Influenza-related complications continue to be a major cause of mortality worldwide. Due to unclear mechanisms, a substantial number of influenza-related deaths result from bacterial superinfections, particularly secondary pneumococcal pneumonia. Here, we report what we believe to be a novel mechanism by which influenza-induced type I IFNs sensitize hosts to secondary bacterial infections. Influenza-infected mice deficient for type I IFN-α/β receptor signaling (Ifnar–/– mice) had improved survival and clearance of secondary Streptococcus pneumoniae infection from the lungs and blood, as compared with similarly infected wild-type animals. The less effective response in wild-type mice seemed to be attributable to impaired production of neutrophil chemoattractants KC (also known as Cxcl1) and Mip2 (also known as Cxcl2) following secondary challenge with S. pneumoniae. This resulted in inadequate neutrophil responses during the early phase of host defense against secondary bacterial infection. Indeed, influenza-infected wild-type mice cleared secondary pneumococcal pneumonia after pulmonary administration of exogenous KC and Mip2, whereas neutralization of Cxcr2, the common receptor for KC and Mip2, reversed the protective phenotype observed in Ifnar–/– mice. These data may underscore the importance of the type I IFN inhibitory pathway on CXC chemokine production. Collectively, these findings highlight what we believe to be a novel mechanism by which the antiviral response to influenza sensitizes hosts to secondary bacterial pneumonia.
Arash Shahangian, Edward K. Chow, Xiaoli Tian, Jason R. Kang, Amir Ghaffari, Su Y. Liu, John A. Belperio, Genhong Cheng, Jane C. Deng
Usage data is cumulative from October 2018 through October 2019.
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.