SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • lipopolysaccharide;
  • smoker;
  • induced sputum

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Authorship contributions
  8. Competing Interests
  9. REFERENCES

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT

• Neutrophilic airway inflammation is a feature of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Inhaled lipopolysaccharide (LPS) challenge in healthy non-smokers has been used to assess the anti-inflammatory effects of novel drugs on neutrophilic airway inflammation.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

• We performed inhaled LPS challenge in smokers to study an inflammatory response in subjects who more closely resemble COPD patients. Inhaled LPS caused reproducible pulmonary inflammation in smokers, associated with changes in systemic biomarkers. Inhaled LPS appears to be a suitable model for studying exacerbations of COPD.

AIMS Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) is a TLR4 agonist which activates NFκB dependent cytokine production. We investigated LPS inhalation in healthy smokers as a model of COPD bacterial exacerbations. We studied safety, reproducibility, the translocation of the NFκB subunit p65 in sputum cells and changes in systemic biomarkers of inflammation.

METHODS Twelve smokers inhaled 5 and 30 µg LPS and safety was monitored over 24 h. IL-6, CRP, CCl-18, SP-D, CC-16 and β-defensin 2 were measured in serum samples collected at baseline, 4, 8 and 24 h. Sputum was induced at baseline, 6 and 24 h for cell counts and p65 expression. Repeated challenges were performed after a 2 week interval in 10 smokers.

RESULTS LPS inhalation was well tolerated. Significant increases occurred in sputum neutrophil counts with both doses, with a maximum increase of 21.5% at 6 h after 30 µg which was reproducible, ri (intraclass correlation coefficient) = 0.88. LPS increased sputum cell nuclear p65 translocation and phospho-p65 expression. All of the serum biomarkers increased following challenge but with different temporal patterns.

DISCUSSION Inhaled LPS challenge in smokers causes pulmonary and systemic inflammation that involves NFκB activation. This appears to be a suitable model for studying bacterial exacerbations of COPD.


Introduction

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Authorship contributions
  8. Competing Interests
  9. REFERENCES

The bacterial endotoxin lipopolysaccharide (LPS) is recognized by the pathogen receptor Toll like receptor 4 (TLR4), which is expressed on a range of immune and structural cells. TLR4 signalling activates transcription factors such as NFκB that upregulate the production of inflammatory cytokines involved in the innate immune response [1]. LPS has been administered by inhalation into the lungs of healthy subjects to model the innate immune response. This is a safe procedure that causes an increase in airway neutrophil numbers [2–4]. This model has been used to evaluate the pharmacological effects of anti-inflammatory drugs on neutrophilic airway inflammation [5, 6].

Cigarette smokers with normal lung function (‘healthy smokers’) have increased numbers of airway neutrophils compared with non-smokers [7–9]. There is a further increase in airway neutrophil numbers in smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [7, 8]. Exacerbations caused by bacterial infections are a common event in COPD patients and are associated with an acute upregulation of airway neutrophil numbers [10]. The inhalation of LPS in smokers may serve as a relevant model of bacterial COPD exacerbations, provoking acute neutrophilic inflammation on a background of chronic airway inflammation. This model may be useful for studying the mechanisms responsible for inflammation in exacerbations and for evaluating the effects of anti-inflammatory drugs on such events.

LPS challenge has been performed in healthy smokers with airway inflammation assessed by bronchoscopy [11], which is an invasive procedure. Airway inflammation in LPS challenge studies can also be assessed using induced sputum [2, 3], which is less invasive and can be easily repeated to assess the time course of airway inflammation. In order for LPS challenges in healthy smokers to be used in clinical trials in future, it would be important to know the time course of the inflammatory response in the airways and systemic circulation. Furthermore, the reproducibility of the challenge in this population should be determined.

There has been much interest recently in protein biomarkers for COPD that are secreted mainly by the lungs and are measurable in the systemic circulation. Such biomarkers include surfactant protein D (SP-D), CCl-18 (PARC), CC-16 (Clara cell protein) and β-defensin 2. SP-D is produced by type 2 pneumocytes and Clara cells [12] and plays a role in surfactant homeostasis and pulmonary immunity [13]. CCl-18/PARC is produced by macrophages and dendritic cells [14] and has been associated with lung fibrosis and acute coronary syndromes [15, 16]. SP-D and CCl-18/PARC levels are increased in the serum of COPD patients compared with controls [17, 18]. CC-16 is produced by Clara cells and functions as a protective immunosuppressant during lung injury. Serum CC-16 concentrations show an acute increase after the inhalation of LPS (and ozone) in healthy subjects [19, 20]. Interestingly, serum and induced sputum CC-16 concentrations are reduced in COPD patients compared with controls [21, 22]. β-defensin 2 is a neutrophil chemo-attractant produced by lung epithelial cells that is involved in host innate immune defence [23]. There are conflicting reports of β-defensin 2 levels in the lungs of COPD patients, as increased levels have been observed in broncho-alveolar lavage from COPD patients compared with controls, but decreased levels in the induced sputum of COPD patients compared with controls [22, 24].

This paper reports the effects of LPS challenges in healthy smokers as a potential model of bacterial exacerbations in COPD patients. The novelty of this study is that we measured the time course of airway and systemic inflammation and the reproducibility of the challenge. Airway inflammation was assessed by sputum cell counts and NFκB activation. Biomarkers of inflammation in the circulation including SP-D, CCl-18/PARC, CC-16 and β-defensin 2 were measured.

Methods

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Authorship contributions
  8. Competing Interests
  9. REFERENCES

Subjects

Twenty-two current smokers (11 males and 11 females) with no history of respiratory disease and normal pulmonary function participated. Their mean age was 53.4 years (SD 6.4 years) and mean smoking history 34.6 pack years (SD 19.0 years). All the subjects were current smokers with >10 pack year history. We also used historical induced sputum and lung function data from 10 healthy non-smokers who had previously undergone LPS challenge in our laboratory. Written informed consent was obtained and the study was approved by the local research ethics committee (Greater Manchester South, 09/H1004/8).

Study design

Two studies were performed. The safety and effects of inhaled LPS on airway and systemic inflammation were assessed in study 1, while study 2 investigated the reproducibility of inhaled LPS challenges. In study 1, 12 subjects underwent baseline sputum induction, and were administered 5 µg inhaled LPS (Escherichia coli serotype O26:B6, Sigma-Aldrich, UK reconstituted in 0.9% w/v saline and delivered a Mefar dosimeter; Markos Mefar, Bresica, Italy) after at least 48 h. Sputum induction was performed at 6 and 24 h post LPS challenge. Subjects returned after a 2 week period for a further LPS challenge with 30 µg with sputum inductions at 6 and 24 h. Pulse, blood pressure, oxygen saturations, temperature and spirometry (using Vitalograph, Buckinghamshire, UK) were performed pre LPS challenges and every hour for 6 h post LPS challenge. All these measurements, except spirometry, were continued until 8 h post LPS challenge. Blood samples for biomarkers were collected at pre-challenge (baseline), 4, 8 and 24 h post LPS challenge. Subjects were required to refrain from smoking for 2 h before LPS challenges or sputum induction, and for 8 h post LPS challenges.

Ten healthy smokers participated in study 2. Baseline sputum induction was performed, followed by inhalation of LPS 30 µg after an interval of at least 48 h. Sputum induction was performed at 6 h post LPS. The baseline sputum followed by LPS challenge was repeated after 2 weeks. Subjects were required to refrain from smoking for 2 h before LPS challenges or baseline sputum induction and for 6 h post LPS challenges.

Historical data from 10 healthy non-smokers with normal pulmonary function who had undergone LPS challenge using 30 µg were used. Induced sputum samples were obtained at 6 and 24 h post LPS challenge.

Induced sputum

Sputum was induced and dithiothreitol (DTT) processed using established methods [25]. The supernatant was stored at −80°C for later analysis. Cytospin preparations were made (Cytospin 4, Shandon, Runcorn, UK) and stained with Rapi-diff (Triangle, Skelmersdale, UK). Four hundred non-squamous cells were counted and differential cell counts obtained as percentage of total non-squamous cells. Cell viability was analyzed by trypan blue exclusion.

P65 immunocytochemistry

NFκB activation was assessed by calculating the nuclear translocation of p65 and phospho-p65 in sputum cells. Cytospins were incubated in 0.2% v/v Triton X-100 (Sigma, UK) followed by 15 mm glycine for cell permeabilization. Slides were incubated in Image-IT FX signal enhancer (Invitrogen, Paisley, UK) followed by PGS (1% PBS, 1% w/v gelatine and 0.2% w/v saponin) and incubated with anti-NFκB (p65 1/50 in PGS, Lab Vision, Runcorn, UK) or anti-phospho-NFκB p65 (ser536, Cell Signalling, Hitchen, UK). Following washing, slides were incubated with Alexa 488 conjugated anti-rabbit secondary antibody (Invitrogen), counterstained with propidium iodide and mounted in citifluor (Citifluor Ltd, London, UK).

P65 expression was examined (×200 magnification) by confocal microscopy (LAS SP5, Leica Microsystems, Milton Keynes, UK). Green nuclear and cytoplasmic fluorescence intensities normalized for numbers of cells were measured using image analysis software (Leica Microsystems), running a customized macro.

Measurement of serum biomarkers

Serum was assayed using the following ELISA kits according to manufacturers instructions: IL-6 (Quantinkine hs-IL-6; R&D Systems, Abingdon, UK), β-defensin-2 (Phoenix Pharmaceuticals, Burlingame, USA), CC-16 (Biovendor, Modrice, Czech Republic), CCl-18/PARC (Duo set kit; R&D Systems, Abingdon, UK), SP-D (Biovendor, Modrice, Czech Republic). Serum C-reactive protein (CRP) was measured by high sensitivity particle enhanced immunonephelometry (Cardiophase; BN systems, Dade Behring, Newark, USA) with a lower limit of detection of 0.175 mg l−1.

Data analysis

Sputum differential neutrophil and macrophage counts were normally distributed and so differences pre and post LPS inhalation were compared using paired t-tests. Other sputum cell counts were non-parametric and analyzed using Wilcoxon tests. Immunocytochemistry data were normally distributed; differences pre and post LPS were compared using unpaired t-tests as evaluable slides for all subjects at each time-point were not available. Paired t-tests were used for the subset of patients where all samples were available. Comparisons between healthy smokers and healthy non-smokers were performed using unpaired t-tests. SP-D and CC-16 are presented as means, while hs-CRP, CCl-18/PARC, IL-6 and β-defensin-2 are presented as geometric means. The effects of LPS challenge were assessed using paired t-tests. Safety data were evaluated using one way anova with Bonferroni correction. The reproducibility of LPS challenges was analyzed using Bland Altman plots and intraclass correlation coefficient (ri) for the increase in sputum neutrophil percentage. The differences between baseline sputum cell counts were assessed using paired Student's t-tests. Power calculations were performed using the within subject standard deviation of the increase in sputum neutrophil percentage after repeated challenges.

Results

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Authorship contributions
  8. Competing Interests
  9. REFERENCES

Study 1: effects of 5 and 30 µg LPS

Safety  Only minor symptoms such as headache (n= 1) and rhinorrhea (n= 1) were observed following inhalation of either 5 or 30 µg LPS, which resolved within 24 h. Figure 1 shows an increase in temperature and pulse rate within 8 h which returned to normal by 24 h. Blood pressure did not change. There was a significant decrease in FEV1. The mean maximal decrease was 8.2% with 5 µg and 14.0% with 30 µg. FEV1 returned to normal by 24 h. There was a similar mean maximal decrease in healthy non smokers (11.9%, P= 0.6) following 30 µg LPS. Additionally, analysis of the area under the curve (AUC) for the FEV1 decrease from 0–6 h showed no difference (P= 0.5) between healthy smokers and healthy non-smokers (38.2 FEV1 % h vs. 29.9 FEV1 % h respectively).

image

Figure 1. Safety measures following challenge with LPS 5 or 30 µg. (A) shows the change in body temperature, (B) shows the change in pulse rate and (C) shows the percentage fall in FEV1. ● (5 µg) and ▴ (30 µg) correspond to LPS dose. Data points are mean and error bars represent SEM. + and * indicate P < 0.05 compared with baseline (pre LPS) for 5 and 30 µg doses, respectively

Download figure to PowerPoint

Sputum cell counts  Inhaled LPS increased sputum neutrophil counts (see Table 1 and Figure 2 for individual data). The mean percentage of neutrophils increased by 18.8% and 8.9% at 6 and 24 h respectively, after inhalation of 5 µg LPS. The increases at 6 and 24 h after 30 µg LPS were 21.7% and 7.6% respectively. These data show greater increases at 6 h compared with 24 h, which was statistically significant at the 30 µg dose (P < 0.01). The absolute neutrophil count increased 4.5 and 5.2 fold over baseline at 6 and 24 h, respectively, after 5 µg LPS, and 9.9 and 3.5 fold at 6 and 24 h, respectively, after 30 µg LPS. The greatest fold change was observed after 30 µg LPS at 6 h (P < 0.05 for comparisons with other time points at both LPS doses). There was a decrease in the percentage of macrophages and no significant change in other cells types after LPS challenges.

Table 1. Sputum cell counts following LPS inhalation
  Baseline 5 µg LPS 30 µg LPS
6 h 24 h 6 h 24 h
  1. Data are presented as median (range). Results at different time points were compared against baseline using the Wilcoxon matched pair test. *Indicates P≤ 0.05. †Data are presented as mean (SD) and results at different time points compared with baseline using paired t-test.

Sputum weight (g) 1.2 (0.4−5.9)1.5 (0.3–6.1)2.3 (0.5–7.0)2.1 (0.2–11.5)1.7 (0.2–6.1)
Total cells (×106) 2.7 (1.4–24.1)11.5 (2.0–43.3)15.4 (2.4−66.8)*23.4 (2.8−41.1)*10.0 (2.0−47.0)*
Absolute neutrophil count (×106)1.9 (0.6–18.4)8.4 (1.7–40.1)*9.7 (1.5−63.0)*18.5 (2.2–37.5)*6.5 (1.0–38.9)*
Absolute macrophage count (×106)1.2 (0.2−4.4)2.2 (0.2–7.9)3.0 (0.8–12.4)*2.7 (0.3–6.4)2.3 (0.3−21.9)
Neutrophils (%) 62.0 (21.9)80.8 (11.9)*70.9 (15.8)*83.7 (7.0)*69.6 (18.0)*
Macrophage (%) 31.8 (20.2)16.0 (9.7)*25.2 (14.7)13.1 (5.1)*26.3 (16.5)
Eosinophils (%) 0.9 (0–16.5)0.9 (0–3.5)1.3 (0.25–6.5)0.8 (0–2.3)1.3 (0–5.3.0)
Lymphocyte (%) 0.5 (0–1.3)0.4 (0–1.5)0.5 (0–1.8)0.5 (0–2.8)0.3 (0–1.0)
Epithelial cells (%) 1.1 (0–10)0.8 (0–5.3)0.3 (0–4.5)1.5 (0–5.0)1.9 (0–6.0)
image

Figure 2. Sputum neutrophil counts following challenge with LPS 5 or 30 µg. Individual data and mean values (horizontal lines) are shown. * indicates P≤ 0.05; ** indicates P≤ 0.001

Download figure to PowerPoint

In comparison, in healthy non-smokers the mean baseline neutrophil percentage was 44.5% which increased to 77.8% and 71.0% at 6 and 24 h post LPS, respectively. These mean increases of 33.3% and 26.5% were greater than observed in healthy smokers (P= 0.18 and P= 0.02, respectively).

p65 immunohistochemistry  Figure 3 shows the data from all available samples. P65 was expressed in the nuclei and cytoplasm of both neutrophils and macrophages at baseline. LPS inhalation increased the nuclear translocation of p65 in both macrophages and neutrophils (Figure 3A and B). The intensity of nuclear phospho-p65 staining was significantly increased in macrophages 24 h post 30 µg LPS inhalation with a trend to significance post 5 µg LPS inhalation (Figure 3C). Neutrophils did not stain with phospho-p65. In the subset of patients who had paired samples (pre and post LPS challenge), similar numerical differences were observed to those presented in Figure 3, but statistical significance (P < 0.05) was only reached for phospho-p65 intensity due to the reduction in sample size which varied from n= 5 to n= 9 depending on the time point and LPS dose.

image

Figure 3. Nuclear translocation of p65 following challenge with LPS 5 or 30 µg. (A) shows the mean ratio of p65 between the nucleus and cytoplasm (p65 N : C) in sputum macrophages. (B) shows the p65 N : C ratio in sputum neutrophils. (C) shows the mean nuclear phospho-p65 staining intensity in macrophages following LPS challenge. Error bars represent SEM. * indicates P≤ 0.05, NS not significant

Download figure to PowerPoint

Serum biomarkers  The time profiles of the serum biomarkers following LPS inhalation are shown in Figure 4. LPS 30 µg had a greater effect on these biomarkers, in particular CRP and IL-6. IL-6, CC-16 and β-defensin-2 were increased at 4 h. These three proteins subsequently showed different patterns of regulation. β-defensin-2 levels were persistently raised, IL-6 returned to baseline levels by 24 h, whilst CC-16 levels were significantly below baseline at 24 h. Following LPS inhalation, CRP, SP-D and CCl-18/PARC all showed a delayed increase, with CRP being increased at 8 and 24 h, and SP-D and CCl-18/PARC being increased at 24 h only.

image

Figure 4. Time profiles of systemic biomarker levels following challenge with LPS 5 or 30 µg. The systemic responses following inhalation of 5 µg or 30 µg LPS are shown IL-6 (pg/ml), CRP (mg/ml), CCL-18/PARC (ng/ml), CC-16 (ng/ml), SP-D (ng/ml) and β-Defensin-2 (pg/ml) levels are shown in (a)–(f) respectively. Grey columns represent the biomarker levels following inhalation of 5 µg LPS and the black columns represent the biomarker levels following 30 µg LPS. Data are means (CC-16, SP-D) or geometric means (IL-6, CRP, CCL-18/PARC, β-Defensin-2) and error bars represent SEM. * indicates P ≤ 0.05

Download figure to PowerPoint

Study 2: reproducibility of LPS challenge

Repeated challenges were undertaken using 30 µg of LPS, as this produced greater effects than 5 µg in study 1. Mean sputum cell count data are shown in Table 2 and the Bland−Altman plot for the increase in neutrophil percentage are shown in Figure 5. The mean difference was 1.2% (within subject SD 10.0%). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ri) was 0.88, indicating very good reproducibility. Power calculations using the within subject SD were performed. Sample sizes of n= 5, 7 and 20 are required to demonstrate 75%, 50% and 25% reductions of the increase in percentage neutrophils with 80% power in a crossover study design. There were no significant differences between differential cell counts at baseline and at 2 weeks post LPS challenge.

Table 2. Study 2: Repeated LPS challenges: sputum cell counts
Cell type (%) First challenge Second challenge
B1 P1 B1 vs. P1 P value B2 P2 B2 vs. P2 P value
  1. B1: First baseline; B2: Second baseline; P1: 6 h post LPS (following B1); P2: 6 h post LPS (following B2). Parametric data (†) are presented as mean (SD) and were compared using a paired t-test. Non-parametric data are presented as median (range) and were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. NS indicates that P value > 0.05.

Neutrophils 58.6 (19.2)86.3 (3.9)0.00260.7 (20.8)87.1 (5.4)0.002
Macrophages 40.0 (19.3)13.2 (3.9)0.00237.4 (21.1)12.4 (5.3)0.003
Eosinophils 0.38 (0.0–0.8)0.0 (0.0–0.8)ns0.30 (0.0–4.0)0.0 (0.0–0.8)NS
Lymphocytes 0.13 (0.0–0.8)0.13 (0.0–0.8)ns0.0 (0.0–0.8)0.20 (0.0–0.8)NS
Epithelial cells 0.63 (0.0–2.8)0.0 (0.0–0.5)0.0140.0 (0.0–6.0)0.0 (0.0–0.5)NS
image

Figure 5. Bland−Altman plot to demonstrate the agreement between two LPS challenges. Individual data points represent the mean neutrophil increase of the two challenges (x-axis) against the difference between the two challenges (y-axis). Dotted lines indicate the upper and lower 95% limits of agreement

Download figure to PowerPoint

Discussion

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Authorship contributions
  8. Competing Interests
  9. REFERENCES

Inhaled LPS in healthy smokers increases airway neutrophil numbers and NFκB activation. This challenge was reproducible and well tolerated. Inhaled LPS increased serum concentrations of IL-6, CRP, CC-16, β-defensin-2, CCl-18/PARC and SP-D, but with different time profiles observed for these proteins as IL-6, CC-16 and β-defensin-2 were upregulated at 4 h, whilst CRP, CCl-18 and SP-D showed later upregulation. These effects of inhaled LPS on both pulmonary and systemic inflammation in smokers provide a model that may be useful for investigating the mechanisms involved in bacterial exacerbations of COPD or the effects of anti-inflammatory drugs on such events. Power calculations are presented here for such studies of anti-inflammatory drugs.

The percentage neutrophil counts showed similar increases at 6 h after both LPS doses, with smaller increases at 24 h. In contrast, there was a greater fold change increase in absolute neutrophil cell count at 6 h with the 30 µg dose (9.9 fold) compared with the 5 µg dose (4.5 fold). This suggests that the neutrophil percentage reaches a plateau at approximately 85% in smokers after LPS challenge, but that the absolute neutrophil count shows a different dose−response curve that does not plateau after 5 µg LPS. The 30 µg dose also caused greater effects than the 5 µg dose on serum biomarkers. There was evidence of greater duration of inflammation of the 5 µg LPS dose on sputum absolute cell counts at 24 h compared with the higher LPS dose, although this difference between doses at 24 h was not observed for neutrophil percentage. This might suggest that lower doses of LPS cause a more prolonged time course of inflammation.

The effects of repeated LPS challenges on neutrophil counts were very reproducible, with a mean difference between challenges of only 1.2%. LPS and ozone challenges have been used to investigate the effects of drugs on acute neutrophilic inflammation in healthy subjects [5, 6, 26]. The advantage of the model described in the current study is that healthy smokers have a background of chronic airway inflammation [7, 8] and so the LPS challenge may more closely resemble the acute neutrophilic inflammation that occurs during exacerbations in COPD patients [10]. The power calculations using the within subject SD show that well powered studies can be performed using this reproducible model in limited numbers of subjects, e.g. 20 subjects are required to demonstrate 25% inhibition of the increase in sputum neutrophil percentage with 80% power.

The changes in neutrophil counts in healthy non-smokers were greater than those observed in healthy smokers because of the lower pre LPS baseline neutrophil percentage in healthy non-smokers. Previous LPS challenge studies have used doses ranging from 0.5 to 300 µg [2–4, 27–30], with more side effects observed using higher doses. The doses of 5 and 30 µg of LPS in the current study were well tolerated, and we would advise that higher doses in healthy smokers are not needed.

Environmental LPS exposure concentrations have been reported up to 10 000 endotoxin units (EU)/m3[31] although ambient levels are usually below 1000 EU/m3[32–34]. 1 EU is equivalent to approximately 0.1 ng LPS [35] and so 1000 EU is equivalent to 0.1 µg LPS. Our LPS challenge method with 5 and 30 µg was therefore higher than the level of exposure that would usually occur in the environment [31–34], but may represent an appropriate level during bacterial infections. Certainly, the LPS doses that we used are in accordance with previous publications [3, 11].

TLR4 signalling activates the NFκB pathway [1]. We observed an increase in p65 nuclear translocation and phospho-p65 expression in sputum cells after LPS challenge. P65 displayed high levels of nuclear staining in pre-LPS sputum samples, giving a smaller ‘window’ to observe a change in the nucleus : cytoplasm ratio after LPS challenge. However, there was an increase in phospho-p65 staining intensity of >20% after LPS challenge, which clearly demonstrated p65 activation. Previous studies have shown that NFκB activation is increased in the airways of COPD patients in the stable state and in sputum macrophages during exacerbations [36, 37] Consequently, inhibitors of the NFκB pathway, such as IKK2 inhibitors, are being developed for the treatment of COPD [38, 39]. We could not detect phospho-p65 in sputum neutrophils, although we could detect total p65. This suggests that there was a technical issue with the sensitivity of phospho-p65 staining in sputum neutrophils, rather than an absence of p65 in neutrophils. Nevertheless, our findings demonstrate that NFκB activation is involved in the inflammatory response of healthy smokers due to inhaled LPS. The effects of NFκB inhibitors could therefore be evaluated rapidly in early phase studies using this challenge model.

We studied the serum concentrations of four proteins that are thought to be predominantly secreted by the lungs; SP-D, CCl-18/PARC, CC-16 and β-defensin-2. Serum concentrations of SP-D and CCl-18/PARC are increased in COPD patients [17, 18] and we have shown that acute lung inflammation in smokers causes upregulation of both of these proteins at 24 h. In contrast, there was a more rapid increase in β-defensin-2 concentrations. β-defensin-2 is an endogenous TLR ligand [40] and it is possible that a positive feedback loop exists after LPS inhalation to promote the rapid production of this protein. Previous reports of β-defensin-2 concentrations in the lungs of COPD patients are conflicting, and it is possible that the sampling techniques may influence these results, as increased concentrations were observed in broncho-alveolar lavage but decreased concentrations in induced sputum [22, 24].

LPS inhalation in healthy non-smokers increases CC-16 concentrations at 6 h, returning to normal at 24 h [19]. We observed a similar time profile, but CC-16 concentrations were below baseline at 24 h. This suggests differential regulation of CC-16 in smokers compared with non-smokers. Smokers and COPD patients have lower serum and induced sputum CC-16 concentrations compared with non-smoking controls [21, 22], and our results indicate that acute lung inflammation caused by TLR4 signalling in smokers is a mechanism by which serum CC-16 concentrations are downregulated.

Systemic IL-6 and CRP concentrations are increased after LPS challenges in non-smokers [3, 27, 28, 41] and we observed similar findings in smokers. IL-6 regulates CRP production by the liver [42], and our study suggests that IL-6 promotes a later increase in CRP concentrations after LPS challenge. Serum IL-6 and CRP concentrations are known to increase after COPD exacerbations [43, 44] and our findings suggest a temporal course for the relative induction of these proteins during such events. Indeed, it appears that inhaled LPS challenge in healthy smokers causes an early increase in sputum neutrophils and serum IL-6, CC-16 and β-defensin-2, followed by a later increase in NFκB activation in airway cells coupled with increased serum concentrations of CRP, SP-D and CCl-18/PARC.

In conclusion, LPS challenges in healthy smokers upregulated neutrophilic airway inflammation and NFκB signalling. These pulmonary effects were accompanied by changes in systemic IL-6, CRP, CC-16, β-defensin-2, SP-D and CCl-18/PARC concentrations. We suggest that LPS challenge in healthy smokers can be used as a model of COPD exacerbations, both to study the mechanisms involved in pulmonary and systemic inflammation and to evaluate the effects of anti-inflammatory drugs.

Authorship contributions

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Authorship contributions
  8. Competing Interests
  9. REFERENCES

Participated in research design: Aul, Armstrong, Lomas, Miller, Singh

Conducted experiments: Aul, Armstrong, Duviox, Hayes, Jagger

Performed data analysis: Aul, Duviox, Hayes, Jagger

Wrote or contributed to the writing of the manuscript: Aul, Jagger, Lomas, Miller, Singh

Guarantor: Singh

Competing Interests

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Authorship contributions
  8. Competing Interests
  9. REFERENCES

DS has received sponsorship to attend international meetings, honoraria for lecturing or attending advisory boards and research grants from various pharmaceutical companies including AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Almirall, Forest, Pfizer, UCB, Novartis, and Cipla. DL has received an educational grant and fees for speaking and acts as a consultant for GlaxoSmithKline. BH and BM are employees of GSK. BH owns GSK stock. BM owns GSK stock and stock options. BM's spouse is also an employee of GSK and owns GSK stock and stock options. All other authors have no competing interests to declare.

REFERENCES

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Discussion
  7. Authorship contributions
  8. Competing Interests
  9. REFERENCES
  • 1
    Akira S, Uematsu S, Takeuchi O. Pathogen recognition and innate immunity. Cell 2006; 124: 783801.
  • 2
    Nightingale JA, Rogers DF, Hart LA, Kharitonov SA, Chung KF, Barnes PJ. Effect of inhaled endotoxin on induced sputum in normal, atopic, and atopic asthmatic subjects. Thorax 1998; 53: 56371.
  • 3
    Michel O, Nagy AM, Schroeven M, Duchateau J, Neve J, Fondu P, Sergysels R. Dose-response relationship to inhaled endotoxin in normal subjects. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997; 156: 115764.
  • 4
    Sandstrom T, Bjermer L, Rylander R. Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) inhalation in healthy subjects increases neutrophils, lymphocytes and fibronectin levels in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. Eur Respir J 1992; 5: 9926.
  • 5
    Maris NA, de Vos AF, Dessing MC, Spek CA, Lutter R, Jansen HM, van der Zee JS, Bresser P, van der Poll T. Antiinflammatory effects of salmeterol after inhalation of lipopolysaccharide by healthy volunteers. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005; 172: 87884.
  • 6
    Michel O, Dentener M, Cataldo D, Cantinieaux B, Vertongen F, Delvaux C, Murdoch RD. Evaluation of oral corticosteroids and phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor on the acute inflammation induced by inhaled lipopolysaccharide in human. Pulm Pharmacol Ther 2007; 20: 67683.
  • 7
    Lofdahl JM, Wahlstrom J, Skold CM. Different inflammatory cell pattern and macrophage phenotype in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, smokers and non-smokers. Clin Exp Immunol 2006; 145: 42837.
  • 8
    Isajevs S, Taivans I, Svirina D, Strazda G, Kopeika U. Patterns of inflammatory responses in large and small airways in smokers with and without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Respiration 2011; 81: 36271.
  • 9
    Borrill ZL, Roy K, Vessey RS, Woodcock AA, Singh D. Non-invasive biomarkers and pulmonary function in smokers. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2008; 3: 17183.
  • 10
    Papi A, Bellettato CM, Braccioni F, Romagnoli M, Casolari P, Caramori G, Fabbri LM, Johnston SL. Infections and airway inflammation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease severe exacerbations. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006; 173: 111421.
  • 11
    Wesselius LJ, Nelson ME, Bailey K, O’Brien-Ladner AR. Rapid lung cytokine accumulation and neutrophil recruitment after lipopolysaccharide inhalation by cigarette smokers and nonsmokers. J Lab Clin Med 1997; 129: 10614.
  • 12
    Mori K, Kurihara N, Hayashida S, Tanaka M, Ikeda K. The intrauterine expression of surfactant protein D in the terminal airways of human fetuses compared with surfactant protein A. Eur J Pediatr 2002; 161: 4314.
  • 13
    Kishore U, Greenhough TJ, Waters P, Shrive AK, Ghai R, Kamran MF, Bernal AL, Reid KB, Madam T, Chakraborty T. Surfactant proteins SP-A and SP-D: structure, function and receptors. Mol Immunol 2006; 43: 1293315.
  • 14
    Schutyser E, Richmond A, Van Damme J. Involvement of CC chemokine ligand 18 (CCL18) in normal and pathological processes. J Leukoc Biol 2005; 78: 1426.
  • 15
    Kraaijeveld AO, de Jager SC, De Jager WJ, Prakken BJ, McColl SR, Haspels I, Putter H, van Berkel TJ, Nagelkerken L, Jukema JW, Biessen EA. CC chemokine ligand-5 (CCL5/RANTES) and CC chemokine ligand-18 (CCL18/PARC) are specific markers of refractory unstable angina pectoris and are transiently raised during severe ischemic symptoms. Circulation 2007; 116: 193141.
  • 16
    Atamas SP, Luzina IG, Choi J, Tsymbalyuk N, Carbonetti NH, Singh IS, Trojanowska M, Jimenez SA, White B. Pulmonary and activation-regulated chemokine stimulates collagen production in lung fibroblasts. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 2003; 29: 7439.
  • 17
    Lomas DA, Silverman EK, Edwards LD, Locantore NW, Miller BE, Horstman DH, Tal-Singer R, Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate Endpoints study investigators. Serum surfactant protein D is steroid sensitive and associated with exacerbations of COPD. Eur Respir J 2009; 34: 95102.
  • 18
    Sin DD, Miller B, Duvoix A, Man SF, Zhang X, Silverman EK, Connett JE, Anthonisen NA, Wise RA, Tashkin D, Celli BR, Edwards LD, Locantore N, Macnee W, Tal-Singer R, Lomas DA, ECLIPSE investigators. Serum PARC/CCL-18 Concentrations and Health Outcomes in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011; 183: 118792
  • 19
    Michel O, Murdoch R, Bernard A. Inhaled LPS induces blood release of Clara cell specific protein (CC16) in human beings. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2005; 115: 11437.
  • 20
    Blomberg A, Mudway I, Svensson M, Hagenbjork-Gustafsson A, Thomasson L, Helleday R, Dumont X, Forsberg B, Nordberg G, Bernard A. Clara cell protein as a biomarker for ozone-induced lung injury in humans. Eur Respir J 2003; 22: 8838.
  • 21
    Lomas DA, Silverman EK, Edwards LD, Miller BE, Coxson HO, Tal-Singer R. Evaluation of serum CC-16 as a biomarker for COPD in the ECLIPSE cohort. Thorax 2008; 63: 105863.
  • 22
    Tsoumakidou M, Bouloukaki I, Thimaki K, Tzanakis N, Siafakas NM. Innate immunity proteins in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Exp Lung Res 2010; 36: 37380.
  • 23
    Bals R, Wang X, Wu Z, Freeman T, Bafna V, Zasloff M, Wilson JM. Human beta-defensin 2 is a salt-sensitive peptide antibiotic expressed in human lung. J Clin Invest 1998; 102: 87480.
  • 24
    Pace E, Giarratano A, Ferraro M, Bruno A, Siena L, Mangione S, Johnson M, Giomarkai M. TLR4 upregulation underpins airway neutrophilia in smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and acute respiratory failure. Hum Immunol 2011; 72: 5462.
  • 25
    Pizzichini E, Pizzichini MM, Efthimiadis A, Evans S, Morris MM, Squillace D, Gleich GJ, Dolovich J, Hargreave FE. Indices of airway inflammation in induced sputum: reproducibility and validity of cell and fluid-phase measurements. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1996; 154: 30817.
  • 26
    Holz O, Khalilieh S, Ludwig-Sengpiel A, Watz H, Stryszak P, Soni P, Tsai M, Sadeh J, Magnussen H. SCH527123, a novel CXCR2 antagonist, inhibits ozone-induced neutrophilia in healthy subjects. Eur Respir J 2010; 35: 56470.
  • 27
    Michel O, Duchateau J, Plat G, Cantinieaux B, Hotimsky A, Gerain J, Sergysels R. Blood inflammatory response to inhaled endotoxin in normal subjects. Clin Exp Allergy 1995; 25: 739.
  • 28
    Kitz R, Rose MA, Borgmann A, Schubert R, Zielen S. Systemic and bronchial inflammation following LPS inhalation in asthmatic and healthy subjects. J Endotoxin Res 2006; 12: 36774.
  • 29
    Michel O, Duchateau J, Sergysels R. Effect of inhaled endotoxin on bronchial reactivity in asthmatic and normal subjects. J Appl Physiol 1989; 66: 105964.
  • 30
    Rylander R, Bake B, Fischer JJ, Helander IM. Pulmonary function and symptoms after inhalation of endotoxin. Am Rev Respir Dis 1989; 140: 9816.
  • 31
    Smit LA, Heederik D, Doekes G, Blom C, van Zweden I, Wouters IM. Exposure-response analysis of allergy and respiratory symptoms in endotoxin-exposed adults. Eur Respir J 2008; 31: 12418.
  • 32
    Traversi D, Alessandria L, Schiliro T, Gilli G. Size-fractionated PM10 monitoring in relation to the contribution of endotoxins in different polluted areas. Atmospheric Environment 2011; 45: 351521.
  • 33
    Mueller-Anneling L, Avol E, Peters JM, Thorne PS. Ambient endotoxin concentrations in PM10 from Southern California. Environ Health Perspect 2004; 112: 5838.
  • 34
    Semple S, Devakumar D, Fullerton DG, Thorne PS, Metwali N, Costello A, Gordon SB, Manandhar DS, Ayres JG. Airborne endotoxin concentrations in homes burning biomass fuel. Environ Health Perspect 2010; 118: 98891.
  • 35
    Lane SR, Nicholls PJ, Sewell RD. The measurement and health impact of endotoxin contamination in organic dusts from multiple sources: focus on the cotton industry. Inhal Toxicol 2004; 16: 21729.
  • 36
    Brown V, Elborn JS, Bradley J, Ennis M. Dysregulated apoptosis and NFkappaB expression in COPD subjects. Respir Res 2009; 10: 24.
  • 37
    Caramori G, Romagnoli M, Casolari P, Bellettato C, Casoni G, Boschetto P, Chung KF, Barnes PJ, Adcock IM, Ciaccia A, Fabbri LM, Papi A. Nuclear localisation of p65 in sputum macrophages but not in sputum neutrophils during COPD exacerbations. Thorax 2003; 58: 34851.
  • 38
    Sommers CD, Thompson JM, Guzova JA, Bonar SL, Rader RK, Mathialagan S, Venkatraman N, Holway VW, Kahn LE, Hu G, Garner DS, Huang HC, Chiang PC, Schindler JF, Hu Y, Meyer DM, Kishore NN. Novel tight-binding inhibitory factor-kappaB kinase (IKK-2) inhibitors demonstrate target-specific anti-inflammatory activities in cellular assays and following oral and local delivery in an in vivo model of airway inflammation. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2009; 330: 37788.
  • 39
    Rajendrasozhan S, Hwang JW, Yao H, Kishore N, Rahman I. Anti-inflammatory effect of a selective IkappaB kinase-beta inhibitor in rat lung in response to LPS and cigarette smoke. Pulm Pharmacol Ther 2010; 23: 17281.
  • 40
    Tsutsumi-Ishii Y, Nagaoka I. Modulation of human beta-defensin-2 transcription in pulmonary epithelial cells by lipopolysaccharide-stimulated mononuclear phagocytes via proinflammatory cytokine production. J Immunol 2003; 170: 422636.
  • 41
    O’Grady NP, Preas HL, Pugin J, Fiuza C, Tropea M, Reda D, Banks SM, Suffredini AF. Local inflammatory responses following bronchial endotoxin instillation in humans. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001; 163: 15918.
  • 42
    Kishimoto T. The biology of interleukin-6. Blood 1989; 74: 110.
  • 43
    Perera WR, Hurst JR, Wilkinson TM, Sapsford RJ, Mullerova H, Donaldson GC, Wedzicha JA. Inflammatory changes, recovery and recurrence at COPD exacerbation. Eur Respir J 2007; 29: 52734.
  • 44
    Pinto-Plata VM, Livnat G, Girish M, Cabral H, Masdin P, Linacre P, Dew R, Kenney L, Celli BR. Systemic cytokines, clinical and physiological changes in patients hospitalized for exacerbation of COPD. Chest 2007; 131: 3743.