Peer review process
Not revised: This Reviewed Preprint includes the authors’ original preprint (without revision), an eLife assessment, public reviews, and a provisional response from the authors.
Read more about eLife’s peer review process.Editors
- Reviewing EditorDipyaman GangulyIndian Institute of Chemical Biology, Kolkata, India
- Senior EditorTadatsugu TaniguchiUniversity of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Reviewer #1 (Public review):
Summary:
The authors found that IL-1b signaling is pivotal for hypoxemia development and can modulate NETs formation in LPS+HVV ALI model.
Strengths:
They used IL1R1 ko mice and proved that IL1R1 is involved in ALI model proving that IL1b signalling leads towards ARDS. In addition, hypothermia reduces this effect, suggesting a therapeutic option.
Weaknesses:
(1) IL1R1 binds IL1a and IL1b. What would be the role of IL1a in this scenario?
(2) The authors depleted neutrophils using anti-Ly6G. What about MDSCs? Do these latter cells be involved in ARDS and VILI?
(3) The authors found that TH inhibited IL-1β release from macrophages led to less NETs formation and albumin leakage in the alveolar space in their lung injury model. A graphical abstract could be included suggesting a cellular mechanism.
(4) If Macrophages are responsible for IL1b release that via IL1R1 induces NETosis, what happens if you deplete macrophages? what is the role of epithelial cells?
Reviewer #2 (Public review):
Summary:
The manuscript by Nosaka et al is a comprehensive study exploring the involvement of IL1beta signaling in a 2-hit model of lung injury + ventilation, with a focus on modulation by hypothermia.
Strengths:
The authors demonstrate quite convincingly that interleukin 1 beta plays a role in the development of ventilator-induced lung injury in this model, and that this role includes the regulation of neutrophil extracellular trap formation. The authors use a variety of in vivo animal-based and in vitro cell culture work, and interventions including global gene knockout, cell-targeted knockout and pharmacological inhibition, which greatly strengthen the ability to make clear biological interpretations.
Weaknesses:
A primary point for open discussion is the translatability of the findings to patients. The main model used, one of intratracheal LPS plus mechanical ventilation is well accepted for research exploring the pathogenesis and potential treatments for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). However, the interpretation may still be open to question - in the model here, animals were exposed to LPS to induce inflammation for only 2 hours, and seemingly displayed no signs of sickness, before the start of ventilation. This would not be typical for the majority of ARDS patients, and whether hypothermia could be effective once substantial injury is already present remains an open question. The interaction between LPS/infection and temperature is also complicated - in humans, LPS (or infection) induces a febrile, hyperthermic response, whereas in mice LPS induces hypothermia (eg. Ganeshan K, Chawla A. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2017;13:458-465). Given this difference in physiological response, it is therefore unclear whether hypothermia in mice and hypothermia in humans are easily comparable. Finally, the use of only young, male animals such as in the current study has been typical but may be criticised as limiting translatability to people.
Therefore while the conclusions of the paper are well supported by the data, and the biological pathways have been impressively explored, questions still remain regarding the ultimate interpretations.