Leucine alleviates cytokine storm syndrome by regulating macrophage polarization via the mTORC1/LXRα signaling pathway

  1. Key Laboratory of Animal Disease-Resistance Nutrition of China Ministry of Education, Key laboratory of Animal Disease-resistant Nutrition and Feed of China Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Key laboratory of Animal Disease-resistant Nutrition of Sichuan Province, Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, Sichuan 611130, China

Peer review process

Not revised: This Reviewed Preprint includes the authors’ original preprint (without revision), an eLife assessment, public reviews, and a response from the authors (if available).

Read more about eLife’s peer review process.

Editors

  • Reviewing Editor
    Zsolt Molnár
    University of Pécs, Medical School, Pécs, Hungary
  • Senior Editor
    Jos van der Meer
    Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

The authors aimed to determine the mechanisms that underpin metabolic influences, particularly via the use of leucine which has been implicated in protection in lipopolysaccharide-induced cytokine storm syndrome.

The strength of the work is in establishing the clear relationship between the macrophage subtype and the severity of cytokine storm syndrome which occurs in severe inflammation and infection. They have undertaken a solid analysis of the cellular polarization of macrophage subtypes, identifying leucine suppresses M1 polarization and promotes M2 polarization. Subsequently, the authors confirmed this polarization via examination of signal transduction was mediated through the mTORC1 pathway. Pharmacological manipulation of mTORC was shown to influence arginase 1, a hallmark of M2 polarization. In addition, the authors show that leucine promoted the expression of LXRa required for arginase induction. While these studies identify how leucine might shape M2 cellular metabolism and polarization, the studies were all performed in vitro and do not examine other cellular or molecular changes that might influence the level of cytokine storm that might occur. Thus the specific contributions in cytokine storm syndrome are correlative requiring further analysis in the disease setting. These include features such as localization influencing other immune or stromal cells that might release cytokines and contribute to the syndrome, or molecular pathways not previously described. The statistical reporting and representation of data should be provided in greater detail. The data provides an interesting direction for consideration of the manipulation of immune cells in the context of inflammation and opens further discussion on how this might be practically applied in the clinical setting.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Summary:
The major purpose of this manuscript is to examine whether leucine treatment would be a potential strategy to treat cytokine storm syndrome (CSS). CSS is a common symptom in multiple infectious diseases in clinic, which gradually leads to multiple organ failure and high mortality. Strategies to treat CSS including pulse steroid therapy normally lead to severe side effects. Therefore, it is still required to develop a safe strategy with high efficacy to treat CSS. In clinic, sepsis is well characterized to exhibit CSS and therefore multiple studies utilized a LPS-induced sepsis model to evaluate CSS symptoms. In this study, the authors examined whether leucine, an essential amino acid that has been absorbed daily in our body, could ameliorate CSS symptoms in the LPS-induced sepsis mouse model. They found a potential protective effect of leucine in terms of the survival rate and inflammatory responses.

Strengths:
The study is overall well designed and the results are well analyzed with only minor issues. The methods utilized are appropriate.

Weaknesses:
The mechanistic insights are not sufficient and could not fully explain the phenotype they found. Considering the importance of this study is to identify the potential protective role of leucine in CSS, the authors could also consider investigator-initiated clinical trials to further expand the significance of this study.

  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  2. Wellcome Trust
  3. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
  4. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation