US20210386819A1 - Bioengineered lactobacillus probiotics and the uses thereof - Google Patents
Bioengineered lactobacillus probiotics and the uses thereof Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20210386819A1 US20210386819A1 US17/401,492 US202117401492A US2021386819A1 US 20210386819 A1 US20210386819 A1 US 20210386819A1 US 202117401492 A US202117401492 A US 202117401492A US 2021386819 A1 US2021386819 A1 US 2021386819A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- mice
- blp
- animal
- monocytogenes
- lap
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Pending
Links
- 239000006041 probiotic Substances 0.000 title claims abstract description 165
- 235000018291 probiotics Nutrition 0.000 title claims abstract description 165
- 241000186660 Lactobacillus Species 0.000 title description 14
- 229940039696 lactobacillus Drugs 0.000 title description 7
- 241001465754 Metazoa Species 0.000 claims abstract description 101
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 31
- 230000036541 health Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 24
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 24
- 235000013372 meat Nutrition 0.000 claims abstract description 19
- 239000006052 feed supplement Substances 0.000 claims abstract description 16
- 230000004968 inflammatory condition Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 16
- 239000003937 drug carrier Substances 0.000 claims abstract description 10
- 239000000546 pharmaceutical excipient Substances 0.000 claims abstract description 10
- 239000003085 diluting agent Substances 0.000 claims abstract description 8
- 230000000529 probiotic effect Effects 0.000 claims description 72
- 244000199866 Lactobacillus casei Species 0.000 claims description 37
- 108090000623 proteins and genes Proteins 0.000 claims description 33
- 241000186781 Listeria Species 0.000 claims description 31
- 102000004169 proteins and genes Human genes 0.000 claims description 31
- 235000013958 Lactobacillus casei Nutrition 0.000 claims description 12
- 229940017800 lactobacillus casei Drugs 0.000 claims description 12
- 241000282414 Homo sapiens Species 0.000 claims description 10
- 235000013305 food Nutrition 0.000 claims description 8
- 208000022559 Inflammatory bowel disease Diseases 0.000 claims description 7
- 206010009900 Colitis ulcerative Diseases 0.000 claims description 6
- 208000011231 Crohn disease Diseases 0.000 claims description 6
- 201000006704 Ulcerative Colitis Diseases 0.000 claims description 6
- 241000283690 Bos taurus Species 0.000 claims description 5
- 241000283707 Capra Species 0.000 claims description 5
- 241000282326 Felis catus Species 0.000 claims description 5
- 241000282898 Sus scrofa Species 0.000 claims description 5
- 239000000463 material Substances 0.000 claims description 5
- 241000287828 Gallus gallus Species 0.000 claims description 4
- 241001494479 Pecora Species 0.000 claims description 4
- 239000000047 product Substances 0.000 claims description 4
- FWMNVWWHGCHHJJ-SKKKGAJSSA-N 4-amino-1-[(2r)-6-amino-2-[[(2r)-2-[[(2r)-2-[[(2r)-2-amino-3-phenylpropanoyl]amino]-3-phenylpropanoyl]amino]-4-methylpentanoyl]amino]hexanoyl]piperidine-4-carboxylic acid Chemical compound C([C@H](C(=O)N[C@H](CC(C)C)C(=O)N[C@H](CCCCN)C(=O)N1CCC(N)(CC1)C(O)=O)NC(=O)[C@H](N)CC=1C=CC=CC=1)C1=CC=CC=C1 FWMNVWWHGCHHJJ-SKKKGAJSSA-N 0.000 claims description 3
- 241000009328 Perro Species 0.000 claims 1
- 229920001184 polypeptide Polymers 0.000 claims 1
- 102000004196 processed proteins & peptides Human genes 0.000 claims 1
- 108090000765 processed proteins & peptides Proteins 0.000 claims 1
- 241000699670 Mus sp. Species 0.000 description 186
- 241000186779 Listeria monocytogenes Species 0.000 description 159
- 210000004027 cell Anatomy 0.000 description 74
- 230000001965 increasing effect Effects 0.000 description 64
- 241000699666 Mus <mouse, genus> Species 0.000 description 56
- 210000001519 tissue Anatomy 0.000 description 53
- 241000186805 Listeria innocua Species 0.000 description 49
- 208000015181 infectious disease Diseases 0.000 description 45
- 230000000968 intestinal effect Effects 0.000 description 40
- 210000001035 gastrointestinal tract Anatomy 0.000 description 36
- 241000894006 Bacteria Species 0.000 description 32
- 235000018102 proteins Nutrition 0.000 description 30
- 230000005945 translocation Effects 0.000 description 27
- 238000011282 treatment Methods 0.000 description 27
- 230000002829 reductive effect Effects 0.000 description 24
- 102100038222 60 kDa heat shock protein, mitochondrial Human genes 0.000 description 22
- 101710154868 60 kDa heat shock protein, mitochondrial Proteins 0.000 description 22
- 102000004889 Interleukin-6 Human genes 0.000 description 21
- 108090001005 Interleukin-6 Proteins 0.000 description 21
- 230000003993 interaction Effects 0.000 description 21
- 238000001000 micrograph Methods 0.000 description 21
- 102000000905 Cadherin Human genes 0.000 description 19
- 108050007957 Cadherin Proteins 0.000 description 19
- 108060008682 Tumor Necrosis Factor Proteins 0.000 description 19
- 238000010172 mouse model Methods 0.000 description 19
- 206010024641 Listeriosis Diseases 0.000 description 18
- 230000004890 epithelial barrier function Effects 0.000 description 18
- 230000002519 immonomodulatory effect Effects 0.000 description 18
- 230000001404 mediated effect Effects 0.000 description 18
- 244000052769 pathogen Species 0.000 description 18
- 210000004082 barrier epithelial cell Anatomy 0.000 description 16
- 238000002474 experimental method Methods 0.000 description 16
- 210000000952 spleen Anatomy 0.000 description 16
- 210000002919 epithelial cell Anatomy 0.000 description 15
- 230000004083 survival effect Effects 0.000 description 15
- ULGZDMOVFRHVEP-RWJQBGPGSA-N Erythromycin Chemical compound O([C@@H]1[C@@H](C)C(=O)O[C@@H]([C@@]([C@H](O)[C@@H](C)C(=O)[C@H](C)C[C@@](C)(O)[C@H](O[C@H]2[C@@H]([C@H](C[C@@H](C)O2)N(C)C)O)[C@H]1C)(C)O)CC)[C@H]1C[C@@](C)(OC)[C@@H](O)[C@H](C)O1 ULGZDMOVFRHVEP-RWJQBGPGSA-N 0.000 description 14
- 102000003945 NF-kappa B Human genes 0.000 description 14
- 108010057466 NF-kappa B Proteins 0.000 description 14
- 102100040247 Tumor necrosis factor Human genes 0.000 description 14
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 description 14
- 230000013632 homeostatic process Effects 0.000 description 14
- 230000001717 pathogenic effect Effects 0.000 description 14
- MZOFCQQQCNRIBI-VMXHOPILSA-N (3s)-4-[[(2s)-1-[[(2s)-1-[[(1s)-1-carboxy-2-hydroxyethyl]amino]-4-methyl-1-oxopentan-2-yl]amino]-5-(diaminomethylideneamino)-1-oxopentan-2-yl]amino]-3-[[2-[[(2s)-2,6-diaminohexanoyl]amino]acetyl]amino]-4-oxobutanoic acid Chemical compound OC[C@@H](C(O)=O)NC(=O)[C@H](CC(C)C)NC(=O)[C@H](CCCN=C(N)N)NC(=O)[C@H](CC(O)=O)NC(=O)CNC(=O)[C@@H](N)CCCCN MZOFCQQQCNRIBI-VMXHOPILSA-N 0.000 description 13
- 102000004162 Claudin-1 Human genes 0.000 description 13
- 108090000600 Claudin-1 Proteins 0.000 description 13
- 108090000304 Occludin Proteins 0.000 description 13
- 102000003940 Occludin Human genes 0.000 description 13
- 210000003405 ileum Anatomy 0.000 description 13
- 210000000936 intestine Anatomy 0.000 description 13
- 102000004127 Cytokines Human genes 0.000 description 11
- 108090000695 Cytokines Proteins 0.000 description 11
- 101150038414 LAP gene Proteins 0.000 description 11
- 102000000591 Tight Junction Proteins Human genes 0.000 description 11
- 108010002321 Tight Junction Proteins Proteins 0.000 description 11
- 210000004369 blood Anatomy 0.000 description 11
- 239000008280 blood Substances 0.000 description 11
- 239000012530 fluid Substances 0.000 description 11
- 239000000203 mixture Substances 0.000 description 11
- 238000011002 quantification Methods 0.000 description 11
- 102100022297 Integrin alpha-X Human genes 0.000 description 10
- 150000001875 compounds Chemical class 0.000 description 10
- 230000002055 immunohistochemical effect Effects 0.000 description 10
- 210000004400 mucous membrane Anatomy 0.000 description 10
- 230000009885 systemic effect Effects 0.000 description 10
- 210000002700 urine Anatomy 0.000 description 10
- 238000001262 western blot Methods 0.000 description 10
- 230000001580 bacterial effect Effects 0.000 description 9
- 208000037265 diseases, disorders, signs and symptoms Diseases 0.000 description 9
- 210000002175 goblet cell Anatomy 0.000 description 9
- 230000003834 intracellular effect Effects 0.000 description 9
- 210000004185 liver Anatomy 0.000 description 9
- 210000003097 mucus Anatomy 0.000 description 9
- 230000004044 response Effects 0.000 description 9
- 210000002966 serum Anatomy 0.000 description 9
- 229920001817 Agar Polymers 0.000 description 8
- 238000002965 ELISA Methods 0.000 description 8
- 239000008272 agar Substances 0.000 description 8
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 description 8
- 230000002496 gastric effect Effects 0.000 description 8
- 230000007358 intestinal barrier function Effects 0.000 description 8
- 210000003734 kidney Anatomy 0.000 description 8
- 210000002540 macrophage Anatomy 0.000 description 8
- 230000007246 mechanism Effects 0.000 description 8
- 230000035699 permeability Effects 0.000 description 8
- 210000003289 regulatory T cell Anatomy 0.000 description 8
- 102000003814 Interleukin-10 Human genes 0.000 description 7
- 108090000174 Interleukin-10 Proteins 0.000 description 7
- 102100035044 Myosin light chain kinase, smooth muscle Human genes 0.000 description 7
- 108010074596 Myosin-Light-Chain Kinase Proteins 0.000 description 7
- 210000001744 T-lymphocyte Anatomy 0.000 description 7
- 239000003242 anti bacterial agent Substances 0.000 description 7
- 229940088710 antibiotic agent Drugs 0.000 description 7
- 238000003556 assay Methods 0.000 description 7
- 230000004888 barrier function Effects 0.000 description 7
- 239000011324 bead Substances 0.000 description 7
- 230000037396 body weight Effects 0.000 description 7
- 230000003247 decreasing effect Effects 0.000 description 7
- 210000004443 dendritic cell Anatomy 0.000 description 7
- 239000002158 endotoxin Substances 0.000 description 7
- 229960003276 erythromycin Drugs 0.000 description 7
- 210000003608 fece Anatomy 0.000 description 7
- 210000000987 immune system Anatomy 0.000 description 7
- 230000005764 inhibitory process Effects 0.000 description 7
- XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N water Substances O XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 7
- 102100027581 Forkhead box protein P3 Human genes 0.000 description 6
- 101000861452 Homo sapiens Forkhead box protein P3 Proteins 0.000 description 6
- 101150058357 Muc2 gene Proteins 0.000 description 6
- 108010004217 Natural Cytotoxicity Triggering Receptor 1 Proteins 0.000 description 6
- 102100032870 Natural cytotoxicity triggering receptor 1 Human genes 0.000 description 6
- 102000000852 Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha Human genes 0.000 description 6
- 108010059993 Vancomycin Proteins 0.000 description 6
- 230000004913 activation Effects 0.000 description 6
- 238000004220 aggregation Methods 0.000 description 6
- 230000003110 anti-inflammatory effect Effects 0.000 description 6
- JGPOSNWWINVNFV-UHFFFAOYSA-N carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester Chemical compound C=1C(OC(=O)C)=CC=C2C=1OC1=CC(OC(C)=O)=CC=C1C2(C1=C2)OC(=O)C1=CC=C2C(=O)ON1C(=O)CCC1=O JGPOSNWWINVNFV-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 6
- 239000013553 cell monolayer Substances 0.000 description 6
- 201000010099 disease Diseases 0.000 description 6
- 239000003651 drinking water Substances 0.000 description 6
- 235000020188 drinking water Nutrition 0.000 description 6
- 230000004887 epithelial permeability Effects 0.000 description 6
- 230000008595 infiltration Effects 0.000 description 6
- 238000001764 infiltration Methods 0.000 description 6
- 230000004054 inflammatory process Effects 0.000 description 6
- 210000005027 intestinal barrier Anatomy 0.000 description 6
- JVTAAEKCZFNVCJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N lactic acid Chemical compound CC(O)C(O)=O JVTAAEKCZFNVCJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 6
- 210000000440 neutrophil Anatomy 0.000 description 6
- XJMOSONTPMZWPB-UHFFFAOYSA-M propidium iodide Chemical compound [I-].[I-].C12=CC(N)=CC=C2C2=CC=C(N)C=C2[N+](CCC[N+](C)(CC)CC)=C1C1=CC=CC=C1 XJMOSONTPMZWPB-UHFFFAOYSA-M 0.000 description 6
- 210000001578 tight junction Anatomy 0.000 description 6
- MYPYJXKWCTUITO-LYRMYLQWSA-N vancomycin Chemical compound O([C@@H]1[C@@H](O)[C@H](O)[C@@H](CO)O[C@H]1OC1=C2C=C3C=C1OC1=CC=C(C=C1Cl)[C@@H](O)[C@H](C(N[C@@H](CC(N)=O)C(=O)N[C@H]3C(=O)N[C@H]1C(=O)N[C@H](C(N[C@@H](C3=CC(O)=CC(O)=C3C=3C(O)=CC=C1C=3)C(O)=O)=O)[C@H](O)C1=CC=C(C(=C1)Cl)O2)=O)NC(=O)[C@@H](CC(C)C)NC)[C@H]1C[C@](C)(N)[C@H](O)[C@H](C)O1 MYPYJXKWCTUITO-LYRMYLQWSA-N 0.000 description 6
- 229960003165 vancomycin Drugs 0.000 description 6
- MYPYJXKWCTUITO-UHFFFAOYSA-N vancomycin Natural products O1C(C(=C2)Cl)=CC=C2C(O)C(C(NC(C2=CC(O)=CC(O)=C2C=2C(O)=CC=C3C=2)C(O)=O)=O)NC(=O)C3NC(=O)C2NC(=O)C(CC(N)=O)NC(=O)C(NC(=O)C(CC(C)C)NC)C(O)C(C=C3Cl)=CC=C3OC3=CC2=CC1=C3OC1OC(CO)C(O)C(O)C1OC1CC(C)(N)C(O)C(C)O1 MYPYJXKWCTUITO-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 6
- 108091032973 (ribonucleotides)n+m Proteins 0.000 description 5
- FWBHETKCLVMNFS-UHFFFAOYSA-N 4',6-Diamino-2-phenylindol Chemical compound C1=CC(C(=N)N)=CC=C1C1=CC2=CC=C(C(N)=N)C=C2N1 FWBHETKCLVMNFS-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 5
- 206010061218 Inflammation Diseases 0.000 description 5
- 102000004887 Transforming Growth Factor beta Human genes 0.000 description 5
- 108090001012 Transforming Growth Factor beta Proteins 0.000 description 5
- 150000001413 amino acids Chemical group 0.000 description 5
- 230000008901 benefit Effects 0.000 description 5
- 210000004534 cecum Anatomy 0.000 description 5
- 230000008859 change Effects 0.000 description 5
- 210000001072 colon Anatomy 0.000 description 5
- 230000002950 deficient Effects 0.000 description 5
- 230000004064 dysfunction Effects 0.000 description 5
- 238000005516 engineering process Methods 0.000 description 5
- 210000001842 enterocyte Anatomy 0.000 description 5
- 210000000981 epithelium Anatomy 0.000 description 5
- 230000002550 fecal effect Effects 0.000 description 5
- 238000000684 flow cytometry Methods 0.000 description 5
- 230000012010 growth Effects 0.000 description 5
- 210000002865 immune cell Anatomy 0.000 description 5
- 238000003125 immunofluorescent labeling Methods 0.000 description 5
- 230000001976 improved effect Effects 0.000 description 5
- 238000000338 in vitro Methods 0.000 description 5
- 230000015788 innate immune response Effects 0.000 description 5
- 230000009545 invasion Effects 0.000 description 5
- 230000004807 localization Effects 0.000 description 5
- 238000001325 log-rank test Methods 0.000 description 5
- 230000000770 proinflammatory effect Effects 0.000 description 5
- 230000000069 prophylactic effect Effects 0.000 description 5
- 230000003393 splenic effect Effects 0.000 description 5
- 238000010186 staining Methods 0.000 description 5
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 description 5
- 238000013296 A/J mouse Methods 0.000 description 4
- 241000282472 Canis lupus familiaris Species 0.000 description 4
- 229920002307 Dextran Polymers 0.000 description 4
- CEAZRRDELHUEMR-URQXQFDESA-N Gentamicin Chemical compound O1[C@H](C(C)NC)CC[C@@H](N)[C@H]1O[C@H]1[C@H](O)[C@@H](O[C@@H]2[C@@H]([C@@H](NC)[C@@](C)(O)CO2)O)[C@H](N)C[C@@H]1N CEAZRRDELHUEMR-URQXQFDESA-N 0.000 description 4
- 229930182566 Gentamicin Natural products 0.000 description 4
- 238000013019 agitation Methods 0.000 description 4
- 230000016396 cytokine production Effects 0.000 description 4
- 230000006378 damage Effects 0.000 description 4
- 210000004783 epithelial tight junction Anatomy 0.000 description 4
- 210000005205 gut mucosa Anatomy 0.000 description 4
- 238000010166 immunofluorescence Methods 0.000 description 4
- 238000012744 immunostaining Methods 0.000 description 4
- 210000004692 intercellular junction Anatomy 0.000 description 4
- 210000002490 intestinal epithelial cell Anatomy 0.000 description 4
- 210000004379 membrane Anatomy 0.000 description 4
- 239000012528 membrane Substances 0.000 description 4
- 230000030648 nucleus localization Effects 0.000 description 4
- 210000000056 organ Anatomy 0.000 description 4
- 230000009467 reduction Effects 0.000 description 4
- 230000028327 secretion Effects 0.000 description 4
- 230000035899 viability Effects 0.000 description 4
- 108010062877 Bacteriocins Proteins 0.000 description 3
- 102000006303 Chaperonin 60 Human genes 0.000 description 3
- 108010058432 Chaperonin 60 Proteins 0.000 description 3
- LFQSCWFLJHTTHZ-UHFFFAOYSA-N Ethanol Chemical compound CCO LFQSCWFLJHTTHZ-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 3
- WSFSSNUMVMOOMR-UHFFFAOYSA-N Formaldehyde Chemical compound O=C WSFSSNUMVMOOMR-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 3
- GXCLVBGFBYZDAG-UHFFFAOYSA-N N-[2-(1H-indol-3-yl)ethyl]-N-methylprop-2-en-1-amine Chemical compound CN(CCC1=CNC2=C1C=CC=C2)CC=C GXCLVBGFBYZDAG-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 3
- DNIAPMSPPWPWGF-UHFFFAOYSA-N Propylene glycol Chemical compound CC(O)CO DNIAPMSPPWPWGF-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 3
- FAPWRFPIFSIZLT-UHFFFAOYSA-M Sodium chloride Chemical compound [Na+].[Cl-] FAPWRFPIFSIZLT-UHFFFAOYSA-M 0.000 description 3
- HEMHJVSKTPXQMS-UHFFFAOYSA-M Sodium hydroxide Chemical compound [OH-].[Na+] HEMHJVSKTPXQMS-UHFFFAOYSA-M 0.000 description 3
- CZMRCDWAGMRECN-UGDNZRGBSA-N Sucrose Chemical compound O[C@H]1[C@H](O)[C@@H](CO)O[C@@]1(CO)O[C@@H]1[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@H](O)[C@@H](CO)O1 CZMRCDWAGMRECN-UGDNZRGBSA-N 0.000 description 3
- 230000024932 T cell mediated immunity Effects 0.000 description 3
- 210000002867 adherens junction Anatomy 0.000 description 3
- 230000001750 anti-listerial effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000000845 anti-microbial effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000013459 approach Methods 0.000 description 3
- 230000007375 bacterial translocation Effects 0.000 description 3
- 229940041514 candida albicans extract Drugs 0.000 description 3
- 238000004113 cell culture Methods 0.000 description 3
- 210000002421 cell wall Anatomy 0.000 description 3
- 238000012790 confirmation Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000010226 confocal imaging Methods 0.000 description 3
- 230000007123 defense Effects 0.000 description 3
- 239000008367 deionised water Substances 0.000 description 3
- 229910021641 deionized water Inorganic materials 0.000 description 3
- 238000009792 diffusion process Methods 0.000 description 3
- 208000035475 disorder Diseases 0.000 description 3
- 239000000284 extract Substances 0.000 description 3
- MHMNJMPURVTYEJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N fluorescein-5-isothiocyanate Chemical compound O1C(=O)C2=CC(N=C=S)=CC=C2C21C1=CC=C(O)C=C1OC1=CC(O)=CC=C21 MHMNJMPURVTYEJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 3
- 230000007407 health benefit Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000028993 immune response Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000002757 inflammatory effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 210000005007 innate immune system Anatomy 0.000 description 3
- 239000004310 lactic acid Substances 0.000 description 3
- 235000014655 lactic acid Nutrition 0.000 description 3
- 230000033001 locomotion Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000002688 persistence Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000034190 positive regulation of NF-kappaB transcription factor activity Effects 0.000 description 3
- 235000013406 prebiotics Nutrition 0.000 description 3
- 238000002360 preparation method Methods 0.000 description 3
- 230000002265 prevention Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000001737 promoting effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000003753 real-time PCR Methods 0.000 description 3
- 102000005962 receptors Human genes 0.000 description 3
- 108020003175 receptors Proteins 0.000 description 3
- 239000000243 solution Substances 0.000 description 3
- 239000000725 suspension Substances 0.000 description 3
- 230000008685 targeting Effects 0.000 description 3
- 230000001225 therapeutic effect Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000007492 two-way ANOVA Methods 0.000 description 3
- 239000012138 yeast extract Substances 0.000 description 3
- 241000251468 Actinopterygii Species 0.000 description 2
- 206010070545 Bacterial translocation Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 108060000903 Beta-catenin Proteins 0.000 description 2
- 102000015735 Beta-catenin Human genes 0.000 description 2
- BVKZGUZCCUSVTD-UHFFFAOYSA-L Carbonate Chemical compound [O-]C([O-])=O BVKZGUZCCUSVTD-UHFFFAOYSA-L 0.000 description 2
- FBPFZTCFMRRESA-KVTDHHQDSA-N D-Mannitol Chemical compound OC[C@@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@H](O)[C@H](O)CO FBPFZTCFMRRESA-KVTDHHQDSA-N 0.000 description 2
- 238000008157 ELISA kit Methods 0.000 description 2
- 102100031181 Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase Human genes 0.000 description 2
- PEDCQBHIVMGVHV-UHFFFAOYSA-N Glycerine Chemical compound OCC(O)CO PEDCQBHIVMGVHV-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 2
- WZUVPPKBWHMQCE-UHFFFAOYSA-N Haematoxylin Chemical compound C12=CC(O)=C(O)C=C2CC2(O)C1C1=CC=C(O)C(O)=C1OC2 WZUVPPKBWHMQCE-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 2
- 241000282412 Homo Species 0.000 description 2
- -1 IL-1β Proteins 0.000 description 2
- 206010022678 Intestinal infections Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 240000001046 Lactobacillus acidophilus Species 0.000 description 2
- 241000186605 Lactobacillus paracasei Species 0.000 description 2
- 108060001084 Luciferase Proteins 0.000 description 2
- 239000005089 Luciferase Substances 0.000 description 2
- CSNNHWWHGAXBCP-UHFFFAOYSA-L Magnesium sulfate Chemical compound [Mg+2].[O-][S+2]([O-])([O-])[O-] CSNNHWWHGAXBCP-UHFFFAOYSA-L 0.000 description 2
- 229930195725 Mannitol Natural products 0.000 description 2
- 108010052285 Membrane Proteins Proteins 0.000 description 2
- 241001529936 Murinae Species 0.000 description 2
- 101000984025 Mus musculus Cadherin-1 Proteins 0.000 description 2
- 206010028980 Neoplasm Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 206010048685 Oral infection Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 239000001888 Peptone Substances 0.000 description 2
- 108010080698 Peptones Proteins 0.000 description 2
- 238000011529 RT qPCR Methods 0.000 description 2
- 102000002689 Toll-like receptor Human genes 0.000 description 2
- 108020000411 Toll-like receptor Proteins 0.000 description 2
- 230000005875 antibody response Effects 0.000 description 2
- 239000004599 antimicrobial Substances 0.000 description 2
- 230000002368 bacteriocinic effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000009286 beneficial effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 210000000941 bile Anatomy 0.000 description 2
- 238000004166 bioassay Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000032770 biofilm formation Effects 0.000 description 2
- 239000000872 buffer Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000010804 cDNA synthesis Methods 0.000 description 2
- 201000011510 cancer Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 230000001413 cellular effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000001684 chronic effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000003501 co-culture Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000011248 coating agent Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000000576 coating method Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000000112 colonic effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000000052 comparative effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000002860 competitive effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 239000013078 crystal Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000003235 crystal violet staining Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000002380 cytological effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000007547 defect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000001419 dependent effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000001687 destabilization Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000001514 detection method Methods 0.000 description 2
- 235000005911 diet Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 230000037213 diet Effects 0.000 description 2
- 239000003814 drug Substances 0.000 description 2
- 235000019441 ethanol Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- MMXKVMNBHPAILY-UHFFFAOYSA-N ethyl laurate Chemical compound CCCCCCCCCCCC(=O)OCC MMXKVMNBHPAILY-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 2
- 230000007717 exclusion Effects 0.000 description 2
- 235000021050 feed intake Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 230000006870 function Effects 0.000 description 2
- 210000003736 gastrointestinal content Anatomy 0.000 description 2
- 229960002518 gentamicin Drugs 0.000 description 2
- 108020004445 glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase Proteins 0.000 description 2
- 210000003714 granulocyte Anatomy 0.000 description 2
- 238000003119 immunoblot Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000010820 immunofluorescence microscopy Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000003364 immunohistochemistry Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000001939 inductive effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000028709 inflammatory response Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000004609 intestinal homeostasis Effects 0.000 description 2
- 210000004347 intestinal mucosa Anatomy 0.000 description 2
- 238000001990 intravenous administration Methods 0.000 description 2
- 231100000518 lethal Toxicity 0.000 description 2
- 230000001665 lethal effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 239000007788 liquid Substances 0.000 description 2
- 244000144972 livestock Species 0.000 description 2
- 210000004698 lymphocyte Anatomy 0.000 description 2
- 210000004962 mammalian cell Anatomy 0.000 description 2
- 239000000594 mannitol Substances 0.000 description 2
- 235000010355 mannitol Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 239000003550 marker Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000005259 measurement Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000002609 medium Substances 0.000 description 2
- 230000000813 microbial effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000012544 monitoring process Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000009343 monoculture Methods 0.000 description 2
- 210000001616 monocyte Anatomy 0.000 description 2
- 210000005087 mononuclear cell Anatomy 0.000 description 2
- 231100000252 nontoxic Toxicity 0.000 description 2
- 230000003000 nontoxic effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000001543 one-way ANOVA Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000003305 oral gavage Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000000242 pagocytic effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 102000007863 pattern recognition receptors Human genes 0.000 description 2
- 108010089193 pattern recognition receptors Proteins 0.000 description 2
- 230000035515 penetration Effects 0.000 description 2
- 235000019319 peptone Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 239000013612 plasmid Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000013600 plasmid vector Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000004033 plastic Substances 0.000 description 2
- 229920003023 plastic Polymers 0.000 description 2
- 239000013641 positive control Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000002203 pretreatment Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000005180 public health Effects 0.000 description 2
- 208000012802 recumbency Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 238000003757 reverse transcription PCR Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000000523 sample Substances 0.000 description 2
- 230000003248 secreting effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 239000002356 single layer Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000007787 solid Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000007619 statistical method Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000035882 stress Effects 0.000 description 2
- 239000000126 substance Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000000758 substrate Substances 0.000 description 2
- 208000024891 symptom Diseases 0.000 description 2
- 238000004627 transmission electron microscopy Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000003981 vehicle Substances 0.000 description 2
- 230000004580 weight loss Effects 0.000 description 2
- 102000007469 Actins Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 108010085238 Actins Proteins 0.000 description 1
- GUBGYTABKSRVRQ-XLOQQCSPSA-N Alpha-Lactose Chemical compound O[C@@H]1[C@@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@@H](CO)O[C@H]1O[C@@H]1[C@@H](CO)O[C@H](O)[C@H](O)[C@H]1O GUBGYTABKSRVRQ-XLOQQCSPSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 206010003497 Asphyxia Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 241000416162 Astragalus gummifer Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000186000 Bifidobacterium Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000186018 Bifidobacterium adolescentis Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000186016 Bifidobacterium bifidum Species 0.000 description 1
- 241001608472 Bifidobacterium longum Species 0.000 description 1
- 108091003079 Bovine Serum Albumin Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 241000195940 Bryophyta Species 0.000 description 1
- 102100021943 C-C motif chemokine 2 Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 101710155857 C-C motif chemokine 2 Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 102000003952 Caspase 3 Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 108090000397 Caspase 3 Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 241000700198 Cavia Species 0.000 description 1
- 239000005944 Chlorpyrifos Substances 0.000 description 1
- 102000002029 Claudin Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 108050009302 Claudin Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 206010009944 Colon cancer Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 208000001333 Colorectal Neoplasms Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 229920002261 Corn starch Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 244000241257 Cucumis melo Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000009847 Cucumis melo var cantalupensis Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- FBPFZTCFMRRESA-FSIIMWSLSA-N D-Glucitol Natural products OC[C@H](O)[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@H](O)CO FBPFZTCFMRRESA-FSIIMWSLSA-N 0.000 description 1
- FBPFZTCFMRRESA-JGWLITMVSA-N D-glucitol Chemical compound OC[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@H](O)[C@H](O)CO FBPFZTCFMRRESA-JGWLITMVSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 108020004414 DNA Proteins 0.000 description 1
- LVGKNOAMLMIIKO-UHFFFAOYSA-N Elaidinsaeure-aethylester Natural products CCCCCCCCC=CCCCCCCCC(=O)OCC LVGKNOAMLMIIKO-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 239000001856 Ethyl cellulose Substances 0.000 description 1
- ZZSNKZQZMQGXPY-UHFFFAOYSA-N Ethyl cellulose Chemical compound CCOCC1OC(OC)C(OCC)C(OCC)C1OC1C(O)C(O)C(OC)C(CO)O1 ZZSNKZQZMQGXPY-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 206010015548 Euthanasia Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 206010017943 Gastrointestinal conditions Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 108010010803 Gelatin Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 241000699694 Gerbillinae Species 0.000 description 1
- WQZGKKKJIJFFOK-GASJEMHNSA-N Glucose Natural products OC[C@H]1OC(O)[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@@H]1O WQZGKKKJIJFFOK-GASJEMHNSA-N 0.000 description 1
- WHUUTDBJXJRKMK-UHFFFAOYSA-N Glutamic acid Natural products OC(=O)C(N)CCC(O)=O WHUUTDBJXJRKMK-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 102000004269 Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 108010017080 Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 102000002812 Heat-Shock Proteins Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 108010004889 Heat-Shock Proteins Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 101000917858 Homo sapiens Low affinity immunoglobulin gamma Fc region receptor III-A Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 101000917839 Homo sapiens Low affinity immunoglobulin gamma Fc region receptor III-B Proteins 0.000 description 1
- UFHFLCQGNIYNRP-UHFFFAOYSA-N Hydrogen Chemical compound [H][H] UFHFLCQGNIYNRP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 206010020751 Hypersensitivity Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 206010061598 Immunodeficiency Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 208000020060 Increased inflammatory response Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 108010002352 Interleukin-1 Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 102000013462 Interleukin-12 Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 108010065805 Interleukin-12 Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 102000003810 Interleukin-18 Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 108090000171 Interleukin-18 Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 108090001007 Interleukin-8 Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 102000004890 Interleukin-8 Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 101710148896 Internalin A Proteins 0.000 description 1
- OWYWGLHRNBIFJP-UHFFFAOYSA-N Ipazine Chemical compound CCN(CC)C1=NC(Cl)=NC(NC(C)C)=N1 OWYWGLHRNBIFJP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 235000013956 Lactobacillus acidophilus Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241001616242 Lactobacillus paracasei ATCC 334 Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000186869 Lactobacillus salivarius Species 0.000 description 1
- 241001427851 Lactobacillus salivarius UCC118 Species 0.000 description 1
- GUBGYTABKSRVRQ-QKKXKWKRSA-N Lactose Natural products OC[C@H]1O[C@@H](O[C@H]2[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)C(O)O[C@@H]2CO)[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@H]1O GUBGYTABKSRVRQ-QKKXKWKRSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 102000004882 Lipase Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 108090001060 Lipase Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 239000004367 Lipase Substances 0.000 description 1
- 102100029185 Low affinity immunoglobulin gamma Fc region receptor III-B Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 239000006137 Luria-Bertani broth Substances 0.000 description 1
- 244000070406 Malus silvestris Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000124008 Mammalia Species 0.000 description 1
- 108010006519 Molecular Chaperones Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 102000005431 Molecular Chaperones Human genes 0.000 description 1
- MSFSPUZXLOGKHJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N Muraminsaeure Natural products OC(=O)C(C)OC1C(N)C(O)OC(CO)C1O MSFSPUZXLOGKHJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 241000699660 Mus musculus Species 0.000 description 1
- 206010028851 Necrosis Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 208000008589 Obesity Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 241000283973 Oryctolagus cuniculus Species 0.000 description 1
- 208000001132 Osteoporosis Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 229910019142 PO4 Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 108010019160 Pancreatin Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 229930040373 Paraformaldehyde Natural products 0.000 description 1
- 235000019483 Peanut oil Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 108010080032 Pediocins Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 241000191998 Pediococcus acidilactici Species 0.000 description 1
- 102000057297 Pepsin A Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 108090000284 Pepsin A Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 108091005804 Peptidases Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 108010013639 Peptidoglycan Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 239000002202 Polyethylene glycol Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000004793 Polystyrene Substances 0.000 description 1
- 208000005107 Premature Birth Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 206010036590 Premature baby Diseases 0.000 description 1
- ONIBWKKTOPOVIA-UHFFFAOYSA-N Proline Natural products OC(=O)C1CCCN1 ONIBWKKTOPOVIA-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 239000004365 Protease Substances 0.000 description 1
- 241000508269 Psidium Species 0.000 description 1
- 238000002123 RNA extraction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000013614 RNA sample Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000012980 RPMI-1640 medium Substances 0.000 description 1
- 241000700159 Rattus Species 0.000 description 1
- 101000984017 Rattus norvegicus Cadherin-1 Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 102100037486 Reverse transcriptase/ribonuclease H Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 241000283984 Rodentia Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000019485 Safflower oil Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 206010070834 Sensitisation Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 244000300264 Spinacia oleracea Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000009337 Spinacia oleracea Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 229920002472 Starch Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 108010090804 Streptavidin Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 241000193998 Streptococcus pneumoniae Species 0.000 description 1
- 238000000692 Student's t-test Methods 0.000 description 1
- 229930006000 Sucrose Natural products 0.000 description 1
- 230000005867 T cell response Effects 0.000 description 1
- 229920001615 Tragacanth Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 238000010162 Tukey test Methods 0.000 description 1
- 206010000210 abortion Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 231100000176 abortion Toxicity 0.000 description 1
- DPXJVFZANSGRMM-UHFFFAOYSA-N acetic acid;2,3,4,5,6-pentahydroxyhexanal;sodium Chemical compound [Na].CC(O)=O.OCC(O)C(O)C(O)C(O)C=O DPXJVFZANSGRMM-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 230000009471 action Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000003213 activating effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000001464 adherent effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000002671 adjuvant Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000002776 aggregation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 108010081577 aldehyde dehydrogenase (NAD(P)+) Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 239000000783 alginic acid Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000010443 alginic acid Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 229920000615 alginic acid Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 229960001126 alginic acid Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 150000004781 alginic acids Chemical class 0.000 description 1
- 239000012670 alkaline solution Substances 0.000 description 1
- 208000026935 allergic disease Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 230000007815 allergy Effects 0.000 description 1
- WNROFYMDJYEPJX-UHFFFAOYSA-K aluminium hydroxide Chemical compound [OH-].[OH-].[OH-].[Al+3] WNROFYMDJYEPJX-UHFFFAOYSA-K 0.000 description 1
- 238000004873 anchoring Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000010171 animal model Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000002924 anti-infective effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000000427 antigen Substances 0.000 description 1
- 108091007433 antigens Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 102000036639 antigens Human genes 0.000 description 1
- 239000002246 antineoplastic agent Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000006907 apoptotic process Effects 0.000 description 1
- 235000021016 apples Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- QVGXLLKOCUKJST-UHFFFAOYSA-N atomic oxygen Chemical compound [O] QVGXLLKOCUKJST-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 230000010065 bacterial adhesion Effects 0.000 description 1
- 244000052616 bacterial pathogen Species 0.000 description 1
- WQZGKKKJIJFFOK-VFUOTHLCSA-N beta-D-glucose Chemical compound OC[C@H]1O[C@@H](O)[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@@H]1O WQZGKKKJIJFFOK-VFUOTHLCSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 230000003115 biocidal effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000017531 blood circulation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000006172 buffering agent Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000001768 carboxy methyl cellulose Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000012754 cardiac puncture Methods 0.000 description 1
- 210000004970 cd4 cell Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 210000000170 cell membrane Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 239000001913 cellulose Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229920002678 cellulose Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 229920002301 cellulose acetate Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 238000005119 centrifugation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000001876 chaperonelike Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012512 characterization method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000013351 cheese Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000006243 chemical reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000003153 chemical reaction reagent Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229960005091 chloramphenicol Drugs 0.000 description 1
- WIIZWVCIJKGZOK-RKDXNWHRSA-N chloramphenicol Chemical compound ClC(Cl)C(=O)N[C@H](CO)[C@H](O)C1=CC=C([N+]([O-])=O)C=C1 WIIZWVCIJKGZOK-RKDXNWHRSA-N 0.000 description 1
- SBPBAQFWLVIOKP-UHFFFAOYSA-N chlorpyrifos Chemical compound CCOP(=S)(OCC)OC1=NC(Cl)=C(Cl)C=C1Cl SBPBAQFWLVIOKP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 208000037976 chronic inflammation Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 208000037893 chronic inflammatory disorder Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 229940110456 cocoa butter Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 235000019868 cocoa butter Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 208000004264 complement component 5 deficiency Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 230000001276 controlling effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000010411 cooking Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000005687 corn oil Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000002285 corn oil Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000008120 corn starch Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000012343 cottonseed oil Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000002385 cottonseed oil Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000012228 culture supernatant Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000012258 culturing Methods 0.000 description 1
- 210000000805 cytoplasm Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 210000004292 cytoskeleton Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 231100000433 cytotoxic Toxicity 0.000 description 1
- 210000001151 cytotoxic T lymphocyte Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 230000001472 cytotoxic effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000034994 death Effects 0.000 description 1
- UQLDLKMNUJERMK-UHFFFAOYSA-L di(octadecanoyloxy)lead Chemical compound [Pb+2].CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC([O-])=O.CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC([O-])=O UQLDLKMNUJERMK-UHFFFAOYSA-L 0.000 description 1
- 235000020979 dietary recommendations Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000029087 digestion Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000009826 distribution Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000002552 dosage form Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000035622 drinking Effects 0.000 description 1
- 229940079593 drug Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 210000001198 duodenum Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 230000008846 dynamic interplay Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000002708 enhancing effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 244000000021 enteric pathogen Species 0.000 description 1
- YQGOJNYOYNNSMM-UHFFFAOYSA-N eosin Chemical compound [Na+].OC(=O)C1=CC=CC=C1C1=C2C=C(Br)C(=O)C(Br)=C2OC2=C(Br)C(O)=C(Br)C=C21 YQGOJNYOYNNSMM-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 230000007360 epithelial dysfunction Effects 0.000 description 1
- 210000003743 erythrocyte Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 150000002148 esters Chemical class 0.000 description 1
- 235000019325 ethyl cellulose Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 229920001249 ethyl cellulose Polymers 0.000 description 1
- LVGKNOAMLMIIKO-QXMHVHEDSA-N ethyl oleate Chemical compound CCCCCCCC\C=C/CCCCCCCC(=O)OCC LVGKNOAMLMIIKO-QXMHVHEDSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 229940093471 ethyl oleate Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 230000029142 excretion Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000028023 exocytosis Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000013604 expression vector Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000001125 extrusion Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000012894 fetal calf serum Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000000945 filler Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000019688 fish Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000078673 foodborn pathogen Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000013350 formula milk Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000009472 formulation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000015244 frankfurter Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000008273 gelatin Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229920000159 gelatin Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 235000019322 gelatine Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000011852 gelatine desserts Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000008103 glucose Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000013922 glutamic acid Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000004220 glutamic acid Substances 0.000 description 1
- 125000000291 glutamic acid group Chemical group N[C@@H](CCC(O)=O)C(=O)* 0.000 description 1
- 235000011187 glycerol Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 150000002334 glycols Chemical class 0.000 description 1
- 230000003862 health status Effects 0.000 description 1
- XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-ZSJDYOACSA-N heavy water Substances [2H]O[2H] XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-ZSJDYOACSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 238000007490 hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000001744 histochemical effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 244000052637 human pathogen Species 0.000 description 1
- 230000028996 humoral immune response Effects 0.000 description 1
- 206010020718 hyperplasia Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 235000015243 ice cream Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000003384 imaging method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000036039 immunity Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012606 in vitro cell culture Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000001727 in vivo Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000011534 incubation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000012678 infectious agent Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000002458 infectious effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 208000027866 inflammatory disease Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 230000002401 inhibitory effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000000266 injurious effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 229940076144 interleukin-10 Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 230000017306 interleukin-6 production Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000000543 intermediate Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000003871 intestinal function Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000003870 intestinal permeability Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000010212 intracellular staining Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000007918 intramuscular administration Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000011835 investigation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 210000001630 jejunum Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 238000002372 labelling Methods 0.000 description 1
- 229940039695 lactobacillus acidophilus Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 239000008101 lactose Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000003902 lesion Effects 0.000 description 1
- 231100000636 lethal dose Toxicity 0.000 description 1
- 230000000670 limiting effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 235000019421 lipase Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000015250 liver sausages Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000007774 longterm Effects 0.000 description 1
- 210000004072 lung Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 210000001165 lymph node Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 239000012139 lysis buffer Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229920002521 macromolecule Polymers 0.000 description 1
- VTHJTEIRLNZDEV-UHFFFAOYSA-L magnesium dihydroxide Chemical compound [OH-].[OH-].[Mg+2] VTHJTEIRLNZDEV-UHFFFAOYSA-L 0.000 description 1
- 239000000347 magnesium hydroxide Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229910001862 magnesium hydroxide Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 229910052943 magnesium sulfate Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 238000012423 maintenance Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000036210 malignancy Effects 0.000 description 1
- SQQMAOCOWKFBNP-UHFFFAOYSA-L manganese(II) sulfate Chemical compound [Mn+2].[O-]S([O-])(=O)=O SQQMAOCOWKFBNP-UHFFFAOYSA-L 0.000 description 1
- 229910000357 manganese(II) sulfate Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 108020004999 messenger RNA Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 208000030159 metabolic disease Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 239000002207 metabolite Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000002906 microbiologic effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 244000005700 microbiome Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000011929 mousse Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 210000004877 mucosa Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 230000016379 mucosal immune response Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000017074 necrotic cell death Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000031990 negative regulation of inflammatory response Effects 0.000 description 1
- 208000008338 non-alcoholic fatty liver disease Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 206010053219 non-alcoholic steatohepatitis Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 238000012758 nuclear staining Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000016709 nutrition Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000013116 obese mouse model Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000020824 obesity Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000003921 oil Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000019198 oils Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000004006 olive oil Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000008390 olive oil Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000001503 one-tailed test Methods 0.000 description 1
- 210000004789 organ system Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 229910052760 oxygen Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 239000001301 oxygen Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229940055695 pancreatin Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 210000003134 paneth cell Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 230000000803 paradoxical effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000012188 paraffin wax Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229920002866 paraformaldehyde Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 230000008506 pathogenesis Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000007170 pathology Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000037361 pathway Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000000312 peanut oil Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229940111202 pepsin Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 210000001986 peyer's patch Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 210000001539 phagocyte Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 239000008177 pharmaceutical agent Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000008194 pharmaceutical composition Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000008363 phosphate buffer Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229920001223 polyethylene glycol Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 229920000642 polymer Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 229920005862 polyol Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 150000003077 polyols Chemical class 0.000 description 1
- 229920000136 polysorbate Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 229920002223 polystyrene Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 239000011148 porous material Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000008092 positive effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000008057 potassium phosphate buffer Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229920001592 potato starch Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 230000035935 pregnancy Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000004321 preservation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000003449 preventive effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011321 prophylaxis Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000004445 quantitative analysis Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000003762 quantitative reverse transcription PCR Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000001959 radiotherapy Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000020185 raw untreated milk Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000011160 research Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004043 responsiveness Effects 0.000 description 1
- 235000005713 safflower oil Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000003813 safflower oil Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000008313 sensitization Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000008159 sesame oil Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000011803 sesame oil Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000002002 slurry Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000011734 sodium Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000019812 sodium carboxymethyl cellulose Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 229920001027 sodium carboxymethylcellulose Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 239000011780 sodium chloride Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229910000144 sodium(I) superoxide Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 235000008983 soft cheese Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000002904 solvent Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000000600 sorbitol Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000010356 sorbitol Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000003549 soybean oil Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000012424 soybean oil Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241000894007 species Species 0.000 description 1
- 210000004988 splenocyte Anatomy 0.000 description 1
- 230000006641 stabilisation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011105 stabilization Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000019698 starch Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 208000002254 stillbirth Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 231100000537 stillbirth Toxicity 0.000 description 1
- 230000004936 stimulating effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000000638 stimulation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 229940031000 streptococcus pneumoniae Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 238000007920 subcutaneous administration Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000005720 sucrose Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000000346 sugar Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 150000008163 sugars Chemical class 0.000 description 1
- 239000000829 suppository Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000004114 suspension culture Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000019722 synbiotics Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000000454 talc Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229910052623 talc Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 238000002560 therapeutic procedure Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000008646 thermal stress Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000003053 toxin Substances 0.000 description 1
- 231100000765 toxin Toxicity 0.000 description 1
- 239000000196 tragacanth Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000010487 tragacanth Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 229940116362 tragacanth Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 230000031998 transcytosis Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011830 transgenic mouse model Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000001974 tryptic soy broth Substances 0.000 description 1
- 108010050327 trypticase-soy broth Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 239000012137 tryptone Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000006433 tumor necrosis factor production Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000001521 two-tailed test Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000003827 upregulation Effects 0.000 description 1
- 229960005486 vaccine Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 239000013598 vector Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000000007 visual effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000005406 washing Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000001993 wax Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000003442 weekly effect Effects 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
- A61K—PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL, DENTAL OR TOILETRY PURPOSES
- A61K38/00—Medicinal preparations containing peptides
- A61K38/16—Peptides having more than 20 amino acids; Gastrins; Somatostatins; Melanotropins; Derivatives thereof
- A61K38/164—Peptides having more than 20 amino acids; Gastrins; Somatostatins; Melanotropins; Derivatives thereof from bacteria
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23K—FODDER
- A23K10/00—Animal feeding-stuffs
- A23K10/10—Animal feeding-stuffs obtained by microbiological or biochemical processes
- A23K10/16—Addition of microorganisms or extracts thereof, e.g. single-cell proteins, to feeding-stuff compositions
- A23K10/18—Addition of microorganisms or extracts thereof, e.g. single-cell proteins, to feeding-stuff compositions of live microorganisms
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23L—FOODS, FOODSTUFFS, OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, NOT COVERED BY SUBCLASSES A21D OR A23B-A23J; THEIR PREPARATION OR TREATMENT, e.g. COOKING, MODIFICATION OF NUTRITIVE QUALITIES, PHYSICAL TREATMENT; PRESERVATION OF FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS, IN GENERAL
- A23L33/00—Modifying nutritive qualities of foods; Dietetic products; Preparation or treatment thereof
- A23L33/10—Modifying nutritive qualities of foods; Dietetic products; Preparation or treatment thereof using additives
- A23L33/135—Bacteria or derivatives thereof, e.g. probiotics
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
- A61K—PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL, DENTAL OR TOILETRY PURPOSES
- A61K35/00—Medicinal preparations containing materials or reaction products thereof with undetermined constitution
- A61K35/66—Microorganisms or materials therefrom
- A61K35/74—Bacteria
- A61K35/741—Probiotics
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
- A61K—PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL, DENTAL OR TOILETRY PURPOSES
- A61K35/00—Medicinal preparations containing materials or reaction products thereof with undetermined constitution
- A61K35/66—Microorganisms or materials therefrom
- A61K35/74—Bacteria
- A61K35/741—Probiotics
- A61K35/744—Lactic acid bacteria, e.g. enterococci, pediococci, lactococci, streptococci or leuconostocs
- A61K35/747—Lactobacilli, e.g. L. acidophilus or L. brevis
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
- A61K—PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL, DENTAL OR TOILETRY PURPOSES
- A61K9/00—Medicinal preparations characterised by special physical form
- A61K9/0012—Galenical forms characterised by the site of application
- A61K9/0053—Mouth and digestive tract, i.e. intraoral and peroral administration
- A61K9/0056—Mouth soluble or dispersible forms; Suckable, eatable, chewable coherent forms; Forms rapidly disintegrating in the mouth; Lozenges; Lollipops; Bite capsules; Baked products; Baits or other oral forms for animals
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
- A61K—PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL, DENTAL OR TOILETRY PURPOSES
- A61K9/00—Medicinal preparations characterised by special physical form
- A61K9/14—Particulate form, e.g. powders, Processes for size reducing of pure drugs or the resulting products, Pure drug nanoparticles
- A61K9/19—Particulate form, e.g. powders, Processes for size reducing of pure drugs or the resulting products, Pure drug nanoparticles lyophilised, i.e. freeze-dried, solutions or dispersions
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
- A61P—SPECIFIC THERAPEUTIC ACTIVITY OF CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS OR MEDICINAL PREPARATIONS
- A61P31/00—Antiinfectives, i.e. antibiotics, antiseptics, chemotherapeutics
- A61P31/04—Antibacterial agents
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
- A61P—SPECIFIC THERAPEUTIC ACTIVITY OF CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS OR MEDICINAL PREPARATIONS
- A61P37/00—Drugs for immunological or allergic disorders
- A61P37/02—Immunomodulators
- A61P37/06—Immunosuppressants, e.g. drugs for graft rejection
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23V—INDEXING SCHEME RELATING TO FOODS, FOODSTUFFS OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND LACTIC OR PROPIONIC ACID BACTERIA USED IN FOODSTUFFS OR FOOD PREPARATION
- A23V2400/00—Lactic or propionic acid bacteria
- A23V2400/11—Lactobacillus
- A23V2400/125—Casei
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
- A23V—INDEXING SCHEME RELATING TO FOODS, FOODSTUFFS OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND LACTIC OR PROPIONIC ACID BACTERIA USED IN FOODSTUFFS OR FOOD PREPARATION
- A23V2400/00—Lactic or propionic acid bacteria
- A23V2400/11—Lactobacillus
- A23V2400/165—Paracasei
-
- A23Y2220/17—
-
- A23Y2220/63—
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
- A61K—PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL, DENTAL OR TOILETRY PURPOSES
- A61K35/00—Medicinal preparations containing materials or reaction products thereof with undetermined constitution
- A61K2035/11—Medicinal preparations comprising living procariotic cells
- A61K2035/115—Probiotics
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
- A61K—PREPARATIONS FOR MEDICAL, DENTAL OR TOILETRY PURPOSES
- A61K39/00—Medicinal preparations containing antigens or antibodies
- A61K2039/55—Medicinal preparations containing antigens or antibodies characterised by the host/recipient, e.g. newborn with maternal antibodies
- A61K2039/552—Veterinary vaccine
Definitions
- the present application relates to a method for treating or preventing an inflammatory condition of a patient comprising the step of administering a therapeutically effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP), together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, diluents, and excipients, to the patient in need of relief from said inflammatory condition.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to method for improving animal health and/or meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed of said animal.
- Listeria monocytogenes is an opportunistic human foodborne pathogen responsible for severe systemic infection (listeriosis), and abortion, stillbirth and premature birth in pregnant women, mortality in newborns, the elderly and other immunocompromised individuals.
- L. monocytogenes is well adapted to survive in the harsh environment of the gut (Sleator et al., 2009; Xayarath and Freitag, 2012).
- L. monocytogenes overcomes intestinal epithelial innate defense (Vance et al., 2009) and crosses the epithelial barrier.
- InlA Internalin A
- E-cadherin exposed during villous epithelial cell extrusion can interact with Listeria InlA.
- InlA/E-cadherin interaction is host species-specific.
- proline is substituted by glutamic acid at the amino acid sequence position 16, thus InlA has low affinity for mouse or rat E-cadherin but has a strong interaction with the E-cadherin of permissive hosts, such as humans, gerbils and guinea pigs (Lecuit et al., 1999).
- L. monocytogenes may use alternate routes to translocate across the gut mucosa.
- LAP Listeria adhesion protein
- LAP Listeria adhesion protein
- LAP (866 aa) is a housekeeping alcohol acetaldehyde dehydrogenase (Jagadeesan et al., 2010) in L. monocytogenes and displays moonlighting activity (See below and Sequence Listing for details).
- Hsp60 a mammalian moonlight chaperone protein
- Henderson et al., 2013 activates NF-kB leading to the proinflammatory cytokines release, myosin light chain kinase (MLCK) upregulation and epithelial tight junction protein mislocalization (claudin-1, occludin and E-cadherin), leading to a leaky epithelial barrier for bacterial passage (Drolia et al., 2018).
- MLCK myosin light chain kinase
- epithelial tight junction protein mislocalization claudin-1, occludin and E-cadherin
- LAP protein sequence from Listeria monocytogenes (SEQ ID NO: 1): 1 maikenaaqe vlevqkvidr ladngqkalk afesynqeqv dnivhamala gldqhmplak 61 laveetgrgl yedkciknif ateyiwnnik nnktvgvine d v qtgvieia epvgvvagvt 121 pvtnptsttl fkaiiaiktr npiifafhps aqrcss a aak vvydaaiag apehciqwve 181 kpsleatkql mnhdkvalvl atggagmvks aystgkpalg vgpgnvpayi dktakikrsv 241 ndiilsksfd qg
- the gut mucosa represents the first site for the dynamic interaction of the enteric pathogens with the host (Finlay and Falkow, 1997). Therefore, averting this critical pathogen interaction step should help prevent extra-intestinal dissemination of pathogens and the consequent pathology.
- Live probiotics bacteria such as lactobacilli and bifidobacteria are known to colonize and proliferate in the intestine to improve intestinal microbial balance and protect the host from pathogens (Cross, 2002; Salminen et al., 2010).
- Lactobacillus species are common because they are natural inhabitants of the gut, modulate immune system (Amalaradjou and Bhunia, 2012; Sanders et al., 2014), and enhance epithelial innate defense and restore epithelial barrier function (Bron et al., 2017; Pagnini et al., 2010).
- probiotics for prophylactic or therapeutic use are inconsistent and may be strain specific (Hill et al., 2014) thus may have limited efficacy against a target pathogen. Therefore, there are unmet needs in using probiotic bacteria to prevent pathogen interactions with the host (Amalaradjou and Bhunia, 2013; Focareta et al., 2006; Michon et al., 2016; Mohamadzadeh et al., 2010).
- FIGS. 1A-1D demonstrates that Listeria Adhesion Protein (LAP) from Listeria innocua restored adhesion and translocation ability of the lap-deficient L. monocytogenes (KB208) to enterocytes.
- FIG. 1A shows amino acid sequence comparison of LAP from L. monocytogenes (SEQ ID NO: 1) and L. innocua (SEQ ID NO: 2).
- FIG. 1B shows Western blot analysis of protein preparation from cell wall showing expression of L. innocua LAP in L. monocytogenes KB208 (KB208LAP Lin ).
- FIG. 1C shows adhesion of KB208LAP Lin to Caco-2 cells
- FIGS. 2A-2F show bioengineered Lactobacillus Probiotic (BLP) expressing LAP ( Listeria adhesion protein) of L. innocua reduced L. monocytogenes infection in Caco-2 model.
- FIG. 2A shows the analysis of LAP expression in bioengineered L. casei : Western blot showing LAP expression in cell wall fractions of L. casei expressing LAP of L. monocytogenes (LbcLAP Lm ), and L. innocua (LbcLAP Lin ). Purified recombinant LAP of L. monocytogenes (rLAP Lm ) was used as a positive control.
- FIG. 2B shows translocation of bioengineered probiotics across Caco-2 cells.
- FIG. 2C shows inhibition of L. monocytogenes adhesion; and FIG. 2D shows transepithelial translocation of Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) on Caco-2 cell line treated with L. casei (Lbc) and LbcLAP Lm , LbcLAP Lin , and L. casei carrying empty plasmid vector, pLP401T without any insert (LbcVeclap-).
- FIG. 2E shows increased co-aggregation of BLP (LbcLAP Lm and LbcLAP Lin ) strains in co-incubated suspensions containing equal numbers of BLP+Lm cells captured via Listeria -specific immunomagnetic beads (IMB).
- FIG. 2F depicts micrographs showing co-aggregated BLP cells (LbcLAP Lm and LbcLAP Lin ) with IMB-captured Lm cells expressing GFP. Bars, 1 ⁇ m.
- FIGS. 3A-3H show characterization of bioengineered probiotic strains.
- FIGS. 3A-3B show immunofluorescence staining and flow cytometry using anti-LAP mAb-H7 to verify LAP expression on bioengineered probiotics bacteria.
- FIG. 3C depicts the absence of bacteriocin-like antimicrobial activity in LbcWT and bioengineered strains (LbcLAP Lin ; LbcLAP Lm ) against L. monocytogenes lawn.
- Pediocin a bacteriocin from Pediococcus acidilactici
- vancomycin were used as positive controls showing a zone of inhibition.
- FIGS. 3D-3F show survival of bioengineered L.
- FIG. 3G shows the light microscopic photographs showing the live and dead stained bioengineered LbcLAP Lin strain using cFDA-SE (carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester) and PI (propidium iodide) after exposure to simulated gastric fluid (SGF) and simulated intestinal fluid (SIF) for 2.5 h.
- FIG. 3H confirms LAP expression in bioengineered probiotics (LbcLAP Lin ; LbcLAP Lm ), but absent in LbcWT when grown SIF-I.
- FIGS. 4A-4K demonstrate that bioengineered Lactobacillus casei reduced L. monocytogenes infection in a mouse (A/J) model.
- FIG. 4A is a schematics showing animal experiment protocol: mice (female A/J mice, 6 weeks old) were fed probiotics for 10 days, and then challenged with L. monocytogenes F4244 (8.8 ⁇ 10 8 cfu/animal).
- FIG. 4B Mice body weight analysis over 12-days period during probiotic feeding and challenge with L. monocytogenes (Lm) at time points 0, 5, 10, and 12 days.
- 4C-4D show analysis of bioengineered Lbc colonization in the mouse gut:
- ( 4 C) Total lactic acid bacterial counts in animals that were fed with different bioengineered Lbc or controls on MRS agar plate and vancomycin resistant LbcWT, LbcLAP Lin ; LbcLAP Lm ( 4 D) in the intestine and feces during 10 days of feeding. Wild type and bioengineered probiotic counts in the intestine and fecal samples of mice from day 13.
- FIGS. 4E-4K depict mice experiments showing bioengineered probiotic mediated prevention of L. monocytogenes infection.
- LbcLAP Lm monocytogenes
- LbcLAP Lin L. innocua
- No background Listeria was detected from mice that received only the probiotics (LbcWT, LbcLAPLm, LbcLAPLin) or no probiotics at all.
- FIG. 5 shows visual examination of health status of mice after challenged with L. monocytogenes .
- the animals in the left panels (a,c,e,g) were not challenged (control), while the right panels (b,d,f,h) were challenged with L. monocytogenes F4244.
- the clinical onset of listeriosis in (b) No Lbc+Lm and (d) LbcWT+Lm was evident.
- FIGS. 6A-6D demonstrate epithelial permeability assessment after probiotic exposure.
- FIGS. 6A-6B show epithelial permeability in Caco-2 cell monolayers in transwell insert using 4 kDa FITC-Dextran (FD4) (a) movement from apical to basolateral side and Transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER) (b) after treatment with Control, L. monocytogenes (Lm), No Lbc+Lm, LbcWT, LbcWT+Lm, LbcLAP Lm , LbcLAP Lm +Lm, LbcLAP Lin , LbcLAP Lin +Lm.
- 6A-6B show intestinal epithelial permeability assessment by measuring FD4 levels in serum ( 6 C) and urine ( 6 D) in probiotic fed mice from FIGS. 4A-4K .
- Treatments were, control, No Lbc+Lm, LbcWT, LbcWT+Lm, LbcLAP Lm , LbcLAP Lm +Lm, LbcLAP Lin , LbcLAP Lm +Lm.
- Bioengineered probiotics significantly reduced the FD4 translocation compared to the LbcWT or Lm alone. (***, P ⁇ 0.0001; *, P ⁇ 0.05, ns, not significant).
- FIGS. 7A-7C show cellular junctional protein distribution analysis in Caco-2 and ileal tissue of mice.
- FIG. 7A shows Western blot showing tight junction (ZO-1, occludin, claudin-1) and adherence junction protein (E-cadherin) levels in cells after treatment with L. monocytogenes or probiotic bacteria followed by L. monocytogenes challenge. Confirmation of cell-junction protein mislocalization by confocal immunofluorescence microscopy in Caco-2 cells ( 7 B) and in mouse ileal tissue section ( 7 C). White arrows (presence) and yellow (absence or mislocalization) pointing to the cell junction proteins.
- FIGS. 8A-8E show histopathological scoring of ileal tissues of bioengineered probiotic-fed mice.
- 8 A H&E stained sections
- 8 B Histology score
- 8 C & 8 D Increased goblet cell counts in bioengineered probiotic-fed mice ileal tissues.
- 8 E Immunostaining of tissue sections for Hsp60 expression
- 8 F analysis of transcripts of hspdl (hsp60) in ileal tissues in probiotic fed mice.
- Treatments were, control, No Lbc+Lm, LbcWT, LbcWT+Lm, LbcLAP Lm , LbcLAP Lm +Lm, LbcLAP Lin , LbcLAP Lin +Lm.
- 8 E & 8 F In the presence of L. monocytogenes , epithelial cells expressed a high level of Hsp60 irrespective of probiotic treatment. Data were analyzed by one way ANOVA, and Tukey's grouping was used to determine statistical significance at ***, P ⁇ 0.0001; *, P ⁇ 0.05, ns, not significant).
- FIGS. 9A-91 show immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects of probiotics in RAW macrophage cell line and in mice.
- 9 A & 9 B Attenuation of NF-kB expression in the luciferase reporter RAW cell line (a) and mouse ileum (b). Confocal imaging shows attenuation of NF-kB activity by probiotics compared to Lm WT (b).
- 9 C & 9 D TNF- ⁇ and IL-6 expression in mice ilea after probiotic exposure.
- 9 E- 9 G Flow cytometry analysis showing spleen CD4 cell levels were unaffected while CD8 and CD11c cell levels were increased after challenged with probiotics followed by Lm challenge.
- FIGS. 10A-10D Immunomodulatory action of probiotics expressing the LAP protein: Ileum harvested from A/J mice supplied with or without probiotics for ten days followed by 48 h-post infection with L. monocytogenes was immunostained for CD3 ( 10 A), CD8 ⁇ ( 10 B), Fox-P3 ( 10 C), and cleaved caspase-3 ( 10 D, CC-3; marker of apoptosis. Graphs show CD3 + , CD8 ⁇ + , CC-3 + and CD4 + Fox-P3+, cells from 25 villi/mouse. Each point represents an individual mouse.
- mice fed with probiotics expressing the LAP protein show significantly reduced CD3 + , CD8 + (arrows), CC-3+ cells but significantly increased CD4 + Foxp3 + cells.
- Mice fed with Lactobacillus casei (probiotics) expressing the LAP protein (LbcLAP Lin ) showed significantly (**P ⁇ 0.01, Kaplan-Meier log-rank test) higher survival compared to that of LbcWT.
- FIG. 12 Comparison of the amino acid sequence of LAP ( Listeria adhesion protein) from different strains of Lm and Lin obtained from the NCBI database.
- FIG. 13 Confirmation of Bioengineered Lactobacillus probiotic (BLP) strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAP Lin ) or L. monocytogenes (LbcLAP Lm ) by Western blotting (left panel) and confocal imaging (right panel; arrows)
- BLP Bioengineered Lactobacillus probiotic
- LbcLAP Lin Listeria innocua
- LbcLAP Lm L. monocytogenes
- FIG. 15 Schematics showing mouse experiment protocol.
- FIG. 19 BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAP Lin ) or Lm (LbcLAP Lm ) prevent Lm systemic infection in a mouse model.
- FIG. 20 BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAP Lin ) or Lm (LbcLAP Lm ) prevent Lm systemic infection in a mouse model.
- FIG. 21 BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAP Lin ) or Lm (LbcLAP Lm ) prevent Lm intestinal penetration in a mouse model.
- Lm counts (mean ⁇ SEM) in ileal lamina laminate (LP; right panels). Dots represent an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, four mice/group, n 100 villi.
- Lm is observed in the LP (arrows) in naive or LbcWT-treated mice but confined in the lumen (arrows) in BLP-treated mice (Lbc LAP Lin and Lbc LAP Lm ).
- FIG. 22 BLP (LbcLAP Lin ) prevents lethal L. monocytogenes infection in mice. Increased survival of BLP-treated mice (LbcLAP Lin ) at LD 50 dose. *p ⁇ 0.05 Kaplan-Meier log-rank test.
- FIGS. 23A-23B BLP colonization and persistence in the intestine limits Lm translocation despite discontinuous administration.
- FIG. 23A showing mouse experiment protocol: Mice were treated with L. casei (LbcWT) or BLP (LbcLAP Lin ) strain supplied in drinking water replenished daily (4-8 ⁇ 10 9 CFU/ml) for 10 days (0-9 days) and then challenged with Lm F4244 ( ⁇ 5 ⁇ 10 8 CFU/animal) on day 10, 15 and 20.
- FIG. 23B BLP-mediated reduced Lm burdens at 48 hpi in the intracellular location in the ileum (left), cecum (center), and colon (right) (all bottom panels, gentamicin resistant CFU), in mice on day 12
- IMB Listeria -specific immunomagnetic beads
- FIG. 26 BLP (LbcLAP Lin and LbcLAP Lm ) forms increased biofilm on mouse colonic villi (right two panels)
- FIG. 27 BLP prevents Lm from causing intestinal barrier damage in a mouse model.
- FIG. 28 BLP prevents Lm from causing intestinal barrier loss by maintaining mucus-producing goblet cells in mice.
- FIG. 29 BLP blocks Lm from causing disturbance of intestinal epithelial cell-cell junctional integrity.
- Each point represents an individual mouse.
- FIG. 30 BLP blocks Lm from causing disturbance of intestinal epithelial cell-cell junctional integrity.
- FIG. 31 BLP prevents Lm-induced NF- ⁇ B (p65) activation and modulates cytokine production and immune cells to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- Immunofluorescence micrographs of the ileal tissues showing decreased nuclear localization of p65 (green) in BLP-treated mice (10 days) at 48 hpi. Nuclei; DAPI, blue. Arrows indicate the nuclear localization of p65 in IEC of na ⁇ ve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) mice at 48 hpi.
- FIG. 32 BLP modulates the cytokine TNF ⁇ to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- FIG. 33 BLP modulates the cytokine IL-6 to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- FIG. 34 BLP modulates the cytokine IFN ⁇ to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- FIG. 35 BLP modulates the cytokine IL-10 to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- Graph showing increased IL-10 + cells quantified (mean ⁇ SEM) from immunostained ileal tissues (of BLP-treated (10 days) mice pre- or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi. Each point represents an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n 100 villi.
- FIG. 36 BLP modulates the cytokine TGF ⁇ + to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- Graph showing increased TGF ⁇ + cells quantified (mean ⁇ SEM) from immunostained ileal tissues of BLP-treated (10 days) mice pre- or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi. Each point represents an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n 100 villi.
- FIG. 37 BLP modulates CD4 + T-cell populations for immunomodulation.
- FIG. 38 BLP modulates FOXP3 + T-regulatory cells populations for immunomodulation.
- Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased FOXP3 + T-regulatory cells (left, brown, arrows), in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to na ⁇ ve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 ⁇ m.
- FIG. 39 BLP modulates CD11c + dendritic cells populations for immunomodulation.
- Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased CD11c + dendritic cells (left, brown, arrows), in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to na ⁇ ve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 ⁇ m. Quantification of CD11c + cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean ⁇ SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n 100 villi.
- FIG. 40 BLP modulates natural-killer NKp46 + immune cell populations for immunomodulation.
- Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased NKp46 + cells (left, brown, arrows) in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to na ⁇ ve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 ⁇ m. Quantification of NKp46 + cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean ⁇ SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n 100 villi.
- FIG. 41 Schematics showing the mechanism of BLP-mediated protection against listeriosis.
- the BLP prevents Lm Infection by three mechanisms (i) Competitive exclusion, (ii) improved intestinal barrier function, and (iii) contact-dependent immunomodulation.
- the term “about” can allow for a degree of variability in a value or range, for example, within 10%, within 5%, or within 1% of a stated value or of a stated limit of a range.
- the term “substantially” can allow for a degree of variability in a value or range, for example, within 70%, within 80%, within 90%, within 95%, or within 99% of a stated value or of a stated limit of a range.
- the term “patient” includes human and non-human animals such as companion animals (dogs and cats and the like) and livestock animals. Livestock animals are animals raised for food production.
- the patient to be treated is preferably a mammal, in particular a human being.
- pharmaceutically acceptable carrier refers to a pharmaceutically-acceptable material, composition or vehicle, such as a liquid or solid filler, diluent, excipient, solvent or encapsulating material, involved in carrying or transporting any subject composition or component thereof.
- a pharmaceutically-acceptable material such as a liquid or solid filler, diluent, excipient, solvent or encapsulating material, involved in carrying or transporting any subject composition or component thereof.
- Each carrier must be “acceptable” in the sense of being compatible with the subject composition and its components and not injurious to the patient.
- materials which may serve as pharmaceutically acceptable carriers include: (1) sugars, such as lactose, glucose and sucrose; (2) starches, such as corn starch and potato starch; (3) cellulose, and its derivatives, such as sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, ethyl cellulose and cellulose acetate; (4) powdered tragacanth; (5) malt; (6) gelatin; (7) talc; (8) excipients, such as cocoa butter and suppository waxes; (9) oils, such as peanut oil, cottonseed oil, safflower oil, sesame oil, olive oil, corn oil and soybean oil; (10) glycols, such as propylene glycol; (11) polyols, such as glycerin, sorbitol, mannitol and polyethylene glycol; (12) esters, such as ethyl oleate and ethyl laurate; (13) agar; (14) buffering agents, such as magnesium hydroxide and aluminum hydroxide;
- administering includes all means of introducing the compounds and compositions described herein to the patient, including, but are not limited to, oral (po), intravenous (iv), intramuscular (im), subcutaneous (sc), transdermal, inhalation, buccal, ocular, sublingual, vaginal, rectal, and the like.
- the compounds and compositions described herein may be administered in unit dosage forms and/or formulations containing conventional nontoxic pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, adjuvants, and vehicles.
- the total daily usage of the compounds and compositions described herein may be decided by the attending physician within the scope of sound medical judgment.
- the specific therapeutically effective dose level for any particular patient will depend upon a variety of factors, including the disorder being treated and the severity of the disorder; activity of the specific compound employed; the specific composition employed; the age, body weight, general health, gender, and diet of the patient: the time of administration, and rate of excretion of the specific compound employed, the duration of the treatment, the drugs used in combination or coincidentally with the specific compound employed; and like factors well known to the researcher, veterinarian, medical doctor or other clinician of ordinary skill.
- a wide range of permissible dosages are contemplated herein, including doses falling in the range from about 1 ⁇ g/kg to about 1 g/kg.
- the dosage may be single or divided, and may be administered according to a wide variety of dosing protocols, including q.d., b.i.d., t.i.d., or even every other day, once a week, once a month, and the like.
- the therapeutically effective amount described herein corresponds to the instance of administration, or alternatively to the total daily, weekly, or monthly dose.
- the term “therapeutically effective amount” refers to that amount of active compound or pharmaceutical agent that elicits the biological or medicinal response in a tissue system, animal or human that is being sought by a researcher, veterinarian, medical doctor or other clinicians, which includes alleviation of the symptoms of the disease or disorder being treated.
- the therapeutically effective amount is that which may treat or alleviate the disease or symptoms of the disease at a reasonable benefit/risk ratio applicable to any medical treatment.
- the term “therapeutically effective amount” refers to the amount to be administered to a patient, and may be based on body surface area, patient weight, and/or patient condition.
- body surface area may be approximately determined from patient height and weight (see, e.g., Scientific Tables, Geigy Pharmaceuticals, Ardley, N.Y., pages 537-538 (1970)).
- effective doses may also vary depending on the route of administration, optional excipient usage, and the possibility of co-usage of the compound with other conventional and non-conventional therapeutic treatments, including other anti-tumor agents, radiation therapy, and the like.
- a patient may be an animal or a human being.
- Probiotic The International Scientific Association of Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) in 2014 defined probiotics as “live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host” (Hill et al. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 11.8 (2014): 506-514).
- NTPs Next Generation Probiotics: Conform to the normal definition of a probiotic, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host and is applicable to the prevention, treatment, or cure of a disease or condition of human beings (O'Tolle et al. Nature microbiology 2.5 (2017): 17057; Langella et al. Frontiers in Microbiology 10 (2019): 1047).
- NGPs Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics: Conform to the normal definition of NGPs, but are genetically modified probiotic strains to exclusively target a specific pathogen, toxin or disease conditions and can be used for a therapeutic purpose (Amalaradjou et al Bioengineered 4.6 (2013): 379-387; Hill et al. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 11.8 (2014): 506-514).
- the present invention relates to a method for improving animal health and/or meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed of said animal.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to a method for improving animal health and/or meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed of said animal as disclosed herein, wherein said animal is selected from the group consisting of pig, sheep, goat, chicken, turkey, cat, dog, and cattle.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to a method for improving animal health and/or meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed of said animal as disclosed herein, wherein said NGBP is a reengineered bacteria expressing Listeria adhesion protein (LAP).
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to a method for improving animal health and/or meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed of said animal as disclosed herein, wherein said NGBP is a lyophilized product.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to an animal feed supplement for improving animal health and meat production compromising Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP).
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to an animal feed supplement for improving animal health and meat production compromising Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) as disclosed herein, wherein said NGBP is a reengineered bacteria expressing Listeria adhesion protein (LAP).
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- LAP Listeria adhesion protein
- the present invention relates to an animal feed supplement for improving animal health and meat production compromising Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) as disclosed herein, wherein said animal feed supplement is a lyophilized product.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to an animal feed supplement for improving animal health and meat production compromising Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) as disclosed herein, wherein said animal is selected from the group consisting of pig, sheep, goat, chicken, turkey, cat, dog, and cattle.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to a method to reduce or eliminate antibiotics used in an animal feed for improving animal health and meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to a method to reduce or eliminate antibiotics used in an animal feed for improving animal health and meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed as disclosed herein, wherein said animal is selected from the group consisting of pig, sheep, goat, chicken, turkey, cat, dog, and cattle.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to a method to reduce or eliminate antibiotics used in an animal feed for improving animal health and meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed as disclosed herein, wherein said NGBP is a reengineered bacteria expressing Listeria adhesion protein (LAP).
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to a method for treating or preventing an inflammatory condition of a patient comprising the step of administering a therapeutically effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP), together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, diluents, and excipients, to the patient in need of relief from said inflammatory condition.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to a method for treating or preventing an inflammatory condition of a patient comprising the step of administering a therapeutically effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP), together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, diluents, and excipients, to the patient in need of relief from said inflammatory condition as disclosed herein, wherein said inflammatory condition comprises Crohn's disease (CD), inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), and ulcerative colitis (US), wherein intestinal mucosal cells express a high level of Hsp60.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- the present invention relates to a method for treating or preventing an inflammatory condition of a patient comprising the step of administering a therapeutically effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP), together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, diluents, and excipients, to the patient in need of relief from said inflammatory condition as disclosed herein, wherein said NGBP is a reengineered bacteria expressing Listeria adhesion protein (LAP).
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- LAP Listeria adhesion protein
- the present invention relates to a method for treating or preventing an inflammatory condition of a patient comprising the step of administering a therapeutically effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP), together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, diluents, and excipients, to the patient in need of relief from said inflammatory condition as disclosed herein, wherein NGBP is administered orally.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- Lactobacillus casei can be used on a more commonly used probiotic strain, Lactobacillus casei to competitively exclude pathogen interaction in a mouse model.
- Lactobacillus casei expressing LAP from a nonpathogenic bacterium, L. innocua supplied to mice (A/J) in drinking water for 10 days, and subsequently challenged with L. monocytogenes was able to protect mice from listeriosis.
- This probiotic also significantly reduced L. monocytogenes burden in the extra-intestinal tissues, modulated proinflammatory cytokines levels, dampened NF-kB activity, and improved epithelial innate defense and barrier function to protect mice from the infection.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- LAP Listeria adhesion protein
- Nutritional deprivation also severely impairs gut function including reduced mucus secretion, and shortened villi height and crypt depth.
- Thermal stress can damage the intestinal epithelium and elicit enterocyte membrane damage or death alters villus/crypt structure, impairs tight junction integrity and increases endotoxin levels in the blood.
- Epithelial cells exposed to stress have shown increased Hsp60 expression.
- NGBP Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics
- LAP Listeria adhesion protein
- LAP from Listeria innocua restored adhesion and epithelial translocation ability of the lap-deficient L. monocytogenes strain to enterocytes.
- LAP from pathogenic Listeria i.e., L. monocytogenes
- LAP extracellular secreted LAP in the pathogen, re-associates on the surface of the bacterium to aid in bacterial adhesion and translocation across the epithelial barrier.
- LAP does not aid in adhesion to the intestinal epithelial cells possibly due to a defect in re-association of the protein on the surface of this bacterium (Burkholder et al., 2009; Jagadeesan et al., 2010).
- the lap of L. innocua strain F4248, cloned and expressed in the lap-deficient L we show that the lap of L. innocua strain F4248, cloned and expressed in the lap-deficient L.
- FIG. 1B restored its adhesion to ( FIG. 1D ), and translocation across ( FIG. 1E ) the Caco-2 cell monolayers at levels similar to that of a lap-mutant strain expressing LAP of L. monocytogenes (KB208LAP Lm ), or the L. monocytogenes WT (F4244, serovar 4b).
- Lactobacillus casei expressing LAP of L. innocua reduced L. monocytogenes infection in Caco-2 cell and a mouse model.
- the lap ORF (2.6 kb) from both L. innocua and L. monocytogenes was cloned separately into a Lactobacillus expression vector, pLP401T (Koo et al., 2012; Maassen et al., 1999), and the proteins were expressed on the wild-type probiotic Lactobacillus casei ATCC344 (LbcWT) and designated LbcLAP Lin and LbcLAP Lm , respectively.
- LAP expression in both bioengineered Lactobacillus probiotics (BLP) strains was confirmed by immunoblotting ( FIG.
- FIGS. 3A, 3B immunofluorescence staining and flow cytometry ( FIGS. 3A, 3B ) using anti-LAP mAb.
- LAP induces epithelial barrier dysfunction and promotes L. monocytogenes translocation across the mucosal membrane (Drolia et al., 2018); therefore, the BLP strains (LbcLAP Lin and LbcLAP Lm ) were tested in the in vitro transwell setup for their ability to traverse epithelial-barrier.
- none of the BLP strains showed any significant translocation while the L. monocytogenes WT strain as a control showed a significantly very high translocation ( FIG. 2B ).
- BLP strain pre-exposed to Caco-2 cell line significantly lowered L. monocytogenes adhesion to ( FIG. 2C ) and translocation across the epithelial monolayer in transwell ( FIG. 2D ), while the LbcWT pre-exposure did not show any significant reduction in L. monocytogenes translocation.
- a plasmid-vector control strain without the lap insert (LbcWT VC ) produced similar results as LbcWT, thus dismissing any extraneous anti-listerial effects that could be contributed by the virgin plasmid.
- the prophylactic effect of BLP feeding on listeriosis in mice was investigated using 8-10 weeks old female A/J mice that are highly sensitive to listeriosis (Czuprynski et al., 2003) in four experimental trials conducted over 5 years.
- probiotics survival in the simulated gastric fluid (SGF) and simulated intestinal fluid I (SIF-I) and II (SIF-II) were ensured by plate counting ( FIGS. 3D-3F ).
- Live/dead staining using carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester (cFDA) and propidium iodide (PI) also confirmed probiotics survival in gastric fluids ( FIG. 3G ) and Western blot showed LAP expression on BLP strains while grown in SIF-II ( FIG. 3H ).
- Bioengineered probiotics protected gut barrier integrity.
- LAP induces epithelial barrier dysfunction and promotes of L. monocytogenes translocation in both in vitro cell culture (Burkholder and Bhunia, 2010; Kim and Bhunia, 2013) and in vivo mouse model (Drolia et al., 2018).
- probiotics are known to maintain epithelial tight junction integrity through the immunomodulatory effect which is orchestrated by NF-kB and the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines such as TNF ⁇ , IL-10, IL-6 (Ahrne and Hagslatt, 2011; Pagnini et al., 2010; Zareie et al., 2006).
- Gut permeability was also assessed in BLP-fed mice by monitoring the levels of FD4 in serum and urine (Drolia et al., 2018).
- BLP-fed mice challenged with L. monocytogenes were orally administered with the FD4 4-5 h prior to sacrifice (Drolia et al., 2018).
- the FD4 levels in sera and urine were 1.82 ⁇ g/ml and 18.0 ⁇ g/ml, respectively, while the FD4 levels were 2.6 ⁇ g/ml and 46.9 ⁇ g/ml, after L. monocytogenes challenge.
- the FD4 levels in both sera and urine in animals that received BLP with or without L. monocytogenes challenge had substantially lower FD4 (about 1.9 ⁇ g/ml in sera and 13.2-22.4 ⁇ g/ml in urine) equivalent to that of the control mice that did not receive either bacterium.
- TEM Transmission electron microscopy
- LAP-mediated epithelial barrier dysfunction is governed by mislocalization of epithelial junction proteins, claudin-1, occludin, and E-cadherin (Drolia et al., 2018).
- L. monocytogenes WT alone or Caco-2 pre-treated with probiotics significantly decreased membrane localization of claudin-1, occludin, and E-cadherin analyzed by Western blotting ( FIG. 7A ) and the corresponding transcripts in agreement with our previous study (Drolia et al., 2018).
- Pre-treatment with the BLP prevented L. monocytogenes -mediated claudin-1, occludin and E-cadherin mislocalization.
- Ileal tissue histology and innate immune response to bioengineered probiotic Ileal tissue sections from mice collected at 48 h pi were first examined for inflammation after hematoxylin and eosin staining. Overall, the inflammation due to L. monocytogenes infection in 48 h pi was subtle ( FIGS. 8A-8B ). Ileal tissues of untreated control mice had cylindrical villi with relatively few lymphocytes in the lamina propria. Goblet cells (10% of the villous epithelium) and Paneth cells were mostly confined to the intestinal crypts. The remaining cells of the villous epithelium were enterocytes. The mice that did not receive any probiotics, but were challenged with L.
- FIGS. 8C-8D The BLP-fed mice challenged with L. monocytogenes showed the highest average histomorphological score, and higher goblet cell counts; however, the enterocytes remained intact with no sign of apparent necrosis ( FIGS. 8A-8D ).
- Hsp60 activates innate immune response (Chen et al., 1999; Pockley, 2003). Earlier, we observed that L. monocytogenes infection induced membrane Hsp60 expression, which subsequently facilitated enhanced LAP-mediated L. monocytogenes translocation (Burkholder and Bhunia, 2010; Drolia et al., 2018) by breaching an innate immune system in the mouse. Therefore, we examined the Hsp60 expression in the mouse ileal sections. Hsp60 expression was pronounced and uniformly distributed on the villous epithelial cells of mice that did not receive any probiotics but challenged with L. monocytogenes for 48 h ( FIG. 8E ).
- Hsp60 Hsp60 expression was lower in all probiotic-fed mice but enhanced when challenged with L. monocytogenes .
- FIG. 9A Confocal immunostaining of ileal tissue samples also showed increased translocation of P-p65 and p65 into the nucleus by L. monocytogenes WT but reduced levels in BLP-pretreated mice indicating that BLP stimulates NF-kB ( FIG. 9B ). Furthermore, TNF- ⁇ and IL-6 levels were increased substantially in the murine ileal tissue extracts ( FIGS. 9C-9D ) from L. monocytogenes infected mice without probiotic feeding, while the levels were equivalent to that of the uninfected controls when fed with the BLP strains.
- Probiotic bacteria also influenced cellular immune response to L. monocytogenes infection as seen in the spleen by flow cytometry and cytology.
- splenic CD4 + FIG. 9E
- CD8 ⁇ + FIG. 9F
- T cell populations only CD8 ⁇ + counts showed a strong response in mice challenged with L. monocytogenes in the absence of any probiotic, while the counts were lower in BLP-primed mice following L. monocytogenes challenge.
- L. monocytogenes infection also increased splenic CD11c + (dendritic cell) counts irrespective of the type of probiotics used ( FIG. 9G ).
- Mice fed with Lactobacillus casei (probiotics) expressing the LAP protein (LbcLAPLin) showed significantly (**P ⁇ 0.01, Kaplan-Meier log-rank test) higher survival compared to that of LbcWT.
- FIG. 12 Comparison of the amino acid sequence of LAP ( Listeria adhesion protein) from different strains of Lm and Lin obtained from the NCBI database.
- FIG. 13 Confirmation of Bioengineered Lactobacillus probiotic (BLP) strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAP Lin ) or L. monocytogenes (LbcLAP Lm ) by Western blotting (left panel) and confocal imaging (right panel; arrows)
- BLP Bioengineered Lactobacillus probiotic
- LbcLAP Lin Listeria innocua
- LbcLAP Lm L. monocytogenes
- FIG. 15 Schematics showing mouse experiment protocol.
- FIG. 19 BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAP Lin ) or Lm (LbcLAP Lm ) prevent Lm systemic infection in a mouse model.
- FIG. 20 BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAP Lin ) or Lm (LbcLAP Lm ) prevent Lm systemic infection in a mouse model.
- FIG. 21 BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAP Lin ) or Lm (LbcLAP Lm ) prevent Lm intestinal penetration in a mouse model.
- Lm counts (mean ⁇ SEM) in ileal lamina laminate (LP; right panels). Dots represent an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, four mice/group, n 100 villi.
- Lm is observed in the LP (arrows) in naive or LbcWT-treated mice but confined in the lumen (arrows) in BLP-treated mice (Lbc LAP Lin and Lbc LAP Lm ).
- FIG. 22 BLP (LbcLAP Lin ) prevents lethal L. monocytogenes infection in mice. Increased survival of BLP-treated mice (LbcLAP Lin ) at LD 50 dose. *p ⁇ 0.05 Kaplan-Meier log-rank test.
- FIGS. 23A-23B BLP colonization and persistence in the intestine limits Lm translocation despite discontinuous administration.
- FIG. 23A showing mouse experiment protocol: Mice were treated with L. casei (LbcWT) or BLP (LbcLAP Lm ) strain supplied in drinking water replenished daily (4-8 ⁇ 10 9 CFU/ml) for 10 days (0-9 days) and then challenged with Lm F4244 ( ⁇ 5 ⁇ 10 8 CFU/animal) on day 10, 15 and 20.
- FIG. 23B BLP-mediated reduced Lm burdens at 48 hpi in the intracellular location in the ileum (left), cecum (center), and colon (right) (all bottom panels, gentamicin resistant CFU), in mice on day 12
- IMB Listeria -specific immunomagnetic beads
- FIG. 26 BLP (LbcLAP Lin and LbcLAP Lm ) forms increased biofilm on mouse colonic villi (right two panels)
- FIG. 27 BLP prevents Lm from causing intestinal barrier damage in a mouse model.
- FIG. 28 BLP prevents Lm from causing intestinal barrier loss by maintaining mucus-producing goblet cells in mice.
- FIG. 29 BLP blocks Lm from causing disturbance of intestinal epithelial cell-cell junctional integrity.
- Each point represents an individual mouse.
- FIG. 30 BLP blocks Lm from causing disturbance of intestinal epithelial cell-cell junctional integrity.
- FIG. 31 BLP prevents Lm-induced NF- ⁇ B (p65) activation and modulates cytokine production and immune cells to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- Immunofluorescence micrographs of the ileal tissues showing decreased nuclear localization of p65 (green) in BLP-treated mice (10 days) at 48 hpi. Nuclei; DAPI, blue. Arrows indicate the nuclear localization of p65 in IEC of na ⁇ ve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) mice at 48 hpi.
- FIG. 32 BLP modulates the cytokine TNF ⁇ to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- FIG. 33 BLP modulates the cytokine IL-6 to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- FIG. 34 BLP modulates the cytokine IFN ⁇ to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- FIG. 35 BLP modulates the cytokine IL-10 to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- Graph showing increased IL-10 + cells quantified (mean ⁇ SEM) from immunostained ileal tissues (of BLP-treated (10 days) mice pre- or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi. Each point represents an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n 100 villi.
- FIG. 36 BLP modulates the cytokine TGF ⁇ + to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis.
- Graph showing increased TGF ⁇ + cells quantified (mean ⁇ SEM) from immunostained ileal tissues of BLP-treated (10 days) mice pre- or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi. Each point represents an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n 100 villi.
- FIG. 37 BLP modulates CD4 + T-cell populations for immunomodulation.
- FIG. 38 BLP modulates FOXP3 + T-regulatory cells populations for immunomodulation.
- Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased FOXP3 + T-regulatory cells (left, brown, arrows), in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to na ⁇ ve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 ⁇ m.
- FIG. 39 BLP modulates CD11c + dendritic cells populations for immunomodulation.
- Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased CD11c + dendritic cells (left, brown, arrows), in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to na ⁇ ve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 ⁇ m. Quantification of CD11c + cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean ⁇ SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n 100 villi.
- FIG. 40 BLP modulates natural-killer NKp46 + immune cell populations for immunomodulation.
- Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased NKp46 + cells (left, brown, arrows) in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to na ⁇ ve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 ⁇ m. Quantification of NKp46 + cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean ⁇ SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n 100 villi.
- FIG. 41 Schematics showing the mechanism of BLP-mediated protection against listeriosis.
- the BLP prevents Lm Infection by three mechanisms (i) Competitive exclusion, (ii) improved intestinal barrier function, and (iii) contact-dependent immunomodulation.
- Bioengineered probiotic feeding also increased survival of mice after L. monocytogenes challenge. Mice were fed with probiotic bacteria for 10 days and then challenged with lethal dosage of L. monocytogenes (2 ⁇ 10 9 CFU/mouse). Mice survival was examined over 10 days. Over 82% mice from bioengineered probiotic (LbcLAP Lin )-fed mice group survived while 60% and 50% mice survived that received LbcWT and no probiotic control (na ⁇ ve), respectively ( FIG. 11 ). This study clearly indicates that LAP-expressing bioengineered probiotic bacteria can prevent fatal infection caused by L. monocytogenes.
- Listeria monocytogenes is an invasive opportunistic intracellular human pathogen. It is ubiquitous and is transmitted primarily through food resulting in numerous fatal and costly outbreaks that are associated with consumption of contaminated cheese, ice cream, fish, ready-to-eat meats, and produce (cantaloupe, apples, sprouts, spinach). Besides pregnancy, immune suppressed conditions in the elderly, and malignancy, organ transplant and HIV-AIDs patients are also highly vulnerable (Schuchat et al., 1991). The case fatality rate of listeriosis is 19%.
- Probiotic microbes also produce metabolites and macromolecules promoting gut health by modifying cytokine production and enhancing gut barrier function (Bron et al., 2017; Cho et al., 2014; Salminen et al., 2010). Probiotic microbes can prevent/alleviate chronic inflammatory bowel disease, colorectal cancer, metabolic disorders and obesity, and osteoporosis (Amalaradjou and Bhunia, 2012; Azcarate-Peril et al., 2011; Ly et al., 2011).
- Probiotics are also used in pre-term neonates to allow early colonization with beneficial microbes (Deshpande et al., 2011), and increased sIgA secretion in the gut (Bakker-Zierikzee et al., 2006).
- Lactobacillus species is most common because of their ability to survive, colonize and modulate the immune system in the gut, and are generally safe (Amalaradjou and Bhunia, 2012).
- Corr et al. Corr et al. (Corr et al., 2007) showed that bacteriocin producing Lactobacilli could control listeriosis in a mouse model.
- LAP plays an important role during early-phase of infection (within 24-48 h), promoting translocation of L. monocytogenes across the epithelium in mice (Burkholder et al., 2009; Drolia et al., 2018).
- the LAP lacks a leader sequence thus the bacterial secretory system, SecA2 helps LAP to secrete to the extracellular milieu and for surface display (Burkholder et al., 2009; Mishra et al., 2011).
- the LAP from L. monocytogenes bears high sequence similarity to the LAP from L. innocua (non-pathogen) and the L.
- innocua LAP is unable to re-associate on its own surface possibly due to the lack of a surface anchoring molecule (Jagadeesan et al., 2011; Jagadeesan et al., 2010). This defect probably prevents L. innocua from translocating through the epithelial paracellular route (Burkholder and Bhunia, 2010). Interestingly, the L. innocua LAP fully restored epithelial translocation ability in a lap-deficient L. monocytogenes strain in a cell culture model (this study). This raised an interesting question; can the LAP from L. innocua expressed on probiotic Lactobacillus prevent listeriosis in a mouse model?
- A/J mice are highly sensitive to listeriosis due to C5 complement deficiency (Czuprynski et al., 2003; Jagannath et al., 2000); therefore, these animals should be ideal for studying the prophylactic effect of BLP against listeriosis.
- both bioengineered Lactobacillus casei expressing LAP Lm or LAP Lin were able to prevent L. monocytogenes dissemination substantially (up to 5 log or 99.999% reduction) to extra-intestinal tissues and organs and the mice appeared healthy when sacrificed at 48 h pi.
- Both LbcWT and BLP were maintained in the gut during the 10 days feeding trials and they were not detected in any extra-intestinal tissues upon sacrifice implying that either they did not cross the intestinal barrier or the translocated BLP were cleared immediately by the local immune system. Blood sera also did not reveal any noticeable LAP-specific antibody response suggesting that the LAP antigen may not have disseminated systemically.
- NF-kB NF-kB activation factor
- LAP induced epithelial IL-6 and TNF- ⁇ production during L. monocytogenes infection through activation of NF- ⁇ B (Drolia et al., 2018)
- LAP-expressing BLP was able to dampen L. monocytogenes -mediated proinflammatory cytokine production despite moderate activation of NF-kB. This suggests, perhaps BLP helped maintain epithelial immune homeostasis thus was able to counteract L. monocytogenes mediated inflammatory response.
- bifidum showed increased reactive oxygen intermediates production and enhanced phagocytic activity in macrophages (Deepti and Vinod, 2014).
- a long-term consumption of probiotic has shown to enhance innate immunity and production of IL-1, IL-1 ⁇ , IL-6, IL-10, IL-12, IL-18, INF- ⁇ , and TNF- ⁇ by monocytes and DC (Cross, 2002; Niers et al., 2005).
- CD8 + T-cell response is critical for controlling systemic L. monocytogenes infection (Huleatt et al., 2001).
- CD8 ⁇ + marker in spleen in the L. monocytogenes infected control group 48 h pi, while the opposite trend in BLP-fed animals.
- CD8 ⁇ + cells represent both cytotoxic T-cells and a subset of dendritic cells, and both are requisite for efficient splenic infiltration during intravenous administration of L. monocytogenes in mice (Edelson et al., 2011).
- the wild-type probiotic strains tested are generally ineffective against L. monocytogenes infection (Koo et al., 2012); therefore, the bioengineered probiotic strains were made to prevent listeriosis in a mouse model.
- Our study has demonstrated that the LAP-expressing bioengineered Lactobacillus casei , including the LAP from a nonpathogenic Listeria , protected mice from L. monocytogenes infection through colonization resistance, maintenance of gut permeability and tight junction stability, and immunomodulation.
- Such bioengineered strain can potentially prevent listeriosis in high-risk populations and at the same time promote health benefits inherent to probiotic lactobacilli.
- L. casei a vancomycin-resistant strain of L. casei was selected by sequentially culturing the bacterium in increasing concentrations of vancomycin (300 ⁇ g/ml).
- Recombinant L. paracasei was grown under anaerobic conditions at 37° C. with erythromycin (2 ⁇ g/mL).
- the lap-deficient mutant L. monocytogenes strain KB208 was grown in TSBYE with erythromycin (10 ⁇ g/mL) at 42° C.
- KB208 expressing L. innocua LAP was grown in TSBYE with erythromycin (5 ⁇ g/mL) and chloramphenicol (7 ⁇ g/mL) at 42° C.
- the L. innocua lap gene was cloned into pMGS101, electrotransformed into KB208, and designated LmKB208LAP Lin .
- modified MRS 1% w/v protease peptone, 0.5% w/v yeast extract, 0.2% w/v meat extract, 0.1% v/v TWEEN® 80, 37 mM C 2 H 3 NaO 2 , 0.8 mM MgSO 4 , 0.24 mM MnSO 4 , 8.8 mM C 6 H 14 N 2 O 7 in 0.1 M potassium phosphate buffer, pH 7.0
- LAP expression was verified by Western blotting, ELISA and immunofluorescence staining using anti-LAP mAb (Koo et al., 2012).
- SGF simulated gastrointestinal fluid
- SIF-I and SIF-II simulated intestinal fluid
- Both SIF-I and SIF-II contained bile (bovine bile; 10 g/L, Sigma-Aldrich) and porcine pancreatin (1 g/L; Sigma-Aldrich), but SIF-I pH was 4.3-5.2 and SIF-II pH 6.7-7.5 (adjusted using alkaline solution; 150 ml of 1 N NaOH, 14 g of PO 4 H 2 Na.2H 2 O and deionized water up to 1 L).
- Viability was also verified by performing live and dead staining using cFDA-SE (carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester, 50 ⁇ M) and PI (propidium iodide, 30 ⁇ M) as described (Lee et al., 2004).
- cFDA-SE carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester, 50 ⁇ M
- PI propidium iodide, 30 ⁇ M
- LbcWT and BP LbcLAP Lin and LbcLAP Lm
- LbcLAP Lin and LbcLAP Lm LbcLAP Lin and LbcLAP Lm
- Caco-2 cell monolayers The ability of LbcWT and BP (LbcLAP Lin and LbcLAP Lm ) to inhibit L. monocytogenes adhesion, invasion, and translocation through Caco-2 cell monolayers was investigated as before (Koo et al., 2012). BLP strains were added to each well (MOE 10) and incubated for 24 h. Unbound bacteria were removed by washing with Dulbecco's modified Eagles' medium containing 10% fetal calf serum (D10F), and L. monocytogenes was added (MOI 10) and incubated for 1 h to determine inhibition of adhesion and invasion.
- D10F Dulbecco's modified Eagles' medium containing 10% fetal calf serum
- the cell monolayers were then washed three times and adherent bacteria were released by TRITONTM X-100 treatment and plated. To determine intracellular bacteria, the cell monolayers were treated with gentamycin (50 ⁇ g/mL) for 1 h before TRITONTM X-100 treatment. As a vector control, the recombinant LbcVecLAP ⁇ strain was used.
- Bacterial translocation through epithelial barrier was assayed as before (Burkholder and Bhunia, 2010). Briefly, Caco-2 cells were grown on transwell filter inserts ( 4 - ⁇ m pore filter; Corning, Lowell, Mass.) for 10-12 days to reach confluence. Bacteria were added to the apical well of the insert and incubated for 2 h. Liquid from the basal well was removed, serially diluted, and distributed onto TSA-YE agar plates for enumeration. TEER of Caco-2 cells before and after treatment was measured using a Millicell ERS system (Millipore, Billerica, Mass.).
- FITC-Dextran 3-5 kDa FITC-Dextran (FD4; Sigma) was added to the well (apical side) and translocation of FD4 to the basal side was monitored by a spectrophotometer (Spectramax).
- L. monocytogenes F 4244, L. innocua F4248, LbcWT, LbcLAP Lm , and LbcLAP Lin were cultured for 16-18 h at 37° C. in TSBYE, MRS, or MRS supplemented with 2 ⁇ g/ml erythromycin broth, respectively (see section 3.2.1). All cultures were pelleted by centrifugation at 8000 ⁇ g for 3 min and washed with sterile PBS. All cellular concentrations were serially diluted to obtain a cell concentration of 10 6 cfu/ml. L. monocytogenes or L.
- innocua were allowed to interact with the individual probiotic strains (LbcWT, LbcLAP Lm , or LbcLAP Lin ) at a 1:1 concentration in sterile PBS for 1 h at room temperature with constant agitation on Lab Doctor Revolver (MidSci, Valley Park, Mo.).
- Anti-Listerial magnetic Dynabeads Cat. No. 71006, Thermofischer Scientific were used to capture and separate L. monocytogenes and L. innocua from unbound probiotics. Briefly, 20 ⁇ l/ml of bead slurry was added to the bacterial mixtures and allowed to interact for 10 min at room temperature with constant agitation.
- Beads were magnetically separated and washed with sterile PBS-T (0.1%) 3 times (10 min each wash) with constant agitation. Beads were serially diluted and plated on MOX (Neogen) and MRS agar (BD) for enumeration of Listeria and probiotics, respectively.
- Relative humidity was 50-60% and the temperature was 20-25° C. Mice were randomly assigned to eight different groups. Fresh preparation of probiotics was supplied daily with sterile deionized water at ⁇ 9 ⁇ 10 9 CFU/ml for 10 days. Control animals received only water. Probiotic colonization in the gut was monitored daily by analyzing fecal counts of probiotics on agar plates. For challenge experiment, mice received oral gavage of L. monocytogenes F4244 (WT) at a concentration of 5-8.8 ⁇ 10 8 CFU/mouse using a feeding tube (Popper) and control mice received PBS (Burkholder et al., 2009). Animals were observed for clinical signs, such as ruffled hair, movement and recumbency, and their feeding and drinking habits.
- WT L. monocytogenes F4244
- mice were euthanized by CO 2 asphyxiation at 24 and 48 h pi, and intestine (duodenum, jejunum ileum, cecum, and colon), MLN, spleen, liver, kidney, and blood from the heart were aseptically collected. Feces were collected from each mouse from the time of infection to sacrifice. In some cases, intestinal sections were treated with gentamycin (100 ⁇ g/ml) for 2 h to kill extracellular bacteria. Organs/tissues were homogenized using a tissue homogenizer (Cole Parmer, Vernon Hills, Ill.) in 0.5 ml (blood), 4 ml (spleen, kidney, lungs) or 9 ml (feces, intestine, liver) of PBS.
- MRS agar (Neogen, Lansing, Mich.) containing vancomycin (300 ⁇ g/ml) was used for enumeration of LbcWT, and MRS agar containing erythromycin (2 ⁇ g/ml) was used for bioengineered strains.
- Modified Oxford medium (MOX; Oxoid, Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK) was used for enumeration of Listeria .
- a portion of the ileum ( ⁇ 2 cm) was saved for histopathology, immunohistochemistry, qRT-PCR and other experiments.
- the gut mucosa was collected from an 8-cm section of ileum for sIgA analysis (Haneberg et al., 1994).
- Gut permeability assay Four to five hour before sacrifice, animals were orally gavaged with 100 ⁇ l of FD4 (3 mg/ml; Sigma). Urine voluntarily excreted during euthanasia, was collected from the bag, and blood was collected by cardiac puncture. Sera and urine were appropriately diluted and assayed for FD4 by measuring in a spectrophotometer as described (Condette et al., 2014).
- Caco-2 monolayers (12 days of incubation) were formed in 12 well plates. Probiotics were introduced to the monolayer at an MOE of 10 and incubated for 24 h. The monolayers were challenged with L. monocytogenes (MOE 10) or LPS free purified rLAP (1 mg/ml) for 4 h (Drolia et al., 2018). Culture supernatants were collected and tested for IL-6 and TNF- ⁇ content using ELISA kits (Raybiotech ELH-IL6 and ELH-TNF- ⁇ ). For mouse tissue, IL-6 and TNF- ⁇ , mouse-specific ELISA kits (Ray Biotech ELM-TNF- ⁇ and ELM-IL6-CL) were used.
- ileal tissue homogenates 100 ⁇ l were incubated overnight (16 h).
- Primary antibodies specific to IL-6 or TNF- ⁇ and streptavidin conjugated secondary antibodies were incubated for 1 h and 45 min, respectively, at room temperature. The color was developed as instructed by the manufacturer.
- mice were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde and embedded in paraffin. Sections (5 ⁇ m thick) were stained with hematoxylin and eosin. Microscopic examination was performed by a board-certified veterinary pathologist and the interpretation was based on standard histopathological morphology. The pathologist was blinded to the treatment groups. The extent of mouse ileal lesions was determined by using a semi-quantitative method that included the amount of inflammatory infiltrate and percentage of goblet cells comprising the villous epithelium.
- a histomorphological scale for assessing inflammation in the lamina intestinal of the mucosa is provided as follows: 3, marked amounts (sheets of granulocytes expanding the width of the villous tip); 2, moderate amounts (sheets of granulocytes at the base of the villous); 1, mild amounts (multifocal scattering); and 0, none observed.
- percentage of goblet cells following scale was used: 3, 50% or greater; 2, 25-50%; 1, 11-25%; and 0, ⁇ 10%. The higher the score, the more likely there is an infection in the intestinal tissues.
- For CD3 + cell staining paraffin-embedded intestinal thin sections pre-treated with heat-induced epitope retrieval solution and then blocked with Dako protein block according to manufacturer's instructions.
- Caco-2 monolayers were rinsed in PBS, fixed and permeabilized in 5% formaldehyde for 15 min.
- the Caco-2 monolayers were blocked using 5% normal goat serum in PBS for 1 h at room temperature and then incubated with the primary antibody to ZO-1, Claudin-1, and Occludin or E-cadherin-1 ⁇ -catenin (Invitrogen) at 37° C. overnight.
- the monolayers were then washed with PBS to remove unbound antibody and then incubated with the FITC-conjugated secondary antibody (Anti-mouse/Anti-rabbit IgG) for 1 h at room temperature.
- DAPI was used for nuclear staining.
- the monolayers were then washed and imaged using the Leica fluorescence microscope (Leica, model DMLB, Wetzlar, Germany) equipped with SPOT software (version 4.6.4.2, Diagnostic Instruments, Sterling Heights, Mich.).
- RNA preparation and quantitative reverse transcription PCR Ileum sections (10-15 mm) of each mouse were collected and immediately transferred to 2.0 ml sterile, DNA/RNase-free cryovials containing RNAlater® (Ambion® by Life Technologies Corp., Carlsbad, Calif.), and stored at ⁇ 80° C. until RNA extraction. Individual tissue samples were homogenized with TRIzol® reagent (Life Technologies Corp.) using a Tissue-Tearor (BioSpec Products, Inc., Bartlesville, Okla.), and total RNA was isolated with Direct-zolTM RNA MiniPrep Plus kit (Zymo Research Corp., Irvine, Calif.) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Total RNA aliquots were stored at ⁇ 80° C.
- Primers for each target gene were selected from previous publications, in addition to GAPDH, chosen as an endogenous control. Three technical replicates for each target gene per sample were included in the qPCR assay. Means of triplicates were taken, and the relative amount of target mRNA was normalized to GAPDH ran in every assay. Relative quantification was evaluated using the Comparative Ct method ( ⁇ Ct), and fold difference ( 2 ⁇ ct ) was calculated between control (Control) and treatment groups (Schmittgen and Livak, 2008).
- the gut mucosa was collected from an 8 cm section of ileum for analysis of sIgA. Briefly, 96-well polystyrene plates (HBX, Immulon, ThermoFisher) were coated with 100 ⁇ l of mucus (diluted 1:100 in carbonate coating buffer) and stored at 4° C. overnight. The wells were washed three times in PBST and then sequentially incubated with 1:100 anti-mouse IgA conjugated to HRP and QuantaBlu substrates (Fisher). The fluorescence intensity was measured (Ex: 340 nm; Em: 420 nm) using a Spectramax fluorescent plate reader (Gemini, Sunnyvale, Calif.).
- L. monocytogenes (Lm) F4244 10 7 CFU/well
- Lm-specific IgA was then estimated using 1:100 anti-mouse IgA to HRP and QuantaBlu substrate as mentioned above.
- serum IgG levels 96-well plates were sensitized with serum samples (diluted 1:100 in carbonate coating buffer) at 4° C. overnight, and the IgG levels were detected using anti-mouse IgG ( 1 : 2000 ) and QuantaBlu.
- L. monocytogenes -specific IgG response was measured following sensitization with the F4244 ( 10 7 CFU/well), followed by exposure to serum and anti-mouse IgG.
Abstract
Description
- This application is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/458,243, filed Jul. 1, 2019, which relates to and claims the benefit of U.S. provisional application 62/692,880, filed on Jul. 2, 2018. The contents of which are expressly incorporated herein by reference in its entirety into the present disclosure.
- A computer-readable form (CRF) of the Sequence Listing is submitted concurrently with this application. The file, generated on Jun. 28, 2019, is entitled Sequence_Listing_68291-02_ST25_txt. Applicant states that the content of the computer-readable form is the same and the information recorded in computer readable form is identical to the written sequence listing.
- The present application relates to a method for treating or preventing an inflammatory condition of a patient comprising the step of administering a therapeutically effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP), together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, diluents, and excipients, to the patient in need of relief from said inflammatory condition. In some other embodiments, the present invention relates to method for improving animal health and/or meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed of said animal.
- This section introduces aspects that may help facilitate a better understanding of the disclosure. Accordingly, these statements are to be read in this light and are not to be understood as admissions about what is or is not prior art.
- Listeria monocytogenes is an opportunistic human foodborne pathogen responsible for severe systemic infection (listeriosis), and abortion, stillbirth and premature birth in pregnant women, mortality in newborns, the elderly and other immunocompromised individuals. L. monocytogenes is well adapted to survive in the harsh environment of the gut (Sleator et al., 2009; Xayarath and Freitag, 2012). For the systemic spread, L. monocytogenes overcomes intestinal epithelial innate defense (Vance et al., 2009) and crosses the epithelial barrier. M cells overlying Peyer's patches (Marco et al., 1997; Pron et al., 1998) and Internalin A (InlA)-mediated pathways are considered common events for epithelial barrier crossing. InlA interacts with the host cell receptor E-cadherin for intracellular spread (Lecuit et al., 2001); however, it is located at the basolateral side of the epithelial adherens junction (AJ) and is inaccessible to luminal L. monocytogenes. It is proposed that E-cadherin exposed during villous epithelial cell extrusion (Pentecost et al., 2006) and mucus exocytosis (Nikitas et al., 2011), can interact with Listeria InlA. InlA/E-cadherin interaction is host species-specific. In mouse E-cadherin, proline is substituted by glutamic acid at the amino
acid sequence position 16, thus InlA has low affinity for mouse or rat E-cadherin but has a strong interaction with the E-cadherin of permissive hosts, such as humans, gerbils and guinea pigs (Lecuit et al., 1999). Studies using transgenic mice expressing “humanized” E-cadherin (Disson et al., 2008) or murinized InlA (InlAm) (Bou Ghanem et al., 2012; Wollert et al., 2007) have indicated that L. monocytogenes may use alternate routes to translocate across the gut mucosa. We recently showed that L. monocytogenes, uses Listeria adhesion protein (LAP) to cross the intestinal epithelium by inducing epithelial barrier dysfunction by activating NF-kB and MLCK, in the absence of InlA, in epithelial cell and mouse models (Burkholder and Bhunia, 2010; Drolia et al., 2018). In mice, the bacterium is found in the epithelial lamina propria, mesenteric lymph nodes (MLN), blood, liver, spleen, and kidneys. - LAP (866 aa) is a housekeeping alcohol acetaldehyde dehydrogenase (Jagadeesan et al., 2010) in L. monocytogenes and displays moonlighting activity (See below and Sequence Listing for details). It interacts with the host cell Hsp60 (Wampler et al., 2004), a mammalian moonlight chaperone protein (Henderson et al., 2013), activates NF-kB leading to the proinflammatory cytokines release, myosin light chain kinase (MLCK) upregulation and epithelial tight junction protein mislocalization (claudin-1, occludin and E-cadherin), leading to a leaky epithelial barrier for bacterial passage (Drolia et al., 2018).
-
LAP protein sequence from Listeria monocytogenes (SEQ ID NO: 1): 1 maikenaaqe vlevqkvidr ladngqkalk afesynqeqv dnivhamala gldqhmplak 61 laveetgrgl yedkciknif ateyiwnnik nnktvgvine dvqtgvieia epvgvvagvt 121 pvtnptsttl fkaiiaiktr npiifafhps aqrcssaaak vvydaaiaag apehciqwve 181 kpsleatkql mnhdkvalvl atggagmvks aystgkpalg vgpgnvpayi dktakikrsv 241 ndiilsksfd qgmicaseqa vivdkevake vkaemeankc yfvkgaefkk lesyvinpek 301 gtlnpdvvgk spawianqag fkvpedtkil vaeikgvgdk yplsheklsp vlafieaanq 361 aeafdrceem lvygglghsa vihstdkevq kafgirmkac riivnapsaq ggigdiyngf 421 ipsltlgcgs ygknsvsqnv satnllnvkr iadrrnnmqw fklppkiffe kystqylqkm 481 egvervfivt dpgmgsfkyv dvviehlkkr gndvayqvfa dvepdpsdvt vykgaelmkd 541 fkpdtiialg ggsamdaakg mwlfyehpea sffglkqkfl dirkrtfkyp klggkakfva 601 ipttsgtgse vtpfavitdk ennikyplad yeltpdvaiv daqyvttvpa hitadtgmdv 661 lthaiesyvs vmasdytrgl siraielvfe nlresvltgd pdarekmhna salagmafan 721 aflginhsla hkigpefhip hgranailmp hvirynalkp kkhalfprye sfradedyar 781 isriigfpaa tteegvkslv deiiklgkdv gidmslkgqn vakkdldavv dtladrafmd 841 qcttanpkqp lvselkeiyl eaykgv LAP protein sequence from Listeria innocua (SEQ ID NO: 2): 1 maikenaaqe vlevqkvidr ladngqkalk afesynqeqv dnivhamala gldqhmplak 61 laveetgrgl yedkciknif ateyiwnnik nnktvgvine dtqtgvieia epvgvvagvt 121 pvtnptsttl fkaiiaiktr npiifafhps aqrcsseaak vvydaavaag apehciqwve 181 kpsleatkql mnhdkvalvl atggagmvks aystgkpalg vgpgnvpayi dktakikrsv 241 ndiilsksfd qgmicaseqa vivdkevake vkaemeankc yfvkgaefkk lesyvinpek 301 gtlnpdvvgk spawianqag fkvpedtkil vaeikgvgdk yplsheklsp vlafieaatq 361 aeafdrceem lvygglghsa vihstdkevq kafgirmkac riivnapsaq ggigdiyngf 421 ipsltlgcgs ygknsvsqnv satnllnvkr iadrrnnmqw fklppkiffe kystqylqkm 481 egvervfivt dpgmvqfkyv dvviehlkkr gndvayqvfa dvepdpsdvt vykgaelmkd 541 fkpdtiialg ggsamdaakg mwlfyehpea sffglkqkfl dirkrtfkyp klggkakfva 601 ipttsgtgse vtpfavitdk ennikyplad yeltpdvaiv daqyvttvpa hitadtgmdv 661 lthaiesyvs vmasdytrgl siraielvfe nlresvltgd pdarekmhna salagmafan 721 aflginhsla hkigpefhip hgranailmp hvirynalkp kkhalfprye sfradedyar 781 isriigfpaa tteegvkslv deiiklgkdv gidmslkgqn vakkdldavv dtladrafmd 841 qcttanpkqp lvselkeiyl eaykgv - The gut mucosa represents the first site for the dynamic interaction of the enteric pathogens with the host (Finlay and Falkow, 1997). Therefore, averting this critical pathogen interaction step should help prevent extra-intestinal dissemination of pathogens and the consequent pathology. Live probiotics bacteria such as lactobacilli and bifidobacteria are known to colonize and proliferate in the intestine to improve intestinal microbial balance and protect the host from pathogens (Cross, 2002; Salminen et al., 2010). Among the different probiotic bacteria used, Lactobacillus species are common because they are natural inhabitants of the gut, modulate immune system (Amalaradjou and Bhunia, 2012; Sanders et al., 2014), and enhance epithelial innate defense and restore epithelial barrier function (Bron et al., 2017; Pagnini et al., 2010).
- One of the major drawbacks of probiotics for prophylactic or therapeutic use is that the antimicrobial effect is inconsistent and may be strain specific (Hill et al., 2014) thus may have limited efficacy against a target pathogen. Therefore, there are unmet needs in using probiotic bacteria to prevent pathogen interactions with the host (Amalaradjou and Bhunia, 2013; Focareta et al., 2006; Michon et al., 2016; Mohamadzadeh et al., 2010).
- The above and other objects, features, and advantages of the present invention will become more apparent when taken in conjunction with the following description and drawings wherein identical reference numerals have been used, where possible, to designate identical features that are common to the figures, and wherein:
-
FIGS. 1A-1D demonstrates that Listeria Adhesion Protein (LAP) from Listeria innocua restored adhesion and translocation ability of the lap-deficient L. monocytogenes (KB208) to enterocytes.FIG. 1A shows amino acid sequence comparison of LAP from L. monocytogenes (SEQ ID NO: 1) and L. innocua (SEQ ID NO: 2).FIG. 1B shows Western blot analysis of protein preparation from cell wall showing expression of L. innocua LAP in L. monocytogenes KB208 (KB208LAPLin).FIG. 1C shows adhesion of KB208LAPLin to Caco-2 cellsFIG. 1D shows translocation of KB208LAPLin across Caco-2 cells. Data represent three experiments ran in duplicate. *, P=0.05, **, P=0.001; ***, P=0.0001, ns=not significant. -
FIGS. 2A-2F show bioengineered Lactobacillus Probiotic (BLP) expressing LAP (Listeria adhesion protein) of L. innocua reduced L. monocytogenes infection in Caco-2 model.FIG. 2A shows the analysis of LAP expression in bioengineered L. casei: Western blot showing LAP expression in cell wall fractions of L. casei expressing LAP of L. monocytogenes (LbcLAPLm), and L. innocua (LbcLAPLin). Purified recombinant LAP of L. monocytogenes (rLAPLm) was used as a positive control.FIG. 2B shows translocation of bioengineered probiotics across Caco-2 cells.FIG. 2C shows inhibition of L. monocytogenes adhesion; andFIG. 2D shows transepithelial translocation of Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) on Caco-2 cell line treated with L. casei (Lbc) and LbcLAPLm, LbcLAPLin, and L. casei carrying empty plasmid vector, pLP401T without any insert (LbcVeclap-).FIG. 2E shows increased co-aggregation of BLP (LbcLAPLm and LbcLAPLin) strains in co-incubated suspensions containing equal numbers of BLP+Lm cells captured via Listeria-specific immunomagnetic beads (IMB).FIG. 2F depicts micrographs showing co-aggregated BLP cells (LbcLAPLm and LbcLAPLin) with IMB-captured Lm cells expressing GFP. Bars, 1 μm. -
FIGS. 3A-3H show characterization of bioengineered probiotic strains.FIGS. 3A-3B show immunofluorescence staining and flow cytometry using anti-LAP mAb-H7 to verify LAP expression on bioengineered probiotics bacteria.FIG. 3C depicts the absence of bacteriocin-like antimicrobial activity in LbcWT and bioengineered strains (LbcLAPLin; LbcLAPLm) against L. monocytogenes lawn. Pediocin (a bacteriocin from Pediococcus acidilactici), and vancomycin were used as positive controls showing a zone of inhibition.FIGS. 3D-3F show survival of bioengineered L. casei (LbcLAPLin; LbcLAPLm) and LbcWT in simulated gastric fluid (SGF) (3D), simulated intestinal fluid I (SGF-I) (3E), and simulated intestinal fluid II (SGF-II) (3F).FIG. 3G shows the light microscopic photographs showing the live and dead stained bioengineered LbcLAPLin strain using cFDA-SE (carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester) and PI (propidium iodide) after exposure to simulated gastric fluid (SGF) and simulated intestinal fluid (SIF) for 2.5 h.FIG. 3H confirms LAP expression in bioengineered probiotics (LbcLAPLin; LbcLAPLm), but absent in LbcWT when grown SIF-I. -
FIGS. 4A-4K demonstrate that bioengineered Lactobacillus casei reduced L. monocytogenes infection in a mouse (A/J) model.FIG. 4A is a schematics showing animal experiment protocol: mice (female A/J mice, 6 weeks old) were fed probiotics for 10 days, and then challenged with L. monocytogenes F4244 (8.8×108 cfu/animal).FIG. 4B Mice body weight analysis over 12-days period during probiotic feeding and challenge with L. monocytogenes (Lm) attime points FIGS. 4C-4D show analysis of bioengineered Lbc colonization in the mouse gut: (4C) Total lactic acid bacterial counts in animals that were fed with different bioengineered Lbc or controls on MRS agar plate and vancomycin resistant LbcWT, LbcLAPLin; LbcLAPLm (4D) in the intestine and feces during 10 days of feeding. Wild type and bioengineered probiotic counts in the intestine and fecal samples of mice from day 13. MRS containing vancomycin (300 μg/ml) was used to isolate LbcWT (n=15 mice) and MRS containing erythromycin (2 μg/ml) was used to enumerate bioengineered probiotics, LbcLAPLin (n=15) and LbcLAPLm (n=15). As expected, no antibiotic resistant probiotics were detected from control animals or control animals that received L. monocytogenes (Lm) only. -
FIGS. 4E-4K depict mice experiments showing bioengineered probiotic mediated prevention of L. monocytogenes infection. L. monocytogenes counts in probiotic fed mice in (4E) liver, (4F) spleen, (4G) MLN, (4H) kidney, (4I) blood, (4J) intestine, and (4K) feces after 24 h or 48 h post infection. (n=6-10 mice). Each animal was represented by a dot in the plot (n=3-10 mice per group). Horizontal dotted lines indicate detection limit of the assay. Treatments were, wild type L. casei (LbcWT), bioengineered L. casei expressing LAP of L. monocytogenes (LbcLAPLm) and L. innocua (LbcLAPLin). No background Listeria was detected from mice that received only the probiotics (LbcWT, LbcLAPLm, LbcLAPLin) or no probiotics at all. Data were analyzed by Man Whitney test usingGraphPad Prism 6. (*, P=0.05, **, P=0.001; ***, P=0.0001, ns=not significant). -
FIG. 5 shows visual examination of health status of mice after challenged with L. monocytogenes. The animals in the left panels (a,c,e,g) were not challenged (control), while the right panels (b,d,f,h) were challenged with L. monocytogenes F4244. The clinical onset of listeriosis in (b) No Lbc+Lm and (d) LbcWT+Lm was evident. LbcLAPLin+Lm mice appeared healthy. -
FIGS. 6A-6D demonstrate epithelial permeability assessment after probiotic exposure.FIGS. 6A-6B show epithelial permeability in Caco-2 cell monolayers in transwell insert using 4 kDa FITC-Dextran (FD4) (a) movement from apical to basolateral side and Transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER) (b) after treatment with Control, L. monocytogenes (Lm), No Lbc+Lm, LbcWT, LbcWT+Lm, LbcLAPLm, LbcLAPLm+Lm, LbcLAPLin, LbcLAPLin+Lm.FIGS. 6A-6B show intestinal epithelial permeability assessment by measuring FD4 levels in serum (6C) and urine (6D) in probiotic fed mice fromFIGS. 4A-4K . Treatments were, control, No Lbc+Lm, LbcWT, LbcWT+Lm, LbcLAPLm, LbcLAPLm+Lm, LbcLAPLin, LbcLAPLm+Lm. Bioengineered probiotics significantly reduced the FD4 translocation compared to the LbcWT or Lm alone. (***, P<0.0001; *, P<0.05, ns, not significant). -
FIGS. 7A-7C show cellular junctional protein distribution analysis in Caco-2 and ileal tissue of mice.FIG. 7A shows Western blot showing tight junction (ZO-1, occludin, claudin-1) and adherence junction protein (E-cadherin) levels in cells after treatment with L. monocytogenes or probiotic bacteria followed by L. monocytogenes challenge. Confirmation of cell-junction protein mislocalization by confocal immunofluorescence microscopy in Caco-2 cells (7B) and in mouse ileal tissue section (7C). White arrows (presence) and yellow (absence or mislocalization) pointing to the cell junction proteins. -
FIGS. 8A-8E show histopathological scoring of ileal tissues of bioengineered probiotic-fed mice. (8A) H&E stained sections, (8B) Histology score, (8C & 8D) Increased goblet cell counts in bioengineered probiotic-fed mice ileal tissues. (8E) Immunostaining of tissue sections for Hsp60 expression, (8F) analysis of transcripts of hspdl (hsp60) in ileal tissues in probiotic fed mice. Treatments were, control, No Lbc+Lm, LbcWT, LbcWT+Lm, LbcLAPLm, LbcLAPLm+Lm, LbcLAPLin, LbcLAPLin+Lm. (8E & 8F) In the presence of L. monocytogenes, epithelial cells expressed a high level of Hsp60 irrespective of probiotic treatment. Data were analyzed by one way ANOVA, and Tukey's grouping was used to determine statistical significance at ***, P<0.0001; *, P<0.05, ns, not significant). -
FIGS. 9A-91 show immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects of probiotics in RAW macrophage cell line and in mice. (9A & 9B) Attenuation of NF-kB expression in the luciferase reporter RAW cell line (a) and mouse ileum (b). Confocal imaging shows attenuation of NF-kB activity by probiotics compared to Lm WT (b). (9C & 9D) TNF-α and IL-6 expression in mice ilea after probiotic exposure. (9E-9G) Flow cytometry analysis showing spleen CD4 cell levels were unaffected while CD8 and CD11c cell levels were increased after challenged with probiotics followed by Lm challenge. (9H) Spleen cytology score and (9I) light microscopic imaging showed an increased inflammatory response in characterized by infiltration of neutrophils, macrophages, and lymphocytes, and blinded cytology score to probiotic pre-exposure followed by L. monocytogenes infection. Treatments were, control, No Lbc+Lm, LbcWT, LbcWT+Lm, LbcLAPLm, LbcLAPLm+Lm, LbcLAPLin, LbcLAPLin+Lm. (n=3-10 mice/group). Two-way ANOVA and one-tailed T-tests of individual probiotic treatment pairs were used to demonstrates a significance at P<0.05. -
FIGS. 10A-10D . Immunomodulatory action of probiotics expressing the LAP protein: Ileum harvested from A/J mice supplied with or without probiotics for ten days followed by 48 h-post infection with L. monocytogenes was immunostained for CD3 (10A), CD8α (10B), Fox-P3 (10C), and cleaved caspase-3 (10D, CC-3; marker of apoptosis. Graphs show CD3+, CD8α+, CC-3+ and CD4+ Fox-P3+, cells from 25 villi/mouse. Each point represents an individual mouse. Mice fed with probiotics expressing the LAP protein (LbcLAPLm or LbcLAPLin) prior to L. monocytogenes infection show significantly reduced CD3+, CD8+ (arrows), CC-3+ cells but significantly increased CD4+ Foxp3+ cells. -
FIG. 11 shows survival of mice (A/J strain) supplied with or without probiotics for ten days in drinking water followed by oral infection with L. monocytogens (n=at least 10 per group). Mice fed with Lactobacillus casei (probiotics) expressing the LAP protein (LbcLAPLin) showed significantly (**P<0.01, Kaplan-Meier log-rank test) higher survival compared to that of LbcWT. -
FIG. 12 . Comparison of the amino acid sequence of LAP (Listeria adhesion protein) from different strains of Lm and Lin obtained from the NCBI database. -
FIG. 13 . Confirmation of Bioengineered Lactobacillus probiotic (BLP) strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or L. monocytogenes (LbcLAPLm) by Western blotting (left panel) and confocal imaging (right panel; arrows) -
FIG. 14 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or L. monocytogenes (LbcLAPLm) prevent Lm interaction in vitro in a Caco-2 cell culture model. Increased inhibition of Lm adhesion (left, n=6), invasion (middle, n=6) and translocation (right, n=6) by the BLP strains after 24 h exposure to Caco-2 cells. -
FIG. 15 . Schematics showing mouse experiment protocol. -
FIG. 16 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLin) prevent Lm induced weight loss in mice. Normalized mouse body weight (mean±SD, n=5) onday -
FIG. 17 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLin) show increased intestinal colonization. Increased BLP counts in the intestinal content of mice (n=5) ondays -
FIG. 18 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLin) prevent Lm intestinal infection in a mouse model. Reduced Lm burdens in the intracellular location in the ileum (left, n=6), cecum (middle, n=6), and colon (right, n=6). -
FIG. 19 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLm) prevent Lm systemic infection in a mouse model. Reduced Lm burdens in the liver (left), spleen (right) (left and right, n=5 at 24 h post infection (hpi); and n=17, 14, 13, 14 at 48 hpi), MLN (center, n=11, 9, 8, 9, for each group, respectively), -
FIG. 20 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLm) prevent Lm systemic infection in a mouse model. Reduced Lm burdens in the blood (right, n=5 at 24 hpi; and n=11, 8, 8, 8, at 48 hpi for each group, respectively) and kidney (left, n=6, 3, 3, 3, for each group, respectively). -
FIG. 21 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLm) prevent Lm intestinal penetration in a mouse model. Micrographs of ileal (left) villi immunostained for ZO-1 (brown) and Lm (red, arrows) and counterstained for nucleus (blue) at 48 hpi. Bars, 10 μm. The boxed areas were enlarged. Bars, 1 μm. Lm counts (mean±SEM) in ileal lamina propria (LP; right panels). Dots represent an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, four mice/group, n=100 villi. Lm is observed in the LP (arrows) in naive or LbcWT-treated mice but confined in the lumen (arrows) in BLP-treated mice (Lbc LAPLin and Lbc LAPLm). -
FIG. 22 . BLP (LbcLAPLin) prevents lethal L. monocytogenes infection in mice. Increased survival of BLP-treated mice (LbcLAPLin) at LD50 dose. *p<0.05 Kaplan-Meier log-rank test. -
FIGS. 23A-23B . BLP colonization and persistence in the intestine limits Lm translocation despite discontinuous administration. Schematics (FIG. 23A ) showing mouse experiment protocol: Mice were treated with L. casei (LbcWT) or BLP (LbcLAPLin) strain supplied in drinking water replenished daily (4-8×109 CFU/ml) for 10 days (0-9 days) and then challenged with Lm F4244 (˜5×108 CFU/animal) onday FIG. 23B ) BLP-mediated reduced Lm burdens at 48 hpi in the intracellular location in the ileum (left), cecum (center), and colon (right) (all bottom panels, gentamicin resistant CFU), in mice onday 12 -
FIG. 24 . BLP displays increased co-aggregation with Lm. Increased co-aggregation of BLP (left panel, LbcLAPLin, and LbcLAPLm) strains in co-incubated suspensions containing equal numbers of BLP+Lm cells (n=4) captured via Listeria-specific immunomagnetic beads (IMB) but not with BLP+L. innocua (Lin, n=6) cells or L. casei (alone) (n=10). Micrographs (right panel) showing co-aggregated BLP cells (arrows) with IMB-captured Lm cells expressing GFP (b). Bars, 1 μm. -
FIG. 25 . BLP (LbcLAPLin and LbcLAPLm) forms increased biofilm on plastics. Increased biofilm formation (Abs 595 nm, mean±SEM) of BLP strains as measured by crystal violet staining in monoculture and co-culture with grown in microtiter plates. Images (top panel) show crystal violet stained biofilms of representative wells for each treatment. Data represent three independent experiments obtained from n=6 independent microtiter plate wells. -
FIG. 26 . BLP (LbcLAPLin and LbcLAPLm) forms increased biofilm on mouse colonic villi (right two panels) -
FIG. 27 . BLP prevents Lm from causing intestinal barrier damage in a mouse model. Representative H&E-stained micrographs (bars, 25 μm) (left) and the histological score (right, each point represents an individual mouse) of ileal tissue sections from control (mock-treated) uninfected naïve mice or L. casei-treated (10 days, LbcWT or BLP) pre or post-Lm-challenge at 48 hpi (n=9, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11 mice for each group, respectively). Arrows point to the loss of villous epithelial cells and increased polymorphonuclear and mononuclear cells infiltrating the base of the villous lamina propria in naïve (naive+Lm) and Lbc WT-treated mice (LbcWT+Lm) at 48 hpi. -
FIG. 28 . BLP prevents Lm from causing intestinal barrier loss by maintaining mucus-producing goblet cells in mice. Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of the ileum stained for Muc2 (left, brown), nuclei (blue) from control (mock-treated) uninfected naïve mice or L. casei-treated (10 days, LbcWT or BLP) pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi. Bars, 10 μm. Quantification of Muc2 (right)-positive cells, each point represents an individual mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. Arrows point to increased numbers of Muc2 (left) in BLP treated mice (pre- or post-Lm challenge). -
FIG. 29 : BLP blocks Lm from causing disturbance of intestinal epithelial cell-cell junctional integrity. FITC conjugated 4 kDa dextran (FD4) gut permeability of control (mock-treated) naïve uninfected mice or L. casei-treated (10 days, LbcWT or BLP) pre- or post-Lm challenge (48 hpi) in serum (c) and urine (d). Each point represents an individual mouse. Data represent mean±SEM of n=3 mice for all groups except Lm group, n=5 mice. -
FIG. 30 . BLP blocks Lm from causing disturbance of intestinal epithelial cell-cell junctional integrity. Immunofluorescence micrographs of the ileal tissues showing increased expression of MLCK and P-MLC (green; arrows) and mislocalization (intracellular puncta) of claudin-1 (green; arrows), occludin, and E-cadherin (red; arrows) in naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) but baseline expression of MLCK and P-MLC and intact localization of occludin, claudin-1 and E-cadherin in BLP-treated mice (10 days) at 48 hpi, relative to uninfected naïve mice. Nuclei; DAPI, blue. Images are representative of five different fields from n=3 mice per treatment. Bars, 10 μm. LP, Lamina Propria. -
FIG. 31 : BLP prevents Lm-induced NF-κB (p65) activation and modulates cytokine production and immune cells to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. Immunofluorescence micrographs of the ileal tissues showing decreased nuclear localization of p65 (green) in BLP-treated mice (10 days) at 48 hpi. Nuclei; DAPI, blue. Arrows indicate the nuclear localization of p65 in IEC of naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) mice at 48 hpi. The right panels show the quantified results (mean±SEM) of p65 nuclear positive IEC. Each point represents an average of 15 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=60 villi. Bars, 10 μm. -
FIG. 32 : BLP modulates the cytokine TNFα to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. ELISA showing decreased TNFα (n=6 mice for all groups except LbcWT and LbcLAPLin+Lm group; n=5 and 4 mice, respectively), in the ileal tissues of BLP-treated (10 days) mice, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) at 48 hpi. -
FIG. 33 : BLP modulates the cytokine IL-6 to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. ELISA showing decreased IL-6 (n=6 mice for all groups except LbcWT and LbcLAPLin+Lm group; n=5 and 4 mice, respectively), in the ileal tissues of BLP-treated (10 days) mice, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) at 48 hpi -
FIG. 34 : BLP modulates the cytokine IFNγ to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. ELISA showing increased IFNγ (n=4 mice for all groups), in the ileal tissues of BLP-treated (10 days) mice, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) at 48 hpi -
FIG. 35 : BLP modulates the cytokine IL-10 to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. Graph showing increased IL-10+ cells quantified (mean±SEM) from immunostained ileal tissues (of BLP-treated (10 days) mice pre- or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi. Each point represents an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 36 : BLP modulates the cytokine TGFβ+ to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. Graph showing increased TGFβ+ cells quantified (mean±SEM) from immunostained ileal tissues of BLP-treated (10 days) mice pre- or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi. Each point represents an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 37 : BLP modulates CD4+ T-cell populations for immunomodulation. Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased CD4+ cells (left, brown, arrows), in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 μm. Quantification of CD4+ cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean±SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 38 : BLP modulates FOXP3+ T-regulatory cells populations for immunomodulation. Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased FOXP3+ T-regulatory cells (left, brown, arrows), in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 μm. Quantification of FOXP3+ T-regulatory cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean±SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 39 : BLP modulates CD11c+ dendritic cells populations for immunomodulation. Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased CD11c+ dendritic cells (left, brown, arrows), in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 μm. Quantification of CD11c+ cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean±SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 40 : BLP modulates natural-killer NKp46+ immune cell populations for immunomodulation. Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased NKp46+ cells (left, brown, arrows) in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 μm. Quantification of NKp46+ cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean±SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 41 . Schematics showing the mechanism of BLP-mediated protection against listeriosis. The BLP prevents Lm Infection by three mechanisms (i) Competitive exclusion, (ii) improved intestinal barrier function, and (iii) contact-dependent immunomodulation. - For the purposes of promoting an understanding of the principles of the present disclosure, reference will now be made to the embodiments illustrated in the drawings, and specific language will be used to describe the same. It will nevertheless be understood that no limitation of the scope of this disclosure is thereby intended.
- In the present disclosure the term “about” can allow for a degree of variability in a value or range, for example, within 10%, within 5%, or within 1% of a stated value or of a stated limit of a range.
- In the present disclosure the term “substantially” can allow for a degree of variability in a value or range, for example, within 70%, within 80%, within 90%, within 95%, or within 99% of a stated value or of a stated limit of a range.
- The term “patient” includes human and non-human animals such as companion animals (dogs and cats and the like) and livestock animals. Livestock animals are animals raised for food production. The patient to be treated is preferably a mammal, in particular a human being.
- The term “pharmaceutically acceptable carrier” is art-recognized and refers to a pharmaceutically-acceptable material, composition or vehicle, such as a liquid or solid filler, diluent, excipient, solvent or encapsulating material, involved in carrying or transporting any subject composition or component thereof. Each carrier must be “acceptable” in the sense of being compatible with the subject composition and its components and not injurious to the patient. Some examples of materials which may serve as pharmaceutically acceptable carriers include: (1) sugars, such as lactose, glucose and sucrose; (2) starches, such as corn starch and potato starch; (3) cellulose, and its derivatives, such as sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, ethyl cellulose and cellulose acetate; (4) powdered tragacanth; (5) malt; (6) gelatin; (7) talc; (8) excipients, such as cocoa butter and suppository waxes; (9) oils, such as peanut oil, cottonseed oil, safflower oil, sesame oil, olive oil, corn oil and soybean oil; (10) glycols, such as propylene glycol; (11) polyols, such as glycerin, sorbitol, mannitol and polyethylene glycol; (12) esters, such as ethyl oleate and ethyl laurate; (13) agar; (14) buffering agents, such as magnesium hydroxide and aluminum hydroxide; (15) alginic acid; (16) pyrogen-free water; (17) isotonic saline; (18) Ringer's solution; (19) ethyl alcohol; (20) phosphate buffer solutions; and (21) other non-toxic compatible substances employed in pharmaceutical formulations.
- As used herein, the term “administering” includes all means of introducing the compounds and compositions described herein to the patient, including, but are not limited to, oral (po), intravenous (iv), intramuscular (im), subcutaneous (sc), transdermal, inhalation, buccal, ocular, sublingual, vaginal, rectal, and the like. The compounds and compositions described herein may be administered in unit dosage forms and/or formulations containing conventional nontoxic pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, adjuvants, and vehicles.
- It is to be understood that the total daily usage of the compounds and compositions described herein may be decided by the attending physician within the scope of sound medical judgment. The specific therapeutically effective dose level for any particular patient will depend upon a variety of factors, including the disorder being treated and the severity of the disorder; activity of the specific compound employed; the specific composition employed; the age, body weight, general health, gender, and diet of the patient: the time of administration, and rate of excretion of the specific compound employed, the duration of the treatment, the drugs used in combination or coincidentally with the specific compound employed; and like factors well known to the researcher, veterinarian, medical doctor or other clinician of ordinary skill.
- Depending upon the route of administration, a wide range of permissible dosages are contemplated herein, including doses falling in the range from about 1 μg/kg to about 1 g/kg. The dosage may be single or divided, and may be administered according to a wide variety of dosing protocols, including q.d., b.i.d., t.i.d., or even every other day, once a week, once a month, and the like. In each case the therapeutically effective amount described herein corresponds to the instance of administration, or alternatively to the total daily, weekly, or monthly dose.
- As used herein, the term “therapeutically effective amount” refers to that amount of active compound or pharmaceutical agent that elicits the biological or medicinal response in a tissue system, animal or human that is being sought by a researcher, veterinarian, medical doctor or other clinicians, which includes alleviation of the symptoms of the disease or disorder being treated. In one aspect, the therapeutically effective amount is that which may treat or alleviate the disease or symptoms of the disease at a reasonable benefit/risk ratio applicable to any medical treatment.
- As used herein, the term “therapeutically effective amount” refers to the amount to be administered to a patient, and may be based on body surface area, patient weight, and/or patient condition. In addition, it is appreciated that there is an interrelationship of dosages determined for humans and those dosages determined for animals, including test animals (illustratively based on milligrams per meter squared of body surface) as described by Freireich, E. J., et al., Cancer Chemother. Rep. 1966, 50 (4), 219, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. Body surface area may be approximately determined from patient height and weight (see, e.g., Scientific Tables, Geigy Pharmaceuticals, Ardley, N.Y., pages 537-538 (1970)). It is appreciated that effective doses may also vary depending on the route of administration, optional excipient usage, and the possibility of co-usage of the compound with other conventional and non-conventional therapeutic treatments, including other anti-tumor agents, radiation therapy, and the like.
- As used herein, a patient may be an animal or a human being.
- Probiotic: The International Scientific Association of Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) in 2014 defined probiotics as “live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host” (Hill et al. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 11.8 (2014): 506-514).
- Next Generation Probiotics (NGPs): Conform to the normal definition of a probiotic, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host and is applicable to the prevention, treatment, or cure of a disease or condition of human beings (O'Tolle et al. Nature microbiology 2.5 (2017): 17057; Langella et al. Frontiers in Microbiology 10 (2019): 1047).
- Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBPs): Conform to the normal definition of NGPs, but are genetically modified probiotic strains to exclusively target a specific pathogen, toxin or disease conditions and can be used for a therapeutic purpose (Amalaradjou et al Bioengineered 4.6 (2013): 379-387; Hill et al. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 11.8 (2014): 506-514).
- In some illustrative embodiments, the present invention relates to a method for improving animal health and/or meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed of said animal.
- In some illustrative embodiments, the present invention relates to a method for improving animal health and/or meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed of said animal as disclosed herein, wherein said animal is selected from the group consisting of pig, sheep, goat, chicken, turkey, cat, dog, and cattle.
- In some illustrative embodiments, the present invention relates to a method for improving animal health and/or meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed of said animal as disclosed herein, wherein said NGBP is a reengineered bacteria expressing Listeria adhesion protein (LAP).
- In some illustrative embodiments, the present invention relates to a method for improving animal health and/or meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed of said animal as disclosed herein, wherein said NGBP is a lyophilized product.
- In some other illustrative embodiments, the present invention relates to an animal feed supplement for improving animal health and meat production compromising Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP).
- In some illustrative embodiments, the present invention relates to an animal feed supplement for improving animal health and meat production compromising Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) as disclosed herein, wherein said NGBP is a reengineered bacteria expressing Listeria adhesion protein (LAP).
- In some illustrative embodiments, the present invention relates to an animal feed supplement for improving animal health and meat production compromising Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) as disclosed herein, wherein said animal feed supplement is a lyophilized product.
- In some illustrative embodiments, the present invention relates to an animal feed supplement for improving animal health and meat production compromising Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) as disclosed herein, wherein said animal is selected from the group consisting of pig, sheep, goat, chicken, turkey, cat, dog, and cattle.
- Yet in some other embodiments, the present invention relates to a method to reduce or eliminate antibiotics used in an animal feed for improving animal health and meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed.
- In some other embodiments, the present invention relates to a method to reduce or eliminate antibiotics used in an animal feed for improving animal health and meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed as disclosed herein, wherein said animal is selected from the group consisting of pig, sheep, goat, chicken, turkey, cat, dog, and cattle.
- In some other embodiments, the present invention relates to a method to reduce or eliminate antibiotics used in an animal feed for improving animal health and meat production comprising the step of adding an effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP) to the feed as disclosed herein, wherein said NGBP is a reengineered bacteria expressing Listeria adhesion protein (LAP).
- In some other embodiments, the present invention relates to a method for treating or preventing an inflammatory condition of a patient comprising the step of administering a therapeutically effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP), together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, diluents, and excipients, to the patient in need of relief from said inflammatory condition.
- In some other embodiments, the present invention relates to a method for treating or preventing an inflammatory condition of a patient comprising the step of administering a therapeutically effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP), together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, diluents, and excipients, to the patient in need of relief from said inflammatory condition as disclosed herein, wherein said inflammatory condition comprises Crohn's disease (CD), inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), and ulcerative colitis (US), wherein intestinal mucosal cells express a high level of Hsp60.
- In some other embodiments, the present invention relates to a method for treating or preventing an inflammatory condition of a patient comprising the step of administering a therapeutically effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP), together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, diluents, and excipients, to the patient in need of relief from said inflammatory condition as disclosed herein, wherein said NGBP is a reengineered bacteria expressing Listeria adhesion protein (LAP).
- In some other embodiments, the present invention relates to a method for treating or preventing an inflammatory condition of a patient comprising the step of administering a therapeutically effective amount of Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP), together with one or more pharmaceutically acceptable carriers, diluents, and excipients, to the patient in need of relief from said inflammatory condition as disclosed herein, wherein NGBP is administered orally.
- Here, we investigated whether a probiotic bacterium expressing LAP can competitively exclude pathogen interaction on the host epithelial cell, thereby preventing listeriosis in a high-risk population in the background of the probiotic's natural beneficial attributes. In a previous study, as a proof of concept, we showed that LAP of L. monocytogenes expressed on Lactobacillus paracasei was able to reduce L. monocytogenes interaction with the enterocyte-like Caco-2 cell model, however, its effectiveness in an animal model and the host response are unknown. Here, we investigated if the LAP especially from a non-pathogenic Listeria (L. innocua), can be used on a more commonly used probiotic strain, Lactobacillus casei to competitively exclude pathogen interaction in a mouse model. Here, we show that Lactobacillus casei expressing LAP from a nonpathogenic bacterium, L. innocua, supplied to mice (A/J) in drinking water for 10 days, and subsequently challenged with L. monocytogenes was able to protect mice from listeriosis. This probiotic also significantly reduced L. monocytogenes burden in the extra-intestinal tissues, modulated proinflammatory cytokines levels, dampened NF-kB activity, and improved epithelial innate defense and barrier function to protect mice from the infection.
- Potential benefits of “Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP)” expressing Listeria adhesion protein (LAP) from a nonpathogenic Listeria (L. innocua) that binds to a mammalian cell receptor, Hsp60 on human health:
-
- Probiotics, in general, have positive effects on the gut via their expression of antimicrobial agents, their colonization of niches that might otherwise be occupied by pathogenic bacteria, modulating cytokine levels, and their effects on the gut immune system. Overall, these effects are anti-inflammatory.
- A key ‘receptor’ for LAP is Hsp60, which is involved in both chaperoning and immune system function. At low levels, Hsp60 is anti-inflammatory, but at higher concentrations, it can take on pro-inflammatory roles.
- In many chronic inflammatory disease conditions such as Crohn's Disease (CD), Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), and Ulcerative Colitis (UC), intestinal mucosal cells express a high level of Hsp60.
- Inflammatory disease disrupts gut barrier function thus gut becomes leaky allowing luminal microbes and endotoxins to enter blood circulation. NGBP through its interaction with Hsp60 can maintain epithelial barrier integrity thus prevent endotoxin from crossing gut epithelial barrier—thus maintain a gut health.
- Targeting innate or exogenous microbe-induced Hsp60 in mucosal cells with LAP-expressing NGBP may usefully repress inflammatory processes in the gut, as well as some types of infectious processes.
- LAP-expressing NGBP localization and persistence in the gut is also enhanced because of their interaction with mucosal Hsp60.
- LAP-expressing NGBP also prevents Listeria monocytogenes colonization and systemic spread and provides protection against severe disease as confirmed in a mouse model.
- The LAP-expressing NGBP, by virtue of its Hsp60 targeting, uniquely addresses stabilization of the gut to inflammatory and microbiological challenges, as demonstrated in mouse studies.
- On the other hand, meat animals such as swine encounters various stressful situations throughout their life. Early in life, weaning, food and water deprivation during transportation and heat are common stressors. Stressors can reduce feed intake, exert inflammatory response, and based on the severity, the stressors can affect gut health by disrupting epithelial barrier function thus making the gut a “leaky gut.” A leaky gut permits increased leakage of luminal commensal bacterial endotoxins (LPS, peptidoglycan) or pathogens into the submucosal location resulting in increased inflammatory cytokine secretion (TNFα, IL-6, TGFβ, IL-8, etc) from intestinal epithelial cells and immune cells. Nutritional deprivation also severely impairs gut function including reduced mucus secretion, and shortened villi height and crypt depth. Thermal stress can damage the intestinal epithelium and elicit enterocyte membrane damage or death alters villus/crypt structure, impairs tight junction integrity and increases endotoxin levels in the blood. Epithelial cells exposed to stress have shown increased Hsp60 expression. Altogether, stressors affect growth performance and make animals susceptible to various infectious agents with a huge financial loss to the farmers. Antibiotics are often used in feed to control infections and to enhance growth performance; however, concerns for the onset of antibiotics resistance require an alternative approach.
- Potential benefits of “Next Generation Bioengineered Probiotics (NGBP)” expressing Listeria adhesion protein (LAP) from a nonpathogenic Listeria (L. innocua) that binds to a mammalian cell receptor, Hsp60 on animal health:
-
- LAP-expressing NGBP can be used as a feed supplement to help improve gut health by increased colonization of probiotics by specifically interacting with mucosal Hsp60.
- NGBP can improve gut barrier function by exerting anti-inflammatory response
- Generally, probiotics are most effective when normal intestinal homeostasis is perturbed, particularly during periods of stress. Here NGBP with increased interaction with stressed mucosal cells would be very effective in maintaining intestinal homeostasis.
- Because of anti-inflammatory and anti-microbial response of NGBP, antibiotics use in feed can be reduced or eliminated.
- NGBP mediated improved gut health can also enhance growth performance and body weight.
- The present invention may be better understood in light of the following non-limiting compound examples and method examples.
- LAP from Listeria innocua (non-pathogen) restored adhesion and epithelial translocation ability of the lap-deficient L. monocytogenes strain to enterocytes. LAP from pathogenic Listeria (i.e., L. monocytogenes) shares 99.3% amino acid sequence with the LAP from a nonpathogenic Listeria (L. innocua) (Bailey et al., 2017; Jagadeesan et al., 2010) (
FIG. 1A ). It is proposed that extracellular secreted LAP in the pathogen, re-associates on the surface of the bacterium to aid in bacterial adhesion and translocation across the epithelial barrier (Jagadeesan et al., 2010). However, in L. innocua, LAP does not aid in adhesion to the intestinal epithelial cells possibly due to a defect in re-association of the protein on the surface of this bacterium (Burkholder et al., 2009; Jagadeesan et al., 2010). Here, we show that the lap of L. innocua strain F4248, cloned and expressed in the lap-deficient L. monocytogenes mutant strain (KB208LAPLin) (FIG. 1B ) restored its adhesion to (FIG. 1D ), and translocation across (FIG. 1E ) the Caco-2 cell monolayers at levels similar to that of a lap-mutant strain expressing LAP of L. monocytogenes (KB208LAPLm), or the L. monocytogenes WT (F4244, serovar 4b). These data provide a strong indication that LAP from L. innocua has similar adhesion characteristics as the L. monocytogenes WT strain. - Lactobacillus casei expressing LAP of L. innocua reduced L. monocytogenes infection in Caco-2 cell and a mouse model. The lap ORF (2.6 kb) from both L. innocua and L. monocytogenes was cloned separately into a Lactobacillus expression vector, pLP401T (Koo et al., 2012; Maassen et al., 1999), and the proteins were expressed on the wild-type probiotic Lactobacillus casei ATCC344 (LbcWT) and designated LbcLAPLin and LbcLAPLm, respectively. LAP expression in both bioengineered Lactobacillus probiotics (BLP) strains was confirmed by immunoblotting (
FIG. 2A ), immunofluorescence staining and flow cytometry (FIGS. 3A, 3B ) using anti-LAP mAb. LAP induces epithelial barrier dysfunction and promotes L. monocytogenes translocation across the mucosal membrane (Drolia et al., 2018); therefore, the BLP strains (LbcLAPLin and LbcLAPLm) were tested in the in vitro transwell setup for their ability to traverse epithelial-barrier. Interestingly, none of the BLP strains showed any significant translocation while the L. monocytogenes WT strain as a control showed a significantly very high translocation (FIG. 2B ). These data indicate probiotics' natural ability to maintain the epithelial barrier integrity possibly supersedes LAP-induced epithelial barrier dysfunction (Bron et al., 2017; Pagnini et al., 2010). - Next, we examined if these BLP strains could prevent L. monocytogenes interaction with the epithelial cells. BLP strain pre-exposed to Caco-2 cell line significantly lowered L. monocytogenes adhesion to (
FIG. 2C ) and translocation across the epithelial monolayer in transwell (FIG. 2D ), while the LbcWT pre-exposure did not show any significant reduction in L. monocytogenes translocation. A plasmid-vector control strain without the lap insert (LbcWTVC) produced similar results as LbcWT, thus dismissing any extraneous anti-listerial effects that could be contributed by the virgin plasmid. In addition, none of the probiotic strains produced any anti-listerial compounds analyzed by the agar well-diffusion assay (FIG. 3C ) thus ruled out the involvement of any bacteriocin-like inhibitory substance. Next, we hypothesized that the BLP-mediated inhibition of L. monocytogenes interaction with the epithelial cells could be facilitated by direct binding of L. monocytogenes cells to BLP since BLP expresses LAP, and the LAP has a natural affinity towards its own surface (Burkholder et al., 2009; Jagadeesan et al., 2010). Therefore, we examined the interaction between BLP and L. monocytogenes cells, if any, in a suspension culture. Using a Listeria-specific immunomagnetic bead (IMB; Invitrogen) capture system, we showed that L. monocytogenes WT bound strongly with the BLP cells, while a significantly reduced level with the LbcWT suggesting that BLP interaction (aggregation) with L. monocytogenes was mediated by the LAP (FIG. 2E ). Collectively, these data suggest that pre-occupation of the epithelial surface by LAP-expressing BLP can competitively exclude L. monocytogenes from interacting with the epithelial cells. - The prophylactic effect of BLP feeding on listeriosis in mice was investigated using 8-10 weeks old female A/J mice that are highly sensitive to listeriosis (Czuprynski et al., 2003) in four experimental trials conducted over 5 years. Before the mice feeding experiment, probiotics survival in the simulated gastric fluid (SGF) and simulated intestinal fluid I (SIF-I) and II (SIF-II) were ensured by plate counting (
FIGS. 3D-3F ). Live/dead staining using carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester (cFDA) and propidium iodide (PI) also confirmed probiotics survival in gastric fluids (FIG. 3G ) and Western blot showed LAP expression on BLP strains while grown in SIF-II (FIG. 3H ). - Freshly grown probiotics bacteria were supplied daily in 50 ml drinking water per mouse (probiotic viability was maintained at about 4×109 CFU/ml) for 10 days before an oral challenge with L. monocytogenes F4244 (serovar 4b) strain (5×108 CFU/mouse) (
FIG. 4A ). All probiotic-fed animals maintained a constant body weight during the entire study, even after the challenge with L. monocytogenes strain onday 10. However, the animals that did not receive any probiotics, but were challenged with L. monocytogenes lost >15% body weight (FIG. 4B ). BLP-fed mice appeared healthy and continued to feed and drink even after L. monocytogenes challenge, while the control animals without any probiotics or animals receiving the LbcWT but were challenged with L. monocytogenes, appeared ill (FIG. 5 ). The sick animals displayed ruffled hair, recumbency, reduced responsiveness to external stimuli, and reduced feed intake. - Animals were sacrificed at 24 and 48 h post-infection (pi) in Trial 1 (n=60) and after 48 h pi in Trial 2 (n=30). L. monocytogenes counts in the liver, spleen, MLN, kidneys, blood, intestine, and feces were determined (
FIGS. 4E-4K ). Irrespective of the tissues or organs examined, the LbcWT feeding resulted in a meager 0-1 log CFU/mouse reduction of L. monocytogenes counts. (FIG. 4E-4K ). Astonishingly, the BLP-fed mice showed a reduction of L. monocytogenes counts by 1.5-3 log (up to 99.9%) after 24 h and 3.5-5 log (up to 99.999%) 48 h pi in liver and spleen of half the test population while L. monocytogenes was undetectable in the remainder of mice. L. monocytogenes was also undetectable in blood and the kidney of BLP-fed mice (FIG. 4H, 4I ). No background Listeria was detected from any mice that received only the probiotics or no probiotics at all. - Intestinal colonization and fecal shedding of L. monocytogenes in probiotic-fed mice were also examined. BLP feeding also significantly reduced L. monocytogenes colonization in the intestine (
FIG. 4J ) and fecal shedding (FIG. 4K ), compared with that of the LbcWT-fed mice. Total lactic acid bacteria (LAB) counts in the intestine, and feces of mice were relatively constant irrespective of the bacterial treatments (FIG. 4C ). While the LbcWT and the BLP colonization in the gut (intestine and feces) were maintained at about 4.5 log and 5.5 log CFU/mouse, respectively, when intestinal samples were analyzed 48 h pi (FIG. 4D ). Collectively, these data demonstrate that bioengineered probiotics were maintained in the intestine of mice for the duration of the study and protected mice from the extra-intestinal spread of L. monocytogenes. - Bioengineered probiotics protected gut barrier integrity. We have demonstrated in previous studies that LAP induces epithelial barrier dysfunction and promotes of L. monocytogenes translocation in both in vitro cell culture (Burkholder and Bhunia, 2010; Kim and Bhunia, 2013) and in vivo mouse model (Drolia et al., 2018). Countering this effect, probiotics are known to maintain epithelial tight junction integrity through the immunomodulatory effect which is orchestrated by NF-kB and the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines such as TNFα, IL-10, IL-6 (Ahrne and Hagslatt, 2011; Pagnini et al., 2010; Zareie et al., 2006). First, we examined if the BLP were able to maintain the intestinal epithelial integrity thereby preventing L. monocytogenes translocation to extra-intestinal sites. Epithelial permeability was assessed in Caco-2 cell monolayers by monitoring the diffusion of FD4 from apical to basolateral side (
FIG. 6A ), and by measuring transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER) in a trans-well set up (FIG. 6B ). Caco-2 cells pre-treated with or without LbcWT for 24 h followed by L. monocytogenes challenge for 2 h resulted in a very high FD4 permeability (61-64% change) compared to the control, while LbcLAPLm or LbcLAPLin, pre-treatment for 24 h substantially reduced FD4 translocation following L. monocytogenes infection resulting in only 22% change compared to the untreated control (FIG. 6A ). Likewise, BLP (LbcLAPLm or LbcLAPLin) pre-exposure followed by L. monocytogenes caused only 2.3-6.9% change in Caco-2 TEER values while L. monocytogenes alone caused a 17% change (FIG. 6B ).] - Gut permeability was also assessed in BLP-fed mice by monitoring the levels of FD4 in serum and urine (Drolia et al., 2018). BLP-fed mice challenged with L. monocytogenes were orally administered with the FD4 4-5 h prior to sacrifice (Drolia et al., 2018). Animals (
FIGS. 2A-2F ) that did not receive any probiotics, but were challenged with L. monocytogenes had an FD4 level at 3.5±0.3 μg/ml in sera (FIG. 6C ) and 83.3±13.5 μg/ml in urine (FIG. 6D ). In LbcWT-fed animals, the FD4 levels in sera and urine were 1.82 μg/ml and 18.0 μg/ml, respectively, while the FD4 levels were 2.6 μg/ml and 46.9 μg/ml, after L. monocytogenes challenge. In contrast, the FD4 levels in both sera and urine in animals that received BLP with or without L. monocytogenes challenge had substantially lower FD4 (about 1.9 μg/ml in sera and 13.2-22.4 μg/ml in urine) equivalent to that of the control mice that did not receive either bacterium. These data clearly demonstrate that probiotics especially the LAP-expressing BP were able to attenuate L. monocytogenes-mediated epithelial dysfunction in a mouse model. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) also showed epithelial tight junction opening in ileal tissue sections of mice fed with Lm but not with bioengineered probiotic followed by Lm as examined by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). - LAP-mediated epithelial barrier dysfunction is governed by mislocalization of epithelial junction proteins, claudin-1, occludin, and E-cadherin (Drolia et al., 2018). In Caco-2 cells, L. monocytogenes WT alone or Caco-2 pre-treated with probiotics significantly decreased membrane localization of claudin-1, occludin, and E-cadherin analyzed by Western blotting (
FIG. 7A ) and the corresponding transcripts in agreement with our previous study (Drolia et al., 2018). Pre-treatment with the BLP prevented L. monocytogenes-mediated claudin-1, occludin and E-cadherin mislocalization. Confocal immunofluorescence microscopy confirmed destabilization of the cell junction architecture as ZO-1 disruption by L. monocytogenes was pronounced with a discontinuous cell membrane boundary, which was not seen when the Caco-2 cells were pre-treated with the BLP (FIG. 7B ). E-cadherin and claudin were sequestered in L. monocytogenes-treated Caco-2 cell cytoplasm but was not seen in the BLP pre-treated cells (FIG. 7B ). Similar results were seen in mice ilea where BLP-fed mice maintained intact claudin-1, occludin and E-cadherin even after challenging with L. monocytogenes (FIG. 7C ). Taken together, these data indicate that both BLP strains, but not the wild-type probiotics maintained the tight junction integrity and thus prevented L. monocytogenes movement across the epithelial cell barrier. - Ileal tissue histology and innate immune response to bioengineered probiotic. Ileal tissue sections from mice collected at 48 h pi were first examined for inflammation after hematoxylin and eosin staining. Overall, the inflammation due to L. monocytogenes infection in 48 h pi was subtle (
FIGS. 8A-8B ). Ileal tissues of untreated control mice had cylindrical villi with relatively few lymphocytes in the lamina propria. Goblet cells (10% of the villous epithelium) and Paneth cells were mostly confined to the intestinal crypts. The remaining cells of the villous epithelium were enterocytes. The mice that did not receive any probiotics, but were challenged with L. monocytogenes had mildly increased numbers of goblet cells at 24 h than the mice received only the LbcWT (FIGS. 8C-8D ) in the villous epithelium with neutrophil infiltration at the base of the villous lamina propria. The BLP-fed mice challenged with L. monocytogenes showed the highest average histomorphological score, and higher goblet cell counts; however, the enterocytes remained intact with no sign of apparent necrosis (FIGS. 8A-8D ). - Mammalian Hsp60 activates innate immune response (Chen et al., 1999; Pockley, 2003). Earlier, we observed that L. monocytogenes infection induced membrane Hsp60 expression, which subsequently facilitated enhanced LAP-mediated L. monocytogenes translocation (Burkholder and Bhunia, 2010; Drolia et al., 2018) by breaching an innate immune system in the mouse. Therefore, we examined the Hsp60 expression in the mouse ileal sections. Hsp60 expression was pronounced and uniformly distributed on the villous epithelial cells of mice that did not receive any probiotics but challenged with L. monocytogenes for 48 h (
FIG. 8E ). Expression of Hsp60 was lower in all probiotic-fed mice but enhanced when challenged with L. monocytogenes. A similar trend was observed when the levels of hsppdl (hsp60) transcripts were analyzed in the ileal tissue samples (FIG. 8F ). These data demonstrate that BLP was able to dampen the Hsp60 expression, however, after the L. monocytogenes challenge, Hsp60 expression increased in epithelial cells, which may help the host cells to defend against the infection through a mechanism which requires further investigation. - Immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects of probiotic feeding in mice. Probiotic bacteria modulate the immune response and maintain immune homeostasis via activation of NF-κB and production of epithelial TNF-α (Cross, 2002; Pagnini et al., 2010). Moreover, both TNF-α and IL-6 increase epithelial barrier permeability through activation of NF-κB (Ma et al., 2004). Earlier, we have shown that LAP of L. monocytogenes stimulates NF-κB, produces epithelial TNF-α and IL-6 and increases epithelial permeability by dysregulating epithelial junctional proteins (Drolia et al., 2018). Here, we observed that the BLP strains lowered approximately 2-fold NF-κB activity in a Luciferase reporter RAW (murine macrophage) cell line compared to that of L. monocytogenes WT or LPS-treated control cells (
FIG. 9A ). Confocal immunostaining of ileal tissue samples also showed increased translocation of P-p65 and p65 into the nucleus by L. monocytogenes WT but reduced levels in BLP-pretreated mice indicating that BLP stimulates NF-kB (FIG. 9B ). Furthermore, TNF-α and IL-6 levels were increased substantially in the murine ileal tissue extracts (FIGS. 9C-9D ) from L. monocytogenes infected mice without probiotic feeding, while the levels were equivalent to that of the uninfected controls when fed with the BLP strains. - To assess the state of systemic immune response in BLP-fed mice, levels of several cytokines in the pooled sera from the three animals within each treatment group were analyzed using a semi-quantitative immunoblot array. Strong IL-6 and MCP-1 response were observed in animals that were infected with L. monocytogenes without any pre-exposure to probiotics; however, both the wild-type probiotic and BLP exposure significantly dampened these cytokines in L. monocytogenes-infected mice. In contrast, levels of G-CSF was very high in sera after L. monocytogenes challenge, irrespective of the probiotics used. Serum TNF-α level was undetectable irrespective of the treatments, possibly the array could not detect trace amounts.
- Probiotic bacteria also influenced cellular immune response to L. monocytogenes infection as seen in the spleen by flow cytometry and cytology. Among the splenic CD4+ (
FIG. 9E ) and CD8α+ (FIG. 9F ) T cell populations, only CD8α+ counts showed a strong response in mice challenged with L. monocytogenes in the absence of any probiotic, while the counts were lower in BLP-primed mice following L. monocytogenes challenge. L. monocytogenes infection also increased splenic CD11c+ (dendritic cell) counts irrespective of the type of probiotics used (FIG. 9G ). - Cytological imprints from splenic cross-sections did not reveal any obvious lymphoid hyperplasia in control animals while L. monocytogenes infection resulted in significant neutrophil and macrophage infiltration (
FIG. 9I ). No cytological evidence of inflammation was apparent in any probiotic-fed animals. Interestingly, BLP-fed animals followed by L. monocytogenes challenge showed moderate-to-marked inflammation with increased infiltration of macrophages and neutrophils (FIG. 9I ). Blinded cytology scoring also confirmed such observation (FIG. 9H ). The immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory effects of probiotics and reduced Listeria counts in spleen (FIG. 4F ) strongly suggest that BLP positively influenced cellular immune response for efficient clearance of L. monocytogenes from extra-intestinal sites. - Immunomodulatory effect of probiotic was also assessed in ileal tissues by immunostaining of ileal tissue sections with T-cell markers, anti-CD3+; anti-CD8+ and CD4+ FoxP3+ antibodies which revealed significant differences in total T-cell counts between the control and bioengineered probiotic-fed mice as shown in
FIGS. 10A-10D . Bioengineered probiotics (BLP) enhanced the regulatory T cell (CD4+ FoxP3+) response while cytotoxic (CD8+) cell counts were low. This suggests that bioengineered probiotic was able to prime the immune system, which possibly helped eliminate invaded L. monocytogenes cells and maintain tight junction integrity to prevent bacterial passage or increased clearance of pathogens that were able to cross the epithelial barrier, especially from the BLP-fed mice where most animals showed reduced systemic infection (FIGS. 4A-4K ). -
FIG. 11 shows survival of mice (A/J strain) supplied with or without probiotics for ten days in drinking water followed by oral infection with L. monocytogens (n=at least 10 per group). Mice fed with Lactobacillus casei (probiotics) expressing the LAP protein (LbcLAPLin) showed significantly (**P<0.01, Kaplan-Meier log-rank test) higher survival compared to that of LbcWT. -
FIG. 12 . Comparison of the amino acid sequence of LAP (Listeria adhesion protein) from different strains of Lm and Lin obtained from the NCBI database. -
FIG. 13 . Confirmation of Bioengineered Lactobacillus probiotic (BLP) strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or L. monocytogenes (LbcLAPLm) by Western blotting (left panel) and confocal imaging (right panel; arrows) -
FIG. 14 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or L. monocytogenes (LbcLAPLm) prevent Lm interaction in vitro in a Caco-2 cell culture model. Increased inhibition of Lm adhesion (left, n=6), invasion (middle, n=6) and translocation (right, n=6) by the BLP strains after 24 h exposure to Caco-2 cells. -
FIG. 15 . Schematics showing mouse experiment protocol. -
FIG. 16 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLm) prevent Lm induced weight loss in mice. Normalized mouse body weight (mean±SD, n=5) onday -
FIG. 17 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLm) show increased intestinal colonization. Increased BLP counts in the intestinal content of mice (n=5) ondays -
FIG. 18 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLm) prevent Lm intestinal infection in a mouse model. Reduced Lm burdens in the intracellular location in the ileum (left, n=6), cecum (middle, n=6), and colon (right, n=6). -
FIG. 19 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLm) prevent Lm systemic infection in a mouse model. Reduced Lm burdens in the liver (left), spleen (right) (left and right, n=5 at 24 h post infection (hpi); and n=17, 14, 13, 14 at 48 hpi), MLN (center, n=11, 9, 8, 9, for each group, respectively), -
FIG. 20 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLm) prevent Lm systemic infection in a mouse model. Reduced Lm burdens in the blood (right, n=5 at 24 hpi; and n=11, 8, 8, 8, at 48 hpi for each group, respectively) and kidney (left, n=6, 3, 3, 3, for each group, respectively). -
FIG. 21 . BLP strains expressing LAP from Listeria innocua (LbcLAPLin) or Lm (LbcLAPLm) prevent Lm intestinal penetration in a mouse model. Micrographs of ileal (left) villi immunostained for ZO-1 (brown) and Lm (red, arrows) and counterstained for nucleus (blue) at 48 hpi. Bars, 10 μm. The boxed areas were enlarged. Bars, 1 μm. Lm counts (mean±SEM) in ileal lamina propria (LP; right panels). Dots represent an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, four mice/group, n=100 villi. Lm is observed in the LP (arrows) in naive or LbcWT-treated mice but confined in the lumen (arrows) in BLP-treated mice (Lbc LAPLin and Lbc LAPLm). -
FIG. 22 . BLP (LbcLAPLin) prevents lethal L. monocytogenes infection in mice. Increased survival of BLP-treated mice (LbcLAPLin) at LD50 dose. *p<0.05 Kaplan-Meier log-rank test. -
FIGS. 23A-23B . BLP colonization and persistence in the intestine limits Lm translocation despite discontinuous administration. Schematics (FIG. 23A ) showing mouse experiment protocol: Mice were treated with L. casei (LbcWT) or BLP (LbcLAPLm) strain supplied in drinking water replenished daily (4-8×109 CFU/ml) for 10 days (0-9 days) and then challenged with Lm F4244 (˜5×108 CFU/animal) onday FIG. 23B ) BLP-mediated reduced Lm burdens at 48 hpi in the intracellular location in the ileum (left), cecum (center), and colon (right) (all bottom panels, gentamicin resistant CFU), in mice onday 12 -
FIG. 24 . BLP displays increased co-aggregation with Lm. Increased co-aggregation of BLP (left panel, LbcLAPLin, and LbcLAPLm) strains in co-incubated suspensions containing equal numbers of BLP+Lm cells (n=4) captured via Listeria-specific immunomagnetic beads (IMB) but not with BLP+L. innocua (Lin, n=6) cells or L. casei (alone) (n=10). Micrographs (right panel) showing co-aggregated BLP cells (arrows) with IMB-captured Lm cells expressing GFP (b). Bars, 1 μm. -
FIG. 25 . BLP (LbcLAPLin and LbcLAPLm) forms increased biofilm on plastics. Increased biofilm formation (Abs 595 nm, mean±SEM) of BLP strains as measured by crystal violet staining in monoculture and co-culture with grown in microtiter plates. Images (top panel) show crystal violet stained biofilms of representative wells for each treatment. Data represent three independent experiments obtained from n=6 independent microtiter plate wells. -
FIG. 26 . BLP (LbcLAPLin and LbcLAPLm) forms increased biofilm on mouse colonic villi (right two panels) -
FIG. 27 . BLP prevents Lm from causing intestinal barrier damage in a mouse model. Representative H&E-stained micrographs (bars, 25 μm) (left) and the histological score (right, each point represents an individual mouse) of ileal tissue sections from control (mock-treated) uninfected naïve mice or L. casei-treated (10 days, LbcWT or BLP) pre or post-Lm-challenge at 48 hpi (n=9, 7, 7, 9, 9, 9, 10, 11 mice for each group, respectively). Arrows point to the loss of villous epithelial cells and increased polymorphonuclear and mononuclear cells infiltrating the base of the villous lamina propria in naïve (naive+Lm) and Lbc WT-treated mice (LbcWT+Lm) at 48 hpi. -
FIG. 28 . BLP prevents Lm from causing intestinal barrier loss by maintaining mucus-producing goblet cells in mice. Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of the ileum stained for Muc2 (left, brown), nuclei (blue) from control (mock-treated) uninfected naïve mice or L. casei-treated (10 days, LbcWT or BLP) pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi. Bars, 10 μm. Quantification of Muc2 (right)-positive cells, each point represents an individual mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. Arrows point to increased numbers of Muc2 (left) in BLP treated mice (pre- or post-Lm challenge). -
FIG. 29 : BLP blocks Lm from causing disturbance of intestinal epithelial cell-cell junctional integrity. FITC conjugated 4 kDa dextran (FD4) gut permeability of control (mock-treated) naïve uninfected mice or L. casei-treated (10 days, LbcWT or BLP) pre- or post-Lm challenge (48 hpi) in serum (c) and urine (d). Each point represents an individual mouse. Data represent mean±SEM of n=3 mice for all groups except Lm group, n=5 mice. -
FIG. 30 . BLP blocks Lm from causing disturbance of intestinal epithelial cell-cell junctional integrity. Immunofluorescence micrographs of the ileal tissues showing increased expression of MLCK and P-MLC (green; arrows) and mislocalization (intracellular puncta) of claudin-1 (green; arrows), occludin, and E-cadherin (red; arrows) in naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) but baseline expression of MLCK and P-MLC and intact localization of occludin, claudin-1 and E-cadherin in BLP-treated mice (10 days) at 48 hpi, relative to uninfected naïve mice. Nuclei; DAPI, blue. Images are representative of five different fields from n=3 mice per treatment. Bars, 10 μm. LP, Lamina Propria. -
FIG. 31 : BLP prevents Lm-induced NF-κB (p65) activation and modulates cytokine production and immune cells to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. Immunofluorescence micrographs of the ileal tissues showing decreased nuclear localization of p65 (green) in BLP-treated mice (10 days) at 48 hpi. Nuclei; DAPI, blue. Arrows indicate the nuclear localization of p65 in IEC of naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) mice at 48 hpi. The right panels show the quantified results (mean±SEM) of p65 nuclear positive IEC. Each point represents an average of 15 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=60 villi. Bars, 10 μm. -
FIG. 32 : BLP modulates the cytokine TNFα to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. ELISA showing decreased TNFα (n=6 mice for all groups except LbcWT and LbcLAPLin+Lm group; n=5 and 4 mice, respectively), in the ileal tissues of BLP-treated (10 days) mice, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) at 48 hpi. -
FIG. 33 : BLP modulates the cytokine IL-6 to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. ELISA showing decreased IL-6 (n=6 mice for all groups except LbcWT and LbcLAPLin+Lm group; n=5 and 4 mice, respectively), in the ileal tissues of BLP-treated (10 days) mice, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) at 48 hpi -
FIG. 34 : BLP modulates the cytokine IFNγ to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. ELISA showing increased IFNγ (n=4 mice for all groups), in the ileal tissues of BLP-treated (10 days) mice, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days) at 48 hpi -
FIG. 35 : BLP modulates the cytokine IL-10 to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. Graph showing increased IL-10+ cells quantified (mean±SEM) from immunostained ileal tissues (of BLP-treated (10 days) mice pre- or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi. Each point represents an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 36 : BLP modulates the cytokine TGFβ+ to maintain intestinal immune homeostasis. Graph showing increased TGFβ+ cells quantified (mean±SEM) from immunostained ileal tissues of BLP-treated (10 days) mice pre- or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi. Each point represents an average of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 37 : BLP modulates CD4+ T-cell populations for immunomodulation. Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased CD4+ cells (left, brown, arrows), in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 μm. Quantification of CD4+ cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean±SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 38 : BLP modulates FOXP3+ T-regulatory cells populations for immunomodulation. Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased FOXP3+ T-regulatory cells (left, brown, arrows), in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 μm. Quantification of FOXP3+ T-regulatory cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean±SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 39 : BLP modulates CD11c+ dendritic cells populations for immunomodulation. Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased CD11c+ dendritic cells (left, brown, arrows), in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 μm. Quantification of CD11c+ cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean±SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 40 : BLP modulates natural-killer NKp46+ immune cell populations for immunomodulation. Representative immunohistochemical micrographs of ileal tissues showing increased NKp46+ cells (left, brown, arrows) in BLP-treated mice (10 days) mice pre or post-Lm challenge at 48 hpi, relative to naïve or LbcWT-treated (10 days). Bars, 10 μm. Quantification of NKp46+ cells (right), Each point represents an average (mean±SEM) of 25 villi from a single mouse, 4 mice per group, n=100 villi. -
FIG. 41 . Schematics showing the mechanism of BLP-mediated protection against listeriosis. The BLP prevents Lm Infection by three mechanisms (i) Competitive exclusion, (ii) improved intestinal barrier function, and (iii) contact-dependent immunomodulation. - We also measured the levels of secretory IgA (sIgA) in the ileal mucus samples, and the total sIgA levels for probiotic-fed mice were considerably higher than the control animals; however, there were no differences in LbcWT and the BLP-fed mice indicating probiotics natural ability to induce sIgA production (Bakker-Zierikzee et al., 2006). We also could not detect any LAP-specific antibody in the pooled mice sera from either LbcWT or BLP-fed mice. This provides evidence against submucosal translocation of LAP-expressing probiotics, which is in agreement with Caco-2 transwell data (
FIG. 2B ). However, the sera from probiotic-fed mice that were challenged with L. monocytogenes for 48 h exhibited a very faint antibody reaction with LAP, for which there is no specific explanation. Nevertheless, these data demonstrate that probiotics-mediated humoral immune response, especially the sIgA may also affect L. monocytogenes interaction with intestinal epithelial cells during the early phase of infection (Mantis et al., 2011). - Bioengineered probiotic feeding also increased survival of mice after L. monocytogenes challenge. Mice were fed with probiotic bacteria for 10 days and then challenged with lethal dosage of L. monocytogenes (2×109 CFU/mouse). Mice survival was examined over 10 days. Over 82% mice from bioengineered probiotic (LbcLAPLin)-fed mice group survived while 60% and 50% mice survived that received LbcWT and no probiotic control (naïve), respectively (
FIG. 11 ). This study clearly indicates that LAP-expressing bioengineered probiotic bacteria can prevent fatal infection caused by L. monocytogenes. - Listeria monocytogenes is an invasive opportunistic intracellular human pathogen. It is ubiquitous and is transmitted primarily through food resulting in numerous fatal and costly outbreaks that are associated with consumption of contaminated cheese, ice cream, fish, ready-to-eat meats, and produce (cantaloupe, apples, sprouts, spinach). Besides pregnancy, immune suppressed conditions in the elderly, and malignancy, organ transplant and HIV-AIDs patients are also highly vulnerable (Schuchat et al., 1991). The case fatality rate of listeriosis is 19%. Currently, there is no preventive vaccine against listeriosis except for general precautionary guidelines outlined by the CDC that include thorough cooking of meat, safe food handling practices and avoidance of the FDA designated high-risk foods, such as frankfurters, soft cheeses made with unpasteurized milk, pate, and smoked fish. Therefore, prophylactic intervention strategies for the high-risk population from listeriosis would have a greater public health impact. One of the promising alternatives to the use of antibiotics in prophylaxis or therapy is the utilization of probiotic microbes (Amalaradjou and Bhunia, 2012; Sanders et al., 2014). Probiotic microbes also produce metabolites and macromolecules promoting gut health by modifying cytokine production and enhancing gut barrier function (Bron et al., 2017; Cho et al., 2014; Salminen et al., 2010). Probiotic microbes can prevent/alleviate chronic inflammatory bowel disease, colorectal cancer, metabolic disorders and obesity, and osteoporosis (Amalaradjou and Bhunia, 2012; Azcarate-Peril et al., 2011; Ly et al., 2011). Probiotics are also used in pre-term neonates to allow early colonization with beneficial microbes (Deshpande et al., 2011), and increased sIgA secretion in the gut (Bakker-Zierikzee et al., 2006). Among the different probiotic bacteria used, Lactobacillus species is most common because of their ability to survive, colonize and modulate the immune system in the gut, and are generally safe (Amalaradjou and Bhunia, 2012). Earlier, Corr et al. (Corr et al., 2007) showed that bacteriocin producing Lactobacilli could control listeriosis in a mouse model. However, probiotics approach has been ineffective or has had limited success against listeriosis (Culligan et al., 2009; Koo et al., 2012). To overcome such limitations, we bioengineered a probiotic Lactobacillus casei strain to prevent Listeria interaction with the epithelial cells in the intestinal tract and subsequent extra-intestinal dissemination.
- We have shown previously that LAP plays an important role during early-phase of infection (within 24-48 h), promoting translocation of L. monocytogenes across the epithelium in mice (Burkholder et al., 2009; Drolia et al., 2018). The LAP lacks a leader sequence thus the bacterial secretory system, SecA2 helps LAP to secrete to the extracellular milieu and for surface display (Burkholder et al., 2009; Mishra et al., 2011). The LAP from L. monocytogenes bears high sequence similarity to the LAP from L. innocua (non-pathogen) and the L. innocua LAP is unable to re-associate on its own surface possibly due to the lack of a surface anchoring molecule (Jagadeesan et al., 2011; Jagadeesan et al., 2010). This defect probably prevents L. innocua from translocating through the epithelial paracellular route (Burkholder and Bhunia, 2010). Interestingly, the L. innocua LAP fully restored epithelial translocation ability in a lap-deficient L. monocytogenes strain in a cell culture model (this study). This raised an intriguing question; can the LAP from L. innocua expressed on probiotic Lactobacillus prevent listeriosis in a mouse model? A/J mice are highly sensitive to listeriosis due to C5 complement deficiency (Czuprynski et al., 2003; Jagannath et al., 2000); therefore, these animals should be ideal for studying the prophylactic effect of BLP against listeriosis.
- Incredibly, both bioengineered Lactobacillus casei expressing LAPLm or LAPLin were able to prevent L. monocytogenes dissemination substantially (up to 5 log or 99.999% reduction) to extra-intestinal tissues and organs and the mice appeared healthy when sacrificed at 48 h pi. Both LbcWT and BLP were maintained in the gut during the 10 days feeding trials and they were not detected in any extra-intestinal tissues upon sacrifice implying that either they did not cross the intestinal barrier or the translocated BLP were cleared immediately by the local immune system. Blood sera also did not reveal any noticeable LAP-specific antibody response suggesting that the LAP antigen may not have disseminated systemically.
- Two plausible mechanisms for BLP-mediated protection are postulated: (i) Prevention of L. monocytogenes interaction with the intestinal epithelial cells by BLP via preoccupation of the intestinal niche, and subsequent binding to L. monocytogenes, and (ii) activation of the immune system for increased clearance of the translocated pathogens. Our results also indicate that the BLP prevented L. monocytogenes dissemination by maintaining epithelial tight junction integrity as the preservation of the cytoskeleton and tight junction barrier integrity is critical for modulating paracellular and transcellular bacterial diffusion (Pagnini et al., 2010; Zhou et al., 2010). Mislocalization of epithelial junctional proteins, occludin, claudin-1 and E-cadherin in the ileal tissues of the mice was evident in L. monocytogenes infected mice and the LbcWT-fed groups, while the cell junction architecture remained intact in animals fed with BLP followed by L. monocytogenes infection.
- Probiotic bacteria exert immunomodulatory effect (Ng et al., 2009) and promote gut health through stimulation of epithelial innate immunity by stimulating local production of TNF and activation of NF-kB (Pagnini et al., 2010). In agreement with a previous report (Rothe et al., 1993), here we also observed L. monocytogenes mediated high levels of TNF-α and IL-6 in the ileal tissue homogenates and IL-6 level in the sera. Indeed, activation of NF-kB results in elevated levels of TNF-α and IL-6, which facilitate gut epithelial barrier destabilization (Drolia et al., 2018; Ma et al., 2004). In our previous report, LAP induced epithelial IL-6 and TNF-α production during L. monocytogenes infection through activation of NF-κB (Drolia et al., 2018), in this study, LAP-expressing BLP was able to dampen L. monocytogenes-mediated proinflammatory cytokine production despite moderate activation of NF-kB. This suggests, perhaps BLP helped maintain epithelial immune homeostasis thus was able to counteract L. monocytogenes mediated inflammatory response. During innate immunity, epithelial cells and monocytes secrete IL-6 when stimulated by pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPS) on specific pathogens that are recognized by pattern recognition receptors (PRR) including Toll-like receptors (TLRs) similar to LAP-Hsp60 interaction (Drolia et al., 2018). Previous in vitro studies using RAW264.7 macrophages exposed to cell wall extracts of Bifidobacterium adolescentis, B. longum, and Lactobacillus salivarius Ren enhanced phagocytic activity via increased production of IL-6 and TNF-α (Zhu et al., 2011). Oral gavage of mice with L. acidophilus and B. bifidum showed increased reactive oxygen intermediates production and enhanced phagocytic activity in macrophages (Deepti and Vinod, 2014). A long-term consumption of probiotic has shown to enhance innate immunity and production of IL-1, IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10, IL-12, IL-18, INF-γ, and TNF-α by monocytes and DC (Cross, 2002; Niers et al., 2005).
- Cell-mediated immunity especially the CD8+ T-cell response is critical for controlling systemic L. monocytogenes infection (Huleatt et al., 2001). Here we also observed increased cell counts with CD8α+ marker in spleen in the L. monocytogenes infected control group 48 h pi, while the opposite trend in BLP-fed animals. CD8α+ cells represent both cytotoxic T-cells and a subset of dendritic cells, and both are requisite for efficient splenic infiltration during intravenous administration of L. monocytogenes in mice (Edelson et al., 2011). The concomitant marked increase in neutrophils, macrophages and dendritic cells (CD11c+ and spleen cytology data) in the spleen with L. monocytogenes infection in the BP-fed groups above the control infection group suggests that perhaps the BP strains serve to prime the innate immune system. As such, increased phagocyte infiltration may lead ultimately to improved pathogen clearance without the need for CD8+ T-cells. Prophylactic oral administration of L. casei CRL431 has positively influenced neutrophil response to a nasally inoculated Streptococcus pneumoniae, demonstrating a potentially important link in mucosal immunity between different organ systems (Villena et al., 2005). The total splenic CD4+ T cell population did not change in our study, but other TH subtypes that may contribute to the overall differential immune response were not measured. Probiotic microbe-induced sIgA response in ileal mucus in mice pre-exposed to both LbcWT and the BLP, akin to previous studies (Bakker-Zierikzee et al., 2006; Sakai et al., 2014) suggesting that the probiotic bacteria stimulate mucosal immune response (Mantis et al., 2011) against L. monocytogenes.
- In summary, the wild-type probiotic strains tested are generally ineffective against L. monocytogenes infection (Koo et al., 2012); therefore, the bioengineered probiotic strains were made to prevent listeriosis in a mouse model. Our study has demonstrated that the LAP-expressing bioengineered Lactobacillus casei, including the LAP from a nonpathogenic Listeria, protected mice from L. monocytogenes infection through colonization resistance, maintenance of gut permeability and tight junction stability, and immunomodulation. Such bioengineered strain can potentially prevent listeriosis in high-risk populations and at the same time promote health benefits inherent to probiotic lactobacilli.
- Materials and Methods
- Bacterial strains, plasmids, and growth conditions. All Listeria species were grown in tryptic soy broth containing 0.5% yeast extract (TSBYE; Becton Dickinson, Sparks, Md.) or Luria-Bertani broth (LB, 0.5% NaCl, 1% tryptone peptone, and 0.5% yeast extract) at 37° C. for 16 to 18 h. Probiotic bacteria were cultured in deMan Rogosa Sharpe broth (MRS, Becton Dickinson) at 37° C. for 18-20 h. Lactobacillus casei ATCC 344 wild-type (LbcWT) (a gift from Mike Miller, University of Illinois, Urbana) was used as a host to express LAP from L. innocua and L. monocytogenes. To recover this strain from fecal and intestinal samples during the animal study, a vancomycin-resistant strain of L. casei was selected by sequentially culturing the bacterium in increasing concentrations of vancomycin (300 μg/ml). Recombinant L. paracasei was grown under anaerobic conditions at 37° C. with erythromycin (2 μg/mL). The lap-deficient mutant L. monocytogenes strain KB208 was grown in TSBYE with erythromycin (10 μg/mL) at 42° C. KB208 expressing L. innocua LAP was grown in TSBYE with erythromycin (5 μg/mL) and chloramphenicol (7 μg/mL) at 42° C.
- Generation of bioengineered lactobacilli expressing LAP from L. innocua and L. monocytogenes. The entire lap gene (2.6 kb) from L. innocua was amplified by PCR and inserted into pLP401T (Pouwels et al., 2001) and electrotransformed into L. casei ATCC 334 designated LbcLAPLin (L. casei AKB907) as described before (Koo et al., 2012). Likewise, lap gene from L. monocytogenes was expressed in L. casei designated LbcLAPLin (AKB906). The bioengineered strains were maintained in MRS broth containing erythromycin (2 μg/ml) under anaerobic conditions at 37° C. The L. innocua lap gene was cloned into pMGS101, electrotransformed into KB208, and designated LmKB208LAPLin. To induce LAP expression, the bioengineered L. casei strains, were grown in modified MRS (1% w/v protease peptone, 0.5% w/v yeast extract, 0.2% w/v meat extract, 0.1% v/
v TWEEN® 80, 37 mM C2H3NaO2, 0.8 mM MgSO4, 0.24 mM MnSO4, 8.8 mM C6H14N2O7 in 0.1 M potassium phosphate buffer, pH 7.0) supplemented with mannitol (1% w/v). LAP expression was verified by Western blotting, ELISA and immunofluorescence staining using anti-LAP mAb (Koo et al., 2012). - Growth characteristics of recombinant probiotics in artificial gastrointestinal fluids. The survival of probiotics exposed sequentially to the simulated gastrointestinal fluid (SGF) and simulated intestinal fluid (SIF-I and SIF-II), to simulate gastric phase,
enteric phase 1 andenteric phase 2, respectively), over 6 h (2 h for each step) period was monitored (Buriti et al., 2010). SGF contained pepsin (3 g/L) and lipase (0.9 mg/L) (Sigma-Aldrich), pH 1.2-1.5 (adjusted using 1N HCl). Both SIF-I and SIF-II contained bile (bovine bile; 10 g/L, Sigma-Aldrich) and porcine pancreatin (1 g/L; Sigma-Aldrich), but SIF-I pH was 4.3-5.2 and SIF-II pH 6.7-7.5 (adjusted using alkaline solution; 150 ml of 1 N NaOH, 14 g of PO4H2Na.2H2O and deionized water up to 1 L). Overnight cultures of wild-type or BP were washed and resuspended in SGF (100 ml) and incubated at 37° C., with agitation (150 rpm for 2 h) (gastric phase), and bacterial counts were monitored every 30 min for 2 h. The cells from SGF were pelleted down and transferred sequentially into SIF-I, and SIF-II, incubated each at 37° C. for 2 h to simulate the initial and final phases of intestinal digestion. Probiotics counts were enumerated on MRS plates and the assay was repeated three times with duplicate samples. Viability was also verified by performing live and dead staining using cFDA-SE (carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester, 50 μM) and PI (propidium iodide, 30 μM) as described (Lee et al., 2004). Levels of LAP expression in probiotic cultures during exposure to SGF and SIF were also monitored by immunofluorescence staining and Western blotting using anti-LAP mAb. BP survival in water is also monitored to ensure probiotics viability during animal feeding in a 24-h cycle. - Inhibition of L. monocytogenes adhesion, invasion and paracellular translocation by BP. The ability of LbcWT and BP (LbcLAPLin and LbcLAPLm) to inhibit L. monocytogenes adhesion, invasion, and translocation through Caco-2 cell monolayers was investigated as before (Koo et al., 2012). BLP strains were added to each well (MOE 10) and incubated for 24 h. Unbound bacteria were removed by washing with Dulbecco's modified Eagles' medium containing 10% fetal calf serum (D10F), and L. monocytogenes was added (MOI 10) and incubated for 1 h to determine inhibition of adhesion and invasion. The cell monolayers were then washed three times and adherent bacteria were released by TRITON™ X-100 treatment and plated. To determine intracellular bacteria, the cell monolayers were treated with gentamycin (50 μg/mL) for 1 h before TRITON™ X-100 treatment. As a vector control, the recombinant LbcVecLAP− strain was used.
- Bacterial translocation through epithelial barrier was assayed as before (Burkholder and Bhunia, 2010). Briefly, Caco-2 cells were grown on transwell filter inserts (4-μm pore filter; Corning, Lowell, Mass.) for 10-12 days to reach confluence. Bacteria were added to the apical well of the insert and incubated for 2 h. Liquid from the basal well was removed, serially diluted, and distributed onto TSA-YE agar plates for enumeration. TEER of Caco-2 cells before and after treatment was measured using a Millicell ERS system (Millipore, Billerica, Mass.). For epithelial permeability assay, 3-5 kDa FITC-Dextran (FD4; Sigma) was added to the well (apical side) and translocation of FD4 to the basal side was monitored by a spectrophotometer (Spectramax).
- The interaction between Lactobacilli and L. monocytogenes cells. L. monocytogenes F4244, L. innocua F4248, LbcWT, LbcLAPLm, and LbcLAPLin were cultured for 16-18 h at 37° C. in TSBYE, MRS, or MRS supplemented with 2 μg/ml erythromycin broth, respectively (see section 3.2.1). All cultures were pelleted by centrifugation at 8000×g for 3 min and washed with sterile PBS. All cellular concentrations were serially diluted to obtain a cell concentration of 106 cfu/ml. L. monocytogenes or L. innocua were allowed to interact with the individual probiotic strains (LbcWT, LbcLAPLm, or LbcLAPLin) at a 1:1 concentration in sterile PBS for 1 h at room temperature with constant agitation on Lab Doctor Revolver (MidSci, Valley Park, Mo.). Anti-Listerial magnetic Dynabeads (Cat. No. 71006, Thermofischer Scientific) were used to capture and separate L. monocytogenes and L. innocua from unbound probiotics. Briefly, 20 μl/ml of bead slurry was added to the bacterial mixtures and allowed to interact for 10 min at room temperature with constant agitation. Beads were magnetically separated and washed with sterile PBS-T (0.1%) 3 times (10 min each wash) with constant agitation. Beads were serially diluted and plated on MOX (Neogen) and MRS agar (BD) for enumeration of Listeria and probiotics, respectively.
- Mouse bioassay. Female mice (A/J: 8-10 weeks of age; n=88) were purchased from Jackson Laboratories (Bar Harbor, Me.). The animal bioassay procedure was approved by the Purdue University Animal Care and Use Committee (1201000595). Upon arrival, mice (2/cage) were housed in a cage that had a solid stainless divider to keep them separated. Shepherd's™ ALPHA-dri® (alpha cellulose) was used for bedding. Animals were provided ad lib feed (Rodent Diet 5001, LabDiet, Brentwood, Mo.) and sterile deionized water, and acclimatized for 5 days before the experiment. A cycle of 12 h artificial light and 12 h darkness was maintained. Relative humidity was 50-60% and the temperature was 20-25° C. Mice were randomly assigned to eight different groups. Fresh preparation of probiotics was supplied daily with sterile deionized water at ˜9×109 CFU/ml for 10 days. Control animals received only water. Probiotic colonization in the gut was monitored daily by analyzing fecal counts of probiotics on agar plates. For challenge experiment, mice received oral gavage of L. monocytogenes F4244 (WT) at a concentration of 5-8.8×108 CFU/mouse using a feeding tube (Popper) and control mice received PBS (Burkholder et al., 2009). Animals were observed for clinical signs, such as ruffled hair, movement and recumbency, and their feeding and drinking habits.
- Mice were euthanized by CO2 asphyxiation at 24 and 48 h pi, and intestine (duodenum, jejunum ileum, cecum, and colon), MLN, spleen, liver, kidney, and blood from the heart were aseptically collected. Feces were collected from each mouse from the time of infection to sacrifice. In some cases, intestinal sections were treated with gentamycin (100 μg/ml) for 2 h to kill extracellular bacteria. Organs/tissues were homogenized using a tissue homogenizer (Cole Parmer, Vernon Hills, Ill.) in 0.5 ml (blood), 4 ml (spleen, kidney, lungs) or 9 ml (feces, intestine, liver) of PBS. MRS agar (Neogen, Lansing, Mich.) containing vancomycin (300 μg/ml) was used for enumeration of LbcWT, and MRS agar containing erythromycin (2 μg/ml) was used for bioengineered strains. Modified Oxford medium (MOX; Oxoid, Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK) was used for enumeration of Listeria. A portion of the ileum (˜2 cm) was saved for histopathology, immunohistochemistry, qRT-PCR and other experiments. The gut mucosa was collected from an 8-cm section of ileum for sIgA analysis (Haneberg et al., 1994).
- Gut permeability assay. Four to five hour before sacrifice, animals were orally gavaged with 100 μl of FD4 (3 mg/ml; Sigma). Urine voluntarily excreted during euthanasia, was collected from the bag, and blood was collected by cardiac puncture. Sera and urine were appropriately diluted and assayed for FD4 by measuring in a spectrophotometer as described (Condette et al., 2014).
- Cytokine Analysis. Caco-2 monolayers (12 days of incubation) were formed in 12 well plates. Probiotics were introduced to the monolayer at an MOE of 10 and incubated for 24 h. The monolayers were challenged with L. monocytogenes (MOE 10) or LPS free purified rLAP (1 mg/ml) for 4 h (Drolia et al., 2018). Culture supernatants were collected and tested for IL-6 and TNF-α content using ELISA kits (Raybiotech ELH-IL6 and ELH-TNF-α). For mouse tissue, IL-6 and TNF-α, mouse-specific ELISA kits (Ray Biotech ELM-TNF-α and ELM-IL6-CL) were used. Briefly, ileal tissue homogenates (100 μl) were incubated overnight (16 h). Primary antibodies specific to IL-6 or TNF-α and streptavidin conjugated secondary antibodies were incubated for 1 h and 45 min, respectively, at room temperature. The color was developed as instructed by the manufacturer.
- Histopathology and Immunohistochemistry. Mouse tissues were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde and embedded in paraffin. Sections (5 μm thick) were stained with hematoxylin and eosin. Microscopic examination was performed by a board-certified veterinary pathologist and the interpretation was based on standard histopathological morphology. The pathologist was blinded to the treatment groups. The extent of mouse ileal lesions was determined by using a semi-quantitative method that included the amount of inflammatory infiltrate and percentage of goblet cells comprising the villous epithelium. A histomorphological scale for assessing inflammation in the lamina propria of the mucosa is provided as follows: 3, marked amounts (sheets of granulocytes expanding the width of the villous tip); 2, moderate amounts (sheets of granulocytes at the base of the villous); 1, mild amounts (multifocal scattering); and 0, none observed. To estimate percentage of goblet cells, following scale was used: 3, 50% or greater; 2, 25-50%; 1, 11-25%; and 0, <10%. The higher the score, the more likely there is an infection in the intestinal tissues. For CD3+ cell staining, paraffin-embedded intestinal thin sections pre-treated with heat-induced epitope retrieval solution and then blocked with Dako protein block according to manufacturer's instructions. Rabbit anti-human CD3 (1:500) used as the primary antibody followed by labeling with Dako labeled polymer. The stained slides were then scanned and analyzed using Aperio ScanScope and Aperio ImageScope software (v11.2.0.780) (Aperio Technologies, Vista, Calif.) established algorithms as described previously (Jones et al., 1993). For all CD3 immunostained slides, a semi-quantitative histochemical score (H score) was calculated by the formula: (3×% of strongly stained)+(2×% of moderately stained)+(% of weakly stained), giving a range of 0 to 300. This H score was adapted from the Aperio software (Webster and Dunstan, 2014).
- Analysis of tight junction protein expression. Membrane proteins from Caco-2 monolayers pre-exposed to the probiotic followed by L. monocytogenes infection were extracted and analyzed for tight junction protein expression. Western blot intensity measurements for membrane proteins using antibodies (Invitrogen) were determined as the ratio of the intensity of the tight junction protein (ZO-1, claudin-1, and occludin) and adherens junction protein (E-cadherin, β-catenin) bands to the integrated intensity of the β-actin band in the same sample. Additionally, membrane localization of the tight junction proteins was also analyzed by confocal immunofluorescence staining (Yu et al., 2012). Briefly, confluent Caco-2 monolayers were rinsed in PBS, fixed and permeabilized in 5% formaldehyde for 15 min. The Caco-2 monolayers were blocked using 5% normal goat serum in PBS for 1 h at room temperature and then incubated with the primary antibody to ZO-1, Claudin-1, and Occludin or E-cadherin-1 β-catenin (Invitrogen) at 37° C. overnight. The monolayers were then washed with PBS to remove unbound antibody and then incubated with the FITC-conjugated secondary antibody (Anti-mouse/Anti-rabbit IgG) for 1 h at room temperature. DAPI was used for nuclear staining. The monolayers were then washed and imaged using the Leica fluorescence microscope (Leica, model DMLB, Wetzlar, Germany) equipped with SPOT software (version 4.6.4.2, Diagnostic Instruments, Sterling Heights, Mich.).
- RNA preparation and quantitative reverse transcription PCR. Ileum sections (10-15 mm) of each mouse were collected and immediately transferred to 2.0 ml sterile, DNA/RNase-free cryovials containing RNAlater® (Ambion® by Life Technologies Corp., Carlsbad, Calif.), and stored at −80° C. until RNA extraction. Individual tissue samples were homogenized with TRIzol® reagent (Life Technologies Corp.) using a Tissue-Tearor (BioSpec Products, Inc., Bartlesville, Okla.), and total RNA was isolated with Direct-zol™ RNA MiniPrep Plus kit (Zymo Research Corp., Irvine, Calif.) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Total RNA aliquots were stored at −80° C. until cDNA synthesis. Concentration and quality of the RNA samples were assessed using Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer (Agilent Technologies, Inc. Headquarters, CA). Quantitative RT-PCR was performed in two-step RT-PCR. Independent cDNA synthesis was performed for all samples (n=3 per group) starting from 100 ng of total RNA using SuperScript® VILO™ Master Mix (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, Calif.) according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Quantitative PCR was carried out in a StepOnePlus™ Real-Time PCR System (Applied Biosystems®, Foster City, Calif.) using Fast SYBR® Green Master Mix (Applied Biosystems®) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Primers for each target gene were selected from previous publications, in addition to GAPDH, chosen as an endogenous control. Three technical replicates for each target gene per sample were included in the qPCR assay. Means of triplicates were taken, and the relative amount of target mRNA was normalized to GAPDH ran in every assay. Relative quantification was evaluated using the Comparative Ct method (ΔΔCt), and fold difference (2 −ΔΔct) was calculated between control (Control) and treatment groups (Schmittgen and Livak, 2008).
- Spleen cytology and flow cytometry. Mouse splenocytes (n=3 per group) were harvested by mechanical disruption through a 40-micron mesh filter (Fisher Scientific Co., Pittsburgh, Pa.) into supplemented RPMI-1640 (modified Gibco, Life Technologies). Red blood cells were lysed using ACK Lysis buffer (Lonza, Allendale, N.J.). Cells were suspended in PBS with 1% BSA prior to immunostaining. All cells were blocked with anti-mouse CD16/32 (Affymetrix, Santa Clara, Calif.). Direct extracellular staining was performed. Intracellular staining for FoxP3 was performed using the Mouse Regulatory T-cell Staining Kit #2 (Affymetrix) according to the manufacturer's protocol. Fluorescence measurements were performed on an Accuri C6 flow cytometer (BD, Franklin Lakes, N.J.) and analyzed with the manufacture's software. All statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad (GraphPad Software Inc, La Jolla, Calif.). Unstained and isotype control cells were used for preliminary gating included for all subsequent analysis. CD4+ and CD8α+ data were collected by quadrant plot (n=3). CD11c+ data were obtained from detector histogram and averaged between
tube 3 andtube 4 for each animal (n=3). [Mean population values were compared using two-way ANOVA to compare treatment groups with and without L. monocytogenes infection. Follow-up T-test analysis was performed to compare individual treatment pairs, one-tailed tests were performed only if the two-tailed test showed a significant difference.] - Antibody response analysis. The gut mucosa was collected from an 8 cm section of ileum for analysis of sIgA. Briefly, 96-well polystyrene plates (HBX, Immulon, ThermoFisher) were coated with 100 μl of mucus (diluted 1:100 in carbonate coating buffer) and stored at 4° C. overnight. The wells were washed three times in PBST and then sequentially incubated with 1:100 anti-mouse IgA conjugated to HRP and QuantaBlu substrates (Fisher). The fluorescence intensity was measured (Ex: 340 nm; Em: 420 nm) using a Spectramax fluorescent plate reader (Gemini, Sunnyvale, Calif.). Similarly, Listeria-specific IgA levels were also estimated in the mucus samples using ELISA plates sensitized with an overnight culture of L. monocytogenes (Lm) F4244 (10 7 CFU/well), followed by exposure to mucus samples from each of the animal group. The presence of Lm-specific IgA was then estimated using 1:100 anti-mouse IgA to HRP and QuantaBlu substrate as mentioned above. For analysis of serum IgG levels, 96-well plates were sensitized with serum samples (diluted 1:100 in carbonate coating buffer) at 4° C. overnight, and the IgG levels were detected using anti-mouse IgG (1:2000) and QuantaBlu. In addition, L. monocytogenes-specific IgG response was measured following sensitization with the F4244 (10 7 CFU/well), followed by exposure to serum and anti-mouse IgG.
- Statistical analysis. Experimental data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and GraphPad Prism (La Jolla, Calif.) software. For all analyses: ****p<0.0001; ***p<0.001; **p<0.01; *p<0.05; ns, no significance. For mouse microbial counts, statistical significance was assessed by the Mann-Whitney test. For the mice survival experiment, the Kaplan-Meyer plot was generated, and a log-rank test was performed. In other experiments, comparisons between treatment and control were performed using the one-way or two-way analysis of variance with Tukey's multiple-comparison test. Unless otherwise indicated, data for all experiments are presented as the mean±standard error of the mean (SEM).
- Those skilled in the art will recognize that numerous modifications can be made to the specific implementations described above. The implementations should not be limited to the particular limitations described. Other implementations may be possible.
- While the inventions have been illustrated and described in detail in the drawings and foregoing description, the same is to be considered as illustrative and not restrictive in character, it being understood that only certain embodiments have been shown and described and that all changes and modifications that come within the spirit of the invention are desired to be protected.
- It is intended that the scope of the present methods and apparatuses be defined by the following claims. However, it must be understood that this disclosure may be practiced otherwise than is specifically explained and illustrated without departing from its spirit or scope. It should be understood by those skilled in the art that various alternatives to the embodiments described herein may be employed in practicing the claims without departing from the spirit and scope as defined in the following claims.
-
- Ahrne, S., and Hagslatt, M.-L. J. (2011). Effect of Lactobacilli on paracellular permeability in the gut.
Nutrients 3, 104-117. - Amalaradjou, M. A. R., and Bhunia, A. K. (2012). Modern approaches in probiotics research to control foodborne pathogens. Adv. Food Nutr. Res. 67, 185-239.
- Amalaradjou, M. A. R., and Bhunia, A. K. (2013). Bioengineered probiotics, a strategic approach to control enteric infections. Bioengineered 4, 291-299.
- Azcarate-Peril, M. A., Sikes, M., and Bruno-Barcena, J. M. (2011). The intestinal microbiota, gastrointestinal environment and colorectal cancer: a putative role for probiotics in prevention of colorectal cancer? Am J Physiol—
Gastrointest Liver Physiol 301, G401-G424. - Bailey, T. W., do Nascimento, N. C., and Bhunia, A. K. (2017). Genome sequence of Listeria monocytogenes strain F4244, a 4b serotype.
Genome Announcements 5, e01324-01317. - Bakker-Zierikzee, A. M., van Tol, E. A. F., Kroes, H., Alles, M. S., Kok, F. J., and Bindels, J. G. (2006). Faecal SIgA secretion in infants fed on pre- or probiotic infant formula. Ped. Allergy Immunol. 17, 134-140.
- Bou Ghanem, E. N., Jones, G. S., Myers-Morales, T., Patil, P. D., Hidayatullah, A. N., and D'Orazio, S. E. (2012). InlA promotes dissemination of Listeria monocytogenes to the mesenteric lymph nodes during food borne infection of mice.
PLoS Pathog 8, e1003015. - Bron, P. A., Kleerebezem, M., Brummer, R.-J., Card, P. D., Mercenier, A., MacDonald, T. T., Garcia-Ródenas, C. L., and Wells, J. M. (2017). Can probiotics modulate human disease by impacting intestinal barrier function? Brit. J. Nutr. 117, 93-107.
- Brun, P., Castagliuolo, I., Leo, V. D., Buda, A., Pinzani, M., Palù, G., and Martines, D. (2007). Increased intestinal permeability in obese mice: new evidence in the pathogenesis of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Am J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 292, G518-G525.
- Buriti, F. C. A., Castro, I. A., and Saad, S. M. I. (2010). Viability of Lactobacillus acidophilus in synbiotic guava mousses and its survival under in vitro simulated gastrointestinal conditions. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 137, 121-129.
- Burkholder, K. M., and Bhunia, A. K. (2010). Listeria monocytogenes uses Listeria adhesion protein (LAP) to promote bacterial transepithelial translocation, and induces expression of LAP receptor Hsp60. Infect. Immun. 78, 5062-5073.
- Burkholder, K. M., Kim, K.-P., Mishra, K., Medina, S., Hahm, B.-K., Kim, H., and Bhunia, A. K. (2009). Expression of LAP, a SecA2-dependent secretory protein, is induced under anaerobic environment. Microbes Infect. 11, 859-867.
- Chen, W., Syldath, U., Bellmann, K., Burkart, V., and Kolb, H. (1999). Human 60-kDa Heat-Shock Protein: A Danger Signal to the Innate Immune System. J. Immunol. 162, 3212-3219. Cho, I.-H., Radadia, A. D., Farrokhzad, K., Ximenes, E., Bae, E., Singh, A. K., Oliver, H., Ladisch, M., Bhunia, A., Applegate, B., et al. (2014). Nano/Micro and Spectroscopic Approaches to Food Pathogen Detection. Annu. Rev. Anal. Chem. 7, 65-88.
- Condette, C. J., Khorsi-Cauet, H., Morliere, P., Zabijak, L., Reygner, J., Bach, V., and Gay-Queheillard, J. (2014). Increased gut permeability and bacterial translocation after chronic chlorpyrifos exposure in rats. PLoS One 9, e102217.
- Corr, S., Li, Y., Riedel, C. U., O'Toole, P. W., Hill, C., and Gahan, C. G. M. (2007). Bacteriocin production as a mechanism for the antiinfective activity of Lactobacillus salivarius UCC118. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. (USA) 104, 7617-7621.
- Cross, M. L. (2002). Microbes versus microbes: immune signals generated by probiotic lactobacilli and their role in protection against microbial pathogens. FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol. 34, 245-253.
- Culligan, E. P., Hill, C., and Sleator, R. D. (2009). Probiotics and gastrointestinal disease: successes, problems and future prospects.
Gut Pathog - Czuprynski, C. J., Faith, N. G., and Steinberg, H. (2003). A/J mice are susceptible and C57BL/6 mice are resistant to Listeria monocytogenes infection by intragastric inoculation. Infect. Immun. 71, 682-689.
- Deepti, K., and Vinod, K. K. (2014). Dahi containing Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium bifidum improves phagocytic potential of macrophages in aged mice. J. Food Sci. Technol. 51, 1147-1153.
- Deshpande, G., Rao, S., Keil, A., and Patole, S. (2011). Evidence-based guidelines for use of probiotics in preterm neonates.
BMC Med 9, 92. - Disson, O., Grayo, S., Huillet, E., Nikitas, G., Langa-Vives, F., Dussurget, O., Ragon, M., Le Monnier, A., Babinet, C., Cossart, P., et al. (2008). Conjugated action of two species-specific invasion proteins for fetoplacental listeriosis. Nature 455, 1114-1118.
- Drolia, R., Tenguria, S., Durkes, A. C., Turner, J. R., and Bhunia, A. K. (2018). Listeria adhesion protein induces intestinal epithelial barrier dysfunction for bacterial translocation. Cell Host & Microbe 23, 470-484.
- Edelson, B. T., Bradstreet, T. R., Hildner, K., Carrero, J. A., Frederick, K. E., Wumesh, K. C., Belizaire, R., Aoshi, T., Schreiber, R. D., Miller, M. J., et al. (2011). CD8 alpha(+) dendritic cells are an obligate cellular entry point for productive infection by Listeria monocytogenes. Immunity 35, 236-248.
- Finlay, B. B., and Falkow, S. (1997). Common themes in microbial pathogenicity revisited. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 61, 136-169.
- Focareta, A., Paton, J. C., Morona, R., Cook, J., and Paton, A. W. (2006). A recombinant probiotic for treatment and prevention of cholera. Gastroenterology 130, 1688.
- Haneberg, B., Kendall, D., Amerongen, H. M., Apter, F. M., Kraehenbuhl, J. P., and Neutra, M. R. (1994). Induction of specific immunoglobulin A in the small intestine, colon-rectum, and vagina measured by a new method for collection of secretions from local mucosal surfaces. Infect. Immun. 62, 15-23.
- Henderson, B., Fares, M. A., and Lund, P. A. (2013). Chaperonin 60: a paradoxical, evolutionarily conserved protein family with multiple moonlighting functions. Biol. Rev. 88, 955-987.
- Hill, C., Guarner, F., Reid, G., Gibson, G. R., Merenstein, D. J., Pot, B., Morelli, L., Canani, R. B., Flint, H. J., Salminen, S., et al. (2014). Expert consensus document: The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 11, 506-514.
- Huleatt, J. W., Pilip, I., Kerksiek, K., and Pamer, E. G. (2001). Intestinal and splenic T cell responses to enteric Listeria monocytogenes infection: Distinct repertoires of responding CD8 T lymphocytes. J. Immunol. 166, 4065-4073.
- Jagadeesan, B., Fleishman Littlejohn, A. E., Amalaradjou, M. A. R., Singh, A. K., Mishra, K. K., La, D., Kihara, D., and Bhunia, A. K. (2011). N-Terminal Gly224-Gly411 domain in Listeria adhesion protein interacts with host receptor Hsp60. PLoS One 6, e20694.
- Jagadeesan, B., Koo, O. K., Kim, K. P., Burkholder, K. M., Mishra, K. K., Aroonnual, A., and Bhunia, A. K. (2010). LAP, an alcohol acetaldehyde dehydrogenase enzyme in Listeria promotes bacterial adhesion to enterocyte-like Caco-2 cells only in pathogenic species. Microbiology 156, 2782-2795.
- Jagannath, C., Hoffmann, H., Sepulveda, E., Actor, J., Wetsel, R., and Hunter, R. (2000). Hypersusceptibility of A/J mice to tuberculosis is in part due to a deficiency of the fifth complement component (C5). 52, 369-379.
- Jones, M., Cordell, J. L., Beyers, A. D., Tse, A. G. D., and Mason, D. Y. (1993). Detection of T-cell and B-cell in many animal species using cross-reactive antipeptide antibodies. J. Immunol. 150, 5429-5435.
- Kim, H., and Bhunia, A. K. (2013). Secreted Listeria adhesion protein (Lap) influences Lap-mediated Listeria monocytogenes paracellular translocation through epithelial barrier. Gut Pathog. 5, 16.
- Koo, O. K., Amalaradjou, M. A. R., and Bhunia, A. K. (2012). Recombinant probiotic expressing Listeria adhesion protein attenuates Listeria monocytogenes virulence in vitro. PLoS One 7, e29277.
- Lecuit, M., Dramsi, S., Gottardi, C., Fedor-Chaiken, M., Gumbiner, B., and Cossart, P. (1999). A single amino acid in E-cadherin responsible for host specificity towards the human pathogen Listeria monocytogenes. EMBO J. 18, 3956-3963.
- Lecuit, M., Vandormael-Pournin, S., Lefort, J., Huerre, M., Gounon, P., Dupuy, C., Babinet, C., and Cossart, P. (2001). A transgenic model for listeriosis: role of internalin in crossing the intestinal barrier. Science 292, 1722-1725.
- Lee, M. T., Chen, F. Y., and Huang, H. W. (2004). Energetics of pore formation induced by membrane active peptides. Biochemistry 43, 3590-3599.
- Ly, N. P., Litonjua, A., Gold, D. R., and Celedon, J. C. (2011). Gut microbiota, probiotics, and vitamin D: Interrelated exposures influencing allergy, asthma, and obesity? J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 127, 1087-1094.
- Ma, T. Y., Iwamoto, G. K., Hoa, N. T., Akotia, V., Pedram, A., Boivin, M. A., and Said, H. M. (2004). TNF-α induced increase in intestinal epithelial tight junction permeability requires NF-kB activation. Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointes. Liver Physiol. 286, G367-G376.
- Maassen, C. B., Laman, J. D., den Bak-Glashouwer, M. J., Tielen, F. J., van Holten-Neelen, J. C., Hoogteijling, L., Antonissen, C., Leer, R. J., Pouwels, P. H., Boersma, W. J., et al. (1999). Instruments for oral disease-intervention strategies: recombinant Lactobacillus casei expressing tetanus toxin fragment C for vaccination or myelin proteins for oral tolerance induction in multiple sclerosis.
Vaccine 17, 2117-2128. - Mantis, N. J., Rol, N., and Corthesy, B. (2011). Secretory IgA's complex roles in immunity and mucosal homeostasis in the gut. Mucosal Immunol. 4, 603-611.
- Marco, A. J., Altimira, J., Prats, N., Lopez, S., Dominguez, L., Domingo, M., and Briones, V. (1997). Penetration of Listeria monocytogenes in mice infected by the oral route. Microb. Pathog. 23, 255-263.
- Michon, C., Langella, P., Eijsink, V. G. H., Mathiesen, G., and Chatel, J. M. (2016). Display of recombinant proteins at the surface of lactic acid bacteria: strategies and applications. Microb.
Cell Factories 15, 70. - Mishra, K. K., Mendonca, M., Aroonnual, A., Burkholder, K. M., and Bhunia, A. K. (2011). Genetic organization and molecular characterization of secA2 locus in Listeria species. Gene 489, 76-85.
- Mohamadzadeh, M., Durmaz, E., Zadeh, M., Pakanati, K. C., Gramarossa, M., Cohran, V., and Klaenhammer, T. R. (2010). Targeted expression of anthrax protective antigen by Lactobacillus gasseri as an anthrax vaccine. Future Microbiol. 5, 1289-1296.
- Ng, S. C., Hart, A. L., Kamm, M. A., Stagg, A. J., and Knight, S. C. (2009). Mechanisms of action of probiotics: Recent advances. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 15, 300-310.
- Niers, L. E. M., Timmerman, H. M., Rijkers, G. T., van Bleek, G. M., van Uden, N. O. P., Knol, E. F., Kapsenberg, M. L., Kimpen, J. L. L., and Hoekstra, M. O. (2005). Identification of strong interleukin-10 inducing lactic acid bacteria which down-regulate
T helper type 2 cytokines. Clin. Exp. Allergy 35, 1481-1489. - Nikitas, G., Deschamps, C., Disson, O., Niault, T., Cossart, P., and Lecuit, M. (2011). Transcytosis of Listeria monocytogenes across the intestinal barrier upon specific targeting of goblet cell accessible E-cadherin. J. Exp. Med. 208, 2263-2277.
- Pagnini, C., Saeed, R., Bamias, G., Arseneau, K. O., Pizarro, T. T., and Cominelli, F. (2010). Probiotics promote gut health through stimulation of epithelial innate immunity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A 107, 454-459.
- Pentecost, M., Otto, G., Theriot, J. A., and Amieva, M. R. (2006). Listeria monocytogenes invades the epithelial junctions at sites of cell extrusion.
PLoS Pathog 2, e3. - Pockley, A. G. (2003). Heat shock proteins as regulators of the immune response. The Lancet 362, 469-476.
- Pouwels, P. H., Vriesema, A., Martinez, B., Tielen, F. J., Seegers, J. F., Leer, R. J., Jore, J., and Smit, E. (2001). Lactobacilli as vehicles for targeting antigens to mucosal tissues by surface exposition of foreign antigens. Methods Enzymol 336, 369-389.
- Pron, B., Boumaila, C., Jaubert, F., Sarnacki, S., Monnet, J., Berche, P., and Gaillard, J. (1998). Comprehensive study of the intestinal stage of listeriosis in a rat ligated ileal loop system. Infect. Immun. 66, 747-755.
- Rothe, J., Lesslauer, W., Lotscher, H., Lang, Y., Koebel, P., Kontgen, F., Althage, A., Zinkernagel, R., Steinmetz, M., and Bluethmann, H. (1993). Mice lacking the tumour
necrosis factor receptor 1 are resistant to TNF-mediated toxicity but highly susceptible to infection by Listeria monocytogenes. Nature 364, 798-802. - Sakai, F., Hosoya, T., Ono-Ohmachi, A., Ukibe, K., Ogawa, A., Moriya, T., Kadooka, Y., Shiozaki, T., Nakagawa, H., Nakayama, Y., et al. (2014). Lactobacillus gasseri SBT2055 Induces TGF-beta Expression in Dendritic Cells and Activates TLR2 Signal to Produce IgA in the Small Intestine. PLoS One 9, e105370.
- Salminen, S., Nybom, S., Meriluoto, J., Collado, M. C., Vesterlund, S., and El-Nezami, H. (2010). Interaction of probiotics and pathogens—benefits to human health? Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 21, 157-167.
- Sanders, M. E., Lenoir-Wijnkoop, I., Salminen, S., Merenstein, D. J., Gibson, G. R., Petschow, B. W., Nieuwdorp, M., Tancredi, D. J., Cifelli, C. J., Jacques, P., et al. (2014). Probiotics and prebiotics: prospects for public health and nutritional recommendations. Annals New York Acad. Sci. 1309, 19-29.
- Schmittgen, T. D., and Livak, K. J. (2008). Analyzing real-time PCR data by the comparative C-T method. Nat. Protoc. 3, 1101-1108.
- Schuchat, A., Swaminathan, B., and Broome, C. V. (1991). Epidemiology of human listeriosis. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 4, 169-183.
- Sleator, R. D., Watson, D., Hill, C., and Gahan, C. G. M. (2009). The interaction between Listeria monocytogenes and the host gastrointestinal tract. Microbiology 155, 2463-2475.
- Vance, R. E., Isberg, R. R., and Portnoy, D. A. (2009). Patterns of pathogenesis: discrimination of pathogenic and nonpathogenic microbes by the innate immune system.
Cell Host Microbe 6, 10-21. - Villena, J., Racedo, S., Aguero, G., Bru, E., Medina, M., and Alvarez, S. (2005). Lactobacillus casei improves resistance to pneumococcal respiratory infection in malnourished mice. J. Nutr. 135, 1462-1469.
- Wampler, J. L., Kim, K. P., Jaradat, Z., and Bhunia, A. K. (2004).
Heat shock protein 60 acts as a receptor for the Listeria adhesion protein in Caco-2 cells. Infect. Immun. 72, 931-936. - Webster, J. D., and Dunstan, R. W. (2014). Whole-Slide Imaging and Automated Image Analysis: Considerations and Opportunities in the Practice of Pathology. Vet. Pathol. 51, 211-223.
- Wollert, T., Pasche, B., Rochon, M., Deppenmeier, S., van den Heuvel, J., Gruber, A. D., Heinz, D. W., Lengeling, A., and Schubert, W. D. (2007). Extending the host range of Listeria monocytogenes by rational protein design. Cell 129, 891-902.
- Xayarath, B., and Freitag, N. E. (2012). Optimizing the balance between host and environmental survival skills: lessons learned from Listeria monocytogenes. Future Microbiol. 7, 839-852.
- Yu, Q., Wang, Z., and Yang, Q. (2012). Lactobacillus amylophilus D14 protects tight junction from enteropathogenic bacteria damage in Caco-2 cells. 95, 5580-5587.
- Zareie, M., Johnson-Henry, K., Jury, J., Yang, P. C., Ngan, B. Y., McKay, D. M., Soderholm, J. D., Perdue, M. H., and Sherman, P. M. (2006). Probiotics prevent bacterial translocation and improve intestinal barrier function in rats following chronic psychological stress. Gut 55, 1553-1560.
- Zhou, Y., Qin, H., Zhang, M., Shen, T., Chen, H., Ma, Y., Chu, Z., Zhang, P., and Liu, Z. (2010). Lactobacillus plantarum inhibits intestinal epithelial barrier dysfunction induced by unconjugated bilirubin. Brit. J. Nutr. 104, 390-401.
Claims (15)
Priority Applications (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US17/401,492 US20210386819A1 (en) | 2018-07-02 | 2021-08-13 | Bioengineered lactobacillus probiotics and the uses thereof |
Applications Claiming Priority (3)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US201862692880P | 2018-07-02 | 2018-07-02 | |
US16/458,243 US11090357B2 (en) | 2018-07-02 | 2019-07-01 | Bioengineered lactobacillus probiotics and the uses thereof |
US17/401,492 US20210386819A1 (en) | 2018-07-02 | 2021-08-13 | Bioengineered lactobacillus probiotics and the uses thereof |
Related Parent Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US16/458,243 Continuation US11090357B2 (en) | 2018-07-02 | 2019-07-01 | Bioengineered lactobacillus probiotics and the uses thereof |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20210386819A1 true US20210386819A1 (en) | 2021-12-16 |
Family
ID=69007794
Family Applications (2)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US16/458,243 Active 2039-07-16 US11090357B2 (en) | 2018-07-02 | 2019-07-01 | Bioengineered lactobacillus probiotics and the uses thereof |
US17/401,492 Pending US20210386819A1 (en) | 2018-07-02 | 2021-08-13 | Bioengineered lactobacillus probiotics and the uses thereof |
Family Applications Before (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US16/458,243 Active 2039-07-16 US11090357B2 (en) | 2018-07-02 | 2019-07-01 | Bioengineered lactobacillus probiotics and the uses thereof |
Country Status (1)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (2) | US11090357B2 (en) |
Families Citing this family (2)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US10632208B2 (en) * | 2017-10-06 | 2020-04-28 | Purdue Research Foundation | Peptide-mediated drug delivery across epithelial barrier |
CN114350536B (en) * | 2021-10-20 | 2023-06-06 | 中粮营养健康研究院有限公司 | Lactobacillus plantarum, microbial inoculum and preparation method thereof, application of lactobacillus plantarum and microbial inoculum, fermented food and preparation method of fermented food |
Citations (3)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20070118916A1 (en) * | 2005-10-14 | 2007-05-24 | Metanomics Gmbh | Process for the production of fine chemicals |
US20130202571A1 (en) * | 2012-02-02 | 2013-08-08 | Purdue Research Foundation | Use of probiotic bacteria to prevent and treat listerial infections |
US10632208B2 (en) * | 2017-10-06 | 2020-04-28 | Purdue Research Foundation | Peptide-mediated drug delivery across epithelial barrier |
-
2019
- 2019-07-01 US US16/458,243 patent/US11090357B2/en active Active
-
2021
- 2021-08-13 US US17/401,492 patent/US20210386819A1/en active Pending
Patent Citations (3)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20070118916A1 (en) * | 2005-10-14 | 2007-05-24 | Metanomics Gmbh | Process for the production of fine chemicals |
US20130202571A1 (en) * | 2012-02-02 | 2013-08-08 | Purdue Research Foundation | Use of probiotic bacteria to prevent and treat listerial infections |
US10632208B2 (en) * | 2017-10-06 | 2020-04-28 | Purdue Research Foundation | Peptide-mediated drug delivery across epithelial barrier |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
US20200000876A1 (en) | 2020-01-02 |
US11090357B2 (en) | 2021-08-17 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
Drolia et al. | Receptor-targeted engineered probiotics mitigate lethal Listeria infection | |
Yan et al. | Neonatal colonization of mice with LGG promotes intestinal development and decreases susceptibility to colitis in adulthood | |
Srutkova et al. | Bifidobacterium longum CCM 7952 promotes epithelial barrier function and prevents acute DSS-induced colitis in strictly strain-specific manner | |
Jacobi et al. | Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 (Mutaflor): new insights into an old probiotic bacterium | |
Shen et al. | Outer membrane vesicles of a human commensal mediate immune regulation and disease protection | |
Zhang et al. | Bifidobacterium animalis ssp. Lactis 420 mitigates autoimmune hepatitis through regulating intestinal barrier and liver immune cells | |
US20210386819A1 (en) | Bioengineered lactobacillus probiotics and the uses thereof | |
Schwarzer et al. | Neonatal colonization of germ-free mice with Bifidobacterium longum prevents allergic sensitization to major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 | |
Lähteinen et al. | Effect of Lactobacillus brevis ATCC 8287 as a feeding supplement on the performance and immune function of piglets | |
WO2018084172A1 (en) | Bacteria inducing th1 cells | |
Jin et al. | Lactobacillus fermentum ZYL0401 attenuates lipopolysaccharide-induced hepatic TNF-α expression and liver injury via an IL-10-and PGE2-EP4-dependent mechanism | |
Weng et al. | Bacterial colonization, probiotics, and clinical disease | |
Casaro et al. | A probiotic has differential effects on allergic airway inflammation in A/J and C57BL/6 mice and is correlated with the gut microbiome | |
Mathipa et al. | Lactobacillus casei expressing Internalins A and B reduces Listeria monocytogenes interaction with Caco‐2 cells in vitro | |
Breyner et al. | Oral delivery of pancreatitis‐associated protein by Lactococcus lactis displays protective effects in dinitro‐benzenesulfonic‐acid‐induced colitis model and is able to modulate the composition of the microbiota | |
Pyclik et al. | Viability status-dependent effect of Bifidobacterium longum ssp. longum CCM 7952 on prevention of allergic inflammation in mouse model | |
JP2015502410A (en) | Methods for reducing polyposis and colorectal cancer | |
Ryan et al. | Listeria adhesion protein-expressing bioengineered probiotics prevent fetoplacental transmission of Listeria monocytogenes in a pregnant Guinea pig model | |
WO2017020783A1 (en) | Application of bacteroides fragilis in prevention and/or treatment of meningitis | |
Zhou et al. | Oral immunisation with Taishan Pinus massoniana pollen polysaccharide adjuvant with recombinant Lactococcus lactis-expressing Proteus mirabilis ompA confers optimal protection in mice | |
EP4178597A2 (en) | Probiotics for use in the prevention or treatment of illness and/or symptoms associated with coronaviruses | |
Bai et al. | Vasoactive intestinal polypeptide plays a key role in the microbial-neuroimmune control of intestinal motility | |
JP2015130842A (en) | SCREENING METHOD OF ORAL IMMUNOLOGICAL TOLERANCE SUBSTANCE AIMING INDUCTION OF Foxp3 POSITIVE CONTROL T-CELL AND IFN-γ PRODUCING IL-10 PRODUCING T-CELL AS INDEX AND ORAL IMMUNOLOGICAL TOLERANCE ENHANCING COMPOSITION | |
US20230181654A1 (en) | Agent for Increasing Content of IgA Antibody in Milk | |
Osman et al. | Modelling the immunopathophysiology of Brucella melitensis and its lipopolysaccharide in mice infected via oral route of exposure |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: DOCKETED NEW CASE - READY FOR EXAMINATION |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: NON FINAL ACTION MAILED |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: RESPONSE TO NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION ENTERED AND FORWARDED TO EXAMINER |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: FINAL REJECTION MAILED |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: ADVISORY ACTION MAILED |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: DOCKETED NEW CASE - READY FOR EXAMINATION |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: NON FINAL ACTION MAILED |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: RESPONSE TO NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION ENTERED AND FORWARDED TO EXAMINER |
|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: FINAL REJECTION MAILED |