↓ Skip to main content

IFNγ Enhances CD64-Potentiated Phagocytosis of Treponema pallidum Opsonized with Human Syphilitic Serum by Human Macrophages

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
IFNγ Enhances CD64-Potentiated Phagocytosis of Treponema pallidum Opsonized with Human Syphilitic Serum by Human Macrophages
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01227
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly L Hawley, Adriana R Cruz, Sarah J Benjamin, Carson J La Vake, Jorge L Cervantes, Morgan LeDoyt, Lady G Ramirez, Daniza Mandich, Mary Fiel-Gan, Melissa J Caimano, Justin D Radolf, Juan C Salazar

Abstract

Syphilis is a multi-stage, sexually transmitted disease caused by the spirochete Treponema pallidum (Tp). Considered broadly, syphilis can be conceptualized as a dualistic process in which spirochete-driven inflammation, the cause of clinical manifestations, coexists to varying extents with bacterial persistence. Inflammation is elicited in the tissues, along with the persistence of spirochetes to keep driving a robust immune response while evading host defenses; this duality is best exemplified during the florid, disseminated stage called secondary syphilis (SS). SS lesions typically contain copious amounts of spirochetes along with a mixed cellular infiltrate consisting of CD4(+) T cells, CD8(+) T cells, NK cells, plasma cells, and macrophages. In the rabbit model, Tp are cleared by macrophages via antibody-mediated opsonophagocytosis. Previously, we demonstrated that human syphilitic serum (HSS) promotes efficient uptake of Tp by human monocytes and that opsonophagocytosis of Tp markedly enhances cytokine production. Herein, we used monocyte-derived macrophages to study Tp-macrophage interactions ex vivo. In the absence of HSS, monocyte-derived macrophages internalized low numbers of Tp and secreted little cytokine (e.g., TNF). By contrast, these same macrophages internalized large numbers of unopsonized Borrelia burgdorferi and secreted robust levels of cytokines. Maturation of macrophages with M-CSF and IFNγ resulted in a macrophage phenotype with increased expression of HLA-DR, CD14, inducible nitric oxide synthase, TLR2, TLR8, and the Fcγ receptors (FcγR) CD64 and CD16, even in the absence of LPS. Importantly, IFNγ-polarized macrophages resulted in a statistically significant increase in opsonophagocytosis of Tp accompanied by enhanced production of cytokines, macrophage activation markers (CD40, CD80), TLRs (TLR2, TLR7, TLR8), chemokines (CCL19, CXCL10, CXCL11), and TH1-promoting cytokines (IL-12, IL-15). Finally, the blockade of FcγRs, primarily CD64, significantly diminished spirochetal uptake and proinflammatory cytokine secretion by IFNγ-stimulated macrophages. Our ex vivo studies demonstrate the importance of CD64-potentiated uptake of opsonized Tp and suggest that IFNγ-activated macrophages have an important role in the context of early syphilis. Our study results also provide an ex vivo surrogate system for use in future syphilis vaccine studies.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 21%
Student > Bachelor 9 19%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 12 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 17 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 November 2017.
All research outputs
#16,051,091
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#16,717
of 31,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,856
of 330,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#334
of 539 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 330,919 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 539 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.