↓ Skip to main content

VPAC1 receptor (Vipr1)-deficient mice exhibit ameliorated experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, with specific deficits in the effector stage

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuroinflammation, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
VPAC1 receptor (Vipr1)-deficient mice exhibit ameliorated experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, with specific deficits in the effector stage
Published in
Journal of Neuroinflammation, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12974-016-0626-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catalina Abad, Bhavaani Jayaram, Laurine Becquet, Yuqi Wang, M Sue O’Dorisio, James A. Waschek, Yossan-Var Tan

Abstract

Vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) and pituitary adenylyl cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) are two highly homologous neuropeptides. In vitro and ex vivo experiments repeatedly demonstrate that these peptides exert pronounced immunomodulatory (primarily anti-inflammatory) actions which are mediated by common VPAC1 and VPAC2 G protein-coupled receptors. In agreement, we have shown that mice deficient in PACAP ligand or VPAC2 receptors exhibit exacerbated experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE). However, we observed that VIP-deficient mice are unexpectedly resistant to EAE, suggesting a requirement for this peptide at some stage of disease development. Here, we investigated the involvement of VPAC1 in the development of EAE using a VPAC1-deficient mouse model. EAE was induced in wild-type (WT) and VPAC1 knockout (KO) mice using myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein 35-55 (MOG35-55), and clinical scores were assessed continuously over 30 days. Immune responses in the spinal cords were determined by histology, real-time PCR and immunofluorescence, and in the draining lymph nodes by antigen-recall assays. The contribution of VPAC1 expression in the immune system to the development of EAE was evaluated by means of adoptive transfer and bone marrow chimera experiments. In other experiments, VPAC1 receptor analogs were given to WT mice. MOG35-55-induced EAE was ameliorated in VPAC1 KO mice compared to WT mice. The EAE-resistant phenotype of VPAC1 KO mice correlated with reduced central nervous system (CNS) histopathology and cytokine expression in the spinal cord. The immunization phase of EAE appeared to be unimpaired because lymph node cells from EAE-induced VPAC1 KO mice stimulated in vitro with MOG exhibited robust proliferative and Th1/Th17 responses. Moreover, lymph node and spleen cells from KO mice were fully capable of inducing EAE upon transfer to WT recipients. In contrast, WT cells from MOG-immunized mice did not transfer the disease when administered to VPAC1 KO recipients, implicating a defect in the effector phase of the disease. Bone marrow chimera studies suggested that the resistance of VPAC1-deficient mice was only minimally dependent on the expression of this receptor in the immunogenic/hematopoietic compartment. Consistent with this, impaired spinal cord inductions of several chemokine mRNAs were observed in VPAC1 KO mice. Finally, treatment of WT mice with the VPAC1 receptor antagonist PG97-269 before, but not after, EAE induction mimicked the clinical phenotype of VPAC1 KO mice. VPAC1 gene loss impairs the development of EAE in part by preventing an upregulation of CNS chemokines and invasion of inflammatory cells into the CNS. Use of VPAC1 antagonists in WT mice prior to EAE induction also support a critical role for VPAC1 signaling for the development of EAE.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Researcher 7 18%
Other 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 16%
Neuroscience 6 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 9 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 October 2017.
All research outputs
#18,465,704
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroinflammation
#2,077
of 2,644 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,436
of 352,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroinflammation
#42
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,644 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,012 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.