Differences in the Anaphylactic Response between C3H/HeOuJ and BALB/c Mice

Martín, G.; Hernández, Alejandro La Rotta; Torre, María Vázquez de la; Higaki, Y.; Zubeldía, J M; Baeza, M.L.

doi:10.1159/000478983

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 37 publications

(64 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…I.p. sensitization resulted in higher IgG1 and IgG2a levels after sensitization in C3H mice compared to BALB/c mice, whereas we measured comparable levels after sensitization in both strains. Interestingly, OIT treatment resulted in a significantly higher IgG2a responses in C3H mice compared to BALB/c mice.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 57%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mouse strain differences in response to oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy

Wagenaar

Bol‐Schoenmakers

Giustarini

et al. 2019

Immunity Inflam & Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Promising therapies for food allergy are emerging, mostly based on animal experimentation. However, different mouse strains are used, which may make it hard to compare experiments. The current study investigated whether the immunological differences between C3H/HeOuJ (C3H) and BALB/c mice lead to differences in efficacy of peanut‐specific immunotherapy. Methods After sensitization using peanut extract (PE), C3H and BALB/c mice received oral immunotherapy (OIT) by intragastric dosing for three weeks. Hereafter, mice were exposed to PE via the intradermal, intragastric and intraperitoneal route, to determine allergic outcomes. Furthermore, PE‐specific antibody and cytokine production were determined and the number of various immune cells at different time points during the study were measured. Results OIT protected C3H mice against anaphylaxis, whereas no anaphylaxis was seen in BALB/c mice. In contrast, OIT induced an increase in MMCP‐1 levels in BALB/c mice but not in C3H mice. No effect of OIT on the acute allergic skin response was observed in either strain. Specific antibody responses showed similar patterns in both strains for IgA and IgG1. IgE levels were a tenfold higher in BALB/c mice and after the intragastric challenge (day 70) OIT‐treated BALB/c mice showed induced IgE levels. Moreover, in C3H mice IgG2a levels were higher and increased in response to OIT and challenges. After the final challenge, but not at other timepoints MLN‐derived lymphocytes from OIT‐treated BALB/c mice produced less IL‐13 and IL‐5 compared to control‐treated mice, whereas no differences were seen in case of C3H mice. Conclusions Taken together, these results show that the C3H strain is more suitable to study clinical outcomes of OIT, whereas the BALB/c strain is more optimal to study T cell responses.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 57%

“…Similar results were shown after i.p. sensitization using alum as an adjuvant, however, this method did result in a small systemic anaphylaxis reaction in BALB/c . When both strains were sensitized to ovalbumin, BALB/c mice exhibited similar anaphylactic symptoms as C3H mice, but no effects were seen on body temperature .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Mouse strain differences in response to oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy

Wagenaar

Bol‐Schoenmakers

Giustarini

et al. 2019

Immunity Inflam & Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[31][32][33][34][35] Hence, Th2-dominant strains typically develop successful allergic IgE sensitization, whereas Th1-dominant strains may be predominantly resistant to IgE sensitization. 26,36 Murine studies established that interleukin-4 (IL-4) regulates B cells for secretion of IgG1 and IgE, IL-5 enhances secretion of IgA, whereas interferonγ (IFNγ) stimulates the expression of IgG2a antibodies. [33][34][35] Hence, strain differences may affect a successful sensitization and, consequently, the outcome of testing new therapeutic strategies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strain matters in mouse models of peanut‐allergic anaphylaxis: Systemic IgE‐dependent and Ara h 2‐dominant sensitization in C3H mice

Paolucci

Homère

Waeckerle-Men

et al. 2023

Clin Experimental Allergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Peanut allergy accounts for the majority of food-induced hypersensitivity reactions and can lead to lethal anaphylaxis. Animal models can provide an insight into the immune mechanisms responsible for sensitization and allergic anaphylaxis.However, different mouse strains and sensitization protocols can influence the successful development of a peanut allergic mouse model. Objective:We aimed at developing a systemic anaphylaxis model of peanut allergy that resembles human anaphylaxis. We compared the immunological and clinical responses in genetically different mouse strains.Methods: Female BALB/c, C57BL/6, and C3H mice were intraperitoneally sensitized and later challenged with peanut proteins. Allergen-specific serology was done by ELISA, and anaphylaxis was evaluated by monitoring changes in body temperature upon systemic challenge.Results: Sensitization to peanut was successful in C3H mice and triggered production of allergen-specific antibodies, cytokines and anaphylaxis. Allergic reactions were characterized by the release of allergic mediators and by changes in leukocyte populations in blood and in the peritoneal cavity. Among the identified major peanut allergens, Ara h 2 showed the strongest anaphylactic potential. Much lower or no trigger of peanut-specific antibodies was observed in BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice, which experienced no hypersensitivity reactions. Conclusions:Mouse strain matters for testing of peanut protein allergens. We identified C3H mice as a suitable strain for the development of a mouse model of peanutallergic anaphylaxis. Pre-clinical, humoural and cellular responses resembled the responses observed in human patients. The described model can be useful for further studies on peanut allergy and for the development of new therapeutic strategies.

show abstract

“…However, MCs heterogeneity is detrimental to finding a "universal" biomarker of anaphylaxis. Specifically, differences between human and mice, and even between mice strains, indicate marked variations in IgE abundance, MC activity and features of the released mediators [193,194]. Precisely, the degranulation profile of MCs, far from being simple, is not a unique and uniform.…”

Section: Mast Cells Heterogeneitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Anaphylaxis: Mediators, Biomarkers, and Microenvironments

Fernández-Bravo¹,

Palacio-Garcia²,

Requena-Robledo³

et al. 2022

J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The life-threating nature of the anaphylactic reactions promotes a growing interest to discover new biomarkers that could support their better diagnosis and prevention. However, both the clinical features and the etiopathology of anaphylaxis are very diverse, hindering the elucidation of valuable molecular indicators of disease. Most studies of anaphylaxis have focused on the immune system. Precisely, anaphylactic reactions are characterized primarily by IgE-mediated activation of mast cells and basophils and the release of several mediators. Among them, determinations of the serum tryptase levels is the main in vitro test used to confirm the reaction and there are no available biomarkers with predictive capacity for this pathological event. However, recent research has postulated that alternative pathways, cell types and systems are involved. Consequently, different molecular products have been explored and indicated as potential biomarkers, but none of them have been translated into the clinical practice yet. Precisely, vasoactive agents, proteases, proteoglycans, lipids, interleukins, cytokines, products of the complement-contact and coagulation systems, circulating proteins, extracellular vesicles, microRNAs and metabolites have been found to be altered in patients with anaphylaxis. The recognition of biological processes and molecular pathways interacting in the magnitude of the microenvironments switched on in anaphylaxis will notably nourish the clinical practice and the recognition of better molecular markers. Therefore, this article covers a broad review of the different mediators described in anaphylaxis and their proposal as biomarkers of this pathological event, as well as their role in the molecular basis of the reaction.

show abstract

Differences in the Anaphylactic Response between C3H/HeOuJ and BALB/c Mice

Cited by 11 publications

References 37 publications

Mouse strain differences in response to oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy

Mouse strain differences in response to oral immunotherapy for peanut allergy

Strain matters in mouse models of peanut‐allergic anaphylaxis: Systemic IgE‐dependent and Ara h 2‐dominant sensitization in C3H mice

Anaphylaxis: Mediators, Biomarkers, and Microenvironments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About