Journal of Zoonotic Diseases

Print ISSN: 2476-535X, Online ISSN: 2717-2910

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Peer Review Process

Publication Ethics(COPE Principle)

Indexing and Abstracting

Archiving policy

Related Links

FAQ

Publication Ethics(COPE Principle)

Editorial Policies

Categories of Manuscripts

Instructions for Authors

Copyright form

Competing interests statement form

Peer Review Process

Reviewers (2020)

Reviewers (2021)

Reviewers (2022)

Reviewers (2023)

Reviewers (2024)

Targeting Nrf2//HO-1 antioxidant signaling pathway in Brucella infection

Articles in Press

Document Type : Mini-Review Article

Authors

1 Department of Veterinary Basic Sciences, SR.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

Abstract

Human health is at serious risk from brucellosis, a zoonotic infection brought on by the genus Brucella, especially in areas where livestock is common. The clinical manifestations of brucellosis in humans are diverse, often beginning with nonspecific flu-like symptoms such as fever, chills, malaise, and arthralgia. The immune response to Brucella infection is complex, involving various cytokines and immune mediators, which can be influenced by the host's genetic background and environmental factors. Preventive measures primarily focus on livestock vaccination and public health education regarding the risks associated with unpasteurized dairy products and direct animal contact. The pathophysiology of Brucella is significantly influenced by oxidative stress, primarily in its interactions with the host immune system. It is known that Brucella species cause oxidative stress in their host cells, which activates a number of different biological processes, including the nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor transcription factor (Nrf2) pathway. Nrf2 is a transcription factor that governs the expression of antioxidant proteins, which safeguard against oxidative damage caused by injury and inflammation. Activation of Nrf2 has been shown to upregulate HO-1, which is involved in modulating the immune response. The enzyme's activity regulates proinflammatory cytokines and anti-inflammatory environment, aiding Brucella in evading the host's immune defenses. Therefore, therapeutic strategies that enhance Nrf2 activation could improve the host's immune response while limiting the survival advantage of Brucella. Future research should continue to explore the therapeutic potential of targeting the Nrf2/HO-1 axis in various infectious diseases, particularly Brucella infection, to improve clinical outcomes.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Full Text

Introduction

Brucellosis, a zoonotic infection caused by the genus Brucella, poses significant health risks to humans, particularly in regions where livestock is prevalent. The three species most frequently linked to human infections are Brucella melitensis, Brucella suis, and Brucella abortus. B. melitensis is the most dangerous and widely reported species worldwide (1, 2). Human infections typically arise from direct contact with infected animals or ingesting unpasteurized dairy products (3, 4). The clinical manifestations of brucellosis in humans are diverse, often beginning with nonspecific flu-like symptoms such as fever, chills, malaise, and arthralgia (5-7).

The disease can present acutely or chronically, with acute cases often characterized by undulating fever and systemic symptoms, In contrast, chronic cases may lead to severe complications such as endocarditis, osteomyelitis, and neurological disorders (8, 9). In particular, Brucella canis, while less common, has been associated with milder infections, yet it can still result in serious complications (10, 11). The variability in clinical presentation can complicate diagnosis, as symptoms may mimic other infectious diseases such as malaria or typhoid fever (12, 13).

Brucella's ability to survive and replicate within host macrophages contributes to its pathogenicity, allowing it to evade the immune response and establish chronic infections (14). Histological examinations of affected tissues often reveal myeloid cell infiltrates, indicating an inflammatory response, but brucellar arthritis typically does not lead to significant joint destruction (15). The immune response to Brucella infection is complex, involving various cytokines and immune mediators, which can be influenced by the host's genetic background and environmental factors (16).

Preventive measures primarily focus on livestock vaccination and public health education regarding the risks associated with unpasteurized dairy products and direct animal contact (8). Despite these efforts, brucellosis continues to pose a considerable public health challenge in various areas globally, especially in regions characterized by substantial livestock populations and insufficient veterinary health interventions (1, 2).

Treating brucellosis in humans is multifaceted, requiring a tailored approach based on the severity of the disease and the specific clinical scenario. The combination of doxycycline with rifampicin or streptomycin remains the gold standard, but in complicated cases, a more aggressive treatment strategy involving surgery and prolonged antibiotic therapy may be necessary to achieve successful outcomes (17, 18).

 

The importance of Brucella infection in veterinary medicine

The economic impact of brucellosis is profound, particularly in developing countries where it leads to reproductive failures in livestock, such as abortion and infertility, thereby affecting food security and livelihoods (19, 20). Domesticated animals, including sheep, cattle, goats, and pigs, are the primary reservoirs of Brucella, which can infect humans, particularly in rural settings where close contact occurs often (20, 21). Vaccination remains a crucial strategy in controlling brucellosis in veterinary settings. However, the effectiveness of available vaccines is usually debated. Some vaccines have been shown to provide inadequate protection, leading to a false sense of security among livestock owners and health officials (22, 23). For instance, low-performance vaccines can result in vaccinated animals still acting as reservoirs for the disease, complicating eradication efforts (22). Moreover, serological tests used for diagnosing brucellosis often fail to distinguish between vaccinated and infected animals, which may hamper the effective control of the disease. (24, 25).

The epidemiological landscape of brucellosis varies significantly across regions. In Uganda, studies have reported varying seroprevalence rates in livestock, indicating the complexity of brucellosis transmission dynamics (26, 27). Factors such as herd size, density, and vectors like ticks have been associated with increased prevalence (27, 28). In contrast, in regions with robust veterinary services, such as the United States, brucellosis has been eradicated mainly from domestic livestock through comprehensive vaccination and surveillance programs (29).

Multiple-locus variable number tandem repeat analysis (MLVA), one of the recent developments in molecular techniques, has improved our comprehension of the genetic diversity of Brucella strains and their epidemiological relationships (30, 31). These tools are invaluable for tracking outbreaks and informing control measures. Additionally, developing more specific serological tests, such as those targeting outer membrane proteins, holds promise for improving diagnostic accuracy and differentiating between vaccinated and infected animals (25, 32). According to the points mentioned above, brucellosis remains a critical concern in veterinary medicine, necessitating ongoing research and improved strategies for vaccination, diagnosis, and epidemiological monitoring. The integration of advanced molecular techniques and better vaccine formulations could significantly enhance control efforts, particularly in regions where the disease is endemic.

 

Role of oxidative stress in Brucella infection

A key element in the development of Brucella is oxidative stress, particularly due to its interactions with the host's immune system. Brucella species, such as Brucella abortus, have evolved strategies to endure and proliferate in the oxidative conditions present within host macrophages. The host immune response generates reactive oxygen species (ROS) such as superoxide anions (O2−) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) to combat intracellular pathogens, including Brucella (33). This oxidative stress is a critical factor that influences the survival and virulence of Brucella, as it must adapt to these hostile conditions to establish infection. Research indicates that Brucella can enter a viable but non-culturable (VBNC) state under oxidative stress conditions, which may contribute to its persistence in the host (34). Studies have shown that the presence of oxidative agents like H2O2 and iron (Fe2+) leads to a rapid decline in colony-forming units (CFUs) while increasing ATP levels, suggesting a metabolic adaptation that allows Brucella to survive despite the oxidative challenge (34). Additionally, Brucella's capacity to fight oxidative stress depends critically on the expression of antioxidant enzymes like catalase and superoxide dismutase (SOD). These enzymes help neutralize ROS, thereby enhancing the bacterium's survival within phagocytes (35, 36).

Brucella's ability to modulate the host immune response is also linked to its oxidative stress management. For instance, the thioredoxin-interacting protein (TXNIP) is upregulated during Brucella infection, which helps reduce nitric oxide (NO) and ROS production in macrophages, facilitating Brucella's intracellular survival (37). Additionally, studies have indicated that the cold shock protein A (CspA) is induced under oxidative stress conditions, suggesting that Brucella can adapt its protein expression profile to cope with the hostile environment within macrophages (38).

The general stress response (GSR) system in Brucella is activated by oxidative stress, enabling the bacterium to regulate its virulence and adapt to the challenging intracellular environment (39, 40). This response includes the expression of various stress response proteins that assist in managing oxidative damage and promoting survival during infection (41).

Moreover, the interplay between oxidative stress and the immune response is complex. The release of proinflammatory cytokines in response to elevated oxidative stress may strengthen the immune response against Brucella, but it can also cause tissue damage. The balance between inflammation and oxidative stress is crucial for controlling Brucella infections, as excessive inflammation can hinder the host's ability to clear the pathogen effectively (42).

 

Nrf2 and HO-1 signaling pathway

A transcription factor called nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) migrates to the nucleus in response to oxidative stress. It binds to the antioxidant response element (ARE) found in the promoter regions of several genes, including Heme Oxygenase-1 (HO-1). This process plays a crucial part in cellular defense against oxidative damage by starting the transcription of many antioxidant genes. (43, 44). An enzyme called HO-1 is inducible and helps break down heme into biliverdin, carbon monoxide, and free iron—all vital for protecting cells from oxidative stress. (44, 45).

The Nrf2/HO-1 signaling pathway is recognized as a fundamental mechanism through which cells respond to oxidative stress. Studies have demonstrated, for example, that Nrf2 activation results in HO-1 upregulation, which ultimately has cytoprotective effects by lowering inflammation and oxidative damage. (46-48). This pathway has been implicated in various physiological and pathological contexts, including myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury, where the activation of Nrf2 and subsequent HO-1 expression significantly mitigates oxidative stress-induced damage (47, 48). Furthermore, Nrf2's role extends beyond merely regulating HO-1; it also influences the expression of other antioxidant enzymes, enhancing the overall cellular antioxidant capacity (49, 50).

Research has demonstrated that the deficiency of Nrf2 exacerbates oxidative stress and related pathologies, such as cardiotoxicity induced by doxorubicin, highlighting its protective role (49, 51). Conversely, the induction of HO-1 has been shown to confer adaptive responses to oxidative insults, making it a potential therapeutic target in conditions characterized by oxidative stress (45, 51). For example, compounds like thymoquinone and mangiferin have been shown to activate the Nrf2/HO-1 pathway, leading to increased antioxidant defenses and reduced cellular damage in various models of oxidative stress (43, 44, 46).

Furthermore, the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) is a signaling pathway that affects the interaction between Nrf2 and HO-1. It can modify Nrf2 activity, affecting the expression of HO-1 (52, 53). This suggests that the regulation of the Nrf2/HO-1 axis is complex and involves multiple layers of signaling that respond to the cellular redox state.

 

Role of Nrf2 and HO-1 signaling pathway in Brucella infection

In specific infectious diseases, the Nrf2/HO-1 pathway has been implicated in various pathogens. For example, Brucella infection has been shown to induce HO-1 expression, which may facilitate the survival of the bacteria within host cells (54). Similarly, in viral infections such as Pseudorabies Virus (PRV), HO-1 induction has been associated with reduced viral replication, suggesting a protective role against viral pathogenesis (55). Moreover, increased HO-1 levels have been linked to the severity of COVID-19, implying that the Nrf2/HO-1 axis may be involved in the hyperinflammatory reactions seen in severe cases. (56, 57).

This cytoprotective mechanism is essential in preventing tissue damage during infections, as excessive oxidative stress can lead to cellular apoptosis and exacerbate inflammation (58, 59). Additionally, the modulation of the Nrf2/HO-1 pathway has been investigated as a potential therapeutic approach to strengthen the host's defense mechanisms against infections (60, 61).

Research indicates that Brucella infection triggers the expression of HO-1, a process significantly mediated by Nrf2 activation. For instance, Hu et al. demonstrated that Brucella induces HO-1 expression through signaling pathways involving AMPK, PI3K, and GSK3β, highlighting the importance of Nrf2 in this context (54). Oxidative stress-induced Nrf2 activation is crucial for HO-1 transcriptional activation, which alleviates oxidative damage and promotes cell survival during Brucella infection (54).

Nrf2 not only supports antioxidant defense but also regulates the inflammatory response. Nrf2 activation has been demonstrated to inhibit the production of proinflammatory cytokines, which is especially pertinent in the case of Brucella because the pathogen can cause a strong inflammatory response that could lead to tissue damage (62). The anti-inflammatory properties of Nrf2 are facilitated by its capacity to suppress the NF-κB pathway, which is a crucial regulator of inflammation (63). Thus, Nrf2 serves as a dual protector against oxidative stress and inflammation during Brucella infections. The interplay between Nrf2 and other signaling pathways further complicates its role in Brucella pathogenesis. For example, the Keap1-Nrf2 system is a well-established regulatory mechanism where Keap1 acts as a negative regulator of Nrf2 under non-stressed conditions. Nrf2 is released from Keap1 in response to oxidative stress, moves to the nucleus, and starts the transcription of genes that produce antioxidants (64). Because it improves the cell's capacity to withstand the deleterious effects of reactive oxygen species (ROS) produced during the infection process, this mechanism is essential for the cellular response to oxidative stress caused by Brucella (64). Specifically, the production of CO has been recognized for its role in modulating inflammation and enhancing macrophage function, which is crucial during Brucella infection (65).

Furthermore, research has shown that downregulating HO-1 expression can lead to increased susceptibility to infections and heightened inflammatory responses. For instance, the reduction of HO-1 in trophoblast giant cells during Brucella infection has been linked to increased cell death and adverse pregnancy outcomes, highlighting the protective role of HO-1 in maintaining cellular integrity during bacterial infections (66, 67). This implies that HO-1 is essential for the host's reaction to infection in addition to helping Brucella survive. HO-1 not only serves protective roles but also plays a significant part in regulating the immune response. The enzyme's activity has been associated with proinflammatory cytokines regulation and an anti-inflammatory environment promotion, which can be advantageous for Brucella as it seeks to evade the host's immune defenses (68). The interplay between HO-1 expression and the host's immune response underscores this enzyme’s importance in Brucella infections. Understanding the role of HO-1 in Brucella pathogenesis could lead to novel strategies for managing brucellosis and improving outcomes in affected individuals.

 

Targeting the Nrf2/HO-1 Signaling Pathway therapeutically in cases of Brucella infection

The possibility of treating Brucella infections by altering the Nrf2 and HO-1 signaling pathways is becoming more widely acknowledged, considering how crucially these pathways control inflammation and oxidative stress. The Nrf2 pathway's activation raises the expression of HO-1, which has cytoprotective, anti-inflammatory, and antioxidant qualities (69-71). In the context of Brucella infections, studies have indicated that HO-1 expression is induced as a response to the infection, suggesting that Brucella may exploit this pathway to enhance its survival within host cells (54). This manipulation of the host's antioxidant defenses could facilitate Brucella's intracellular replication and persistence. Moreover, the interaction between Nrf2 and HO-1 plays a vital role in regulating the immune response in the context of Brucella infections. Nrf2 activation has been linked to the control of several immune responses, such as the augmentation of phagocytic activity and the modification of proinflammatory cytokines (72, 73). This suggests that therapeutic strategies to enhance Nrf2 activity could bolster the host's immune response against Brucella by promoting HO-1 expression and thereby reducing oxidative stress and inflammation. Research has also highlighted the potential of various natural compounds to activate the Nrf2/HO-1 pathway, providing a promising avenue for therapeutic intervention. Compounds such as curcumin and dihydrolipoic acid have been shown to activate Nrf2, leading to increased HO-1 expression and subsequent protection against oxidative stress (56, 74). Moreover, the interplay between Nrf2 and HO-1 is critical in regulating the immune response. HO-1 expression, for example, can affect the synthesis of proinflammatory cytokines like IFN-γ, which is necessary for macrophage activation and the bactericidal action against Brucella (75).

Furthermore, the use of antioxidants in therapeutic strategies against brucellosis has been explored. For instance, antioxidant administration could potentially enhance the efficacy of treatments for brucellosis by reducing oxidative stress levels in infected individuals (76, 77). This is supported by findings that show a significant increase in antioxidant levels following treatment in patients with brucellosis, indicating a depletion of the antioxidant system during the infection (78). These findings underscore the potential for developing Nrf2/HO-1-targeted therapies. By modulating these pathways, it may be possible to enhance the host's immune response against Brucella, reduce oxidative stress, and inhibit the pathogen's survival mechanisms. Future research should focus on developing specific Nrf2 activators or HO-1 inhibitors that can be effectively used with traditional antimicrobial therapies to improve outcomes in brucellosis treatment.

Conclusions

In conclusion, oxidative stress is a major factor in the development of Brucella, impacting both the host's immune response and the bacterium's survival strategies. Brucella has developed advanced strategies to combat oxidative stress, such as the synthesis of antioxidant enzymes and the adjustment of host immune responses, both of which are crucial for its survival and pathogenicity within the host. The Nrf2/HO-1 signaling pathway regulates inflammation and oxidative stress, crucial for mediating the immune response to infectious diseases. This pathway's initiation contributes significantly to the overall cytoprotective effects that are necessary for reducing tissue damage and controlling infections in addition to increasing HO-1 expression. Understanding these mechanisms in the context of disease management is even more crucial, given the possibility that antioxidant therapies could help treat brucellosis. Ongoing studies must focus on the therapeutic potential of influencing the Nrf2/HO-1 mechanism in several infectious diseases, to better the clinical outcomes.

 

Acknowledgements

Not applicable. 

Ethical approval

Not applicable.  

There were no ethical considerations to be considered in this research.

Conflict of interest

The authors declared no conflict of interest.

References

  1. References

    1. Qasim SS, Alshuwaier K, Alosaimi MQ, Alghafees MA, Alrasheed A, Layqah L, et al. Brucellosis in Saudi children: presentation, complications, and treatment outcome. Cureus. 2020;12(11). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.11289 
    2. Paixao TA, Roux CM, den Hartigh AB, Sankaran-Walters S, Dandekar S, Santos RL, et al. Establishment of systemic Brucella melitensis infection through the digestive tract requires urease, the type IV secretion system, and lipopolysaccharide O antigen. Infect Immun. 2009;77(10):4197-208. https://doi.org/10.1128/iai.00417-09 
    3. Dong SB, Wang LP, Wu CX, Li F, Yue Y, Piao DR, et al. A case of brucellosis concomitant with HIV infection in China. Infect Dis  2020;9(01):90-4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40249-020-0624-7 
    4. Tiller RV, Gee JE, Frace MA, Taylor TK, Setubal JC, Hoffmaster AR, et al. Characterization of novel Brucella strains originating from wild native rodent species in North Queensland, Australia. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010;76(17):5837-45. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.00620-10 
    5. Xie J, Wang J, Li Z, Wang W, Pang Y, He Y. Ontology-based meta-analysis of animal and human adverse events associated with licensed brucellosis vaccines. Front Pharmacol. 2018;9:503. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2018.00503 
    6. Shaikh A, Sarfaraz M, Ehsan S. Pediatric Brucellosis: A Challenging Diagnosis-Case Report. J Prim Care Community Health. 2023;14:21501319231170497. https://doi.org/10.1177/21501319231170497
    7. Yang X, Skyberg JA, Cao L, Clapp B, Thornburg T, Pascual DW. Progress in Brucella vaccine development. Front Biol. 2013;8:60-77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11515-012-1196-0 
    8. Goodwin ZI, Pascual DW. Brucellosis vaccines for livestock. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2016;181:51-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetimm.2016.03.011 
    9. Silva TM, Costa EA, Paixão TA, Tsolis RM, Santos RL. Laboratory animal models for brucellosis research. Biomed Res Int. 2011;2011(1):518323. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/518323 
    10. Dentinger CM, Jacob K, Lee LV, Mendez HA, Chotikanatis K, McDonough PL, et al. Human Brucella canis infection and subsequent laboratory exposures associated with a puppy, New York City, 2012. Zoonoses Public Health. 2015;62(5):407-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/zph.12163 
    11. Lucero NE, Jacob NO, Ayala SM, Escobar GI, Tuccillo P, Jacques I. Unusual clinical presentation of brucellosis caused by Brucella canis. J Med Microbiol. 2005;54(5):505-8. https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.45928-0 
    12. Katandukila JV, Chuhila YJ, Chibwana FD. Serological Analyses of Human Brucellosis in Ngara and Kibondo Districts, Tanzania. Tanz J Sci. 2021;47(3):1225-35. https://doi.org/10.4314/tjs.v47i3.30 
    13. Al Jarboa F, Almanea S, Aldebasi B. Brucellosis in a 12-year-old boy in Saudi Arabia: A case report for literature review. Pak J Med Health Sci. 2022;16(05):873-876. https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs22165873 
    14. Zhang X, Chen J, Cheng H, Zhu J, Dong Q, Zhang H, et al. MicroRNA-155 expression with Brucella infection in vitro and in vivo and decreased serum levels of microRNA-155 in patients with brucellosis. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):4181.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08180-6 
    15. Skyberg JA, Thornburg T, Kochetkova I, Layton W, Callis G, Rollins MF, et al. IFN-γ-deficient mice develop IL-1-dependent cutaneous and musculoskeletal inflammation during experimental brucellosis. J Leukoc Biol. 2012;92(2):375-87. https://doi.org/10.1189/jlb.1211626 
    16. Elfaki MG, Alaidan AA, Al-Hokail AA. Host response to Brucella infection: review and future perspective. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2015;9(07):697-701. https://doi.org/10.3855/jidc.6625 
    17. Abdel-Maksoud M, House B, Wasfy M, Abdel-Rahman B, Pimentel G, Roushdy G, et al. In vitro antibiotic susceptibility testing of Brucella isolates from Egypt between 1999 and 2007 and evidence of probable rifampin resistance. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2012;11:1-4. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-0711-11-24 
    18. Hamieh A, Hamieh M. Brucella prosthetic valve endocarditis with septic and cardiogenic shock. IDCases. 2020;21:e00881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idcr.2020.e00881 
    19. Roop RM, Barton IS, Hopersberger D, Martin DW. Uncovering the hidden credentials of Brucella virulence. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2021;85(1):10.1128/mmbr. 00021-19. https://doi.org/10.1128/mmbr.00021-19 
    20. Di Bonaventura G, Angeletti S, Ianni A, Petitti T, Gherardi G. Microbiological laboratory diagnosis of human brucellosis: an overview. Pathogens. 2021;10(12):1623. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10121623 
    21. Ma F, Xiao M, Zhu L, Jiang W, Jiang J, Zhang PF, et al. An integrated platform for Brucella with knowledge graph technology: From genomic analysis to epidemiological projection. Front Genet. 2022;13:981633. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.981633 
    22. Darbandi A, Alamdary SZ, Koupaei M, Ghanavati R, Heidary M, Talebi M. Evaluation of immune responses to Brucella vaccines in mouse models: A systematic review. Front Vet Sci. 2022;9:903890. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.903890 
    23. Molina-Sánchez B, Martínez-Herrera DI, Pardío-Sedas VT, Flores-Castro R, Morales-Álvarez JF, Villagómez-Cortés JA. Comparative Field Trial Effect of Brucella spp. Vaccines on Seroconversion in Goats and Their Possible Implications to Control Programs. New Insight into Brucella Infection and Foodborne Diseases: IntechOpen; 2020. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.87065 
    24. Zhang J, Guo F, Chen C, Li Z, Zhang H, Wang Y, et al. Brucella melitensis 16 M Δhfq attenuation confers protection against wild‐type challenge in BALB/c mice. Microbiol Immunol. 2013;57(7):502-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/1348-0421.12065 
    25. Vatankhah M, Beheshti N, Mirkalantari S, Khoramabadi N, Aghababa H, Mahdavi M. Recombinant Omp2b antigen-based ELISA is an efficient tool for specific serodiagnosis of animal brucellosis. Braz J Microbiol. 2019;50:979-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42770-019-00097-z 
    26. Bugeza J, Roesel K, Moriyon I, Mugizi D, Alinaitwe L, Kivali V, et al. Sero-prevalence and factors associated with anti-Brucella antibodies in slaughter livestock in Uganda. Front Epidemiol. 2023;3:1213592. https://doi.org/10.3389/fepid.2023.1213592 
    27. Miller R, Nakavuma J, Ssajjakambwe P, Vudriko P, Musisi N, Kaneene J. The prevalence of brucellosis in cattle, goats and humans in rural Uganda: a comparative study. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2016;63(6):e197-e210. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.12332 
    28. Gomo C. Brucellosis at the Wildlife/Livestock/Human Interface [Internet]. Updates on Brucellosis. InTech; 2015. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/61212
    29. Hikal AF, Wareth G, Khan A. Brucellosis: Why is it eradicated from domestic livestock in the United States but not in the Nile River Basin countries? Ger J Microbiol. 2023;3:19-25. https://doi.org/10.51585/gjm.2023.2.0026 
    30. Allen A, Breadon E, Byrne A, Mallon T, Skuce R, Groussaud P, et al. Molecular epidemiology of Brucella abortus in Northern Ireland—1991 to 2012. PLoS One. 2015;10(9):e0136721. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136721
    31. Mirkalantari S, Masjedian F, Fateme A. Determination of investigation of the link between human and animal Brucella isolates in Iran using multiple-locus variable number tandem repeat method comprising 16 loci (MLVA-16). Braz J Infect Dis. 2021;25(1):101043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjid.2020.11.008 
    32. Yao M, Liu M, Chen X, Li J, Li Y, Wei YR, et al. Comparison of BP26, Omp25 and Omp31 and a multiepitope-based fusion protein in the serological detection of canine brucellosis. Infect Drug Resist. 2022:5301-8. https://doi.org/10.2147/idr.s374432 
    33. Zai X, Yang Q, Yin Y, Li R, Qian M, Zhao T, et al. Relative quantitative proteomic analysis of Brucella abortus reveals metabolic adaptation to multiple environmental stresses. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:2347. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.02347 
    34. Jacob J. Evidence of a Viable but Nonculturable (VBNC) Phase in B. abortus S19 under Oxidative Stress (H2O2,-Fe2+, Bleach) and under Non-Oxidative Inhibitory Conditions (Isopropanol, Erythritol, Selenite). Microorganisms. 2024;12(3):491. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12030491 
    35. Kumar A, Gupta V, Mandil R, Verma A, Rahal A, Yadav S. Mapping of oxidative stress in immune response induced by polymer gel based Brucella melitensis vaccine in mice. Indian J Anim Sci. 2018;88(7):11-8. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v88i7.81406 
    36. Nguyen TT, Huy TXN, Aguilar CNT, Reyes AWB, Salad SA, Min WG, et al. Intracellular Growth Inhibition and Host Immune Modulation of 3-Amino-1, 2, 4-triazole in Murine Brucellosis. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(24):17352. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms242417352 
    37. Hu H, Tian M, Li P, Guan X, Lian Z, Yin Y, et al. Brucella infection regulates thioredoxin-interacting protein expression to facilitate intracellular survival by reducing the production of nitric oxide and reactive oxygen species. J Immunol. 2020;204(3):632-43. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1801550 
    38. Wang Z, Wang S, Wu Q. Cold shock protein A plays an important role in the stress adaptation and virulence of Brucella melitensis. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2014;354(1):27-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/1574-6968.12430 
    39. Dikiy I, Gardner KH. Shining light on the alphaproteobacterial general stress response: Comment on: Fiebig et al., Mol Microbiol, 2019. Mol Microbiol. 2019;112(2):438-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/mmi.14311 
    40. Kim HS, Caswell CC, Foreman R, Roop RM, Crosson S. The Brucella abortus general stress response system regulates chronic mammalian infection and is controlled by phosphorylation and proteolysis. J Biol Chem. 2013;288(19):13906-16. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.m113.459305 
    41. Ekaza E, Teyssier J, Ouahrani-Bettache S, Liautard JP, Köhler S. Characterization of Brucella suis clpB and clpAB mutants and participation of the genes in stress responses. J Bacteriol. 2001;183(8):2677-81. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.183.8.2677-2681.2001 
    42. Macedo GC, Magnani DM, Carvalho NB, Bruna-Romero O, Gazzinelli RT, Oliveira SC. Central role of MyD88-dependent dendritic cell maturation and proinflammatory cytokine production to control Brucella abortus infection. J Immunol. 2008;180(2):1080-7. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.180.2.1080
    43. Hu X, Liang Y, Zhao B, Wang Y. Thymoquinone protects human retinal pigment epithelial cells against hydrogen peroxide induced oxidative stress and apoptosis. J Cell  2019;120(3):4514-22.
    44. Shao YY, Li B, Huang YM, Luo Q, Xie YM, Chen YH. Thymoquinone attenuates brain injury via an antioxidative pathway in a status epilepticus rat model. Transl Neurosci. 2017;8(1):9-14. https://doi.org/10.1515/tnsci-2017-0003 
    45. Han F, Hui Z, Zhang S, Hou N, Wang Y, Sun X. Induction of haemeoxygenase-1 improves FFA-induced endothelial dysfunction in rat aorta. Cell Physiol Biochem. 2015;35(3):1230-40. https://doi.org/10.1159/000373946 
    46. Piao CH, Fan YJ, Nguyen TV, Song CH, Chai OH. Mangiferin alleviates ovalbumin-induced allergic rhinitis via Nrf2/HO-1/NF-κB signaling pathways. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(10):3415. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21103415 
    47. Wang R, Wu Y, Jiang S. FOXC2 Alleviates Myocardial Ischemia‐Reperfusion Injury in Rats through Regulating Nrf2/HO‐1 Signaling Pathway. Dis Markers. 2021;2021(1):9628521. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9628521 
    48. Jiang Y, Liu Y, Xiao W, Zhang D, Liu X, Xiao H, et al. Xinmailong Attenuates Doxorubicin‐Induced Lysosomal Dysfunction and Oxidative Stress in H9c2 Cells via HO‐ Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2021;2021(1):5896931. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5896931 
    49. Li S, Wang W, Niu T, Wang H, Li B, Shao L, et al. Nrf2 deficiency exaggerates doxorubicin‐induced cardiotoxicity and cardiac dysfunction. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2014;2014(1):748524. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/748524 
    50. Chen MC, Ye YY, Ji G, Liu JW. Hesperidin upregulates heme oxygenase-1 to attenuate hydrogen peroxide-induced cell damage in hepatic L02 cells. J Agric Food Chem. 2010;58(6):3330-5. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf904549s 
    51. Bessa SS, Mohamed Ali EM, Abd El-Wahab Ael-S, Nor El-Din SA. Heme oxygenase-1 mRNA expression in egyptian patients with chronic liver disease. Hepat Mon. 2012;12(4):278. https://doi.org/10.5812/hepatmon.846 
    52. Li T, Chen B, Du M, Song J, Cheng X, Wang X, et al. Casein glycomacropeptide hydrolysates exert cytoprotective effect against cellular oxidative stress by up-regulating HO-1 expression in HepG2 cells. Nutrients. 2017;9(1):31. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9010031 
    53. Lee SE, Yang H, Son GW, Park HR, Park CS, Jin YH, et al. Eriodictyol protects endothelial cells against oxidative stress-induced cell death through modulating ERK/Nrf2/ARE-dependent heme oxygenase-1 expression. Int J Mol Sci. 2015;16(7):14526-39. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms160714526 
    54. Hu H, Tian M, Yin Y, Zuo D, Guan X, Ding C, et al. Brucella induces heme oxygenase‐1 expression to promote its infection. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2022;69(5):2697-711. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.14422 
    55. Zhang A, Wan B, Jiang D, Wu Y, Ji P, Du Y, et al. The cytoprotective enzyme heme oxygenase-1 suppresses pseudorabies virus replication in vitro. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:412. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.00412 
    56. Mihić D, Loinjak D, Maričić L, Smolić R, Šahinović I, Steiner K, et al. The Relationship between Nrf2 and HO-1 with the Severity of COVID-19 Disease. Medicina. 2022;58(11):1658. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina58111658 
    57. de Lima F, Moraes CRP, Barbosa MS, Bombassaro B, Palma AC, Dertkigil SSJ, et al. Association of heme-oxygenase 1, hemopexin, and heme levels with markers of disease severity in COVID-19. Exp Biol Med. 2023;248(4):309-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/15353702221139185 
    58. Rossi M, Piagnerelli M, Van Meerhaeghe A, Boudjeltia KZ. Heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) cytoprotective pathway: A potential treatment strategy against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-induced cytokine storm syndrome. Med Hypotheses. 2020;144:110242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2020.110242 
    59. Hara Y, Tsukiji J, Yabe A, Onishi Y, Hirose H, Yamamoto M, et al. Heme oxygenase-1 as an important predictor of the severity of COVID-19. PLoS One. 2022;17(8):e0273500. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273500
    60. Tachibana M, Hashino M, Nishida T, Shimizu T, Watarai M. Protective role of heme oxygenase-1 in Listeria monocytogenes-induced abortion. PLoS One. 2011;6(9):e25046. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025046 
    61. Brück J, Holstein J, Glocova I, Seidel U, Geisel J, Kanno T, et al. Nutritional control of IL-23/Th17-mediated autoimmune disease through HO-1/STAT3 activation. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):44482. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44482 
    62. Gremmels H, De Jong OG, Hazenbrink DH, Fledderus JO, Verhaar MC. The transcription factor Nrf2 protects angiogenic capacity of endothelial colony‐forming cells in high‐oxygen radical stress conditions. Stem Cells Int. 2017;2017(1):4680612. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/4680612 
    63. Freigang S, Ampenberger F, Spohn G, Heer S, Shamshiev AT, Kisielow J, et al. Nrf2 is essential for cholesterol crystal‐induced inflammasome activation and exacerbation of atherosclerosis. Eur J Immunol. 2011;41(7):2040-51. https://doi.org/10.1002/eji.201041316 
    64. Ungvari Z, Bailey-Downs L, Sosnowska D, Gautam T, Koncz P, Losonczy G, et al. Vascular oxidative stress in aging: a homeostatic failure due to dysregulation of NRF2-mediated antioxidant response. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2011;301(2):H363-H72. https://doi.org/10.1096/fasebj.25.1_supplement.1093.10 
    65. Onyiah JC, Sheikh SZ, Maharshak N, Steinbach EC, Russo SM, Kobayashi T, et al. Carbon monoxide and heme oxygenase-1 prevent intestinal inflammation in mice by promoting bacterial clearance. Gastroenterology. 2013;144(4):789-98. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2012.12.025 
    66. Wang Z, Sun D, Chen G, Li G, Dou S, Wang R, et al. Tim-3 inhibits macrophage control of Listeria monocytogenes by inhibiting Nrf2. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):42095. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep42095 
    67. Hashino M, Tachibana M, Nishida T, Hara H, Tsuchiya K, Mitsuyama M, et al. Inactivation of the MAPK signaling pathway by Listeria monocytogenes infection promotes trophoblast giant cell death. Front Microbiol. 2015;6:1145. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2015.01145 
    68. Chen X, Zhang Y, Wang W, Liu Z, Meng J, Han Z. Mesenchymal stem cells modified with heme oxygenase-1 have enhanced paracrine function and attenuate lipopolysaccharide-induced inflammatory and oxidative damage in pulmonary microvascular endothelial cells. Cell Physiol Biochem. 2018;49(1):101-22. https://doi.org/10.1159/000492847 
    69. Zhu X, Guo F, Tang H, Huang C, Xie G, Huang T, et al. Islet Transplantation Attenuating Testicular Injury in Type 1 Diabetic Rats Is Associated with Suppression of Oxidative Stress and Inflammation via Nrf‐2/HO‐1 and NF‐κB Pathways. J Diabetes Res. 2019;2019(1):8712492. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8712492 
    70. Cao S, Du J, Hei Q. Lycium barbarum polysaccharide protects against neurotoxicity via the Nrf2‑HO‑1 pathway. Exp Ther Med. 2017;14(5):4919-27. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2017.5127 
    71. Kim HJ, Zheng M, Kim SK, Cho JJ, Shin CH, Joe Y, et al. CO/HO-1 induces NQO-1 expression via Nrf2 activation. Immune Netw. 2011;11(6):376-82. https://doi.org/10.4110/in.2011.11.6.376 
    72. Smith JA, Khan M, Magnani DD, Harms JS, Durward M, Radhakrishnan GK, et al. Brucella induces an unfolded protein response via TcpB that supports intracellular replication in macrophages. PLoS pathog. 2013;9(12):e1003785. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1003785 
    73. Ye F, Li X, Li L, Yuan J, Chen J. t‐BHQ provides protection against lead neurotoxicity via Nrf2/HO-1 pathway. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2016;2016(1):2075915. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2075915 
    74. Bian H, Wang G, Huang J, Liang L, Zheng Y, Wei Y, et al. Dihydrolipoic acid protects against lipopolysaccharide-induced behavioral deficits and neuroinflammation via regulation of Nrf2/HO-1/NLRP3 signaling in rat. J Neuroinflammation. 2020;17:1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-020-01836-y 
    75. Li ZQ, Gui D, Sun ZH, Zhang JB, Zhang WZ, Zhang H, et al. Immunization of BALB/c mice with Brucella abortus 2308Δ wbkA confers protection against wild-type infection. J Vet Sci. 2015;16(4):467-73. https://doi.org/10.4142/jvs.2015.16.4.467 
    76. Karaagac L, Koruk ST, Koruk I, Aksoy N. Decreasing oxidative stress in response to treatment in patients with brucellosis: could it be used to monitor treatment? Int J Infect Dis 2011;15(5):e346-e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2011.01.009 
    77. Kolgelier S, Ergin M, Demir LS, Inkaya AC, Demir NA, Alisik M, et al. Impaired thiol-disulfide balance in acute brucellosis. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2017;70(3):258-62. https://doi.org/10.7883/yoken.jjid.2016.196 
    78. Merhan O, Bozukluhan K, Mushap K, Büyük F, Özden Ö, Kükürt A. Investigation of oxidative stress index and lipid profile in cattle with Brucellosis. KafkasUniv Vet Fak Derg. 2017;23(6). https://doi.org/10.9775/kvfd.2017.18004 

     

     

     

     



     

     

Journal of Zoonotic Diseases

Articles in Press, Corrected Proof
Available Online from 10 May 2025
Files
History
  • Receive Date: 15 January 2025
  • Revise Date: 01 March 2025
  • Accept Date: 08 May 2025
  • First Publish Date: 10 May 2025
Share
How to cite
Statistics