All Title Author
Keywords Abstract


Markedly Increased High-Mobility Group Box 1 Protein in a Patient with Small-for-Size Syndrome

DOI: 10.1155/2014/272498

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Background. Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) occurs in the presence of insufficient liver mass to maintain normal function after liver transplantation. Murine mortality following 85% hepatectomy can be reduced by the use of soluble receptor for advanced glycation end products (sRAGE) to scavenge damage-associated molecular patterns and prevent their engagement with membrane-bound RAGE. Aims. To explore serum levels of sRAGE, high-mobility group box-1 (HMGB1) protein, and other soluble inflammatory mediators in a fatal case of SFSS. Methods. Serum levels of HMGB1, sRAGE, IL-18, and other inflammatory mediators were measured by ELISA in a case of SFSS, and the results were compared with 8 patients with paracetamol-induced acute liver failure (ALF) and 6 healthy controls (HC). Results. HMGB1 levels were markedly higher in the SFSS patient (92.1?ng/mL) compared with the ALF patients (median (IQR) 11.4 (3.7–14.8)?ng/mL) and HC (1.42 (1.38–1.56)?ng/mL). In contrast, sRAGE levels were lower in the SFSS patient (1.88?ng/mL) compared with the ALF patients (3.53 (2.66–12.37)?ng/mL) and were similar to HC levels (1.40 (1.23–1.89)?ng/mL). Conclusion. These results suggest an imbalance between pro- and anti-inflammatory innate immune pathways in SFSS. Modulation of the HMGB1-RAGE axis may represent a future therapeutic avenue in this condition. 1. Introduction The capacity for liver regeneration is finite, placing a restriction upon the minimum mass of liver tissue required to maintain hepatic function following split liver transplantation (LT) or liver resection. Small-for-size syndrome (SFSS) occurs in the presence of insufficient liver mass to maintain normal function and is characterised by severe graft dysfunction and increased ascites output [1]. The pathophysiology of SFSS is multifactorial, involving insufficient graft volume, poor graft quality, and excessive portal inflow [2]. Amplification of proinflammatory mediators in the remnant tissue is also recognised to play an important role in limiting liver regeneration [3]. Recent murine studies have suggested that a key pathway in this process involves the receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE), a cell-surface multiligand pattern recognition receptor linked with amplification of the innate inflammatory response to cell death. Engagement of membrane-bound RAGE with ligands such as high-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) protein sustains inflammatory responses and promotes apoptosis in the hepatic remnant following massive hepatectomy [4]. Soluble RAGE (sRAGE), the truncated extracellular domain of RAGE,

References

[1]  J. C. Emond, J. F. Renz, L. D. Ferrell et al., “Functional analysis of grafts from living donors: implications for the treatment of older recipients,” Annals of Surgery, vol. 224, no. 4, pp. 544–554, 1996.
[2]  O. N. Tucker and N. Heaton, “The “small for size” liver syndrome,” Current Opinion in Critical Care, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 150–155, 2005.
[3]  Y. Panis, D. M. McMullan, and J. C. Emond, “Progressive necrosis after hepatectomy and the pathophysiology of liver failure after massive resection,” Surgery, vol. 121, no. 2, pp. 142–149, 1997.
[4]  G. Cataldegirmen, S. Zeng, N. Feirt et al., “RAGE limits regeneration after massive liver injury by coordinated suppression of TNF-α and NF-κB,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 201, no. 3, pp. 473–484, 2005.
[5]  C. Semino, G. Angelini, A. Poggi, and A. Rubartelli, “NK/iDC interaction results in IL-18 secretion by DCs at the synaptic cleft followed by NK cell activation and release of the DC maturation factor HMGB1,” Blood, vol. 106, no. 2, pp. 609–616, 2005.
[6]  F. Dahm, P. Georgiev, and P.-A. Clavien, “Small-for-size syndrome after partial liver transplantation: definition, mechanisms of disease and clinical implications,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 5, no. 11, pp. 2605–2610, 2005.
[7]  M. Ilmakunnas, E. M. Tukiainen, A. Rouhiainen et al., “High mobility group box 1 protein as a marker of hepatocellular injury in human liver transplantation,” Liver Transplantation, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 1517–1525, 2008.
[8]  K. Shirabe, K. Takenaka, K. Yamatomto et al., “Impaired systemic immunity and frequent infection in patients with Candida antigen after hepatectomy,” Hepato-Gastroenterology, vol. 44, no. 13, pp. 199–204, 1997.
[9]  F. Kimura, M. Miyazaki, T. Suwa et al., “Increased serum interleukin-6 level and reduction of hepatic acute-phase response after major hepatectomy,” European Surgical Research, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 96–103, 1996.
[10]  H. Wang, O. Bloom, M. Zhang et al., “HMG-1 as a late mediator of endotoxin lethality in mice,” Science, vol. 285, no. 5425, pp. 248–251, 1999.
[11]  P. Scaffidi, T. Misteli, and M. E. Bianchi, “Release of chromatin protein HMGB1 by necrotic cells triggers inflammation,” Nature, vol. 418, no. 6894, pp. 191–195, 2002.
[12]  T. Bonaldi, F. Talamo, P. Scaffidi et al., “Monocytic cells hyperacetylate chromatin protein HMGB1 to redirect it towards secretion,” The EMBO Journal, vol. 22, no. 20, pp. 5551–5560, 2003.
[13]  C. Semino, J. Ceccarelli, L. V. Lotti, M. R. Torrisi, G. Angelini, and A. Rubartelli, “The maturation potential of NK cell clones toward autologous dendritic cells correlates with HMGB1 secretion,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 92–99, 2007.
[14]  M. T. Lotze and K. J. Tracey, “High-mobility group box 1 protein (HMGB1): nuclear weapon in the immune arsenal,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 331–342, 2005.
[15]  M. Ombrellino, H. Wang, M. S. Ajemian et al., “Increased serum concentrations of high-mobility-group protein 1 in haemorrhagic shock,” The Lancet, vol. 354, no. 9188, pp. 1446–1447, 1999.
[16]  L. Ulloa and D. Messmer, “High-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) protein: friend and foe,” Cytokine and Growth Factor Reviews, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 189–201, 2006.
[17]  D. J. Antoine, D. P. Williams, A. Kipar et al., “High-mobility group box-1 protein and keratin-18, circulating serum proteins informative of acetaminophen-induced necrosis and apoptosis in vivo,” Toxicological Sciences, vol. 112, no. 2, pp. 521–531, 2009.
[18]  B. V. Martin-Murphy, M. P. Holt, and C. Ju, “The role of damage associated molecular pattern molecules in acetaminophen-induced liver injury in mice,” Toxicology Letters, vol. 192, no. 3, pp. 387–394, 2010.
[19]  A. Tsung, R. Sahai, H. Tanaka et al., “The nuclear factor HMGB1 mediates hepatic injury after murine liver ischemia-reperfusion,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 201, no. 7, pp. 1135–1143, 2005.
[20]  T. Watanabe, S. Kubota, M. Nagaya et al., “The role of HMGB-1 on the development of necrosis during hepatic ischemia and hepatic ischemia/reperfusion injury in mice,” Journal of Surgical Research, vol. 124, no. 1, pp. 59–66, 2005.
[21]  M. E. Bianchi, “HMGB1 loves company,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 86, no. 3, pp. 573–576, 2009.
[22]  R. Kokkola, ?. Andersson, G. Mullins et al., “RAGE is the major receptor for the proinflammatory activity of HMGB1 in rodent macrophages,” Scandinavian Journal of Immunology, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2005.
[23]  S. Straino, A. di Carlo, A. Mangoni et al., “High-mobility group box 1 protein in human and murine skin: involvement in wound healing,” Journal of Investigative Dermatology, vol. 128, no. 6, pp. 1545–1553, 2008.
[24]  F. Limana, A. Germani, A. Zacheo et al., “Exogenous high-mobility group box 1 protein induces myocardial regeneration after infarction via enhanced cardiac C-kit+ cell proliferation and differentiation,” Circulation Research, vol. 97, no. 8, pp. e73–e83, 2005.
[25]  Z.-F. Yang, D. W.-Y. Ho, A. C.-Y. Chu, Y.-Q. Wang, and S.-T. Fan, “Linking inflammation to acute rejection in small-for-size liver allografts: the potential role of early macrophage activation,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 196–209, 2004.
[26]  T. Omura, T. Nakagawa, H. B. Randall et al., “Increased immune responses to regenerating partial liver grafts in the rat,” Journal of Surgical Research, vol. 70, no. 1, pp. 34–40, 1997.
[27]  M. Shiraishi, M. E. Csete, C. Yasunaga et al., “Regeneration-induced accelerated rejection in reduced-size liver grafts,” Transplantation, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 336–340, 1994.
[28]  C. Bopp, A. Bierhaus, S. Hofer et al., “Bench-to-bedside review: the inflammation-perpetuating pattern-recognition receptor RAGE as a therapeutic target in sepsis,” Critical Care, vol. 12, no. 1, article 201, 2008.
[29]  U. Ekong, S. Zeng, H. Dun et al., “Blockade of the receptor for advanced glycation end products attenuates acetaminophen-induced hepatotoxicity in mice,” Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 682–688, 2006.
[30]  S. Zeng, N. Feirt, M. Goldstein et al., “Blockade of receptor for advanced glycation end product (RAGE) attenuates ischemia and reperfusion injury to the liver in mice,” Hepatology, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 422–432, 2004.
[31]  B. Liliensiek, M. A. Weigand, A. Bierhaus et al., “Receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE) regulates sepsis but not the adaptive immune response,” The Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 113, no. 11, pp. 1641–1650, 2004.
[32]  M. A. van Zoelen, A. M. Schmidt, S. Florquin, et al., “Receptor for advanced glycation end products facilitates host defense during Escherichia coli-induced abdominal sepsis in mice,” The Journal of Infectious Diseases, vol. 200, no. 5, pp. 765–773, 2009.

Full-Text

comments powered by Disqus

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

微信:OALib Journal