1 / 42

Optimisation of the immune response

Optimisation of the immune response. Graham Medley Ecology & Epidemiology group Warwick, UK. Age-dependant Intensity. Macroparasite Immunity Models. Immune response is a function of history of exposure Memory, M(a) Immunity is a non-linear, increasing function of M(a) But why?

benjamin
Download Presentation

Optimisation of the immune response

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Optimisation of the immune response Graham Medley Ecology & Epidemiology group Warwick, UK

  2. Age-dependant Intensity

  3. Macroparasite Immunity Models • Immune response is a function of history of exposure • Memory, M(a) • Immunity is a non-linear, increasing function of M(a) • But why? • If it takes hours to respond to a virus, why does it take years to respond to macroparasites? • Hosts should be more concerned with present & future than past

  4. Also applies to other chronic infections, e.g. malaria. As intensity of transmission (immigration rate) increases: >> the overall intensity of infection increases >> the age at peak intensity decreases >> there is a “change” at sexual maturity Lusingu et al. , Malaria Journal 2004, 3:26

  5. What is the Immune System for? • Hosts use their IS to maximise survival and reproduction • Possibly tautological, but true • The IS does not have the sole aim of killing parasites • IS is constrained by other physiology • Persistence of infection does not immediately imply parasite cunning or immunity failure • Generate questions about the functions of immunity • and therefore the mechanisms that might be expected

  6. Constraints to Immunity • IS is expensive in terms of limited resources (energy & protein) • Other processes that enhance “fitness” • E.g. growth & reproduction • Many physiological processes constrained by “minimum energy” or “minimum protein” • IS is dangerous • Autoimmune disease

  7. Hosts may choose to devote resources to things other than immunity • especially if infection is rarely immediately lethal and continuous (macroparasites) • not if infection will be lethal if uncontrolled (viruses)

  8. Immunopathology • For many infections, the immune response “causes” the disease • Respiratory syncytial virus • Eosinophilia creates the clinical disease • Ablate eosinophilia & mice die without symptoms • Schistosomiasis • Circulatory failure due to granuloma formation around eggs embedded in liver • Ascaris suum • Single large dose leads to explusion • Same dose trickled leads to establishment & little pathology

  9. Adaptive Immunity • Adaptive to overcome pathogen adaptation • Adaptive to host requirements: protein & energy • Also adaptive to survival / reproduction context • Nutrition (resources) • Malnourished hosts experience more disease • Gender & Social Status • Males & females do not have same priorities • Hormonal influence (effect of testosterone) • Age • Priorities change • Immuno-modulation of parasite burden

  10. Trickle Exposure:  Dose

  11. Natural Exposure:  Duration

  12. Maternal Exposure

  13. Adaptive Immunity • Exposure modulates infection so that prevalence increases and maximum burdens decrease • Variability is decreased • Immune system is the modulator • Exposure results in “shuffling” of individual burdens within a group of hosts • No expulsion

  14. Model of Resource Allocation • How should hosts devote resources between immunity and other functions as they age? • Simple model of infection, immunity and fitness • Single host over age • Constrained optimisation problem

  15. Macroparasites • Within-host parasite population, p • Immigration-death process • Parasites do not reproduce within the host • Immigration & death rates of parasite depend on level of immunity

  16. Simple Model : Immunity • Resource input is constant: R • Partitioned into immunity (I), growth & reproduction • Resources devoted to immunity are dependent on • parasite population • individual host dependent parameter, (a)

  17. Simple Model : Host • Fixed age at maturity, w • Investment in growth during immaturity to increase size, g • Survival to any age is dependent on relative size and current parasite burden determine survival, s • Reproduction is dependent on size and resources available

  18. Reproductive Value, RV • Maximum age, L • Expected future reproductive success • survival is related to size and parasite burden • reproductive effort is related to size and resources (not used for parasite resistance) • Maximise fitness as a trade-off between • reducing parasites now • less likely to die • and growing to be bigger • less likely to die in the future & reproduce more

  19. Model Structure • Differential equations • Three equations ( g, p, s ) • Solved & maximised numerically • IBM stochastic simulations • Unscaled • Redundancy: pathogenicity ~ immigration • Quantitatively meaningless

  20. Optimisation Problem • Aim is to optimise the host fitness by varying proportion of resources devoted to immunity, (a) • Initially assume  constant throughout life • RV at birth maximised

  21. Effect of control parameter, 

  22. Immunity is always “sub-optimal” • Reproductive value is optimised at when resources devoted to immunity are intermediate • There is an “optimal” parasite burden • Given continuous (constant) immigration and constant resources • Optimised values change with conditions • Changing immigration & resource level…

  23. Dependence on 

  24. Dependence on resources Medley, G.F. (2002) Parasitology 125 (7), S61-S70

  25. Age-related immunity • Allow (a) • Linear segments • RV calculated throughout life • Amounts to maximising at each age • “Dynamic programming” approach: each (a) depends on the others • All other parameters (R, ) constant with age

  26. R=0.5,1,1.5,2

  27. R=0.5,1,1.5,2

  28. =5,25,50,100

  29. Age-Related RV =5,25,50,100

  30. =5,25,50,100

  31. =5,25,50,100

  32. Age-dependant Intensity

  33. Results • Maximum age span (30) • Immunity reduced as death approaches • No value in compromising reproduction for survival • Reproductive maturity • Big change in immunity • Emphasise growth during immaturity • Emphasise survival in maturity • Optimal strategy is to increase risk of death in order to be “fitter” when older

  34. Mutapi et al. – S.haematobium BMC Infectious Diseases 2006, 6:96

  35. Peak Shift

  36. 500 hosts with uniform random R,  and β; (constant )

  37. Conclusions • IR in host context • Reproduces observed phenomena: • Age-related intensity • Peak shift • Heterogeneity • Predisposition

  38. Speculations • What we can expect the IS to do • Dynamic • Mechanisms for continual monitoring of damage, changes in parasite population size, physiological state • Effectiveness (e.g. B-cell affinity maturation) • Defined by host context (age, nutrition etc) • Mechanisms for interaction with remainder of physiology • Molecules that operate in both, e.g. leptin • Learning • Adaptive immunity is a sensory system • Controls innate immunity • Determines immune response in context, e.g. effects of age vs HLA in HIV

  39. Survival against age at HIV seroconversion Proportion surviving Years since infection Time from HIV-1 seroconversion to AIDS and death before widespread use of highly-active anti-retroviral therapy A collaborative re-analysis. Cascade Collaboration. Lancet 2001:355 11311137

  40. Is Death a Failure? • Death does not immediately imply immune system failure • Risking death to be bigger • Apoptosis • Cell death to kill intracellular parasites • Do eusocial insects die to kill their parasites & protect their sisters? • Since infection transmits least some immuno-modulation is not optimal for individual • Hand-waving arguments involving inclusive fitness

  41. Individuals  Populations • Infection rate depends on sum of individual parasite burdens • Resources are limiting • Competition for resources: dependent on size? • Dynamic game • Individual strategies determine others (and own) conditions • Real time optimisation of individual IR • High “discount rate” (e.g. random death) will emphasise current immunity • Immuno-ecology

More Related