Go to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • All ...
  • Videos
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Resource and Technical Advances
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Editorials
    • Perspectives
    • Physician-Scientist Development
    • Reviews
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • In-Press Preview
  • Resource and Technical Advances
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Editorials
  • Perspectives
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Reviews
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
Host immunology and rational immunotherapy for carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae infection
Naoki Iwanaga, Ivy Sandquist, Alanna Wanek, Janet McCombs, Kejing Song, Jay K. Kolls
Naoki Iwanaga, Ivy Sandquist, Alanna Wanek, Janet McCombs, Kejing Song, Jay K. Kolls
View: Text | PDF
Research Article Infectious disease Pulmonology

Host immunology and rational immunotherapy for carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae infection

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

Infections due to carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae have emerged as a global threat due to its widespread antimicrobial resistance. Transplant recipients and patients with hematologic malignancies have high mortality rate, suggesting host factors in susceptibility. We developed a model of pulmonary infection using ST258 strain C4, KPC-2 clone, which are predominant K. pneumoniae carbapenemase–producing (KPC-producing) bacteria, and demonstrated that Rag2–/– Il2rg–/– mice — but not WT C57BL/6 or Rag2–/– mice — were susceptible to this opportunistic infection. Using single cell RNA sequencing in infected Rag2–/– mice, we identified distinct clusters of Ifng+ NK cells and Il17a+, Il22+, and inducible T cell costimulatory molecule–positive (ICOS+) group 3 innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) that were critical for host resistance. As solid organ transplantation is a risk factor, we generated a more clinically relevant model using FK506 in WT C57BL/6 mice. We further demonstrated that immunotherapy with recombinant IL-22 treatment ameliorated the ST258 pulmonary infection in both FK506-treated WT mice and Rag2–/– Il2rg–/– mice via hepatic IL-22ra1 signaling. These data support the development of host-directed immunotherapy as an adjunct treatment to new antibiotics.

Authors

Naoki Iwanaga, Ivy Sandquist, Alanna Wanek, Janet McCombs, Kejing Song, Jay K. Kolls

×

Figure 5

Dual blockade of ICOS and NK cells exacerbates lung infection.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
Dual blockade of ICOS and NK cells exacerbates lung infection.
Six- to 8...
Six- to 8-week-old male Rag2–/– mice were administered both 500 μg anti-ICOS and 250 μg anti-NK1.1 or isotype control once 2 hours prior to intratracheal challenge with 1 × 106 CFU ST258 C4 strain and euthanized 24 hours after infection. (A–F) Dual blockade reduced mRNA expression of Il17a (A), Il17f (B), Il22 (C), Klrb1c (D), and Ifng (E) and significantly increased CFU in the lung (F) (n = 9–10). Data are pooled from 3 independent experiments. (G and H) Additionally Xcl1 (G) and Ccl5 (H) mRNA expression in the naive Rag2–/–, infected Rag2–/–, and infected Rag2–/– pretreated with 250 μg anti-NK1.1 mAb i.p. once 2 hours prior to infection are shown (n = 5, data shown representative of 2 separate experiments). Data are presented as mean ± SEM. Significant differences are designated by using 1-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparisons test (A–E, G-H), while Mann-Whitney U test is used for the CFU comparison. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001.

Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts