Conjunctival mast cell as a mediator of eosinophilic response in ocular allergy

Division of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Faculty of Medicine, Tottori University, Yonago, Japan.
Molecular vision (Impact Factor: 2.25). 02/2008; 14:1525-32.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine the contribution of conjunctival mast cells to the allergen-specific inflammatory responses in eyes with allergic conjunctivitis and to test the hypothesis that mast cells act as mediators of the early phase response.
The participation of mast cells in allergen-induced inflammatory cell recruitment was studied in an experimental murine model of allergic conjunctivitis. Experimental allergic conjunctivitis was induced by a single or multiple sensitizing injections of an allergen. The conjunctiva of allergen-sensitized, mast cell-deficient (Kit(w)/Kit(w-v)) mice were reconstituted with conjunctival mast cells isolated from naïve wild type mice by subconjunctival transfer. Kit(w)/Kit(w-v) mice and conjunctival mast cell reconstituted Kit(w)/Kit(w-v) mice were evaluated for early phase reactions and late phase inflammatory responses.
The early phase response was minimal in Kit(w)/Kit(w-v) mice after both a single injection and multiple sensitization injections of the allergen. The early phase responses were fully restored following adoptive transfer of isolated conjunctival mast cells from naïve wild type mice. Eosinophilic inflammatory responses were significantly depressed in Kit(w)/Kit(w-v) mice without the impairment of allergen-specific priming. Reconstitution of the conjunctiva of Kit(w)/Kit(w-v) mice with mast cells from wild type mice fully restored the allergen-specific eosinophilic responses but not the neutrophilic responses.
Our data indicate that conjunctival mast cells are essential for eosinophilic inflammation but not for neutrophilia in allergic conjunctivitis that is mediated by mast cell activation.

Download full-text


Available from: Dai Miyazaki, Jul 01, 2015
1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examines the histology of conjunctival biopsy samples from patients with persistent allergic eosinophilic conjunctivitis (AEC) or non-allergic eosinophilic conjunctivitis (NAEC). Fourteen patients with conjunctivitis and eosinophilia in cytology samples were included in the study. Seven had positive skin-prick tests (the AEC group) and seven had negative skin-prick tests (the NAEC group). Eight asymptomatic subjects with negative skin-prick tests served as a control group. In conjunctival biopsies eosinophils were identified with monoclonal antibodies. Mast cells were identified by specific immunostaining and tryptase-positive granules were counted around them. The percentage of degranulated mast cells was used as a measure of cell activation. Eosinophil and goblet cell numbers were counted, epithelial thickness was measured, and the symptoms were characterized and graded. The numbers of eosinophils in biopsies were higher in patients with AEC than in healthy controls (p = 0.010). The proportion of activated mast cells tended to be higher in AEC patients (65%) than in NAEC patients (48%) or control subjects (40%). Patients with AEC had more goblet cells than control subjects (p = 0.049) and their epithelial layer was thicker (p = 0.054). Patients with AEC had more severe symptoms than control subjects (p = 0.0005), whereas the symptoms of NAEC patients did not differ statistically from those of controls (p = 0.065). Patients with NAEC were characterized by mild eosinophilic inflammation and only minor structural conjunctival changes. The condition seems to run a relatively mild but persistent clinical course.
    Acta ophthalmologica 11/2009; 88(2):245-50. DOI:10.1111/j.1755-3768.2009.01599.x · 2.51 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of the present investigation is to study the effects of topical ocular montelukast in an animal model of allergic conjunctivitis in rabbits. Eighteen Albino New Zeeland rabbits were used and divided into six groups; three of which served as controls. Allergic conjunctivitis model was induced in the other three groups (IV, V and VI) by topical application of 1000 µg of compound 48/80 in each eye. Group IV was left untreated while groups V and VI were treated with 0.1% montelukast and 1% prednisolone eye drops respectively. The eye drops were applied before application of the compound. The eyes were evaluated by clinical examination and scoring of the allergic manifestations as well as by light microscopic examination of the conjunctiva. Both montelukast and prednisolone produced improvement of the allergic manifestations detected both clinically and histologically with prednisolone being more effective than montelukast. In conclusion, topical ocular montelukast can be a potential therapeutic drug with a new route of administration that can be used for treatment of allergic conjunctivitis.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The immune response is regulated, in part, by effector cells whose activation requires multiple signals. For example, T cells require signals emanating from the T cell antigen receptor and co-stimulatory molecules for full activation. Here, we present evidence indicating that IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions in vivo also require cognate signals to activate mast cells. Immediate hypersensitivity reactions in the conjunctiva are ablated in mice deficient in eotaxin-1, despite normal numbers of tissue mast cells and levels of IgE. To further define the co-stimulatory signals mediated by chemokine receptor 3 (CCR3), an eotaxin-1 receptor, effects of CCR3 blockade were tested with an allergic conjunctivitis model and in ex vivo isolated connective tissue-type mast cells. Our results show that CCR3 blockade significantly suppresses allergen-mediated hypersensitivity reactions as well as IgE-mediated mast cell degranulation. We propose that a co-stimulatory axis by CCR3, mainly stimulated by eotaxin-1, is pivotal in mast cell-mediated hypersensitivity reactions.
    International Immunology 02/2009; 21(2):187-201. DOI:10.1093/intimm/dxn137 · 3.18 Impact Factor