Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device.
You can download and read online Oral tolerance: the response of the intestinal mucosa to dietary antigens file PDF Book only if you are registered here.
And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Oral tolerance: the response of the intestinal mucosa to dietary antigens book.
Happy reading Oral tolerance: the response of the intestinal mucosa to dietary antigens Bookeveryone.
Download file Free Book PDF Oral tolerance: the response of the intestinal mucosa to dietary antigens at Complete PDF Library.
This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats.
Here is The CompletePDF Book Library.
It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Oral tolerance: the response of the intestinal mucosa to dietary antigens Pocket Guide.
The GI mucosa is the largest Immune responses in the gut are by neutralizing food antigens and limiting their access to the immune system (15, 16 ).
Table of contents
- Mucosal Immunology
- Frontiers | Gut Mucosal Antibody Responses and Implications for Food Allergy | Immunology
The intestinal epithelium and the GALT play a crucial role in the maintenance of the oral tolerance — antigen specific tolerance to orally ingested food and bacterial antigens [ 44 ]. All mucosal epithelial layers are a part of the innate immunity and serve as a first line of defense against numerous exogenous factors. The epithelial cells in the gut form a reliable and highly selective barrier between the intraluminal content and the body interior.
The disruption of this barrier could lead to the development of an inflammatory response. This would be a result of the direct interaction between the GALT and the intraluminal antigens. This has been confirmed in animal models — the mice with genetically determined alterations of the intestinal permeability are developing intestinal inflammation [ 45 , 46 ]. Normally there is a constant interaction between the intestinal epithelium and GALT thus making possible the existence of the oral tolerance [ 47 ]. There is a complex relationship between the intestinal immune system and the resident and transient intestinal microbiota and it is crucial for the epithelial cells and the mucosal immune system to distinguish between pathogenic and non-pathogenic agents.
Intestinal epithelial cells and some enteroendocrine cells are capable of detecting bacterial antigens and initiating and regulating both innate and adaptive immune responses. Signals from bacteria can be transmitted to adjacent immune cells such as macrophages, dendritic cells and lymphocytes through molecules expressed on the epithelial cell surface — the so called pattern-recognitioning receptors PRRs.
TLRs alert the immune system to the presence of highly conserved microbial antigens called pathogen-associated molecular patterns PAMPs. They are present on most microorganisms. This is exactly how probiotic bacteria interact with the mucosal immune system — by their PAMPs. There are at least ten types of human TLRs. In humans, TLRs are expressed in most tissues, including myelomonocytic cells, dendritic cells and endothelial and epithelial cells. Interaction of TLRs and PAMPs results in activation of a complex intracellular signaling cascade, up-regulation of inflammatory genes, production of pro- and anti-inflammatory inflammatory cytokines and interferons, and recruitment of myeloid cells.
It also stimulates expression of co-stimulatory molecules required to induce an adaptive immune response of APC [ 4 , 50 ]. TLR4 recognises LPS [ 53 , 54 ], a constituent of the cell wall of Gram-negative bacteria, while TLR2 reacts with a wider spectrum of bacterial products such as lipoproteins, peptidoglycans and lipoteichoic acid found both in Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria [ 55 , 56 ]. There is another family of membrane-bound receptors for detection of proteins and they are different from the TLRs.
This is the case in the epithelial cells of the GIT where the cells are in constant contact with the microbiota, and the expression of TLRs must be down-regulated in order to avoid over-stimulation and permanent activation. However, if these intestinal epithelial cells get infected with invasive bacteria or bacteria interacting directly with the plasma membrane, they will come into contact with NLRs and will activate some certain defense mechanisms [ 58 ]. NOD1 can sense peptidoglycan moieties containing meso-diaminopimelic acid, which primarily are associated to gram-negative bacteria.
NOD2 senses the muramyl dipeptide motif that can be found in a wider range of bacteria, including numerous probiotic bacteria [ 59 , 60 ]. The NLRs and TLRs play a crucial role in the regulation of the inflammatory response towards indigenous and transient microbiota. These lymphocytes take part mostly in the cell-mediated immune response, the normal functions of the macrophages and the delayed hypersensitivity reactions;. Thlymphocytes — some authors link them with the development of numerous autoimmune diseases.
Their activation and functions are not fully studies and understood but they differ from the Th1- and Th2-lymphocytes. This is a result of a paradoxical inflammatory response towards the resident intestinal flora [ 65 - 71 ];.
There are parts of the indigenous microbiota that are less prone to induce inflammation, and there may even be bacterial genera with the ability to counteract inflammation. This seemingly inflammation-suppressing effect can be a result of different actions. The inflammation-suppressing fractions of the bacterial flora may be able to:.
All three actions may work simultaneously. The long-term inflammation increases the risk for atherosclerosis, cancer, dementia and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Diabetes type 2 and obesity are also characterised by a low-grade inflammation but it is still unclear if the inflammation is the cause of the condition or just a result of it. The indigenous flora of the human body may trigger inflammation, and so favourable influence on the composition of the indigenous microbiota can be a strategy to mitigate inflammation.
The use of probiotic bacteria can affect the composition of the resident flora, but probiotics may also have more direct effects on the immune system and the permeability of the mucosa. The better the barrier effect of the mucosa the smaller the risk of translocation of pro-inflammatory components originating from the mucosal microbiota [ 72 ]. The polarization of the immune response is the reason why the oral intake of probiotic bacteria has been proven to be effective in allergic inflammation — atopic dermatitis, vernal keratoconjunctivitis but also in inflammatory bowel disease [ 23 , 24 ]; infectious and antibiotic induced diarrhea [ 19 , 20 ], urogenital infections [ 21 , 22 ], atopic disease [ 25 , 26 ].
In addition some authors suggest that probiotics may have a place as adjunctive treatment in H. Based on the clinical evidence we could assume that the effects of probiotic bacteria over the mucosal immune response may be divided into local and systemic. Indeed the efficacy of probiotic bacteria in atopic disease speaks of some systemic effect. According to the authors this is possible because of the functional entero-mammaric link and the functional redistribution of activated lymphocytes from the gut to the mammary gland and vice versa. In addition to this Dalmasso et al.
The facilitation of oral tolerance and innocent bystander suppression by probiotic bacteria [ 78 , 79 ] support the fact that particular probiotics not only drive protection against infection throughout the mucosal immune system, but also regulate the effector response. It is likely that different bacterial species operate through different mechanisms, indicating the importance of screening assays when identifying new isolates for clinical testing.
A new focus in biotherapy can be expected to evolve. It still remains to convert predictable shifts in mucosal immunity into practical health gains for the benefits of immunobiotic therapy to be realised [ 74 ]. Indeed the probiotics, the resident flora and the mucosal immune system are extremely strongly related and act as a single equilibrium and should always be investigated and described together. There is a long way to go until we fully understand and manage to control the interaction between the probiotic bacteria and the mucosal immune system.
This chapter was only possible because of the support from my family and the life lessons of my scientific mentor Prof. Zahariy Krastev. Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3. Help us write another book on this subject and reach those readers. Login to your personal dashboard for more detailed statistics on your publications. Edited by Everlon Rigobelo. We are IntechOpen, the world's leading publisher of Open Access books.
Built by scientists, for scientists. Our readership spans scientists, professors, researchers, librarians, and students, as well as business professionals. Downloaded: Introduction There is complex and ubiquitous interface between the probiotic and resident bacteria human microbiota at various mucosal sites and the mucosal immune system. Human microbiota The human microbiota is an aggregate of microorganisms that reside on the surface and in deep layers of skin, in the saliva and oral mucosa, in the conjunctiva, the urogenital, to some extend the respiratory and above all the gastrointestinal tract.
Oral microbiota The oral cavity shelters a very diverse, abundant and complex microbial community. Conjunctival microbiota The conjunctiva harbors few or no organisms. Urogenital microbiota The urogenital flora is comprised mostly by the bacteria in the anterior urethra and the genital tract in women. Intestinal microbiota The number of bacteria in the digestive system alone is at least as big as the number of the stars in our home galaxy — the Milky Way as it contains no less than 10 11 stars [ 3 ], thus forming a specific bacterial microcosmos the human gut. Table 1. Predominant bacterial genera and families inhabiting the human intestine.
Probiotic bacteria The probiotic bacteria belong to the transient species as their presence in the human body is always a result of exogenous intake. Some of these dietary associations with food allergy are supported by studies that potentially explain the immune basis of this association. Alternatively, there are dietary components that are well known to influence mucosal immunity, whose role in food allergy remains unstudied.
An example of the latter is vitamin A. Multiple steps are required for the transformation of dietary vitamin A to retinoic acid, but the last step is mediated by retinal dehydrogenase RALDH enzymes. Vitamin A-depleted mice lack T cells and IgA-secreting B cells in the intestinal mucosa, but not elsewhere in the body [ 69 ]. Although retinoic acid promotes Tregs and suppresses the development of Th17 effector cells in vitro , findings in vivo suggest that retinoic acid is important for induction of both regulatory and effector T cells in the gastrointestinal mucosa [ 70 ].
For example, in the context of high levels of the cytokine IL, which is a feature of celiac disease, retinoic acid can promote the development of pathogenic Th1 and Th17 effector cells rather than regulatory T cells and promote celiac-like disease in mice [ 71 ]. Thus, although much of the in vitro evidence suggests that Vitamin A should be regulatory, it has the potential to contribute to pathogenesis of intestinal disease. Additional studies are needed, both mechanistic studies utilizing animal models of food allergy as well as in human subjects to determine how dietary vitamin A levels may specifically influence the development of food allergy.
Vitamin D is another nutrient of significant interest in the development of tolerance or allergic sensitization to food antigens. Serum vitamin D levels are generated both by dietary intake and synthesis of vitamin D in the skin in response to exposure to sunlight. Addition of vitamin D to immunizations given by the subcutaneous route induces protective mucosal immunity [ 72 ]. Like retinoic acid, vitamin D can influence T and B cell homing, and has been shown to suppress the development of Th17 cells in vivo [ 73 ]. As with vitamin A, there is a lack of mechanistic studies in mouse models of food allergy to test the role of vitamin D in disease.
However, there are some data from human subjects to hint at a potential protective role of vitamin D in food allergy. Incidence of food allergy varies with latitude in Australia [ 76 ], and in the US, rates of epinephrine auto-injector prescriptions as a proxy measurement of food allergy and emergency room visits for acute allergic reactions vary according to latitude, with highest rates in the northeast [ 77 ].
This has been hypothesized to be due to associated variations in vitamin D levels secondary to differences in sun exposure. The association of serum vitamin D levels with allergic sensitization to common allergens was analyzed using data available in the NHANES database. It was found that low Vitamin D was associated with elevated sensitization to peanut and shrimp, but not milk or egg [ 63 ]. This was observed for children, but not adults. It is not clear why this nutrient would have antigen-selective effects on allergic sensitization, but may relate to either the age or route of antigen exposure.
- Probiotics and Mucosal Immune Response;
- MATERIALS AND METHODS.
- Oral tolerance to food protein;
- Oral tolerance and gut-oriented immune response to dietary proteins | SpringerLink?
- The development and role of microbial-host interactions in gut mucosal immune development!
Aryl hydrocarbon receptor AHR ligands are derived from environmental and dietary sources and have a significant effect on both innate and adaptive immunity in the intestinal mucosa. These are primarily innate-type cells with invariant TCR usage. This loss was associated with an increased microbial burden in the small intestine, and increased susceptibility to experimental colitis. The intestinal source of immuno-modulatory ligands for the AHR is primarily from food.
There are also data showing that AHR ligands modulate adaptive immune responses in the intestine. Depending on the ligand used, AHR ligands could either enhance Tregs and suppress autoimmunity, or enhance IL and exacerbate autoimmunity [ 80 ]. Immunomodulatory effects of exogenous AHR ligands have been shown in an experimental model of peanut allergy [ 81 ], but it has not yet been shown if diet-derived AHR ligands may be protective against the development of food allergy.
Cruciferous vegetables broccoli, cabbage, and brussels sprouts are rich sources of AHR ligands, and may provide a means for modulating the immune tone of the intestine. Obesity is associated with elevated levels of IgE, including specific IgE against common food allergens [ 65 ]. Obesity is considered to be a systemic inflammatory state, and the presence of innate lymphoid cells producing Th2 cytokines within adipose tissue suggests a potential mechanistic link between obesity and allergic disease [ 82 ].
However, a high fat diet is also associated with significant changes in the local immune milieu, such as increased inflammatory markers in the intestinal mucosa, increased epithelial permeability and elevated levels of LPS in the serum, and changes in the intestinal microbiome [ 83 , 84 ]. Interestingly, it was recently reported that high fat diet-induced obesity and changes in the microbiome were both downstream of changes in the mucosal immune system, in particular lymphotoxin-dependent elevation of the cytokines IL and IL [ 85 ].
IL is a cytokine produced by innate lymphoid cells that has both protective and pro-inflammatory funtions. IL is a cytokine produced by antigen presenting cells that contributes to the development of Th17 cells. The immune changes observed in these studies were not of a Th2 phenotype that would contribute to allergic sensitization in food allergy, but demonstrates that the innate lymphoid milieu of the intestine can be significantly altered by the fat composition of the diet.
The role of high fat diet in food sensitization needs to be addressed experimentally. A second major environmental factor likely to influence susceptibility to food allergy is the microbiota through modulation of the mucosal immune system. Studies of the last 15 years using gnotobiotic mice germ-free or reconstituted with defined microbiota have identified a critical role for the gut microbiota in shaping the intestinal mucosa with regard to immune and barrier function, and influencing systemic immunity and metabolism [ 86 ].
It is now well established that gastrointestinal inflammation associated with a number of experimental models of inflammatory bowel disease is dependent on the gut microbiota. Furthermore, reconstitution of germ-free mice with defined microbiota has identified microbial species that promote or protect against gastrointestinal inflammation[ 87 ].
Particular species, including B. Therefore the relative abundance of various constituents of the commensal flora may determine the immune balance of the gastrointestinal tract. In the context of allergic disease, recent work has shown that signals from the commensal microbiota suppress IgE production and basophil development [ 92 ], although it has been shown that colonization with particular species including Clostridium can suppress allergic sensitization [ 90 ].
Rivas et al recently demonstrated that a specific strain of ova-sensitized mice, which experienced allergic reactions following gastric challenge with ova, had a signature microbiota that differed from wild-type, ova-sensitized but non-reactive mice [ 93 ]. Transfer of this microbiota to germ-free wild-type mice promoted ova-specific IgE sensitization and allergic reactions following gastric challenge in recipient mice, implicating the microbiota in the development of food allergy. Germ-free mice have under-developed mucosal immune systems, so it can be difficult to interpret studies utilizing germ-free mice in studies of diseases affecting the mucosal immune system.
However, germ-free mice and mice treated with broad-spectrum antibiotics have increased susceptibility to sensitization to food allergens [ 94 ] [ 95 ], highlighting the general inhibitory activity of the microbiota on the generation of an IgE response to foods. The power of the gnotobiotic approach comes from the ability to reconstitute germ-free mice with defined microbiota, particularly if combined with knowledge about the constituents of the human microbiome associated with a particular disease.
Recent studies have shown that mice can be reconstituted with human microbiota, and that microbiota can then be reproducibly controlled by altering the diet [ 96 , 97 ]. This is a very powerful system for dissecting the intersection of diet, microbiota, and human disease. It has been reported that colonization of germ-free mice with microbiota from healthy human infants is protective against allergic sensitization to milk allergens [ 98 ]. What is known about the intestinal microbiome in food allergy?
Using culture-based methods, dysbiosis has been described in a few studies comparing allergic children to healthy controls. Bifidobacterium species have been found to be either decreased or unchanged in allergic populations [ 99 , ]. Only one study to date has used 16S-based sequencing to compare the microbiota of a group of 20 infants with atopic eczema many with IgE sensitization to foods to a control group without atopic manifestations, with a finding of reduced diversity in the microbiome of infants with atopic eczema [ ].
In addition to reductions in diversity, there were also significant reductions in abundance of the phylum Proteabacteria, but no differences in Bifidobacterium were observed. These studies point to a possible dysbiosis in food allergy. Larger prospective studies are needed to identify changes in the microbiome that precede the development of food allergy as defined by rigorous clinical criteria, and controlling for dietary intervention. If a signature of dysbiosis can be associated with food allergy, further mechanistic studies utilizing gnotobiotic mice reconstituted with human microbiota would be warranted.
In addition to bacterial constituents of the microbiome, the human virome may also play a significant role in shaping the mucosal immune system [ ]. The majority of peanut-allergic children experience their first allergic reaction to peanut on their first known ingestion of peanut [ ]. This suggests that sensitization resulting in IgE production must have occurred by exposure through a non-oral route. Two leading theories for the basis of this sensitization are in utero sensitization, or by household exposure through non-oral routes.
In utero sensitization to allergens is thought to occur by trans-placental transfer of antigen, and exposure of an immature, Th2 biased, and potentially genetically predisposed immune system to the allergen resulting in generation of allergic sensitization.
Measurement of discordant allergen-specific IgE in cord blood, newborn blood, and maternal blood supports the hypothesis that IgE sensitization may occur in utero [ ]. The clinical data on the impact of allergen in the maternal diet has been mixed; with some reports showing no effect [ ] and others showing that maternal ingestion of peanut during pregnancy was a risk-factor for the development of peanut sensitization [ ].
The mechanism of in utero tolerance induction has not been addressed, but maternal exposure during lactation induces oral tolerance in offspring through a TGF-beta-dependent mechanism [ ]. However, there is no evidence from human studies supporting a protective role of maternal allergen ingestion in food allergy. Household non-oral exposure to peanut allergen was reported to be a risk factor for peanut allergy in children independent of maternal ingestion during pregnancy and lactation [ ]. One relevant route of exposure was hypothesized to be the skin. Further evidence fitting the hypothesis that sensitization to peanut may occur through the skin comes from data showing that mutations in the filaggrin gene associated with decreased skin barrier are a risk factor for peanut allergy [ ].
Data from animal models show that allergic sensitization can be readily induced by topical allergen exposure. However, these models show that additional factors beyond exposure are necessary to induce sensitization. This can include adjuvant [ ], or tape stripping to induce up-regulation of cytokines including TSLP and IL [ , ], or induction of damage signals that activate intraepithelial lymphocytes that participate in allergic sensitization [ ]. Similar to what is observed with the oral route, additional signals are needed beyond allergen exposure to result in allergic sensitization.
The concept of damage or barrier defects contributing to allergic sensitization via the skin is supported by clinical observations that atopic dermatitis is a significant risk factor for the development of food allergy [ ]. These data indicate that the skin may be a highly relevant site of sensitization to food allergens. Understanding the environmental or intrinsic co-factors that provide adjuvant activity to food allergens upon exposure by any route is critical to our understanding of why food allergy is a steadily increasing clinical problem.
As in the gut, the skin microbiome has also been shown to shape skin immunity [ ] and may contribute to sensitization through cutaneous routes. Figure 2 illustrates environmental factors that may contribute to allergic sensitization to food allergens. Green arrows indicate factors either known or suggested to promote allergic sensitization, red arrows indicate factors suppressive to allergic sensitization known or suggested.
In skin, damage and decreased barrier can function as physiologic adjuvants driving this process. Dietary factors including Vitamin D, Vitamin A, aryl hydrocarbon receptor AHR ligands, and folate are thought to promote regulatory responses or suppress inflammatory responses, while high fat diet HFD promotes inflammatory responses. The gut microbiota or its constituents can suppress aspects of the allergic immune response, directly or through the induction of Tregs. The practice of excluding allergens such as peanut from the diet in infancy has been proposed as a contributing factor in the rising incidence of peanut allergy by allowing cutaneous exposure to occur in the absence of tolerizing signals from the ingestion of peanut.
The Learning Early About Peanut Allergy LEAP study is an ongoing interventional study to test whether early introduction of peanut into the diet can prevent the development of clinical peanut allergy. Infants with egg allergy, atopic dermatitis, or both were recruited into the study, and recently published baseline parameters confirmed the strong association of eczema with peanut allergy [ ].
The results from this trial will determine if tolerance to peanut can be induced in infants at high risk for peanut allergy by early introduction of the allergen into the diet. There is little direct information on the immune communication between gut and skin in food allergy, but clearly such communication occurs. The skin is the most common site of manifestations of food allergy in response to oral food challenge [ ].
Frontiers | Gut Mucosal Antibody Responses and Implications for Food Allergy | Immunology
Evidence outlined above suggests that the skin is also a likely site of initial sensitization to foods. It is not clear if IgE sensitization to food antigens through the skin requires any homing of T or B cells to the gastrointestinal tract, but there is evidence that topical immunization leads to a mucosal antibody response that is dependent on vitamin A in the diet [ ]. Clearly the potential exists for effector T and B cells to home to the gut after antigen exposure via the skin. Despite the fact that ingested food is the trigger of food allergic reactions, the fact that both priming and manifestations of food allergy can occur exclusively via the skin raises the interesting question of whether food allergy should be considered a gastrointestinal disease.
Once sensitization has occurred and antigen-specific IgE has been generated, oral re-exposure to that allergen can lead to local or systemic manifestations of food allergy. In human disease, the most common manifestations of reactions are cutaneous urticaria , followed by gastrointestinal and respiratory reactions [ ]. Studies from mice indicate that food allergens must be absorbed systemically in order to induce symptoms of anaphylaxis [ , ] and that factors that interfere with passage across the intestinal epithelium such as heat aggregation of the antigens prevent anaphylactic symptoms [ , ].
The ability to induce anaphylaxis by the oral route in mice is highly strain and allergen dependent, but resistant strains of mice will undergo anaphylaxis when systemically challenged [ , ]. The basis of this susceptibility to oral allergen challenge in mice is not currently understood. Systemic anaphylaxis in mice is mediated predominantly by IgE with some contribution from IgG and is mast cell dependent, except in the case of intravenous allergen challenge when macrophages can also contribute to symptoms [ , ].
Histamine and platelet activating factor PAF are both required for systemic manifestations of anaphylaxis in mice [ , ]. Antihistamines are commonly used in the treatment of acute reactions to foods, and clinical studies have found PAF to be elevated in serum of subjects undergoing anaphylaxis, particularly those with more severe symptoms [ ].
PAF acetylhydrolase, the enzyme that breaks down PAF, is also decreased in subjects with severe anaphylaxis [ ]. PAF is elevated in other disorders such as necrotizing enterocolitis [ ], it remains to be determined if PAF is a biomarker of severe anaphylaxis in humans or if it plays a role in the pathogenesis.
Gastrointestinal manifestations of allergy in mice are observed secondary to a T cell-driven allergic inflammation that is induced by repeated allergen exposure [ , ]. It is not clear why mice require repeated allergen challenge to induce gastrointestinal symptoms, but this may relate to the very low baseline level of resident mast cells in the normal small intestinal lamina propria of mice.
During this repeated allergen exposure, the release of chemokines including CCL20 induce the accumulation of antigen-specific Th2 cells in the intestinal mucosa [ , ]. The epithelial cytokine TSLP is also critical for generating this local inflammation during repeated allergen exposure that is necessary for symptom onset [ ]. T cell cytokines including IL-4, IL, and IL-9 are critical for generating this allergic inflammation in the gut [ , ], likely upstream of the expansion of mucosal mast cells. As with systemic manifestations of anaphylaxis, allergen-induced diarrhea is mast cell-dependent and severity correlates with intestinal mast cell numbers [ , ].
Mast cells contribute to the allergic response not only through acute release of mediators, but also as a major local source of IL [ ]. Symptoms are not mediated by histamine but instead by serotonin together with platelet activating factor [ ].
It is not yet clear if different manifestations of food allergy in human disease are mediated by different immune mechanisms, or how antigen absorbed through the intestinal mucosa may pass through the gut to trigger systemic symptoms without inducing local gastrointestinal symptoms. A schematic illustrating our current understanding of the mechanisms underlying manifestations of food allergy is shown in Figure 3. Mast cells are central to both local and systemic manifestations of food allergy. Antigen disseminated systemically can trigger distal reactions urticaria, bronchospasm through histamine and platelet activating factor PAF dependent mechanisms.
Gastrointestinal manifestations of food allergy in mice are dependent on repeated exposure to the food allergen that drives an allergic inflammation and mastocytosis that is necessary for the local symptoms. PAF and serotonin mediate the local acute response diarrhea to allergen exposure. We do not yet understand why the default immune response to a dietary antigen deviates from a suppressive response mediated by Tregs to a Th2-biased response that promotes IgE class switching and allergic responses upon re-exposure.
The rapidly increasing incidence of disease in westernized countries suggests a role for environmental factors. Emerging evidence points to dietary factors and the microbiome as important modifiers of the mucosal immune environment, but research remains to be done to investigate the role of these and other environmental factors in the development of inappropriate allergic sensitization to foods. Identification of modifiable risk factors would have a significant beneficial impact on this perplexing disease. Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.
There are many open questions on the role of environmental factors, such as dietary factors and microbiota, in the development of food allergy, but data suggest that both have an important modulatory effect on the mucosal immune system. New experimental tools, particularly in the field of genomics and the microbiome, are likely to shed light on factors responsible for the growing clinical problem of food allergy.
The snippet could not be located in the article text. This may be because the snippet appears in a figure legend, contains special characters or spans different sections of the article. Curr Biol. Author manuscript; available in PMC May 6. PMID: Sampson , MD. Tel: ; fax: ; ude. Copyright notice. The publisher's final edited version of this article is available at Curr Biol. See other articles in PMC that cite the published article.
The MHC-peptide complex is recognised by T helper lymphocytes which, in the presence of other co-stimulatory surface molecules and cytokine signaling, become activated and thereby activate B cells binding the same antigen. After activation, antigen-relevant T and B cells proliferate within the lymphoid tissue, but are then exported to the bloodstream where they 're-circulate' until they reach the tissue where the antigen was originally encountered.
Here, they selectively exit the circulation by virtue of the interaction with specific molecules addressins expressed by the local vascular endothelium. The subsequent effector phase of the immune response results in antigen elimination by antibody-mediated phagocytosis and complement activation, and by cell-mediated immunity. The large numbers of antigen-specific cells are normally controlled before they damage normal tissue by populations of T regulatory suppressor cells.
Memory T and B cells are retained to mount the more potent secondary immune response on re-exposure to antigen. Organised, unencapsulated, lymphoid tissue in Peyer's patches. The enterocyte lining of the intestine. Diffuse lymphoid tissue scattered throughout the lamina propria. A wide range of pathogens can potentially infect the intestine, and will tend to provoke a protective immune response.
Pathogen-derived antigen is first taken up, usually via the microfold M cells overlying Peyer's patches, and presented to T cells, initiating an immune response. Antigen-activated lymphocytes 'home' to the lamina propria via mesenteric lymph and blood, through interaction with addressins particularly MAdCAM-1 on the vascular endothelium.
The effector immune response is determined by the nature and amount of antigen and its route of presentation, but may primarily involve:. IgA production and secretion across the epithelium. Classical type 1 response controlled by T helper 1 Th1 lymphocytes: cell-mediated T cell cytotoxicity, IgG and cytokines e. Classical type 2 response controlled by T helper 2 Th2 lymphocytes: IgE-mast cell and eosinophil dominated. Whilst an active immune response to pathogens is not surprising, the more striking feature of the GALT is the ability to selectively recognise and ignore non-pathogenic antigens.
Such antigens may preferentially enter the lamina propria compartment through the enterocytes or lamina propria dendritic cells rather than the Peyer's patches, and activate regulatory and suppressor T cells. Such T-reg cells are characterised by the dominant production of the down-regulatory cytokine IL, whilst T helper 3 Th3 cells predominantly express transforming growth factor TGF-beta.
Both mediate local and systemic unresponsiveness, i. The normal intestinal mucosa has an intact mucosal barrier and an environment dominated by down-regulatory cytokines e. Therefore, most immune responses that develop are tolerance responses, with IgA expression and immune exclusion. Yet the GALT must decide when to generate specific immune responses i. The best hypothesis for how such decisions are made is currently the 'Danger theory', based on the supposition that the type of response depends upon the amount of antigen and the context in which it is presented.
When the mucosa is invaded by a pathogen or toxin, cell damage leads to release of 'danger signals' i. In this altered micro-environment, the immune response generated changes from tolerance to an active immune response. This can either be 'Th1-dominated' e.
If the antigenic challenge to the GALT is contained, the 'danger' signals diminish and the normal 'tolerogenic' environment returns. However, if mucosal barrier remains breached, or the pathogenic insult continues unabated, or there is an inherent immune abnormality, chronic inflammation ensues.
This may also lead to a breakdown in tolerance to harmless environmental antigens food components and commensal bacteria , and food allergy or inflammatory bowel disease may develop. Whilst the presence of either a disrupted mucosal barrier, or immune system dysregulation, or both, are required for development of uncontrolled inflammation, the presence of the specific food antigen or the enteric flora respectively are essential for the expression of these diseases. Ultimately any histopathological changes are similar as there is a final common for the development of intestinal inflammation whatever the cause.
The role of the GALT in the aetiology of spontaneous idiopathic IBD and food allergy in will be discussed in subsequent lectures, but may be associated with one or a combination of:. Altered mucosal permeability. Abnormal antigen presentation. Dysregulation of the mucosal immune system. Any of these mechanisms may depend on genetic susceptibility, and perhaps be damaged by infective agents.
Development of dietary sensitization or intestinal inflammation may follow a primary insult to the GI tract, and then become self-perpetuating. Treatment is aimed at trying to restore the normal mucosal barrier and switch off the inappropriate immune response. The help of Prof. Chronic intestinal inflammation and intestinal disease in dogs. J Vet Intern Med ; Diseases of the Small Intestine. In: Textbook of Veterinary Internal Medicine. Elsevier, Philadelphia , pp Edward J. Welcome, VIN Public! Search this Resource. View main page. Abstracts - Oral. Meloxicam Therapy. Zoonotic GI Parasites.
Abdominal Obesity. Alfaxan Anesthetic. Evaluation of Dirlotapide. Neural Angiostrongyliasis. Suture Pattern Techniques. Contamination Potential of Propofol. Pinaverium Bromide. Allograft Cortical Bone Plate. Exocrine Pancreatic Function. Free-Form External Fixators. Full Thickness Skin Grafting. High Frequency Ultrasound. Insecticide Susceptibility. Endoscopic Findings: Psittacines.
Labrador Elbow Dysplasia. Pancarpal Arthrodesis. Parasitic Infection. Percutaneous Heartworm Removal. Pyruvate Kinase Deficiency. Toxoplasmosis in Lahore-Pakistan. Serum Calcium. Stress-Induced Apoptosis. Thermoplastic Resin. Cardiorespiratory Safety. Hydroxyapatite-Chitosan Composites. Markers of Mammary Tumors. Iodine Contrast Medium. Abstracts - Poster. Cox-2 Selective Drugs. Gastric Lesions. Infusion Rates of Propofol. Modified Fascia Lata Overlap. Tissue Inhibitor of Metalloproteinase Tramadol vs. Degradable Porous Scaffolds. Tissue Doppler Assessment. Toggle Pin Stabilization.
Anesthetic Indices. Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis. Dietary Protein Intake. Green Tea Extract. Inspired Oxygen Fractions. Topical Corticosteroids.
- 4th Edition.
- Mucosal Immunology--Why It's Important - WSAVA - VIN.
- Erementar Gerade Vol. 3!
- Article tools.
Efficacy of New Food. Enamel Matrix Derivative. Endoscopic Placement. Enhanced Osteogenesis. Markers of Testicular Tumors. Vesicoureteral Reflux Induction. Finishing the Pregnancy. Hemodynamic Alterations. Hepatic Small Cell Lymphosarcoma. Canine Parvovirus Strains. Influence of Neutering. Spirulina Platensis. Lymphocyte Deformability. Management of Fractures. Modified Stabilization Method. Molecular Screening. Online Mendelian Inheritance. Progressive Lysosomal Storage Disease.
Percutaneous Hip Denervation. Feline Gastric Helicobacters. Antimicrobial Resistant Bacteria.