Cited by 58Antimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusDermatology and Skin DiseasesAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities

Interleukin-22 regulates antimicrobial peptide expression and keratinocyte differentiation to control Staphylococcus aureus colonization of the nasal mucosa

Open access
Mulcahy, M.E., Leech, J.M., Renauld, J-C, Mills, K HG, McLoughlin, R.M.·2016·Mucosal Immunology

Abstract

The local immune response occurring during Staphylococcus aureus nasal colonization remains ill-defined. Studies have highlighted the importance of T-cell immunity in controlling S. aureus colonization of the nasal mucosa. We extend these observations, identifying a critical role for interleukin (IL)-22 in this process. IL-22 is basally expressed within the nasal mucosa and is induced upon S. aureus colonization. IL-22 is produced by CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes at this site, with innate-like lymphocytes also contributing. IL-22 −/− mice demonstrate significantly elevated levels of S. aureus nasal colonization as compared with wild-type (WT) mice. This was associated with reduced expression of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) in the nose. Furthermore, expression of staphylococcal ligands loricrin and cytokeratin 10 was higher in the noses of IL-22 −/− as compared with WT mice. IL-17 has been shown to regulate S. aureus nasal colonization by controlling local neutrophil responses; however, IL-17 expression and neutrophil responses were comparable in the noses of IL-22 −/− and WT mice during S. aureus colonization. We conclude that IL-22 has an important role in controlling S. aureus nasal colonization through distinct mechanisms, with IL-22 mediating its effect exclusively by inducing AMP expression and controlling availability of staphylococcal ligands.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/mi.2016.24

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • IL-22-stimulated keratinocytes secrete increased amounts of defensins and other antimicrobial peptides that limit S. aureus proliferation.

    “IL-22 stimulated keratinocytes, for example, secrete increased amounts of defensins and other antimicrobial peptides that limit S. aureus proliferation (Cho et al., 2010;Mulcahy et al., 2016).”

    From Iron in infection and immunity (2020) · cites this paper as Mulcahy et al., 2016

    The Results (section 'IL-22 does not regulate the IL-17 axis or neutrophil recruitment during nasal colonization'; page unavailable) report that nasal expression of defensins and other antimicrobial peptides was nearly abolished in IL-22-deficient mice. The Discussion reports that IL-22 enhances antimicrobial-peptide production in human keratinocytes and that these peptides can act against S. aureus. The paper does not show that IL-22-stimulated keratinocytes secrete increased amounts of those peptides or directly measure the claimed effect of that secretion on bacterial proliferation. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mulcahy, M. E., Leech, J. M., Renauld, J.-C., Mills, K. H., & McLoughlin, R. M.
Affiliations
  • Trinity College Dublin (IE)
  • Ludwig Cancer Research (BE)
Corresponding author
McLoughlin, R.M.
Venue
Mucosal Immunology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-11
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
1429-1441
ISSN
1933-0219 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2314674414
Cited by
58
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2
FWCI
6.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Mucosal Immunology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Trinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Science Foundation Ireland (12/IP/1532)
  • Irish Research Council (GOIPD/2014/385)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatology and Skin Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Antimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Keywords
IL-22, Staphylococcus aureus, nasal carriage, antimicrobial peptides, keratinocyte differentiation, loricrin, cytokeratin 10, innate-like lymphocytes, IL-17, neutrophils, nasal mucosa
MeSH terms
Interleukin-22, Adenosine Monophosphate, Animals, Cell Differentiation, Disease Models, Animal, Interleukins, Nasal Mucosa, Staphylococcal Infections, Staphylococcus aureus, Keratinocytes, Gene Expression, T-Lymphocyte Subsets, Mice, Knockout, Antimicrobial Cationic Peptides, Mice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review