Lipid A-Mediated Tolerance and Cancer Therapy

  • Cheryl E. Rockwell
  • David. C. Morrison
  • Nilofer QureshiEmail author
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 667)


The term “tolerance” from an immunological perspective, broadly encompasses a number of phenomena, but generally refers to a diminished responsiveness to LPS and/or other microbial products. With the discovery that many of the immunological, physiological and/or pathophysiological effects of LPS can be attributed to the lipid A moiety of the LPS molecule, a number of different lipid A analogs were synthesized with the goal of developing a drug that could be used clinically to treat cancer. In many instances, the development of tolerance to the lipid A congeners confounded the utility of these analogs as cancer therapeutics. In certain circumstances, however, the development of tolerance in patients has been utilized therapeutically to protect immunosuppressed patients from sepsis. Although numerous studies have been designed to investigate the development of tolerance, the underlying molecular mechanism remains unclear. This may be due, in part, to differences in the experimental models used, the sources and types of microbes and microbial products studied, kinetics of responses, and/or other experimental conditions. Nonetheless, a number of different signaling pathways have been identified as potentially modulating and/or triggering the development of tolerance. Though complex and incompletely understood, the capacity of tolerance to impact lipid A-based therapeutics, either positively or negatively, is inarguable, thus underscoring the necessity for further investigation toward elucidating the mechanisms contributing to the development of tolerance to lipid A and its analogs.


Endotoxin Tolerance Synthetic Lipid Late Tolerance Endotoxin Lethality Early Tolerance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Hoption Cann SA, van Netten JP, van Netten C. Dr William Coley and tumour regression: a place in history or in the future. Postgrad Med J 2003; 79(938):672–680.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shear MJ, Turner FC. Chemical treatment of tumors: isolation of hemorrhagic-producing fraction from Serratia marcescens (Bacillus prodigiosus) culture filtrate. J Natl Cancer Inst 1943; 4:81–97.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Raetz CR, Garrett TA, Reynolds CM et al. Kdoz-Lipid A of Escherichia coli, a defined endotoxin that activates macrophages via TLR-4. J Lipid Res 2006; 47(5):1097–1111.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Galanos C. Physical state and biological activity of lipopolysaccharides. Toxicity and immunogenicity of the lipid A component. Z Immunitatsforsch Exp Klin Immunol 1975; 149(2–4):214–229.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kanegasaki S, Kojima Y, Matsuura M et al. Biological activities of analogues of lipid A based chemically on the revised structural model. Comparison of mediator-inducing, immunomodulating and endotoxic activities. Eur J Biochem 1984; 143(2):237–242.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Homma JY, Matsuura M, Kanegasaki S et al. Structural requirements of lipid A responsible for the functions: a study with chemically synthesized lipid A and its analogues. J Biochem (Tokyo) 1985; 98(2):395–406.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kotani S, Takada H, Tsujimoto M et al. Synthetic lipid A with endotoxic and related biological activities comparable to those of a natural lipid A from an Escherichia coli remutant, Infect Immun 1985; 49(1):225–237.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Galanos C, Luderitz O, Rietschel ET et al. Synthetic and natural Escherichia coli free lipid A express identical endotoxic activities. Eur J Biochem 1985; 148(1):1–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Galanos C, Lehmann V, Luderitz O et al. Endotoxic properties of chemically synthesized lipid A part structures. Comparison of synthetic lipid A precursor and synthetic analogues with biosynthetic lipid A precursor and free lipid A. Eur J Biochem 1984; 140(2):221–227.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dobrovolskaia MA, Medvedev AE, Thomas KE et al. Induction of in vitro reprogramming by Toll-like receptor (TLR)2 and TLR4 agonists in murine macrophages: effects of TLR “homotolerance” versus “heterotolerance” on NF-kappa B signaling pathway components. J Immunol 2003; 170(1):508–519.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lehner MD, Morath S, Michelsen KS et al. Induction of cross-tolerance by lipopolysaccharide and highly purified lipoteichoic acid via different Toll-like receptors independent of paracrine mediators. J Immunol 2001; 166(8):5161–5167.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sato S, Nomura F, Kawai T et al. Synergy and cross-tolerance between toll-like receptor (TLR) 2-and TLR4-mediated signaling pathways. J Immunol 2000; 165(12):7096–7101.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schade FU, Flach R, Flohe S et al. Endotoxin tolerance. In: Brade H, Opal SM, Vogel SN, Morrison D, eds. Endotoxin in Health and Disease. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1999: 751–767.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    West MA, Heagy W Endotoxin tolerance: a review. Crit Care Med 2002; 30(1 Suppl):S64–S73.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Greisman SE, Hornick RB. The nature of endotoxin tolerance. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc 1975; 86:43–50:43–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Matsuura M, Nakano M. Mechanisms to induce tolerance by synthetic monosaccharide lipid A analogues against LPS lethality in mice. Prog Clin Biol Res 1995; 392:539–548.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Satoh M, Tsurumaki K, Kagehara H et al. Induction of inrratumoral tumor necrosis factor by a synthetic lipid A analog, ONO-4007, with less tolerance in repeated administration and its implication in potent antitumor effects with low toxicity. Cancer Immunol Immunother 2002; 50(12):653–662.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Qureshi N, Takayama K. Structure and function of lipid A. In: Iglewski BH, Clark VL, eds. The bacteria. New York: Academic Press, 1990: 319–338.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Golenbock DT, Hampton RY, Qureshi N et al. Lipid A-like molecules that antagonize the effects of endotoxins on human monocytes. J Biol Chem 1991; 266(29):19490–19498.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stutz P, Liehl E. Lipid A analogs aimed at preventing the detrimental effects of endotoxin. Infect Dis Clin North Am 1991; 5(4):847–873.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ribi E, Haskins WT, Landy M et al. Symposium on bacterial endotoxins. I. Relationship of chemical composition to biological activity. Bacteriol Rev 1961; 25:427–436.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ribi E, Haskins WT, Milner KC et al. Physicochemical changes in endotoxin associated with loss of biological potency. J Bacteriol 1962; 84:803–814.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Takayama K, Qureshi N, Raetz CR et al. Influence of fine structure of lipid A on Limulus amebocyte lysate clotting and toxic activities. Infect Immun 1984; 45(2):350–355.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Qureshi N, Takayama K, Heller D et al. Position of ester groups in the lipid A backbone of lipopolysaccharides obtained from Salmonella typhimurium. J Biol Chem 1983; 258(21):12947–12951.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Qureshi N, Mascagni P, Ribi E et al. Monophosphoryllipid A obtained from lipopolysaccharides of Salmonella minnesota R595. Purification of the dimethyl derivative by high performance liquid chromatography and complete structural determination. J Biol Chem 1985; 260(9):5271–5278.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Madonna GS, Peterson JE, Ribi EE et al. Early-phase endotoxin tolerance: induction by a detoxified lipid A derivative, monophosphoryllipid A. Infect Immun 1986; 52(1):6–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Qureshi N, Takayama K, Ribi E. Purification and structural determination of nontoxic lipid A obtained from the lipopolysaccharide of Salmonella typhimurium. J Biol Chem 1982; 257(19):11808–11815.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Henricson BE, Benjamin WR, Vogel SN. Differential cytokine induction by doses of lipopolysaccharide and monophosphoryllipid A that result in equivalent early endotoxin tolerance. Infect Immun 1990; 58(8):2429–2437.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Takayama K, Qureshi N, Beutler B et al. Diphosphoryllipid A from Rhodopseudomonas sphaeroides ATCC 17023 blocks induction of cachectin in macrophages by lipopolysaccharide. Infect Immun 1989; 57(4): 1336–1338.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kirkland TN, Qureshi N, Takayama K. Diphosphoryllipid A derived from lipopolysaccharide (LPS) of Rhodopseudomonas sphaeroides inhibits activation of 70Z/3 cells by LPS. Infect Immun 1991; 59(1):131–136.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Qureshi N, Takayama K, Kurtz R. Diphosphoryl lipid A obtained from the nontoxic lipopolysaccharide of Rhodopseudomonas sphaeroides is an endotoxin antagonist in mice. Infect Immun 1991; 59(1):441–444.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Henricson BE, Perera PY, Qureshi N et al. Rhodopseudomonas sphaeroides lipid A derivatives block in vitro induction of tumor necrosis factor and endotoxin tolerance by smooth lipopolysaccharide and monophosphoryllipid A. Infect Immun 1992; 60(10):4285–4290.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Qureshi N, Jarvis BW, Takayama K. Nontoxic RsDPLA as a potent antagonist of toxic lipopolysaccharide. In: Brade H, Opal SM, Vogel SN, Morrison DC, eds. Endotoxin in health and disease. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1999: 687–698.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rossignol DP, Hawkins LD, Christ WJ et al. Synthetic endotoxin antagonists. In: Brade H, Opal SM, Vogel SN, Morrison DC, eds. Endotoxin in health and disease. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1999: 699–717.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Persing DH, Coler RN, Lacy MJ et al. Taking toll: lipid A mimetics as adjuvants and immunomodulators. Trends Microbiol 2002; 10(10 Suppl):S32–S37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Carswell EA, Old LJ, Kassel RL et al. An endotoxin-induced serum factor that causesnecrosis of tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1975; 72(9):3666–3670.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Haranaka K, Satomi N, Sakurai A et al. Role of lipid A in the production of tumor necrosis factor and differences in antitumor activity between tumor necrosis factor and lipopolysaccharide. Tohoku J Exp Med 1984; 144(4):385–396.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Fraker DL, Sheppard BC, Norton JA. Impact of tolerance on antitumor efficacy of tumor necrosis factor in mice. Cancer Res 1990; 50(8):2261–2267.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mackensen A, Galanos C, Wehr U et al. Endotoxin tolerance: regulation of cytokine production and cellular changes in response to endotoxin application in cancer patients. Eur Cytokine Nerw 1992; 3(6):571–579.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Engelhardt R, Mackensen A, Galanos C et al. Biological response to intravenously administered endotoxin in patients with advanced cancer. J Biol Response Mod 1990; 9(5):480–491.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Engelhardt R, Mackensen A, Galanos C. Phase I trial of intravenously administered endotoxin (Salmonella abortus equi) in cancer patients. Cancer Res 1991; 51(10):2524–2530.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Otto F, Schmid P, Mackensen A et al. Phase II trial of intravenous endotoxin in patients with colorectal and nonsmall cell lung cancer. Eur J Cancer 1996; 32A(10):1712–1718.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Engelhardt R, Otto F, Mackensen A et al. Endotoxin (Salmonella abortus equi) in cancer patients. Clinical and immunological findings. Prog Clin Biol Res 1995; 392:253–261.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mackensen A, Galanos C, Engelhardt R. Modulating activity of interferon-gamma on endotoxin-induced cytokine production in cancer patients. Blood 1991; 78(12):3254–3258.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kawasaki H, Moriyama M, Ohtani Y et al. Restoration of normal febrile response to endotoxin in pyrogen-tolerant rabbits by injection with human beta interferon. Infect Immun 1987; 55(11):2574–2578.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Soszynski D. Inhibition of nitric oxide synthase delays the development of tolerance to LPS in rats. Physiol Behav 2002; 76(1):159–169.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ropert C, Closel M, Chaves AC et al. Inhibition of a p38/stress-activated protein kinase-2-dependent phosphatase restores function of IL-1 receptor-associate kinase-1 and reverses Toll-like receptor 2-and 4-dependent tolerance of macrophages. J Immunol 2003; 171(3):1456–1465.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wysocka M, Montaner LJ, Karp CL. Flt3 ligand treatment reverses endotoxin tolerance-related immunoparalysis. J Immunol 2005; 174(11):7398–7402.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Berger MR, Petru E, Schmahl D. Therapeutic ratio of mono or combination bacterial lipopolysaccharide therapy in methylnitrosourea-induced rat mammary carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 1987; 113(5):437–445.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bertok L. Radio-detoxified endotoxin activates natural immunity: a review. Pathophysiology 2005; 12(2):85–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Berendt MJ, Newborg MF, North RJ. Increased toxicity of endotoxin for tumor-bearing mice and mice responding to bacterial pathogens: macrophage activation as a common denominator. Infect Immun 1980; 28(2):645–647.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Serafini P, Borrello I, Bronte V. Myeloid suppressor cells in cancer: recruitment, phenotype, properties and mechanisms of immune suppression. Semin Cancer Biol 2006; 16(1):53–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kusmartsev S, Gabrilovich DI. Role of immature myeloid cells in mechanisms of immune evasion in cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother 2006; 55(3):237–245.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Linehan DC, Goedegebuure PS. CD25+ CD4+ regulatory T-cells in cancer. Immunol Res 2005; 32(1–3): 155–168.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Frey AB, Monu N. Effector-phase tolerance: another mechanism of how cancer escapes antitumor immune response. J Leukoc Biol 2006; 79(4):652–662.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Page GG. Surgery-induced immunosuppression and postoperative pain management. AACN Clin Issues 2005; 16(3):302–309.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Joosten JJ, van Muijen GN, Wobbes T et al. Cryosurgery of tumor tissue causes endotoxin tolerance through an inflammatory response. Anticancer Res 2003; 23(lA):427–432.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Chase JJ, Kubey W, Dulek MH et al. Effect of monophosphoryllipid A on host resistance to bacterial infection. Infect Immun 1986; 53(3):711–712.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Schutze E, Hildebrandt J, Liehl E et al. Protection of mice from mortality caused by living and heat-killed bacteria by SDZ MRL 953. Circ Shock 1994; 42(3):121–127.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Knopf HP, Otto F, Engelhardt R et al. Discordant adaptation of human peritoneal macrophages to stimulation by lipopolysaccharide and the synthetic lipid A analogue SDZ MRL 953. Down-regulation of TNF-alpha and IL-6 is paralleled by an up-regulation of IL-1 beta and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor expression. J Immunol l994; 153(1):287–299.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Takayama K, Ribi E, Cantrell JL. Isolation of a nontoxic lipid A fraction containing tumor regression activity. Cancer Res 1981; 41(7):2654–2657.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Astiz ME, Rackow EC, Still JG et al. Pretreatment of normal humans with monophosphoryl lipid A induces tolerance to endotoxin: a prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Crit Care Med 1995; 23(1):9–17.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Henricson BE, Manthey CL, Perera PY et al. Dissociation of lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-inducible gene expression in murine macrophages pretreated with smooth LPS versus monophosphoryllipid A. Infect Immun 1993; 61(6):2325–2333.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Astiz ME, Saha DC, Brooks K et al. Comparison of the induction of endotoxin tolerance in endotoxemia and peritonitis by monophosphoryllipid A and lipopolysaccharide. Circ Shock 1993; 39: 194–198.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ribi E, Cantrell JL, Takayama K et al. Lipid A and immunotherapy. Rev Infect Dis 1984; 6(4):567–572.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Matsushita K, Kuramitsu Y, Ohiro Y et al. ONO-4007, a synthetic lipid A analog, induces Thl-type immune response in tumor eradication and restores nitric oxide production by peritoneal macrophages. Int J Oncol 2003; 23(2):489–493.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Matsushita K, Kobayashi M, Totsuka Y et al. ONO-4007 induces specific anti-tumor immunity mediated by tumor necrosis factor-alpha. Anticancer Drugs 1998; 9(3):273–282.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kuramitsu Y, Matsushita K, Ohiro Y et al. Therapeutic effects of a new synthetic lipid A analog, ONO-4007, on rat hepatoma KDH-8 depend on tumor necrosis factor-sensitivity of the tumor cells. Anticancer Drugs 1997; 8(9):898–901.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Ishida H, Irie K, Suganuma T et al. A lipid A analog ONO-4007 induces tolerance to plasma leakage in mice. Inflamm Res 2002; 51(1):38–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Matsumoto N, Oida H, Aze Y et al. Intratumoral tumor necrosis factor induction and tumor growth suppression by ONO-4007, a low-toxicity lipid A analog. Anticancer Res 1998; 18(6A):4283–4289.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Veda H, Yamazaki M. Induction of tumor necrosis factor in a murine tumor by systemic administration of a novel synthetic lipid A analogue, ONO-4007. J Immunother 1997; 20(1):65–69.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Morita S, Yamamoto M, Kamigaki T et al. Synthetic lipid A produces antitumor effect in a hamster pancreatic carcinoma model through production of tumor necrosis factor from activated macrophages. Kobe J Med Sci 1996; 42(4):219–231.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Akimoto T, Kumazawa E, Jimbo T et al. Antitumor effect of DT-5461a, a synthetic low-toxicity lipid A analog, involves endogenous tumor necrosis factor induction subsequent to macrophage activation. Int J Immunopharmacol 1994; 16(11):887–893.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Jimbo T, Akimoto T, Tohgo A. Effect of combined administration of a synthetic low-toxicity lipid A derivative, DT-5461a and indomethacin in various experimental tumor models of colon 26 carcinoma in mice. Cancer Immunol Immunother 1995; 40(1):10–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Fan H, Cook JA. Molecular mechanisms of endotoxin tolerance. J Endotoxin Res 2004; 10(2):71–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Chu E, Casey LC, Harris JE et al. Suppression of the development of tumoricidal function in gamma interferon-treated human peripheral blood monocytes by lipopolysaccharide: the role of cyclooxygenase metabolites. J Clin Immunol 1993; 13(1):49–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Sato K, Yoo YC, Fukushima A et al. A novel synthetic lipid A analog with low endotoxicity, DT-5461, prevents lethal endotoxemia. Infect Immun 1995; 63(8):2859–2866.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Sato K, Yoo YC, Matsuzawa K et al. Tolerance to the anti-metastatic effect of lipopolysaccharide against liver metastasis in mice. Int J Cancer 1996; 66(1):98–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Kiani A, Tschiersch A, Gaboriau E et al. Downregulation of the proinflammatory cytokine response to endotoxin by pretreatment with the nontoxic lipid A analog SDZ MRL 953 in cancer patients. Blood 1997; 90(4):1673–1683.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Saha DC, Barua RS, Astiz ME et al. Monophosphoryllipid A stimulated up-regulation of reactive oxygen intermediates in human monocytes in vitro. J Leukoc Biol 2001; 70(3):381–385.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kasravi FB, Lee DH, Weisgraber K et al. Lipoprotein-bound endotoxin exerts an immunomodulatory effect on heparocytes through the lipid A domain of LPS. J Endotoxin Res 2005; 11(1):19–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Ogawa H, Ranee P, Heidemann J et al. Mechanisms of endotoxin tolerance in human intestinal microvascular endothelial cells. J Immunol 2003; 170(12):5956–5964.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Parker LC, Jones EC, Prince LR et al. Endotoxin tolerance induces selective alterations in neutrophil function. J Leukoc Biol 2005; 78(6):1301–1305.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Fujihara M, Muroi M, Tanamoto K et al. Molecular mechanisms of macrophage activation and deactivation by lipopolysaccharide: roles of the receptor complex. Pharmacol Ther 2003; 100(2):171–194.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Medvedev AE, Sabroe I, Hasday JD et al. Tolerance to microbial TLR ligands: molecular mechanisms and relevance to disease. J Endotoxin Res 2006; 12(3):133–150.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Nomura F, Akashi S, Sakao Y et al. Cutting edge: endotoxin tolerance in mouse peritoneal macrophages correlates with down-regulation of surface toll-like receptor 4 expression. J Immunol 2000; 164(7):3476–3479.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Medvedev AE, Kopydlowski KM, Vogel SN. Inhibition of lipopolysaccharide-induced signal transduction in endotoxin-tolerized mouse macrophages: dysregulation of cytokine, chemokine and toll-like receptor 2 and 4 gene expression. J Immunol 2000; 164(11):5564–5574.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Martin M, Katz J, Vogel SN et al. Differential induction of endotoxin tolerance by lipopolysaccharides derived from Porphyromonas gingivalis and Escherichia coli. J Immunol 2001; 167(9):5278–5285.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Zarember KA, Godowski PJ. Tissue expression of human Toll-like receptors and differential regulation of Toll-like receptor mRNAs in leukocytes in response to microbes, their products and cytokines. J Immunol 2002; 168(2):554–561.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Medvedev AE, Lentschat A, Wahl LM et al. Dysregulation of LPS-induced Toll-like receptor 4-MyD88 complex formation and IL-1 receptor-associated kinase 1 activation in endotoxin-tolerant cells. J Immunol 2002; 169(9):5209–5216.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Oshikawa K, Sugiyama Y. Gene expression of Toll-like receptors and associated molecules induced by inflammatory stimuli in the primary alveolar macrophage. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2003; 305(3):649–655.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Moreno C, Merino J, Vazquez B et al. Anti-inflammatory cytokines induce lipopolysaccharide tolerance in human monocytes without modifying toll-like receptor 4 membrane expression. Scand J Immunol 2004; 59(6):553–558.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Wittebole X, Coyle SM, Kumar A et al. Expression of tumour necrosis factor receptor and Toll-like receptor 2 and 4 on peripheral blood leucocytes of human volunteers after endotoxin challenge: a comparison of flow cytometric light scatter and immunofluorescence gating. Clin Exp Immunol 2005; 141(1):99–106.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Tarnai R, Sugawara S, Takeuchi O et al. Synergistic effects of lipopolysaccharide and interferon-gamma in inducing interleukin-8 production in human monocytic THP-1 cells is accompanied by up-regulation of CD14, Toll-like receptor 4, MD-2 and MyD88 expression. J Endotoxin Res 2003; 9(3):145–153.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Ziegler-Heitbrock HW, Wedel A, Schraut W et al. Tolerance to lipopolysaccharide involves mobilization of nuclear factor kappa B with predominance of p50 homodimers. J Biol Chem 1994; 269(25):17001–17004.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Mathison J, Wolfson E, Steinemann S et al. Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) recognition in macrophages. Participation of LPS-binding protein and CD14 in LPS-induced adaptation in rabbit peritoneal exudate macrophages. J Clin Invest 1993; 92(4):2053–2059.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Akashi S, Shimazu R, Ogata H et al. Cutting edge: cell surface expression and lipopolysaccharide signaling via the toll-like receptor 4-MD-2 complex on mouse peritoneal macrophages. J Immuno 2000; 164(7):3471–3475.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Medvedev AE, Vogel SN. Overexpression of CD14, TLR4 and MD-2 in HEK 293T cells does not prevent induction of in vitro endotoxin tolerance. J Endotoxin Res 2003; 9(1):60–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Burns K, Janssens S, Brissoni B et al. Inhibition of interleukin 1 receptor/Toll-like receptor signaling through the alternatively spliced, short form of MyD88 is due to its failure to recruit lRAK-4. J Exp Med 2003; 197(2):263–268.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Janssens S, Burns K, Vercammen E et al. MyD88S, a splice variant of MyD88, differentially modulates NF-kappa B-and AP-1-dependent gene expression. FEBS Lett 2003; 548(1-3):103–107.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Li L, Cousart S, Hu J et al. Characterization of interleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase in normal and endotoxin-tolerant cells. J Biol Chem 2000; 275(30):23340–23345.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Noubir S, Hmama Z, Reiner NE. Dual receptors and distinct pathways mediate inrerleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase degradation in response to lipopolysaccharide. Involvement of CD 14/TLR4, CR3 and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase. J Biol Chem 2004; 279(24):25189–25195.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Kobayashi K, Hernandez LD, Galan JE et al. lRAK-M is a negative regulator of Toll-like receptor signaling. Cell 2002; 110(2):191–202.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Lopez-Collazo E, Fuentes-Prior P, Arnalich F et al. Pathophysiology of interleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase-M: implications in refractory state. Curr Opin Infect Dis 2006; 19(3):237–244.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Stoiber D, Kovarik P, Cohney S et al. Lipopolysaccharide induces in macrophages the synthesis of the suppressor of cytokine signaling 3 and suppresses signal transduction in response to the activating factor IFN-gamma. J Immunol 1999; 163(5):2640–2647.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Berlato C, Cassatella MA, Kinjyo I et al. Involvement of suppressor of cytokine signaling-3 as a mediator of the inhibitory effects of IL-10 on lipopolysaccharide-induced macrophage activation. J Immunol 2002; 168(12):6404–6411.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Nakagawa R, Naka T, Tsutsui H et al. SOCS-1 participates in negative regulation of LPS responses. Immunity 2002; 17(5):677–687.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Gingras S, Parganas E, de Pauw A et al. Re-examination of the role of suppressor of cytokine signaling 1 (SOCS1) in the regulation of toll-like receptor signaling. J Biol Chem 2004; 279(52):54702–54707.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Brint EK, Xu D, Liu H et al. ST2 is an inhibitor of interleukin 1 receptor and Toll-like receptor 4 signaling and maintains endotoxin tolerance. Nat Immunol 2004; 5(4):373–379.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Liew FY, Liu H, Xu D. A novel negative regulator for IL-1 receptor and Toll-like receptor 4. Immunol Lett 2005; 96(1):27–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Zhang G, Ghosh S. Negative regulation of toll-like receptor-mediated signaling by Tollip. J Biol Chem 2002; 277(9):7059–7065.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Li T, Hu J, Li L. Characterization of Tollip protein upon Lipopolysaccharide challenge. Mol Immunol 2004; 41(1):85–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Didierlaurent A, Brissoni B, Velin D et al. Tollip regulates proinflammatory responses to interleukin-1 and lipopolysaccharide. Mol Cell Biol 2006; 26(3):735–742.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Sly LM, Rauh M J, Kalesnikoff J et al. LPS-induced upregulation of SHIP is essential for endotoxin tolerance. Immunity 2004; 21(2):227–239.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Guzik T J, Korbut R, Adamek-Guzik T. Nitric oxide and superoxide in inflammation and immune regulation. J Physiol Pharmacol 2003; 54(4):469–487.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Zhang X, Morrison DC. Lipopolysaccharide-induced selective priming effects on tumor necrosis factor alpha and nitric oxide production in mouse peritoneal macrophages. J Exp Med 1993; 177(2):511–516.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Tominaga K, Saito S, Matsuura M et al. Role of IFN-gamma on dissociation between nitric oxide and TNF/IL-6 production by murine peritoneal cells after restimulation with bacterial lipopolysaccharide. J Leukoc Biol 1999; 66(6):974–980.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Spitzer JA, Zheng M, Kolls JK et al. Ethanol and LPS modulate NF-kappaB activation, inducible NO synthase and COX-2 gene expression in rat liver cells in vivo. Front Biosci 2002; 7:a99–108.Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Fahmi H, Ancuta P, Perrier S et al. Preexposure of mouse peritoneal macrophages to lipopolysaccharide and other stimuli enhances the nitric oxide response to secondary stimuli. Inflamm Res 1996; 45(7):347–353.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Zingarelli B, Halushka PV, Caputi AP et al. Increased nitric oxide synthesis during the development of endotoxin tolerance. Shock 1995; 3(2):102–108.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Severn A, Xu D, Doyle J et al. Pre-exposure of murine macrophages to lipopolysaccharide inhibits the induction of nitric oxide synthase and reduces leishmanicidal activity. Eur J Immunol 1993; 23(7):1711–1714.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Dias MB, Almeida MC, Carnio EC et al. Role of nitric oxide in tolerance to lipopolysaccharide in mice. J Appl Physiol 2005; 98(4):1322–1327.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Zingarelli B, Hake PW, Cook JA. Inducible nitric oxide synthase is not required in the development of endotoxin tolerance in mice. Shock 2002; 17(6):478–484.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Bogdan C, Vodovotz Y, Nathan C. Macrophage deactivation by interleukin 10. J Exp Med 1991; 174(6):1549–1555.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    de Waal MR, Abrams J, Bennett B et al. Interleukin 10(IL-10) inhibits cytokine synthesis by human monocytes: an autoregulatory role of IL-10 produced by monocytes. J Exp Med 1991; 174(5):1209–1220.Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Randow F, Syrbe U, Meisel C et al. Mechanism of endotoxin desensitization: involvement of interleukin 10 and transforming growth factor beta. J Exp Med 1995; 181(5):1887–1892.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Berg D J, Kuhn R, Rajewsky K et al. Interleukin-10 is a central regulator of the response to LPS in murine models of endoroxic shock and the Shwartzman reaction but not endotoxin tolerance. J Clin Invest 1995; 96(5):2339–2347.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Chantry D, Turner M, Abney E et al. Modulation of cytokine production by transforming growth factor-beta. J Immunol 1989; 142(12):4295–4300.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Hafenrichter DG, Roland CR, Mangino M J et al. The Kupffer cell in endotoxin tolerance: mechanisms of protection against lethal endotoxemia. Shock 1994; 2(4):251–256.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Li MH, Seatter SC, Manthei R et al. Macrophage endotoxin tolerance: effect of TNF or endotoxin pretreatment. J Surg Res 1994; 57(1):85–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Seatter SC, Li MH, Bubrick MP et al. Endotoxin pretreatment of human monocytes alters subsequent endotoxin-triggered release of inflammatory mediators. Shock 1995; 3(4):252–258.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Bulger EM, Maier RW, Lipid mediators in the pathophysiology of critical illness. Crit Care Med 2000; 28(4 Suppl):N27–N36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Jiang C, Ting AT, Seed B. PPAR-gamma agonists inhibit production of monocyte inflammatory cytokines. Nature 1998; 391(6662):82–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Ricote M, Li AC, Willson TM et al. The peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma is a negative regulator of macrophage activation. Nature 1998; 391(6662):79–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Uchimura K, Nakamura M, Enjoji M et al. Activation of retinoic X receptor and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma inhibits nitric oxide and tumor necrosis factor-alpha production in rat Kupffer cells. Hepatology 2001; 33(1):91–99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Von Knethen AA, Brune B. Delayed activation of PPARgamma by LPS and IFN-gamma attenuates the oxidative burst in macrophages. FASEB J 2001; 15(2):535–544.Google Scholar
  137. 137.
    Bohuslav J, Kravchenko VV, Parry GC et al. Regulation of an essential innate immune response by the p50 subunit of NF-kappa B. J Clin Invest 1998; 102(9):1645–1652.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Wysocka M, Robertson S, Riemann H et al. IL-12 suppression during experimental endotoxin tolerance: dendritic cell loss and macrophage hyporesponsiveness. J Immuno 2001; 166(12):7504–7513.Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Hirsch C, Ploegh HL. Intracellular targeting of the proteasome. Trends Cell Biol 2000; 10(7):268–272.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Voges D, Zwickl P, Baumeister W: The 26S proteasome: a molecular machine designed for controlled proteolysis. Annu Rev Biochem 1999; 68:1015–1068.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Elenich LA, Nandi D, Kent AE et al. The complete primary structure of mouse 20S proteasomes. Immunogenetics 1999; 49(10):835–842.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Dahlman B, Hendil KB, Kristensen P et al. Subunit arrangement in the human proteasome. In: Hilt W, Wolf DH, eds. Proteasomes; The world of regulatory proteolysis. Georgetown: Landes Bioscience, 2000: 37–47.Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    Groettrup M, Khan S, Schwarz K et al. Interferon-gamma inducible exchangesof 20S proteasome active site subunits: why? Biochimie 2001; 83(3–4):367–372.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Gaczynska M, Goldberg AL, Tanaka K et al. Proteasome subunits X and Y alter peptidase activities in opposite ways to the interferon-gamma-induced subunits LMP2 and LMP7. J Biol Chem 1996; 271(29): 17275–17280.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Qureshi N, Perera PY, Shen J et al. The proteasome as a lipopolysaccharide-binding protein in macrophages: differential effects of proteasome inhibition on lipopolysaccharide-induced signaling events. J Immunol 2003; 171(3):1515–1525.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Qureshi N, Vogel SN, Van WC, III et al. The proteasome: a central regulator of inflammation and macrophage function. Immunol Res 2005; 31(3):243–260.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Shen J, Reis J, Morrison DC et al. Key inflammatory signaling pathways are regulated by the proteasome. Shock 2006; 25(5):472–484.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Husebye H, Halaas O, Stenmark H et al. Endocytic pathways regulate Toll-like receptor 4 signaling and link innate and adaptive immunity. EMBO I 2006; 25(4):683–692.Google Scholar
  149. 149.
    Kutuzova GD, Albrecht RM, Erickson CM et al. Diphosphoryllipid A from Rhodobacter sphaeroides blocks the binding and internalization of lipopolysaccharide in RAW 264. 7 cells. J Immunol 2001; 167(1):482–489.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Lien E, Means TK, Heine H et al. Toll-like receptor 4 imparts ligand-specific recognition of bacterial lipopolysaccharide. J Clin Invest 2000; 105(4):497–504.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Jarvis BW, Lichenstein H, Qureshi N. Diphosphoryllipid A from Rhodobacter sphaeroides inhibits complexes that form in vitro between lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-binding protein, soluble CD14 and spectrally pure LPS. Infect Immun 1997; 65(8):3011–3016.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Baker PJ, Taylor CE, Stashak PW et al. Inactivation of suppressor T-cell activity by the nontoxic lipopolysaccharide of Rhodopseudomonas sphaeroides. Infect Immun 1990; 58(9):2862–2868.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Baker PJ, Hiernaux JR, Fauntleroy MB et al. Ability of monophosphoryllipid A to augment the antibody response of young mice. Infect Immun 1988; 56(12):3064–3066.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Baker PJ, Hiernaux JR, Fauntleroy MB et al. Inactivation of suppressor T-cell activity by nontoxic monophosphoryllipid A. Infect Immun 1988; 56(5):1076–1083.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Landes Bioscience and Springer Science+Business Media 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cheryl E. Rockwell
    • 1
  • David. C. Morrison
    • 1
  • Nilofer Qureshi
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Basic Medical Science, School of Medicine, Shockl Trauma Research CenterUniversity of MissouriKansas CityUSA

Personalised recommendations