Cited by 990Tuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyImmune responses and vaccinationsImmune Response and Inflammation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 248 of the 251 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 303 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Macrophage defense mechanisms against intracellular bacteria

Open access
Weiss, Günter, Schaible, Ulrich E.·2015·Immunological Reviews

Abstract

Summary: Macrophages and neutrophils play a decisive role in host responses to intracellular bacteria including the agent of tuberculosis ( TB ), M ycobacterium tuberculosis as they represent the forefront of innate immune defense against bacterial invaders. At the same time, these phagocytes are also primary targets of intracellular bacteria to be abused as host cells. Their efficacy to contain and eliminate intracellular M . tuberculosis decides whether a patient initially becomes infected or not. However, when the infection becomes chronic or even latent (as in the case of TB ) despite development of specific immune activation, phagocytes have also important effector functions. Macrophages have evolved a myriad of defense strategies to combat infection with intracellular bacteria such as M . tuberculosis . These include induction of toxic anti‐microbial effectors such as nitric oxide and reactive oxygen intermediates, the stimulation of microbe intoxication mechanisms via acidification or metal accumulation in the phagolysosome, the restriction of the microbe's access to essential nutrients such as iron, fatty acids, or amino acids, the production of anti‐microbial peptides and cytokines, along with induction of autophagy and efferocytosis to eliminate the pathogen. On the other hand, M . tuberculosis , as a prime example of a well‐adapted facultative intracellular bacterium, has learned during evolution to counter‐balance the host's immune defense strategies to secure survival or multiplication within this otherwise hostile environment. This review provides an overview of innate immune defense of macrophages directed against intracellular bacteria with a focus on M . tuberculosis . Gaining more insights and knowledge into this complex network of host‐pathogen interaction will identify novel target sites of intervention to successfully clear infection at a time of rapidly emerging multi‐resistance of M . tuberculosis against conventional antibiotics.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review describes how macrophages and neutrophils defend against intracellular bacteria, especially *Mycobacterium tuberculosis*, through phagosome maturation, radicals, autophagy, cytokines, efferocytosis, and nutrient/metal restriction. It also outlines *M. tuberculosis* counter-strategies and proposes host-pathogen interfaces as potential therapeutic targets.

Key findings

  • Macrophages use toxic effectors such as nitric oxide and reactive oxygen intermediates, phagolysosomal acidification, antimicrobial peptides and cytokines, autophagy, efferocytosis, and restriction of iron, fatty acids, amino acids, and other metals to contain intracellular bacteria.
  • *M. tuberculosis* counters these defenses by impairing phagosome maturation, resisting acidic and radical stress, manipulating host lipid metabolism, and securing iron via siderophores and other uptake pathways.
  • In human pulmonary tuberculosis, the review cites that 86% of patients were anemic and that anemic patients were three times more likely to have positive sputum smear results.
  • Iron availability promotes *M. tuberculosis* growth, while host iron-restriction pathways involving IFN-γ, ferroportin, Nramp1, lipocalin-2, and hepcidin can limit bacterial iron; in one cited mouse study, transgenic NRAMP1 expression reduced mycobacterial loads by one log in lung and spleen during the first 2 weeks after aerosol infection.

Methods

  • Narrative review; no primary experiments are reported.
  • Synthesizes mechanistic literature on macrophage and neutrophil innate immunity against intracellular bacteria, with a focus on *M. tuberculosis*.
  • Draws on in vitro, mouse, and human studies, including cited unpublished data, to describe host defense pathways and pathogen counter-strategies.

Limitations

  • The paper does not present a formal limitations section.
  • It notes that many mechanisms were demonstrated in mouse models or other intracellular bacteria such as *Salmonella typhimurium*, and whether they apply to *M. tuberculosis* remains to be shown.
  • Some cited findings rely on unpublished data; as a narrative review, no systematic search or quality appraisal is described.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/imr.12266

Cites

248 of 248 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

Figure 1 Intracellular trafficking of bacteria in phagocytes and anti-microbial responses in macrophages and polymorphonuclear neutrophils. Schematic drawing depicts the phagocytic responses of macrophages (MΦs) and neutrophils (PMNs) against bacterial invaders, and the intracellular fate of the engulfed particles. Non-opsonized or antibody-/complement (C)-opsonized bacteria are recognized and bound by surface receptors for bacterial compounds or the respective opsonins, which triggers signaling cascades involving Syk or DIA1 and leads to actin polymerization and phagocytic cup formation. In MΦs, upon phagosome closure, the maturing phagosome traverses an early and late phagosomal and a phagolysosomal stage paralleling endosomal maturation. Phagosome biogenesis is accompanied by continuous fusion and fission events, including fusion with trans-Golgi transport vesicles, endosomes, lysosomes, and autophagosomes. These interactions cause acquisition and loss of different stage-specific markers. A hallmark of phagosome biogenesis is acidification of the phagosomal lumen by the proton pumping vATPase. A low pH is a prerequisite for optimal enzymatic activity of most late endosomal/lysosomal hydrolases, which are delivered to the nascent phagosome bound to the M6PR from the trans-Golgi. The stepwise succession of phagosomal maturation in macrophages is strikingly different from phagosome formation in PMNs. Phagocytosis and fusion with the lysosomal azurophilic granules is often happening simultaneously. At the same time, specific granules discharge iron sequestering lactoferrin and Lcn2 into both, the phagosomal lumen and the extracellular space. These granules also deliver phagocytic receptors to the PMN surface for recognition and uptake of bacteria. Finally, the gelatinase granules spill out proteases and other enzymes to degrade extracellular matrix proteins, leading to tissue disruption to allow PMN evasion into infection site but ultimately to pathogenesis.
Figure 1 Intracellular trafficking of bacteria in phagocytes and anti-microbial responses in macrophages and polymorphonuclear neutrophils. Schematic drawing depicts the phagocytic responses of macrophages (MΦs) and neutrophils (PMNs) against bacterial invaders, and the intracellular fate of the engulfed particles. Non-opsonized or antibody-/complement (C)-opsonized bacteria are recognized and bound by surface receptors for bacterial compounds or the respective opsonins, which triggers signaling cascades involving Syk or DIA1 and leads to actin polymerization and phagocytic cup formation. In MΦs, upon phagosome closure, the maturing phagosome traverses an early and late phagosomal and a phagolysosomal stage paralleling endosomal maturation. Phagosome biogenesis is accompanied by continuous fusion and fission events, including fusion with trans-Golgi transport vesicles, endosomes, lysosomes, and autophagosomes. These interactions cause acquisition and loss of different stage-specific markers. A hallmark of phagosome biogenesis is acidification of the phagosomal lumen by the proton pumping vATPase. A low pH is a prerequisite for optimal enzymatic activity of most late endosomal/lysosomal hydrolases, which are delivered to the nascent phagosome bound to the M6PR from the trans-Golgi. The stepwise succession of phagosomal maturation in macrophages is strikingly different from phagosome formation in PMNs. Phagocytosis and fusion with the lysosomal azurophilic granules is often happening simultaneously. At the same time, specific granules discharge iron sequestering lactoferrin and Lcn2 into both, the phagosomal lumen and the extracellular space. These granules also deliver phagocytic receptors to the PMN surface for recognition and uptake of bacteria. Finally, the gelatinase granules spill out proteases and other enzymes to degrade extracellular matrix proteins, leading to tissue disruption to allow PMN evasion into infection site but ultimately to pathogenesis.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Figure 2 The battle for iron. Macrophages use multiple pathways to restrict the essential growth factor iron for intracellular mycobacteria. First, cytokines such as IFN-γ inhibit the transcriptional expression of transferrin receptor (TfR). TfR is a major source of iron for mycobacteria, because the bacteria can utilize its ligand, transferrin iron, following its endosomal transfer. Macrophages produce lipocalin-2 (Lcn2), which binds and neutralizes siderophores produced by M. tuberculosis to scavenge and re-utilize cytoplasmic iron. Furthermore, macrophage-derived cytokines such as TNF-α induce the formation of the iron-binding protein ferritin, which incorporates iron into its core rendering it unavailable for intracellular bacteria as well as the iron binding protein lactoferrin (Lf), which also scavenges this metal. Activated macrophages express the phagolysomal protein Nramp1, which among other effects pumps iron out of macrophages, thereby reducing the availability of the metal in the phagosome for mycobacteria. Finally, upon formation of nitric oxide, the transcription factor Nrf2 is activated, stimulating the expression of the major iron export protein ferroportin (FP1) pumping iron out of the phagolyosome and of the cytoplasma of macrophages. By mechanisms that remain elusive, the stimulation of hepcidin expression in the liver, which is a major mechanism for iron restriction to extracellular pathogens, is circumvented. All these events result in reduction in intracellular iron levels and a limited availability of iron for intra-macrophage bacteria. Based on the negative regulatory effects of iron on IFN-γ activity, the reduction in this metal's availability results in strengthened innate anti-microbial immune responses. Importantly, some of the pathways shown in this figure have been investigated for other intracellular bacteria such as S. typhimurium, and their importance for M. tuberculosis remains to be shown.
Figure 2 The battle for iron. Macrophages use multiple pathways to restrict the essential growth factor iron for intracellular mycobacteria. First, cytokines such as IFN-γ inhibit the transcriptional expression of transferrin receptor (TfR). TfR is a major source of iron for mycobacteria, because the bacteria can utilize its ligand, transferrin iron, following its endosomal transfer. Macrophages produce lipocalin-2 (Lcn2), which binds and neutralizes siderophores produced by M. tuberculosis to scavenge and re-utilize cytoplasmic iron. Furthermore, macrophage-derived cytokines such as TNF-α induce the formation of the iron-binding protein ferritin, which incorporates iron into its core rendering it unavailable for intracellular bacteria as well as the iron binding protein lactoferrin (Lf), which also scavenges this metal. Activated macrophages express the phagolysomal protein Nramp1, which among other effects pumps iron out of macrophages, thereby reducing the availability of the metal in the phagosome for mycobacteria. Finally, upon formation of nitric oxide, the transcription factor Nrf2 is activated, stimulating the expression of the major iron export protein ferroportin (FP1) pumping iron out of the phagolyosome and of the cytoplasma of macrophages. By mechanisms that remain elusive, the stimulation of hepcidin expression in the liver, which is a major mechanism for iron restriction to extracellular pathogens, is circumvented. All these events result in reduction in intracellular iron levels and a limited availability of iron for intra-macrophage bacteria. Based on the negative regulatory effects of iron on IFN-γ activity, the reduction in this metal's availability results in strengthened innate anti-microbial immune responses. Importantly, some of the pathways shown in this figure have been investigated for other intracellular bacteria such as S. typhimurium, and their importance for M. tuberculosis remains to be shown.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

214 Not checked yet · 99 No basis given · 20 Own interpretation · 3 Own result · 2 Supported

Verify all 301 references — free account

Show all 176 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 60
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 123
162 of 162

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 251 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–500 of 990

Metadata

Authors
Weiss, G., & Schaible, U. E.
Affiliations
  • Innsbruck Medical University (AT)
  • London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Weiss, Günter
Venue
Immunological Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-02-20
Volume
264
Issue
1
Pages
182-203
ISSN
  • 0105-2896 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-065X
OpenAlex
W2055224823
Cited by
989
References
251
Citations by year
2026: 67 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 107 · 2023: 112 · 2022: 112 · 2021: 106 · 2020: 91 · 2019: 103 · 2018: 72 · 2017: 72 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 18
FWCI
10.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Immunological Reviews (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsches Zentrum für Infektionsforschung
  • Austrian Science Fund
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Tuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immune responses and vaccinations
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immune Response and Inflammation
Keywords
macrophages, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, tuberculosis, innate immunity, intracellular bacteria, reactive oxygen species, nitric oxide, iron limitation, antimicrobial peptides, autophagy, efferocytosis, host-pathogen interaction, antibiotic resistance
MeSH terms
Animals, Cell Communication, Humans, Immunity, Innate, Lysosomes, Macrophage Activation, Macrophages, Metals, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Phagocytes, Phagocytosis, Phagosomes, Tuberculosis, Host-Pathogen Interactions

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-07, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-07 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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