Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, 85259, USA.
Clin Exp Allergy. 2010 Apr;40(4):563-75. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2010.03484.x.
Discussions of eosinophils are often descriptions of end-stage effector cells with destructive capabilities mediated predominantly by released cytotoxic cationic granule proteins. Moreover, eosinophils in the medical literature are invariably associated with the pathologies linked with helminth infections or allergic diseases such as asthma. This has led to an almost fatalist view of eosinophil effector functions and associated therapeutic strategies targeting these cells that would make even William of Ockham proud - eosinophil effector functions have physiological consequences that increase patient morbidity/mortality and 'the only good eosinophils are dead eosinophils'. Unfortunately, the strengths of dogmas are also their greatest weaknesses. Namely, while the repetitive proclamation of dogmatic concepts by authoritative sources (i.e. reviews, meeting proceedings, textbooks, etc.) builds consensus within the medical community and lower the entropies surrounding difficult issues, they often ignore not easily explained details and place diminished importance on alternative hypotheses. The goal of this perspective is twofold: (i) we will review recent observations regarding eosinophils and their activities as well as reinterpret earlier data as part of the synthesis of a new paradigm. In this paradigm, we hypothesize that eosinophils accumulate at unique sites in response to cell turnover or in response to local stem cell activity(ies). We further suggest that this accumulation is part of one or more mechanisms regulating tissue homeostasis. Specifically, instead of immune cells exclusively mediating innate host defence, we suggest that accumulating tissue eosinophils are actually regulators of Local Immunity And/or Remodeling/Repair in both health and disease - the LIAR hypothesis; (ii) we want to be inflammatory (pun intended!) and challenge the currently common perspective of eosinophils as destructive end-stage effector cells. Our hope is to create more questions than we answer and provoke everyone to spend countless hours simply to prove us wrong!
讨论嗜酸性粒细胞时,通常描述的是具有破坏性能力的终末效应细胞,主要由释放的细胞毒性阳离子颗粒蛋白介导。此外,医学文献中的嗜酸性粒细胞总是与与寄生虫感染或哮喘等过敏性疾病相关的病理学有关。这导致了对嗜酸性粒细胞效应功能的几乎宿命论的看法,以及针对这些细胞的相关治疗策略,这些策略甚至会让奥卡姆感到自豪——嗜酸性粒细胞效应功能具有增加患者发病率/死亡率的生理后果,“唯一好的嗜酸性粒细胞是死的嗜酸性粒细胞”。不幸的是,教条的力量也是它们最大的弱点。也就是说,虽然权威来源(即评论、会议记录、教科书等)反复宣布教条概念会在医学界建立共识,并降低围绕困难问题的熵,但它们往往忽略了不易解释的细节,并降低了对替代假设的重视。本文的目的有两个:(i)我们将回顾最近关于嗜酸性粒细胞及其活性的观察结果,并重新解释早期数据,作为合成新范式的一部分。在这个范式中,我们假设嗜酸性粒细胞会在细胞更新或局部干细胞活动的情况下积聚在独特的部位。我们进一步提出,这种积累是调节组织稳态的一个或多个机制的一部分。具体来说,我们不是假设免疫细胞专门介导先天宿主防御,而是假设积聚的组织嗜酸性粒细胞实际上是局部免疫和/或健康和疾病中的重塑/修复的调节剂——LIAR 假说;(ii)我们想变得有争议(有意为之!)并挑战目前关于嗜酸性粒细胞作为破坏性终末效应细胞的常见观点。我们希望提出的问题多于我们回答的问题,并促使每个人花费无数个小时只是为了证明我们错了!