Journal of Immunology Research

Journal of Immunology Research / 2017 / Article
Special Issue

Neutrophils: Their Role in Innate and Adaptive Immunity 2017

View this Special Issue

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2017 |Article ID 2896380 |

Balázs Rada, "Neutrophil Extracellular Traps and Microcrystals", Journal of Immunology Research, vol. 2017, Article ID 2896380, 7 pages, 2017.

Neutrophil Extracellular Traps and Microcrystals

Academic Editor: Michael Schnoor
Received15 Dec 2016
Accepted15 Feb 2017
Published07 Mar 2017


Neutrophil extracellular traps represent a fascinating mechanism by which PMNs entrap extracellular microbes. The primary purpose of this innate immune mechanism is thought to localize the infection at an early stage. Interestingly, the ability of different microcrystals to induce NET formation has been recently described. Microcrystals are insoluble crystals with a size of 1–100 micrometers that have different composition and shape. Microcrystals have it in common that they irritate phagocytes including PMNs and typically trigger an inflammatory response. This review is the first to summarize observations with regard to PMN activation and NET release induced by microcrystals. Gout-causing monosodium urate crystals, pseudogout-causing calcium pyrophosphate dehydrate crystals, cholesterol crystals associated with atherosclerosis, silicosis-causing silica crystals, and adjuvant alum crystals are discussed.

1. Neutrophil Extracellular Traps

NET formation is a breathtaking mechanism by which neutrophil granulocytes (PMNs) trap extracellular pathogens (Figure 1) [1]. This innate immune mechanism involves remarkable cellular and molecular changes in PMNs. The membranes of granules and the nucleus dissolve, and the cytosolic and nuclear contents fuse [2]. The tightly packed, multilobulated nucleus of stimulated PMNs decondenses and will be released in the extracellular space (Figure 1) [1, 2]. The released DNA is associated with a variety of proteins, mainly histones and primary granule components. In fact, protein-DNA complexes have been used to define NET-derived extracellular DNA (ecDNA) and to distinguish it from DNA released from PMNs by other mechanisms [3, 4]. In addition to PMNs, eosinophil granulocytes, mast cells, and macrophages have also been shown to release extracellular traps, and ET formation has been documented in several species including humans [57]. Although the signaling steps in PMNs leading to NET formation remain largely unknown, a few steps are accepted. The NADPH oxidase was identified first as an enzyme essential for the extrusion of NETs [2]. Later on, the critical contributions of myeloperoxidase and neutrophil elastase were also revealed [8, 9]. A milestone in the process of understanding the mechanism of NET formation was the discovery that citrullination of histones by peptidylarginine deiminase 4 (PAD4) is also crucial [1012]. Although these molecules are important in mediating NET formation, more recent results indicate that their contribution to the process is likely stimulus-, species-, and context-dependent [1316]. These observations are also in line with the notion that the complicated process of NET formation is unlikely mediated by a single signaling pathway but rather by a complex network of molecular and cellular events. A wide range of stimuli has been described that stimulate NET release in PMNs including whole microbes (bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites), soluble molecules (microbial and host), and microcrystals of different origin [17, 18]. Trapping microorganisms is definitely a major function of NETs but might not be the only one. Considering the variety of agents triggering NETs under sterile inflammatory conditions including microcrystals discussed here, it is likely that NETs play a main role in the general inflammatory cascade, no matter what the stimulus. A novel role for NETs in limiting inflammation has already been proposed in gout, for instance [19]. Future research needs to clarify their exact physiological role, mechanism, and regulation. Microcrystals represent a unique set of NET-inducing stimuli (Figure 1) since they are particulate, can be phagocytosed, and form under different pathological conditions. In this review current knowledge on microcrystal-induced formation of NETs is summarized.

2. Monosodium Urate Crystals (MSU)

MSU crystals are the causative agents of the autoinflammatory condition, gout [21]. MSU crystals are negatively birefringent, needle-shaped, and generally 5–25 μm (sometimes 100 μm) in length [22, 23]. Uric acid is a degradation product of nucleic acid metabolism and crystallizes in the joints of gout patients in the form of needle-shaped crystals [21]. MSU crystals irritate the innate immune system including macrophages and PMNs leading to acute, painful attacks and chronic joint destruction [21, 24]. MSU crystal-induced PMN activation is a critical step in this inflammatory cascade and understanding its mechanism is crucial to developing novel anti-inflammatory therapies for gout.

PMNs attempt to phagocytose MSU crystals and produce reactive oxygen species (ROS) by the NADPH oxidase in response to them [3335]. The first observation that MSU crystals induce NET release in PMNs was made by Mitroulis et al. showing that autophagy, PI3K signaling, and endosomal acidification are required for NET formation by MSU crystals [25]. The authors also described that gout synovial cells and peripheral PMNs of gout patients spontaneously release NETs, and gout synovial fluid and gout serum promote NET formation of PMNs obtained from healthy volunteers [25]. This observation was further expanded by Schorn et al. reporting that histones colocalize with DNA in MSU crystal-elicited NETs, and not only PMNs, but also basophil and eosinophil granulocytes also release NETs in response to MSU crystals [7]. They proposed that NETs immobilize the crystals, similarly how NETs would entrap bacteria [26]. The biological relevance of this finding was characterized in the landmark paper written by Schauer et al. suggesting that MSU crystal-induced formation of aggregated NETs (aggNETs) limits inflammation [19]. The high concentration of PMN proteases found in aggNETs was proposed to degrade several proinflammatory cytokines and put an end to recruitment of new leukocytes [19]. The authors showed that aggNETs formed in vitro and in vivo strongly reduced the amount of detectable proinflammatory cytokines [19]. They also found that mice deficient in the NADPH oxidase and incapable of making NETs developed an exacerbated, prolonged, chronic inflammation in contrast to control mice with normal NET-forming ability that had a restricted inflammatory response [19]. This phenomenon could be reversed by adoptively transferring aggNETs into NETosis-deficient mice [19].

Based on this study, the following role of NETs in gout pathogenesis has been proposed (Figure 2) [36]. First, PMNs recruited in large numbers to the joints of gout patients following inflammasome activation encounter MSU crystals (Figure 2) [36]. Activation of PMNs is accompanied with inflammation-associated pain in acute gout [36]. Whether NETs contribute to this phase of gout attack remains to be elucidated but is likely since by forming NETs PMNs also release their dangerous granule content. Second, at high PMN densities present at later stages of acute attacks, NETs form aggNETs that degrade proinflammatory cytokines and densely pack crystals to stop inflammation (Figure 2) [36]. AggNETs were proposed to form the basis for gouty tophi [19], a long-described white material that typically appears at the end of acute attacks and is characteristic for the chronic phase of gout (Figure 2) [19, 37]. Overall, aggNET formation was proposed to stop the acute inflammatory response at the expense of forming tophi that have been associated with symptoms of chronic gout [19, 36]. Recently, some of these data have been challenged [38]. Future studies are required to work out all the details of this mechanism [39]. Whether the general PMN-mediated inflammatory cascade has a built-in breaking mechanism identical or similar to the one described in gout remains an exciting, open question.

Despite its proposed novel role in gout pathogenesis, less is known about the cellular and molecular mechanism and regulation of MSU crystal-elicited NET formation. The requirement of a functional NADPH oxidase for MSU crystal-evoked NET release has been shown [19]. PMNs of patients suffering from chronic granulomatous disease (CGD) are unable to release NETs in response to PMA, bacteria [2], and MSU crystals [19]. NADPH oxidase deficient murine PMNs stimulated with MSU crystals do not release NETs and aggNETs, neither in vitro, nor in vivo [19]. Interestingly, soluble uric acid, not its crystallized form, stimulates NET release in an NADPH oxidase-independent manner [40]. These results indicate that NET release in gout must be complex, and multiple mechanisms could be responsible for mediating it. Authophagy has also been proposed to mediate NET formation induced by MSU crystals and other stimuli [25, 41, 42]. In a study by Desai et al. the involvement of RIPK1-RIPK3-MLKL signaling has been proposed in MSU crystal- and PMA-induced NET formation suggesting that NETosis is actually a PMN-specific necroptotic pathway [27]. This has been challenged by Amini et al. showing that NET release can occur independently of RIP3K and MLKL signaling, in response to PMA at least [43]. Thus, the relationship between NET formation and PMN necroptosis remains to be studied in more detail. In a recent study performed by Sil et al., we found that PMNs need to attempt to phagocytose MSU crystals in order to perform subsequent NET release and to form aggNETs [23]. PMNs do not really phagocytose MSU crystals since most of the crystals are far longer than PMNs themselves [23]. Our data indicated that only a small fraction of PMNs engaged in attempting MSU crystal phagocytosis but NET-releasing PMNs were all associated with MSU crystals [23]. This let us conclude that MSU crystal phagocytosis is a prerequisite for NET formation [23]. We proposed the involvement of the purinergic P2Y6 receptor in this mechanism based on a strong reduction of MSU crystal-induced NET release by general purinergic receptor inhibitors and the P2Y6-specific inhibitor MRS2578 [23]. Interestingly, exonucleotides alone failed to induce NET release in human PMNs [23]. On the other hand, MRS2578 reduced MSU crystal-stimulated ROS production, cytokine release, and PMN migration suggesting the involvement of these steps in MSU crystal-promoted NET extrusion [23]. In a separate study we revealed that interleukin-1β (IL-1β) derived from macrophages enhances NET release triggered by MSU crystals [28]. IL-1β promotes NET formation but NETs degrade cytokines including IL-1β; what could be the relevance of these two, opposite mechanisms in vivo in acute gout? They are most likely separated in time during the inflammatory process. While, at the early stage of gout flares, IL-1β drives inflammation, PMN recruitment and activation (proinflammatory segment), NETs become important later when sufficient levels accumulated capable of aggNET formation and cytokine degradation (anti-inflammatory phase). The details of this complex in vivo mechanism are, however, not well-understood. We and others also showed that anakinra, a potent IL-1 receptor antagonist, and antibodies neutralizing IL-1β inhibit the NETosis-enhancing effect of macrophages and gout synovial fluid [25, 28]. These results add a novel mechanism by which anakinra works and describe IL-1β as a potentiator of NET formation linking two significant arms of the inflammatory cascade in gout, inflammasome activation in macrophages, and NET formation in PMNs. A recent work by Pieterse et al. emphasized the critical role of phagocytes engulfing small urate microaggregates (SMA) in hyperuricemic blood [44]. These SMAs form first before they grow into long, needle-shaped MSU crystals that are known to trigger NET release [44]. Phagocytes take up SMAs and prevent the formation of MSU crystals and NETs in the circulation [44].

3. Calcium Pyrophosphate Dehydrate Crystals (CPPD)

Pseudogout is a condition similar to gout also characterized by periodic acute joint attacks that potentially turn into a chronic disease. Pseudogout is, however, caused by a different inflammatory microcrystal, calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate (CPPD) crystals [45]. CPPD crystals are typically shorter than MSU crystals and have a more rhomboid shape in contrast to the needle-like form of MSU crystals [29]. The pathomechanism of pseudogout is less studied than that of gout but PMN accumulation and its coincidence with painful attacks are also characteristic [46]. In a paper by Pang et al. we described robust in vitro NET formation of human PMNs in response to CPPD crystals [29]. CPPD crystals represent a much stronger NET-inducing signal for PMNs than MSU crystals [23, 28, 29]. We found that PMNs phagocytose CPPD crystals that is also a requirement for CPPD crystal-triggered NET release [29]. PMN nuclei underwent the same, characteristic morphological changes following CPPD crystal stimulation [29] as after PMA challenge [47]. The nucleus of PMNs undergoing NET formation first loses its segmented nature and lobi [1, 2, 29, 47]. Next, the nuclear material decondenses leading to the appearance of diffuse NETs followed by the formation of full-blown spread NETs [29, 47]. NADPH oxidase activity was not needed for CPPD crystal-elicited extrusion of NETs (Table 1) while it has been reported to be essential for MSU crystal-stimulated NET formation [19]. The NET-inducing ability of CPPD crystals required the activity of the heat shock protein 90, PI3K, and CXCR2 [29]. These results indicate that while both crystals induce NET release in human PMNs, different signaling pathways might be responsible for mediating the process.

Crystal nameClinical relevanceRequirement of the followingReferences

Monosodium urate (MSU)GoutYes??No[7, 19, 23, 2528]
Calcium pyrophosphate dehydrate crystals (CPPD)PseudogoutNo???[29]
Cholesterol crystalsAtherosclerosisYesNo?Yes[30]
Silica crystalsSilicosis????[31]
PMA (in comparison)Yes?YesYes[2, 9, 32]

4. Alum

Alum is the most successful vaccine adjuvant used in the history of human medicine [48]; its exact mechanism of action remains, however, largely unknown to this day. Alum is composed of microcrystals and is thought primarily to enhance the efficacy of vaccines by increasing antigen phagocytosis by antigen presenting cells and by serving as an antigen depot [49]. Although PMNs are not the first cell type that comes to our mind when thinking of the mechanism of action of adjuvants, recent publications suggest that PMNs could play an important role in mediating or fine-tuning the immune response in the presence of adjuvants [5052]. PMNs are rapidly recruited to the site of vaccination in large numbers; therefore, studying their interaction with adjuvants is clinically relevant since they could significantly alter the immune response at this early stage. PMNs have already been shown to release fibrin-like extracellular traps in the presence of aluminium adjuvants in vivo in mice [53]. No study has been performed though on how human PMNs interact with alum crystals in vitro. We therefore isolated human PMNs from the peripheral blood of healthy volunteers according to previously described protocols [20, 29] and stimulated them with aluminium adjuvant (Alhydrogel, InvivoGen) to detect extracellular DNA release using the DNA-binding, membrane-impermeable dye, Sytox Orange [4]. As our previously unpublished data show in Figure 3, PMNs responded to increasing concentrations of Alhydrogel with extracellular DNA release. This alum-induced DNA release was independent of reactive oxygen species production since the NADPH oxidase inhibitor diphenyleneiodonium (DPI) was without any effect (Figure 3). These data suggest that PMNs release their DNA upon alum crystal exposure. Future experiments are required to reveal the exact nature of this cell death mechanism.

5. Cholesterol Crystals

The important role of IL-1β in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis has been well known but the mechanism by which macrophages release this cytokine remained poorly understood. Warnatsch et al. demonstrated recently that PMNs and NETs are crucial for both priming and stimulating macrophages to secrete IL-1β that will recruit additional PMNs to the atherosclerotic lesions [30]. PMNs have been previously implicated in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis but their exact role has been unclear [54, 55]. These researchers showed that cholesterol crystals induce NET release in vitro in human PMNs in a concentration range that also activates the inflammasome [30]. Cholesterol crystals stimulated ROS production in PMNs and NET formation was blocked by the NADPH oxidase inhibitor DPI (Table 1) [30]. Neutrophil elastase translocated to the nucleus during cholesterol crystal-triggered NET formation but the PAD4 inhibitor Cl-amidine was without any effect [30]. NETs were also detected in vivo in lesions but were entirely absent in ApoE/PR3/NE-deficient mice lacking apolipoprotein E, neutrophil elastase, and proteinase 3 [30]. NET-deficient animals on high fat diet exhibited a reduced lesion size after 8 weeks proposing that NETs promote lesion formation in atherosclerosis [30]. NETs were required for enhanced cytokine production by macrophages in presence of cholesterol crystals that activated Th17 cells and amplified leukocyte recruitment [30]. The authors concluded that danger signals fuel sterile inflammation in atherosclerosis via PMNs [30].

6. Silica Crystals

Chronic exposure to silica crystals leads to pulmonary silicosis or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and also relates to vasculitis or chronic renal failure [56, 57]. Silica crystals activate the inflammasome and can be phagocytosed by immune cells including PMNs [58]. NETs have also been associated with glomerulonephritis and small vessel vasculitis as the source of antineutrophilic cytoplasmic antibodies [59, 60]. Although silica crystal stimulation of murine PMNs leads to ROS release, the in vivo relevance of this finding has not been established yet [61]. Brinkmann et al. described extracellular DNA release in human PMNs challenged with different doses of silica crystals suggesting that silica crystal-promoted NETs could play an important role in the establishment of lung disease [31]. PMNs are known to be recruited in large numbers to the lungs in silicosis animal models and human patients [6264]. While silica crystal-stimulated DNA release from PMNs was comparable to that induced by MSU crystals [31], eosinophils did not release ETs in the presence of silica crystals [7].

7. Conclusion

Despite their different origin and structure, microcrystals activate PMNs leading to an inflammatory response. PMNs attempt to engulf microcrystals that is required for launching their effector responses including ROS production and NET release. Although a young and specific field, PMN-microcrystal interactions are clinically relevant to study due to their involvement in diverse biological processes ranging from disease pathologies of sterile autoinflammatory and infectious diseases to vaccination.

Competing Interests

The author has no conflict of interests to report.


  1. V. Brinkmann, U. Reichard, C. Goosmann et al., “Neutrophil extracellular traps kill bacteria,” Science, vol. 303, no. 5663, pp. 1532–1535, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. T. A. Fuchs, U. Abed, C. Goosmann et al., “Novel cell death program leads to neutrophil extracellular traps,” Journal of Cell Biology, vol. 176, no. 2, pp. 231–241, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. D.-G. Yoo, M. Floyd, M. Winn, S. M. Moskowitz, and B. Rada, “NET formation induced by Pseudomonas aeruginosa cystic fibrosis isolates measured as release of myeloperoxidase-DNA and neutrophil elastase-DNA complexes,” Immunology Letters, vol. 160, no. 2, pp. 186–194, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. P. Sil, D.-G. Yoo, M. Floyd, A. Gingerich, and B. Rada, “High throughput measurement of extracellular DNA release and quantitative NET formation in human neutrophils in vitro,” Journal of Visualized Experiments, vol. 2016, no. 112, Article ID e52779, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. M. von Köckritz-Blickwede and V. Nizet, “Innate immunity turned inside-out: antimicrobial defense by phagocyte extracellular traps,” Journal of Molecular Medicine, vol. 87, no. 8, pp. 775–783, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. M. Von Köckritz-Blickwede, O. Goldmann, P. Thulin et al., “Phagocytosis-independent antimicrobial activity of mast cells by means of extracellular trap formation,” Blood, vol. 111, no. 6, pp. 3070–3080, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. C. Schorn, C. Janko, M. Latzko, R. Chaurio, G. Schett, and M. Herrmann, “Monosodium urate crystals induce extracellular DNA traps in neutrophils, eosinophils, and basophils but not in mononuclear cells,” Frontiers in Immunology, vol. 3, article no. 277, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. K. D. Metzler, C. Goosmann, A. Lubojemska, A. Zychlinsky, and V. Papayannopoulos, “Myeloperoxidase-containing complex regulates neutrophil elastase release and actin dynamics during NETosis,” Cell Reports, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 883–896, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. V. Papayannopoulos, K. D. Metzler, A. Hakkim, and A. Zychlinsky, “Neutrophil elastase and myeloperoxidase regulate the formation of neutrophil extracellular traps,” Journal of Cell Biology, vol. 191, no. 3, pp. 677–691, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. Y. Wang, M. Li, S. Stadler et al., “Histone hypercitrullination mediates chromatin decondensation and neutrophil extracellular trap formation,” Journal of Cell Biology, vol. 184, no. 2, pp. 205–213, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. P. Li, M. Li, M. R. Lindberg, M. J. Kennett, N. Xiong, and Y. Wang, “PAD4 is essential for antibacterial innate immunity mediated by neutrophil extracellular traps,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 207, no. 9, pp. 1853–1862, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. M. Leshner, S. Wang, C. Lewis et al., “PAD4 mediated histone hypercitrullination induces heterochromatin decondensation and chromatin unfolding to form neutrophil extracellular trap-like structures,” Frontiers in Immunology, vol. 3, article 307, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. K. Martinod, M. Demers, T. A. Fuchs et al., “Neutrophil histone modification by peptidylarginine deiminase 4 is critical for deep vein thrombosis in mice,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 110, no. 21, pp. 8674–8679, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. H. Parker, M. Dragunow, M. B. Hampton, A. J. Kettle, and C. C. Winterbourn, “Requirements for NADPH oxidase and myeloperoxidase in neutrophil extracellular trap formation differ depending on the stimulus,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 841–849, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. H. Parker and C. C. Winterbourn, “Reactive oxidants and myeloperoxidase and their involvement in neutrophil extracellular traps,” Frontiers in Immunology, vol. 3, article 424, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. D. N. Douda, M. A. Khan, H. Grasemann, and N. Palaniyar, “SK3 channel and mitochondrial ROS mediate NADPH oxidase-independent NETosis induced by calcium influx,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 112, no. 9, pp. 2817–2822, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. O. E. Sørensen and N. Borregaard, “Neutrophil extracellular traps—the dark side of neutrophils,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 126, no. 5, pp. 1612–1620, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. N. V. Vorobjeva and B. V. Pinegin, “Neutrophil extracellular traps: mechanisms of formation and role in health and disease,” Biochemistry (Moscow), vol. 79, no. 12, pp. 1286–1296, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. C. Schauer, C. Janko, L. E. Munoz et al., “Aggregated neutrophil extracellular traps limit inflammation by degrading cytokines and chemokines,” Nature medicine, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 511–517, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. D.-G. Yoo, M. Winn, L. Pang et al., “Release of cystic fibrosis airway inflammatory markers from pseudomonas aeruginosa-stimulated human neutrophils involves NADPH oxidase-dependent extracellular DNA trap formation,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 192, no. 10, pp. 4728–4738, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. C.-F. Kuo, M. J. Grainge, W. Zhang, and M. Doherty, “Global epidemiology of gout: prevalence, incidence and risk factors,” Nature Reviews Rheumatology, vol. 11, no. 11, pp. 649–662, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. A. K. Rosenthal and N. Mandel, “Identification of crystals in synovial fluids and joint tissues,” Current Rheumatology Reports, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 11–16, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. P. Sil, C. P. Hayes, B. J. Reaves et al., “P2Y6 receptor antagonist MRS2578 inhibits neutrophil activation and aggregated neutrophil extracellular trap formation induced by gout-associated monosodium urate crystals,” The Journal of Immunology, vol. 198, no. 1, pp. 428–442, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. F. Martinon, “Update on biology: uric acid and the activation of immune and inflammatory cells,” Current Rheumatology Reports, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 135–141, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. I. Mitroulis, K. Kambas, A. Chrysanthopoulou et al., “Neutrophil extracellular trap formation is associated with IL-1β and autophagy-related signaling in gout,” PLoS ONE, vol. 6, no. 12, Article ID e29318, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. C. Schorn, C. Janko, V. Krenn et al., “Bonding the foe—NETting neutrophils immobilize the pro-inflammatory monosodium urate crystals,” Frontiers in Immunology, vol. 3, article no. 376, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. J. Desai, S. V. Kumar, S. R. Mulay et al., “PMA and crystal-induced neutrophil extracellular trap formation involves RIPK1-RIPK3-MLKL signaling,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 223–229, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. P. Sil, H. Wicklum, C. Surell, and B. Rada, “Macrophage-derived IL-1β enhances monosodium urate crystal-triggered NET formation,” Inflammation Research, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 227–237, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. L. Pang, C. P. Hayes, K. Buac, D.-G. Yoo, and B. Rada, “Pseudogout-associated inflammatory calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate microcrystals induce formation of neutrophil extracellular traps,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 190, no. 12, pp. 6488–6500, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. A. Warnatsch, M. Ioannou, Q. Wang, and V. Papayannopoulos, “Neutrophil extracellular traps license macrophages for cytokine production in atherosclerosis,” Science, vol. 349, no. 6245, pp. 316–320, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. V. Brinkmann, C. Goosmann, L. I. Kühn, and A. Zychlinsky, “Automatic quantification of in vitro NET formation,” Frontiers in Immunology, vol. 3, article no. 413, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. K. D. Metzler, T. A. Fuchs, W. M. Nauseef et al., “Myeloperoxidase is required for neutrophil extracellular trap formation: implications for innate immunity,” Blood, vol. 117, no. 3, pp. 953–959, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. M. Gaudry, C. J. Roberge, R. De Medicis, A. Lussier, P. E. Poubelle, and P. H. Naccache, “Crystal-induced neutrophil activation. III. Inflammatory microcrystals induce a distinct pattern of tyrosine phosphorylation in human neutrophils,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 1649–1655, 1993. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. P. H. Naccache, S. Bourgoin, E. Plante et al., “Crystal-induced neutrophil activation. II. Evidence for the activation of a phosphatidylcholine-specific phospholipase D,” Arthritis and Rheumatism, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 117–125, 1993. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. S. Abramson, S. T. Hoffstein, and G. Weissmann, “Superoxide anion generation by human neutrophils exposed to monosodium urate. Effect of protein adsorption and complement activation,” Arthritis and Rheumatism, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 174–180, 1982. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. C. Maueröder, D. Kienhöfer, J. Hahn et al., “How neutrophil extracellular traps orchestrate the local immune response in gout,” Journal of Molecular Medicine, vol. 93, no. 7, pp. 727–734, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. A. Chhana and N. Dalbeth, “The gouty tophus: a review,” Current Rheumatology Reports, vol. 17, no. 3, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. L. L. Reber, N. Gaudenzio, P. Starkl, and S. J. Galli, “Neutrophils are not required for resolution of acute gouty arthritis in mice,” Nature Medicine, vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 1382–1384, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. C. Reinwald, C. Schauer, J. Z. Csepregi et al., “Reply to ‘Neutrophils are not required for resolution of acute gouty arthritis in mice’,” Nature Medicine, vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 1384–1386, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  40. Y. Arai, Y. Nishinaka, T. Arai et al., “Uric acid induces NADPH oxidase-independent neutrophil extracellular trap formation,” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, vol. 443, no. 2, pp. 556–561, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. Q. Remijsen, T. Vanden Berghe, E. Wirawan et al., “Neutrophil extracellular trap cell death requires both autophagy and superoxide generation,” Cell Research, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 290–304, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. A. Sharma, T. J. Simonson, C. N. Jondle, B. B. Mishra, and J. Sharma, “Mincle regulates autophagy to control neutrophil extracellular trap formation,” The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  43. P. Amini, D. Stojkov, X. Wang et al., “NET formation can occur independently of RIPK3 and MLKL signaling,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 178–184, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. E. Pieterse, I. Jeremic, C. Czegley et al., “Blood-borne phagocytes internalize urate microaggregates and prevent intravascular NETosis by urate crystals,” Scientific Reports, vol. 6, p. 38229, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  45. R. Liu-Bryan and F. Lioté, “Monosodium urate and calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate (CPPD) crystals, inflammation, and cellular signaling,” Joint Bone Spine, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 295–302, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  46. N. Busso and H.-K. Ea, “The mechanisms of inflammation in gout and pseudogout (CPP-induced arthritis),” Reumatismo, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 230–237, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  47. A. Hakkim, T. A. Fuchs, N. E. Martinez et al., “Activation of the Raf-MEK-ERK pathway is required for neutrophil extracellular trap formation,” Nature Chemical Biology, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 75–77, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  48. C. Exley, P. Siesjö, and H. Eriksson, “The immunobiology of aluminium adjuvants: how do they really work?” Trends in Immunology, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 103–109, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  49. B. N. Lambrecht, M. Kool, M. A. Willart, and H. Hammad, “Mechanism of action of clinically approved adjuvants,” Current Opinion in Immunology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 23–29, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  50. C.-W. Yang, B. S. I. Strong, M. J. Miller, and E. R. Unanue, “Neutrophils influence the level of antigen presentation during the immune response to protein antigens in adjuvants,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 185, no. 5, pp. 2927–2934, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  51. E. Oleszycka, H. B. T. Moran, G. A. Tynan et al., “IL-1α and inflammasome-independent IL-1β promote neutrophil infiltration following alum vaccination,” The FEBS Journal, vol. 283, no. 1, pp. 9–24, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  52. T. Nakayama, “An inflammatory response is essential for the development of adaptive immunity-immunogenicity and immunotoxicity,” Vaccine, vol. 34, no. 47, pp. 5815–5818, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  53. M. W. Munks, A. S. McKee, M. K. MacLeod et al., “Aluminum adjuvants elicit fibrin-dependent extracellular traps in vivo,” Blood, vol. 116, no. 24, pp. 5191–5199, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  54. M. Drechsler, R. T. A. Megens, M. van Zandvoort, C. Weber, and O. Soehnlein, “Hyperlipidemia-triggered neutrophilia promotes early atherosclerosis,” Circulation, vol. 122, no. 18, pp. 1837–1845, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  55. Y. Döring, M. Drechsler, S. Wantha et al., “Lack of neutrophil-derived CRAMP reduces atherosclerosis in mice,” Circulation Research, vol. 110, no. 8, pp. 1052–1056, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  56. J. W. Cohen Tervaert, C. A. Stegeman, and C. G. M. Kallenberg, “Silicon exposure and vasculitis,” Current Opinion in Rheumatology, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 12–17, 1998. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  57. E. Hnizdo and V. Vallyathan, “Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease due to occupational exposure to silica dust: a review of epidemiological and pathological evidence,” Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 237–243, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  58. C. Dostert, V. Pétrilli, R. Van Bruggen, C. Steele, B. T. Mossman, and J. Tschopp, “Innate immune activation through Nalp3 inflammasome sensing of asbestos and silica,” Science, vol. 320, no. 5876, pp. 674–677, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  59. K. Kessenbrock, M. Krumbholz, U. Schönermarck et al., “Netting neutrophils in autoimmune small-vessel vasculitis,” Nature Medicine, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 623–625, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  60. M. Yoshida, M. Sasaki, K. Sugisaki, Y. Yamaguchi, and M. Yamada, “Neutrophil extracellular trap components in fibrinoid necrosis of the kidney with myeloperoxidase-ANCA-associated vasculitis,” Clinical Kidney Journal, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 308–312, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  61. D. van Berlo, A. Wessels, A. W. Boots et al., “Neutrophil-derived ROS contribute to oxidative DNA damage induction by quartz particles,” Free Radical Biology and Medicine, vol. 49, no. 11, pp. 1685–1693, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  62. S. Lo Re, L. Dumoutier, I. Couillin et al., “IL-17A-producing γδ T and Th17 lymphocytes mediate lung inflammation but not fibrosis in experimental silicosis,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 184, no. 11, pp. 6367–6377, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  63. V. M. Borges, M. F. Lopes, H. Falcão et al., “Apoptosis underlies immunopathogenic mechanisms in acute silicosis,” American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 78–84, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  64. R. Zhai, X. Ge, H. Li, Z. Tang, R. Liao, and J. Kleinjans, “Differences in cellular and inflammatory cytokine profiles in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid in bagassosis and silicosis,” American Journal of Industrial Medicine, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 338–344, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2017 Balázs Rada. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Related articles

No related content is available yet for this article.
 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

No related content is available yet for this article.

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2021, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.