Enhanced lung inflammatory response in whole-body compared to nose-only cigarette smoke-exposed mice

Abstract

BackgroundChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by a progressive and abnormal inflammatory response in the lungs, mainly caused by cigarette smoking. Animal models exposed to cigarette smoke (CS) are used to mimic human COPD but the use of different CS protocols makes it difficult to compare the immunological and structural consequences of using a nose-only or whole-body CS exposure system. We hypothesized that when using a standardized CS exposure protocol based on particle density and CO (carbon monoxide) levels, the whole-body CS exposure system would generate a more severe inflammatory response than the nose-only system, due to possible sensitization by uptake of CS-components through the skin or via grooming.MethodsIn this study focusing on early COPD, mice were exposed twice daily 5 days a week to CS either with a nose-only or whole-body exposure system for 14 weeks to assess lung function, remodeling and inflammation.ResultsAt sacrifice, serum cotinine levels were significantly higher in the whole-body (5.3 (2.3–6.9) ng/ml) compared to the nose-only ((2.0 (1.8–2.5) ng/ml) exposure system and controls (1.0 (0.9–1.0) ng/ml). Both CS exposure systems induced a similar degree of lung function impairment, while inflammation was more severe in whole body exposure system. Slightly more bronchial epithelial damage, mucus and airspace enlargement were observed with the nose-only exposure system. More lymphocytes were present in the bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and lymph nodes of the whole-body exposure system while enhanced IgA and IgG production was found in BAL and to a lesser extent in serum with the nose-only exposure system.ConclusionThe current standardized CS-exposure protocol resulted in a higher internal load of serum cotinine in the whole-body exposure system, which was associated with more inflammation. However, both exposure systems resulted in a similar lung function impairment. Data also highlighted differences between the two models in terms of lung inflammation and remodelling, and potential sensitization to CS. Researchers should be aware of these differences when designing their future studies for an early intervention in COPD.