Advertisement

Prologue: Innate Immune Tools to Defend Against Stressful Injury: Success and Failure

  • Walter Gottlieb Land
Chapter

Abstract

In the prologue of Part V, the scenario of a continuous struggle for life of all organisms on earth against internal and environmental stressful and injurious conditions is cursorily sketched. Eukaryotic cells are not only intrinsically engaged in taking care for transient adaptations that typically occur in response to relatively mild changes in conditions. They must also continuously adapt to fluctuations in external conditions associated with heavy perturbing and insulting stimuli. Whereas severe injuries may lead to an immediate accidental cell death associated with passive release of DAMPs, moderate injuries may initially result in DAMP-induced stress responses including the heat shock response, the unfolded protein response, and the DNA damage response, the aim being to restore homeostasis. However, when unsuccessful, these stress responses result in a controlled destruction of the stressed cell known as regulated cell death, one typical subroutine form being regulated necrosis. This type of cell death is associated with (1) active secretion of inducible DAMPs during the dying process, followed by (2) passive release of constitutive DAMPs after final rupture of the plasma membrane. Both constitutive and inducible DAMPs evoke cell-extrinsic efferent innate immune responses in terms of inflammation and inflammation-related events such as phagocytosis and may elicit subsequent antigen-specific adaptive immune responses. The complex scenario of these hierarchical interrelationships between stress responses, types of regulated cell death, and emission of DAMPs is outlined in this part of the book in the form of a streamlined text.

References

  1. 1.
    Saunders LR, Verdin E. Cell biology. Stress response and aging. Science. 2009;323:1021–2. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19229027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    de Nadal E, Ammerer G, Posas F. Controlling gene expression in response to stress. Nat Rev Genet. 2011;12:833–45. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22048664 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Davies KJA. Adaptive homeostasis. Mol Aspects Med. 2016;49:1–7. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27112802 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Crisan TO, Netea MG, Joosten LAB. Innate immune memory: Implications for host responses to damage-associated molecular patterns. Eur J Immunol. 2016;46:817–8.  https://doi.org/10.1002/eji.201545497.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Galluzzi L, Bravo-San Pedro JM, Vitale I, Aaronson SA, Abrams JM, Adam D, et al. Essential versus accessory aspects of cell death: recommendations of the NCCD 2015. Cell Death Differ. 2015;22:58–73. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25236395 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Land WG, Agostinis P, Gasser S, Garg AD, Linkermann A. Transplantation and damage associated molecular patterns (DAMPs). Am J Transplant. 2016;16:3338–61. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27421829 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chovatiya R, Medzhitov R. Stress, inflammation, and defense of homeostasis. Mol Cell. 2014;54:281–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of StrasbourgMolecular ImmunoRheumatology, Laboratory of Excellence TransplantexStrasbourgFrance

Personalised recommendations