF-α and IL-1β in LPS treated mice were higher than those in the control group before (Fig 4C and 4D). However, after infection with Leptospira, the level of inflammation in the LPS group was lower than that in the control group (Fig 4A and 4B).
A (TNF-α) and B (IL-1β) are the levels of cytokines in Leptospira infection control group and LPS group. C (TNF-α) and D (IL-1β) were the cytokine levels of control group and LPS group without Leptospira infection. t-test was used to compare the difference between infection control group and LPS treatment group. * P<0.05, **P<0.01.
LPS pre-treatment promoted the phagocytosis index and bactericidal ability of BMDM on Leptospira
In order to elucidate the protective effect induced by LPS, we studied BMDM in vitro. The results showed that the number of Leptospira phagocytosed by macrophages in LPS group was higher than that in control group (Fig 5A), while the number of remaining surviving Leptospira in 4 hours was lower than that in control group (Fig 5B). The experimental results show that LPS pre-treatment enhances the body’s ability to remove Leptospira.
Effect of LPS on bone marrow macrophages (A), After Leptospira infected bone marrow macrophages for 1 hour, the extracellular Leptospira was removed, and the number of Leptospira in the cells was detected by real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR. the differences were compared by t-test. *P < 0.05 **P<0.01. (B) the stock of Leptospira in bone marrow macrophages at different times was cultured with EMJH broth and counted by Petroff-Hauser chamber under dark field microscope to quantify the bacteria or cell-associated bacteria in the culture supernatant. The data is the average SD of three independent experiments. t-test was used to compare the difference between infection control group and LPS treatment group. * P<0.05.
Discussion
Leptospirosis is a zoonotic disease that can infect almost all mammals and cause a wide range of clinical symptoms [1,17,18]. Antibiotic therapy is the main way of treatment at present, however antibiotics can cause toxicity and drug resistance [4,19]. During Leptospira infection, the inflammatory response of sensitive animals is delayed [10], Therefore, we speculate that early activation of the immune system is an effective treatment for leptospirosis. In view of the important role of TLR4 in the control of leptospirosis. In view of the important role of TLR4 in controlling leptospirosis [13], so we hypothesized that TLR4 receptor agonist LPS could help control leptospirosis, and tested the efficacy of LPS in the resistance of leptospirosis [13]. The results showed that the inflammatory response induced by LPS was effective in the prevention of leptospirosis.
The delayed inflammatory response in sensitive animals may be the reason for their susceptibility [10]. We used LPS to activate immunity in advance, which greatly improved the survival rate. This coincides with the latest progress in domestication immunotherapy for leptospirosis [20]. The protein levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines TNF-α and IL-1β were up-regulated in mice induced by LPS. It is reported that IL-1β and TNF-α promote the activation of macrophages, and subsequent secretion of immuno-regulators including pro-inflammatory factors that amplify the inflammatory response [8].
Toll-like receptors (TLRs) plays an important role in resisting pathogen [21]. TLR2 and TLR4 can recognize Leptospira in mice [12,22], mediate downstream signal pathways, release inflammatory factors, and promote the clearance of Leptospira [23–25]. In particular, TLR4 has played an important role [13]. TLR4 deficiency causes death in mice infected with Leptospira. Gram-negative bacteria LPS is the most characteristic ligand of TLR4 [14]. In the experiment, we found that LPS pre-treatment can effectively prevent Leptospira infection. Therefore, targeting TLR4 may be an effective way to against leptospirosis in the future.
Interestingly, in the late stage of leptospirosis, inflammatory storm causes death of the body [8]. Our experimental results showed that the inflammatory level of mice infected with Leptospira did not increase sharply after LPS pre-treatment, which made mice avoid being damaged by their own excessive inflammatory response after infection with Leptospira. The decrease in the level of inflammation after infection may be due to the reduced bacterial load. Thus, eliminating the load of leptospirosis in the treatment of early leptospirosis is the key.
Macrophages are the main immune cells involved in the clearance of leptospirosis in the host [26–28]. Interestingly, macrophages have significant phenotypic plasticity and can be reprogrammed in response to various environmental cytokines and pathogens to form an immune memory [29,30]. Intraperitoneal injection of LPS causes macrophages disappearance reaction [31,32]. At this time, Macrophages gather in the peritoneal lining and undergo a series of activation signals, leading to inflammation and the production of fully activated macrophages, resulting in up-regulation of macrophage function [33]. Recently, studies have shown that acute immune stimulation of LPS leads to transient changes in the abundance, composition, offspring and gene expression of hematopoietic stem cells, and enhances the response of related immune genes to secondary stimulation [34]. In addition, LPS can induce cell apoptosis in vivo. The immature macrophages in the engulf the apoptotic cells and thus become activated [35]. These activated macrophages showed stronger phagocytosis and bactericidal when the host was infected with Leptospira. The effect of LPS on central and peripheral immunity may be one of the mechanisms by which it plays a protective role.
In this experiment, we found that pre-treatment with LPS can fire a strong immune response to Leptospira in time. Moreover, LPS can enhance the bactericidal activity of macrophages. These findings will contribute to a better understanding of the pathogenic mechanism of leptospirosis and reveal new treatment strategies.
Acknowledgments
We thank Dr. Xiaokui Guo (Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China) for providing Leptospira interrogans serovar Lai strain Lai (56601).
References
- 1. Schneider MC, et al. (2013) Leptospirosis: a silent epidemic disease. International journal of environmental research and public health 10(12):7229–7234. pmid:24351743
- 2. Hung CC, et al. (2006) Leptospiral membrane proteins stimulate pro-inflammatory chemokines secretion by renal tubule epithelial cells through toll-like receptor 2 and p38 mitogen activated protein kinase. Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation: official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association—European Renal Association 21(4):898–910. pmid:16339163
- 3. Bharti AR, et al. (2003) Leptospirosis: a zoonotic disease of global importance. The Lancet. Infectious diseases 3(12):757–771. pmid:14652202
- 4. Haake DA & Levett PN (2015) Leptospirosis in humans. Current topics in microbiology and immunology 387:65–97. pmid:25388133
- 5. Soo ZMP, Khan NA, & Siddiqui R (2020) Leptospirosis: Increasing importance in developing countries. Acta tropica 201:105183. pmid:31542372
- 6. Guerrier G & D’Ortenzio E (2013) The Jarisch-Herxheimer reaction in leptospirosis: a systematic review. PloS one 8(3):e59266. pmid:23555644
- 7. Wu D, et al. (2017) Low-dose norfloxacin and ciprofloxacin therapy worsen leptospirosis in hamster. Microbial pathogenesis 102:36–41. pmid:27894961
- 8. Cagliero J, Villanueva S, & Matsui M (2018) Leptospirosis Pathophysiology: Into the Storm of Cytokines. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology 8:204. pmid:29974037
- 9. Soares LM, et al. (2014) Immunomodulatory treatment with thalidomide in experimental leptospirosis in Golden Syrian hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus). Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 108(2):105–111. pmid:24361944
- 10. Matsui M, Rouleau V, Bruyere-Ostells L, & Goarant C (2011) Gene expression profiles of immune mediators and histopathological findings in animal models of leptospirosis: comparison between susceptible hamsters and resistant mice. Infection and immunity 79(11):4480–4492. pmid:21844232
- 11. Akira S, Uematsu S, & Takeuchi O (2006) Pathogen recognition and innate immunity. Cell 124(4):783–801. pmid:16497588
- 12. Nahori MA, et al. (2005) Differential TLR recognition of leptospiral lipid A and lipopolysaccharide in murine and human cells. Journal of immunology 175(9):6022–6031. pmid:16237097
- 13. Viriyakosol S, Matthias MA, Swancutt MA, Kirkland TN, & Vinetz JM (2006) Toll-like receptor 4 protects against lethal Leptospira interrogans serovar icterohaemorrhagiae infection and contributes to in vivo control of leptospiral burden. Infection and immunity 74(2):887–895. pmid:16428731
- 14. Poltorak A, et al. (1998) Defective LPS signaling in C3H/HeJ and C57BL/10ScCr mice: mutations in Tlr4 gene. Science 282(5396):2085–2088. pmid:9851930
- 15. Cao Y, et al. (2011) Evaluation of novel fusion proteins derived from extracellular matrix binding domains of LigB as vaccine candidates against leptospirosis in a hamster model. Vaccine 29(43):7379–7386. pmid:21803087
- 16. Cao Y, Xie X, Zhang W, Wu D, & Tu C (2018) Low-dose Norfloxacin-treated leptospires induce less IL-1beta release in J774A.1cells following discrepant leptospiral gene expression. Microbial pathogenesis 119:125–130. pmid:29653152
- 17. Levett PN (2001) Leptospirosis. Clinical microbiology reviews 14(2):296–326. pmid:11292640
- 18. McBride AJ, Athanazio DA, Reis MG, & Ko AI (2005) Leptospirosis. Current opinion in infectious diseases 18(5):376–386. pmid:16148523
- 19. Li L, et al. (2016) The antibacterial activity and action mechanism of emodin from Polygonum cuspidatum against Haemophilus parasuis in vitro. Microbiological research 186–187:139–145. pmid:27242151
- 20. Santecchia I, et al. (2019) Innate immune memory through TLR2 and NOD2 contributes to the control of Leptospira interrogans infection. PLoS pathogens 15(5):e1007811. pmid:31107928
- 21. Gomes-Solecki M, Santecchia I, & Werts C (2017) Animal Models of Leptospirosis: Of Mice and Hamsters. Frontiers in immunology 8:58. pmid:28270811
- 22. Zhang W, et al. (2016) Toll-Like Receptor 2 Agonist Pam3CSK4 Alleviates the Pathology of Leptospirosis in Hamster. Infection and immunity 84(12):3350–3357. pmid:27620721
- 23. Kawai T & Akira S (2005) Pathogen recognition with Toll-like receptors. Current opinion in immunology 17(4):338–344. pmid:15950447
- 24. Iwasaki A & Medzhitov R (2004) Toll-like receptor control of the adaptive immune responses. Nature immunology 5(10):987–995. pmid:15454922
- 25. Takeda K & Akira S (2003) Toll receptors and pathogen resistance. Cellular microbiology 5(3):143–153. pmid:12614458
- 26. Arean VM (1962) The pathologic anatomy and pathogenesis of fatal human leptospirosis (Weil’s disease). The American journal of pathology 40:393–423. pmid:13862141
- 27. Chen X, et al. (2017) Mononuclear-macrophages but not neutrophils act as major infiltrating anti-leptospiral phagocytes during leptospirosis. PloS one 12(7):e0181014. pmid:28700741
- 28. Werts C (2018) Interaction of Leptospira with the Innate Immune System. Current topics in microbiology and immunology 415:163–187. pmid:29038956
- 29. Martinez FO & Gordon S (2014) The M1 and M2 paradigm of macrophage activation: time for reassessment. F1000prime reports 6:13. pmid:24669294
- 30. Netea MG, Quintin J, & van der Meer JW (2011) Trained immunity: a memory for innate host defense. Cell host & microbe 9(5):355–361. pmid:21575907
- 31. Nelson DS & Boyden SV (1963) The loss of macrophages from peritoneal exudates following the injection of antigens into guinea-pigs with delayed-type hypersensitivity. Immunology 6:264–275. pmid:13938030
- 32. Wiener E, Shilo M, & Beck A (1965) Effect of Bacterial Lipopolysaccharides on Mouse Peritoneal Leukocytes. Laboratory investigation; a journal of technical methods and pathology 14:475–487. pmid:14286382
- 33. Barth MW, Hendrzak JA, Melnicoff MJ, & Morahan PS (1995) Review of the macrophage disappearance reaction. Journal of leukocyte biology 57(3):361–367. pmid:7884305
- 34. de Laval B, et al. (2020) C/EBPbeta-Dependent Epigenetic Memory Induces Trained Immunity in Hematopoietic Stem Cells. Cell stem cell.
- 35. Weavers H, Evans IR, Martin P, & Wood W (2016) Corpse Engulfment Generates a Molecular Memory that Primes the Macrophage Inflammatory Response. Cell 165(7):1658–1671. pmid:27212238