Back

The healing potential of wild type and recombinant S100A8 to attenuate skin wound inflammation

Akinshipo, A. W. O.; Chen, L.; DiPietro, L. A.

2020-09-17 immunology
10.1101/2020.09.16.298380 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundWounds represent a major health burden in our society and poorly healing wounds are a significant clinical problem worldwide, During the acute inflammatory, neutrophils which are normal wound scavengers seems to create additional tissue destruction and promote scar formation. This project examined the utility of using pluronic gel to deliver ala42S100A8, a peptide that repels neutrophils, to wounds, allowing more regenerative repair. MethodExcisional wound models on female BALB/c mice were made and 4 treatments including pluronic gel only group, Wild type S100A8 (1, 2, and 4g) with Pluronic gel, and ala42S100A8 (1, 2, and 4g) with Pluronic gel were applied to the wounds. Wounds were harvested at day 1 and day 3. Myeloperoxidase (MPO) protein level was examined using an ELISA kit and cytokine protein expression of CXCL1 (GRO-1), CXCL2 (MIP-2). IL-6, and TNF- was determined using a multiplex ELISA kit. ResultsMPO level in Pluronic gel treated wounds at day 1 was significantly higher than that in control, suggesting that the Pluronic gel itself causes increased inflammation in wounds, while treatment with 1g of s100A8 or 1 and 4g of ala42S100A8 seemed to decrease MPO at day 1 compared to the Pluronic gel treated wounds. Treatment with 1g of s100A8 also led to a decrease IL-6 and TNF- production at day 1 when compared to the Pluronic gel group, although no statistical difference was observed ConclusionsOur findings strongly suggest that wound inflammation is reduced by treatment with 1ug of S100A8. As such, this study provides proof-of-principal for further investigations of S100A8/ala42S100A8 as a wound therapeutic. Additional studies with lower doses and increased sample size, along with the use of alternative delivery systems, will provide important information about the utility of this approach.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 10%
18.7%
2
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.0%
3
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 7%
8.0%
4
ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering
37 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.5%
5
Biomaterials Science
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
50% of probability mass above
6
Biomaterials Advances
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
7
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
98 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.1%
8
Frontiers in Immunology
638 papers in training set
Top 4%
3.3%
9
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
494 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.3%
10
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
11
Biomaterials
84 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.5%
12
International Journal of Biological Macromolecules
76 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
13
Journal of Controlled Release
44 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
14
Advanced Therapeutics
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
15
ACS Omega
105 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
16
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
187 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
17
Frontiers in Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
18
Biotechnology and Bioengineering
53 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
19
Translational Vision Science & Technology
39 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
20
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 64%
0.9%
21
The FASEB Journal
194 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
22
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 34%
0.9%
23
Microbiology Spectrum
469 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.6%