Research article Special Issues

A within-host model on the interaction dynamics between innate immune cells and Mycobacterium tuberculosis

  • Tuberculosis is the leading cause of death worldwide from a single infectious agent; it has also been declared a threat to humanity by the World Health Organization. New insights indicate that the innate immune response plays a crucial role in determining the outcome of the infection. In this study, we assessed the role of macrophages in the innate immune response through a simple mathematical model. Our results confirm that macrophages provide the primary protective response against Mycobacterium tuberculosis. However, they also highlight the importance of other innate cells in the outcome of infection. Specifically, our findings suggest that, in addition to macrophage activity, the involvement of other innate immune cells is essential for eliminating or controlling bacterial progression, ultimately leading to an adaptive immune response.

    Citation: Eduardo Ibargüen-Mondragón, M. Victoria Otero-Espinar, Miller Cerón Gómez. A within-host model on the interaction dynamics between innate immune cells and Mycobacterium tuberculosis[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2025, 22(3): 511-527. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2025019

    Related Papers:

    [1] Eduardo Ibarguen-Mondragon, Lourdes Esteva, Leslie Chávez-Galán . A mathematical model for cellular immunology of tuberculosis. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2011, 8(4): 973-986. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2011.8.973
    [2] Suman Ganguli, David Gammack, Denise E. Kirschner . A Metapopulation Model Of Granuloma Formation In The Lung During Infection With Mycobacterium Tuberculosis. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2005, 2(3): 535-560. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2005.2.535
    [3] Chang Gong, Jennifer J. Linderman, Denise Kirschner . A population model capturing dynamics of tuberculosis granulomas predicts host infection outcomes. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2015, 12(3): 625-642. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015.12.625
    [4] Tianqi Song, Chuncheng Wang, Boping Tian . Mathematical models for within-host competition of malaria parasites. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(6): 6623-6653. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019330
    [5] Ali Moussaoui, Vitaly Volpert . The impact of immune cell interactions on virus quasi-species formation. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(11): 7530-7553. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024331
    [6] Lingli Zhou, Fengqing Fu, Yao Wang, Ling Yang . Interlocked feedback loops balance the adaptive immune response. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(4): 4084-4100. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022188
    [7] Yilong Li, Shigui Ruan, Dongmei Xiao . The Within-Host dynamics of malaria infection with immune response. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2011, 8(4): 999-1018. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2011.8.999
    [8] Fabrizio Clarelli, Roberto Natalini . A pressure model of immune response to mycobacterium tuberculosis infection in several space dimensions. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2010, 7(2): 277-300. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2010.7.277
    [9] Jinhu Xu, Yicang Zhou . Bifurcation analysis of HIV-1 infection model with cell-to-cell transmission and immune response delay. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2016, 13(2): 343-367. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015006
    [10] Khalid Hattaf, Noura Yousfi . Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infection model with two modes of transmission and immune response. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(5): 5326-5340. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020288
  • Tuberculosis is the leading cause of death worldwide from a single infectious agent; it has also been declared a threat to humanity by the World Health Organization. New insights indicate that the innate immune response plays a crucial role in determining the outcome of the infection. In this study, we assessed the role of macrophages in the innate immune response through a simple mathematical model. Our results confirm that macrophages provide the primary protective response against Mycobacterium tuberculosis. However, they also highlight the importance of other innate cells in the outcome of infection. Specifically, our findings suggest that, in addition to macrophage activity, the involvement of other innate immune cells is essential for eliminating or controlling bacterial progression, ultimately leading to an adaptive immune response.



    Tuberculosis (TB) is an infectious disease caused by the Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb). It is both preventable and generally curable. However, in 2022, TB was the second leading cause of death worldwide due to a single infectious agent, following coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Current statistics are encouraging, showing a decline in the incidence, prevalence, and mortality rates over the years. Between 2015 and 2022, the incidence rate decreased by 8.9%, and TB-related deaths fell by 19% during the same period [1]. Despite these improvements, the situation remains concerning, with approximately a quarter of the world's population estimated to be infected with Mtb, and over 10 million people falling ill with TB each year [1].

    After an individual is infected with Mtb, the risk of developing TB disease is highest in the first 2 years (approximately 5%), after which it decreases. Without treatment, the mortality rate from TB is high (approximately 50%). With the treatments currently recommended by WHO (a 4- to 6-month course of anti-TB drugs), approximately 85% of people with TB can be cured [1]. The above allows us to assume that one in two sick people not treated with any medication overcomes the disease thanks to their immune system (a complex network of cells, tissues, organs, and substances they produce, which help the body fight infections and other diseases).

    Defense mechanisms against substances that are considered harmful or foreign are divided into innate immune response and acquired immune response. The role of adaptive or acquired immunity in controlling Mtb infection is well-studied, and the protective role of T and B lymphocytes in anti-tuberculosis immunity is widely recognized [2]. However, following exposure to Mtb, it typically takes 4 to 6 weeks for a human host, and 2 to 3 weeks for mice, to develop antigen-specific T-cell responses in the lymph nodes [3]. Therefore, the non-specific innate immune response plays a pivotal role in protecting the host before the onset of adaptive immunity and even leads to early clearance of bacteria [3].

    Innate immunity constitutes the first defense against harmful substances or antigens that try to enter the body, which also includes barriers such as the skin, mucous membranes, tears, and stomach acid [2,4]. In TB, the innate immune response is crucial in determining the course of infection. The processes of transmission, infection, and development of TB are well-defined [3].

    Transmission of Mtb begins when an infected individual expels microdroplets containing the infectious bacillus into the environment, which are then inhaled by an uninfected individual. Infectious bacilli can persist for up to 3 hours in closed, non-ventilated environments, and those that overcome the intrinsic barriers of the innate immune response (skin, mucous membranes, tears) enter the respiratory tract, which serves as a means of transport, generally to the pulmonary alveoli [3,5]. It is important to note that there are many cells of the innate immune system that participate in the response against TB; however, the precise mechanisms of TB immunopathology have not yet been fully understood [3].

    Once Mtb overcomes the first barriers, it encounters the alveolar epithelial cells (AEC), which are the first to interact with any pathogen that attempts to enter the respiratory tract. AECs are also known to be vital for host defenses against Mtb, and although knowledge about their immunopathological functions in TB has increased considerably, they are still not fully elucidated [3,6].

    In the alveoli, bacteria are detected, recognized, phagocytosed, and processed by antigen-presenting cells (APCs). The first line of defense against Mtb are alveolar macrophages (AM). Through the expression of several cell surface receptors, the macrophage recognizes, binds, and internalizes foreign particles, including Mtb. These cells phagocytose the Mtb by placing it inside a vacuole called a phagosome, which fuses with a bag of enzymes called a lysosome, giving rise to the phagolysosome [4].

    Through a complex process, the enzymes of the phagolysosome control or eliminate the bacteria and also generate a signaling cascade that involves the production of cytokines and chemokines. This stimulate the activation of the antimicrobial activities of the phagocytes and recruitment of other cells of the immune system to the site of infection. However, bacilli that are not destroyed manipulate phagosome maturation to prevent phagolysosome formation and evade their removal. Furthermore, the phagosome binds to other vesicles with nutrients necessary for its replication inside the AM, converting the infected macrophage into a niche for bacterial replication [7].

    In an attempt to deprive Mtb of its chosen cellular niche, macrophages infected with attenuated strains of Mtb can undergo apoptosis in a manner involving tumor necrosis factor-alpha, TNFα, (proinflammatory cytokine secreted in the immune system by monocytes and macrophages, T and B lymphocytes, NK cells, and polymorphonuclear leukocytes). This cell death process also results in reduced survival of mycobacteria and leads to the priming of Mtb-specific CD8 T-cells [8,9].

    Macrophage apoptosis may contribute to the innate immune response against this intracellular infection by containing and limiting the growth of bacilli, as has been observed for other infectious agents, and may therefore be part of a successful host defense mechanism [10]. On the other hand, TNF induces mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (ROS) to cause necrosis of Mtb-infected macrophages. Necrosis of infected macrophages constitutes a critical pathogenic event in TB by releasing mycobacteria into the extracellular environment, permissive for Mtb population growth [11].

    Neutrophils play a specific role of great clinical importance in TB, although controversial studies have established a close correlation between the development of TB and tissue infiltration by neutrophils. However, the functions of circulating neutrophils in the development of tuberculosis is largely unknown [11]. Through animal models and in vitro experiments with human cells, it has been suggested that endothelial cells (EC) also participate in the immunopathology of TB. In vitro studies have shown that human ECs succumb to Mtb infection, and can help in the dissemination of bacteria through the bloodstream and lymph [3]. Also, ECs produce ROS, nitrogen intermediates (RNI), and antimicrobial peptides such as defensins to control bacterial growth [3]. Similarly, it has been verified that other cells that also participate in the innate immune response are eosinophils, dendritic cells, inflammatory monocytes, natural killer cells, and innate lymphoid cells, among others [3,4].

    As observed, Mtb interacts with various innate immune cells, however the immunopathology arising from these interactions is not fully determined. In this regard, further research is needed to understand the immunopathology of TB. It is well documented that macrophages exert an important role in innate immune response against Mtb but they are also a niche for Mtb replication and propagation [6,7,12,13]. However, new studies have revealed that other cells such as dendritic cells, neutrophils and monocytes also play a key role in the immunopathology of TB [14,15].

    Mathematical models had been used to gain insights in within-host dynamics of TB, mainly, related to adaptive immunity [16,17,18,19]. Currently, it is known that the innate immune response is critical to the outcome of Mtb infection, since it can control bacterial progression or substantially influence the subsequent adaptive response of the host. In the literature, researchers have analyzed several aspects of the innate immune response against Mycobacterium tuberculosis throughout of mathematical modeling. In [20], the authors formulated and analyzed a model to describe the dynamics of innate immunology of macrophages against Mycobacterium tuberculosis. In [21], the authors formulated a system of ordinary differential equations that describes the interaction dynamics between Mtb, iron, lipids, and nitric oxide in the early phase of macrophage infection. They incorporated the bactericidal property of nitric oxide and the cellular regulation of iron and lipids to analyze the role they play in the outcome of infection. In [22], the authors developed a spatiotemporal model of the initial and innate response to tuberculosis. The model consists of coupled reaction-diffusion-advection equations governing the dynamics of macrophages (resting and infected), bacteria (extracellular and intracellular), and a chemokine released by the bacteria, each of which affects final granuloma size. The model describes the migration of uninfected macrophages to the site of infection (pulmonary alveoli) and their subsequent phagocytosis of bacteria. It aims to capture clearance by innate immunity or disease progression through granuloma growth. In [23], the early immune response to Mtb infection in the lungs was modeled by means of coupled reaction-diffusion-transport equations with chemotaxis. The results and conclusions are similar to those presented in [22]. Other computational approaches have also addressed the role of early innate immunity in TB [21,24,25,26].

    In this work, we are interested in evaluating and comparing the response of macrophages with respect to the response of other cells of the innate immune system against TB. To this end, we formulate and analyze, at theoretical and numerical levels, a non-linear system of ordinary differential equations that describes the interaction between macrophages, the other cells of the innate immune system, and Mtb. We believe this is the first model that incorporates the dynamics of all innate immune cells against Mtb.

    In order to characterize some aspects of TB immunology at the cellular level, in the context of the innate immune response, and focus on the role played by macrophage responses in the outcome of infection, in this section, we formulate a model that describes the dynamics of interaction between innate immune cells and Mycobacterium tuberculosis at the site of infection.

    Since there are different innate immune cells that participate in the response against Mtb [3], we will group all the innate cells that act against TB into a single population that we will denote by C. We also consider the population of macrophages, M, which is divided into uninfected macrophages, MU (macrophages that have not had contact with Mtb or that phagocytize Mtb and eliminate it efficiently), and infected macrophages, MI (macrophages that phagocytose the bacteria but do not have the capacity to eliminate it, and the bacteria also reproduce inside it). Similarly, we consider the population of bacteria, B, which will be divided into two subpopulations: the population of internal bacteria, BI (bacteria that have been phagocytosed by innate cells), and the population of external bacteria, BE (bacteria that have not been phagocytosed or that have gone from internal to external due to the necrotic death of their host cells).

    The cell population of the innate immune system at time t is represented by C(t), which is composed of the subgroups of alveolar epithelial cells, endothelial cells, macrophages, neutrophils, eosinophils, monocytes, dendritic cells, natural killer cells, invariant natural killer T lymphocytes and innate lymphoid cells. All of these cells play a role in the immunopathology of TB that favors the host and/or the bacteria. Unfortunately, for most of them, the functions they perform and the mechanisms they carry out are still a matter of research; available results come from individual studies, and the hypotheses established based on them must be empirically validated [3,4,15].

    We assume that the site of infection are the pulmonary alveoli and that infectious bacilli have been transported there. At this site, resident cells recruited from the bone marrow via the thymus or lymph nodes, among others, have initiated an innate immune response. As mentioned in the previous section, the set of cells that participate in this response is quite broad. However, at this stage of the infection, none of them show a specific response to the antigen [3,4].

    We suppose that innate cells are recruited at a constant rate, ΛC, and die at per capita natural death rate, μC. Since cells produced by the thymus and lymph differentiate into different types of innate immune cells, and we want to compare the macrophages response with respect to the response of the rest of the innate cells, we assume that a portion of innate cells differentiate into uninfected macrophages at a rate α.

    Since a portion of the bacteria phagocytosed by macrophages is eliminated by them, and the other turns them into their reproduction niche, we assume that uninfected macrophages phagocytose Mtb at a rate ε, of which a fraction ν becomes infected. Other innate cells participate directly or indirectly in the death of infected macrophages [3,4]; for this reason, we assume that the innate cells eliminates the population of infected macrophages at a rate λ. Necrosis is classified by NCCD-201 as accidental cell death, and Mtb-infected macrophage necrosis occurs when the Mtb kills infected macrophages [27,28]. This process is a key part of the Mtb infection cycle, allowing the bacteria to spread and evade the host's immune response. In TB, the internal bacteria, in addition to reproducing within the macrophage, induce its death by necrosis, releasing necrotic tissue, and a certain amount of bacteria into the environment [3,28]. As a consequence, we assume that the natural death of infected macrophages is by necrosis, which occurs at a per capita rate μMI(BI), which is a function that depends on the internal bacteria. Consequently, the number of infected macrophages that die by necrosis is μMI(BI)MI, and in turn, these necrotic macrophages release on average r bacilli into the extracellular environment. This implies that the amount of external bacteria released into the environment would be proportional to the number of macrophages that die by necrosis, rμMI(BI). To date, the most appropriate functional response for μMI(BI) has not been empirically determined. However, there is experimental evidence that the amount of foreign bacteria produced by macrophage necrosis is proportional to the number of infected macrophages [29]. For this reason, in this model, we will assume that infected macrophages die by necrosis at a constant rate μMI. In addition, bacteria phagocytosed by macrophages are eliminated at a rate, κ.

    Since there are other innate cells such as dendritic cells, neutrophils, or monocytes that phagocytose and eliminate Mtb [3,4], we assume that extracellular bacteria are eliminated by these innate cells at a rate η. We also assume that internal bacteria replicate inside an infected macrophage at a rate β, following a saturation kinetics with carrying capacity of the infected macrophages denoted by KI. Finally, μMU, μBE, and μBI denote the per capita natural death rates (reciprocal of the half-life) of uninfected macrophages, and intracellular and extracellular bacteria, respectively.

    From the above assumptions, we obtain the following system of ordinary differential equations

    dCdt=ΛCαCμCCdMUdt=αCενBEMUμMUMUdMIdt=ενBEMUλMICμMIMIdBEdt=rμMIMIεκBEMUηBECμBEBEdBIdt=β(1BIKI)MIμBIBI. (2.1)

    The set of biological interest is given by

    Ω={(CMUMIBEBI)R5+:0CΛCα+μC,0MU+MIαΛCμM(α+μC),0BE+BIˉαμB}, (2.2)

    where μM=min{μMU,μMI}, μB=min{μBE,μBI}, and ˉα=α(rμMI+β)ΛCμM(α+μC). The following lemma ensures that system (2.1) makes biological sense; that is, all solutions starting at Ω remain there for all t0.

    Lemma 2.1. The set Ω defined in (2.2) is positively invariant for solutions of the system (2.1).

    Proof. Let us start by verifying the existence of the solution to the initial value problem defined by the system (2.1) and x0=(C(0),MU(0),MI(0),BE(0),BI(0))Ω. Since the vector field defined by the right-hand side of (2.1) is C1(R5+), then the fundamental theorem of existence and uniqueness guarantees the existence of a solution x(t)R5+ in the interval [0,σ] [30]. Furthermore, if the compact set ˉΩR5+ satisfies {yR5:y=f(t)for somet[0,σ)}, then by the extension theorem σ= (Corollary 2, page 91, [30]). Now, suppose that x0Ω, then we have

    0C(0)ΛCα+μC,0MU(0)+MI(0)αΛCμM(α+μC),0BE(0)+BI(0)ˉαμB.

    On the other hand, the solution of the first equation of the system (2.1) is given by

    C(t)=ΛCα+μC+(C(0)ΛCα+μC)e(α+μC)t,

    since 0C(0)ΛC/(α+μC), then 0C(t)ΛC/(α+μC) for all t0. Adding the second and third equations of the system (2.1), we have

    dMUdt+dMIdt=αCμMUMUλMICμMIMI,

    since μMμMU and μMμMI, then from the previous equation we obtain the following inequality

    dMUdt+dMIdtαΛCα+μCμM(MU+MI)λMICαΛCα+μCμM(MU+MI),

    or equivalently

    d(MU+MI)dt+μM(MU+MI)αΛCα+μC.

    The solution of the above inequality satisfies

    MU(t)+MI(t)αΛCμU(α+μC)+(MU(0)+MI(0)αΛCμM(α+μC))eμMt,

    since 0MU(0)+MI(0)αΛCμM(α+μC), then 0MU(t)+MI(t)αΛCμM(α+μC) for all t0. Adding the fourth and fifth equations of (2.1) we have

    dBEdt+dBIdt=rμMIMI+β(1BIKI)MIεκBEMUηBECμBEBEμBIBI,

    since μBμBE, μBμBI, MI<αΛC/μM(α+μC), then we obtain the following inequality

    d(BE+BI)dt+μB(BE+BI)<ˉα,

    where ˉα=α(rμMI+β)ΛCμM(α+μC). The solution of the above inequality satisfies

    BE(t)+BI(t)<ˉαμB+(BE(0)+BI(0)ˉαμB)eμBt.

    Therefore, if B(0)ˉα/μB, then B(t)ˉα/μB for all t0.

    Taking the left-hand side of (2.1) equal to the zero vector gives the following system of algebraic equations

    ΛCαCμCC=0αCενBEMUμMUMU=0ενBEMUλMICμMIMI=0rμMIMIεκBEMUηBECμBEBE=0β(1BIKI)MIμBIBI=0. (3.1)

    From the first equation of (3.1), we obtain C=C, where

    C=ΛCα+μC. (3.2)

    Substituting (3.2) in the second equation of (3.1), we obtain

    MU=αCενBE+μMU. (3.3)

    From the third equation of (3.1), we obtain

    MI=ενBEMUλC+μMI=ενBEλC+μMIαCενBE+μMU. (3.4)

    Substituting (3.2), (3.3), and (3.4) in the fourth equation of (3.1), we obtain

    rμMIενBEλC+μMIαCενBE+μMUεκBEαCενBE+μMUηBECμBEBE=0.

    The solutions of the above equation are given by BE=0 and BE=BE, where

    BE=[καCν(ηC+μBE)+μMUεν](R01), (3.5)

    and

    R0=rμMIεναC(λC+μMI)[εκαC+μMU(ηC+μBE)]. (3.6)

    If BE=0, we obtain the free-infection equilibrium

    E0=(C,αCμMU,0,0,0). (3.7)

    Now, substituting (3.5) in the Eqs (3.3) and (3.4) we obtain

    MU=αCενBE+μMUMI=ενBEλC+μMIαCενBE+μMU. (3.8)

    Substituting (3.8) in the fifth equation of (3.1), we obtain BI=BI, where

    BI=βMIβKIMI+μBI. (3.9)

    As a consequence, if R0>1, there exists a non-trivial equilibrium

    E1=(C,MU,MI,BE,BI). (3.10)

    The following theorem summarizes the results of the existence of equilibria.

    Teorem 3.1. If R01, then E0 defined in (3.7) is the only equilibrium in Ω. If R0>1, in addition to E0, there exists the infected equilibrium E1 defined in (3.10).

    In this section, we will analyze the stability of equilibrium solutions. The linearization of the system (2.1) around an equilibrium solution ˉx is given by x=J(ˉx)x, where the Jacobian matrix J evaluated at x is given by

    J(x)=((α+μC)0000α(ενBE+μMU)0ενMU0λMIενBE(λC+μMI)ενMU0ηBEεκBErμMI(εκMU+ηC+μBE)000β(1BIKI)0(βMIKI+μBI)). (3.11)

    From (3.11), we verify that the Jacobian matrix evaluated in trivial equilibrium E0 is given by

    J(E0)=((α+μC)0000αμMU0εναCμMU000(λC+μMI)εναCμMU000rμMI(εκαCμMU+ηC+μBE)000β0μBI.) (3.12)

    The eigenvalues of J(E0) defined in (3.12) are given by (α+μC), μMU, μBI, and the roots of the following quadratic equation

    ς2+(λC+μMI+εκαCμMU+ηC+μBE)ς+1μMU(λC+μMI)(εκαC+μMU(ηC+μBE))(1R0)=0.

    The above implies that E0 is locally asymptotically stable in Ω when R0<1. Similarly, it is verified that the eigenvalues of J(E1) are (α+μC), (βMI/KI+μBI) and the roots of the following polynomial

    ς3+a2ς2+a1ς+a0, (3.13)

    where

    a2=εκMU+ηC+μBE+λC+μMI+ενBE+μMUa1=(εκMU+ηC+μBE+λC+μMI)(ενBE+μMU)ενMUεκBEa0=ενMU[rμMIενBEεκBE(λC+μMI)]=ενMU(λC+μMI)(ηC+μBR)BEMU.

    Since the coefficients of the cubic polynomial (3.13) do not change sign, then from the rule of the signs of Descartes, it is verified that all its roots have a negative real part. Therefore, the equilibrium E1 is locally asymptotically stable in Ω. The following theorem summarizes the results of the existence of equilibria.

    Teorem 3.2. If R0<1, then E0 defined in (3.7) is locally asymptotically stable in Ω. If R0>1, E0 is unstable, and E1 defined in (3.10) is locally asymptotically stable in Ω.

    In the previous section, it was verified that the result of the infection depends on the basic radius of offspring R0 defined in (3.6). We observe that R0 depends on almost all the parameters of the model. In this sense, an interesting question is which parameters of the model (2.1) influence the most values of R0. To answer this question, it is necessary to perform a sensitivity analysis that determines the uncertainty of the model outputs based on the uncertainty of its inputs.

    There are various theoretical and numerical methods to perform this type of analysis. In our case, we have an initial value problem defined by a system of nonlinear ordinary differential equations whose inputs are the model parameters and the initial conditions; and also, the behavior of the model outputs is conditioned by the value of R0. As such, good method to perform the analysis consists of using the normalized sensitivity index to determine the sensitivity of R0 with respect to each of the parameters that define it.

    Let p be a parameter, and the normalized sensitivity index ΥR0p is given by the following partial derivative

    ΥR0p=pR0R0p. (4.1)

    From (4.1), we verify that

    ΥR0ΛC=μMUμBEμMUμBE+(εκα+μMUη)CλCλC+μMIΥR0α=1+αα+μC[λCλC+μMIεκ(α+μC)C+μMUμBEμMUμBE+(εκα+μMUη)C]ΥR0μC=μCα+μC[μMUμBEμMUμBE+(εκα+μMUη)C+λCλC+μMI]ΥR0ε=1εκαCμMUμBE+(εκα+μMUη)CΥR0ν=1ΥR0μMU=μMUηC+μMUμBEμMUμBE+(εκα+μMUη)CΥR0λ=λCλC+μMIΥR0μMI=1μMIλC+μMIΥR0r=1ΥR0κ=εκαCμMUμBE+(εκα+μMUη)CΥR0η=μMUηCμMUμBE+(εκα+μMUη)CΥR0μBE=μMUμBEμMUμBE+(εκα+μMUη)C. (4.2)

    From (4.2) we verify that sensitivity indices are within the ranges presented in Table 1.

    Table 1.  Range of normalized sensitivity indices.
    Índice ΥR0ΛC ΥR0α ΥR0μC ΥR0ε ΥR0ν ΥR0μMU ΥR0λ ΥR0μMI ΥR0r ΥR0κ ΥR0η ΥR0μBE
    Rango (1,1) (,2) (2,0) (0,1) 1 (1,0) (1.0) (0,1) 1 (1,0) (1,0) (1,0)

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    From Table 1 we observe that ΥR0ΛC(1,1), ΥR0α(,2), ΥR0μC(2,0), ΥR0ν=ΥR0r=1, {ΥR0μMU,ΥR0λ,ΥR0κ,ΥR0η,ΥR0μBE}(1,0) and {ΥR0ε,ΥR0μMI}(0,1). The above indicates that the parameters μC, μMU, λ, κ, η, and μBE have a positive impact on infection control, in the sense that if the value of any of these parameters increases, then the value of R0 decreases. On the other hand, an increase in any of the parameters ν,r,μMI o ε leads to an increase in the value of R0.

    Due to the form of the expressions that define ΥR0ΛC and ΥR0α, it was not possible to determine a smaller range; however, we can conclude that the parameters ΛC, α, and μC can have positive or negative effects on infection control. Note that, if we do not consider the three previous parameters, the parameters that most influence the outcome of the infection are r and ν.

    Let us observe that the rate of differentiation of innate cells into macrophages, α, is the parameter that most influences the outcome of the infection (an increase of 5% in this parameter would generate an increase in R0 between 5.6% and 7.85%), followed by the parameters ν, r, ΛC, and μMI. It is also observed that when the phagocytic rate of macrophages has a high impact on the variation of R0, the rate of bacterial elimination by macrophages has a low impact, and vice versa. The incidence of the parameters μC and μBE on the variation of R0 is almost zero. Finally, the minimum value of μMU has a greater impact on the result of the infection than its maximum value.

    Figures 1 and 2 were made with data from Table 2 and show graphs of the temporal behavior of the cell population. In Figure 1, it can be seen that in the first 10 hours, a large number of innate cells differentiate into macrophages, almost quintupling their initial population, all with the purpose of counteracting the spread of the infection. However, their response was insufficient because both the population of bacteria and infected macrophages increased considerably.

    Figure 1.  Initial conditions (500,50,0,50,0). Values of the parameters: ΛC=5, α=0.05, ε=0.01, ν=0.6, r=50, κ=0.001, η=0.003, β=0.032, λ=0.001,μC=0.0067, μMU=0.0032, μMI=0.0101, μBE=0.002, μBI=0.03, KI=50.
    Figure 2.  Initial conditions (500,50,0,50,0). Values of the parameters: ΛC=120, α=0.06, ε=0.8, ν=0.8, r=50, κ=0.01, η=0.001, β=0.032, λ=0.01,μC=0.0083, μMU=0.0051, μMI=0.0556, μBE=0.02, μBI=0.03, KI=50.
    Table 2.  Parameter ranges.
    Parameter Description Values References
    ΛC Recruitment rate of innate cells 50–120 cell/h [31]
    α Differentiation rate of macrophages 0.02–0.06 h1 [32]
    ε Phagocytosis rate of macrophages 0.1–0.8 [31]
    ν Macrophage infection rate 0.2–0.8 [31]
    εν Effective macrophage infection rate 0.02–0.64 (h cell)1 [31]
    r Nnumber of bact. released by necrotic MI 1–50 cell [31]
    κ Bacterial elimination rate by macrophages 0.001–0.01 [31]
    εκ Effective bacterial killing rate by macrophages 0.0001–0.008 (h cell)1 [31]
    η Bacterial elimination rate by innate cells 0.003–0.03 (h cell)1 [31]
    β BI replication rate within MI 0.0032–0.032 h1 [31]
    λ MI elimination rate by innate cells 0.001–0.01 (h cell)1 [31]
    μC Natural death rate of C 0.0067–0.0083 h1 [31]
    μMU Natural death rate of MU 0.0032–0.0051 h1 [32]
    μMI MI death rate due to necrosis 0.0101–0.0139 h1 [31]
    μBE Natural death rate of BE 0.002–0.02 h1 [13]
    μBI Natural death rate of BI 0.002–0.03 h1 [13]
    KI Carrying capacity of macrophages 10–100 cell [31]

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    In contrast, in Figure 2, it can be seen that the initial population of macrophages declines very rapidly, and, although at the beginning the populations of external bacteria and infected macrophages grow rapidly, after 2 hours these decrease to less than 10 bacteria and 10 infected macrophages. Table 4 shows the values of sensitivity indices for the simulations presented in Figures 1 and 2.

    Table 3.  Sensitivity indices evaluated at extreme values of the parameters in Table 2.
    Index ΥR0ΛC ΥR0α ΥR0μC ΥR0ε ΥR0ν ΥR0μMU ΥR0λ ΥR0μMI ΥR0r ΥR0κ ΥR0η ΥR0μBE
    Minimum 0.99 1.57 0.24 0.83 1 0.83 0.99 0.99 1 0.17 0.83 2.95×104
    Maximum 0.99 1.12 0.12 0.24 1 0.24 0.99 0.99 1 0.76 0.24 9.17×105

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 4.  Index values.
    Índice ΥR0ΛC ΥR0α ΥR0μC ΥR0ε ΥR0ν ΥR0μMU ΥR0λ ΥR0μMI ΥR0r ΥR0κ ΥR0η ΥR0μBE
    Figure 1 0.89 1.74 0.11 0.95 1 0,95 0.90 0.90 1 0.05 0.94 7×103
    Figure 2 0.99 0.89 0.12 0.01 1 0,01 0.99 0.99 1 0.99 0.01 1.2×104

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    It is important to highlight that although in Figure 1 it can be seen that at the beginning the population of uninfected macrophages grows, and in Figure 2 this population decreases from the beginning, the sensitivity analysis reveals that the innate immune response of uninfected macrophages was better in the second simulation. Indeed, the magnitude of ΥR0κ was larger in the second simulation, indicating that more bacteria were eliminated in the second simulation than in the first one.

    In a similar way, indicating that more uninfected macrophages were killed in the first simulation than in the second one (Figure 2), and decreased steadily in the first simulation (Figure 1). Since the magnitude of ΥR0η was larger in the first simulation and the magnitude of ΥR0α was smaller in the second simulation, parameter analysis suggests that its incidence was significantly higher in the first one.

    The infection and replication rates have a high impact on the outcome of the infection, but they have the same incidence in both cases. Although the recruitment of bone marrow cells is low in the first simulation and high in the second one, the level of incidence on the outcome of the infection is similar in both cases. The incidence level of both the death rate of innate cells that do not differentiate into infected macrophages as well as the death rate of external cells did not have a significant impact on bacterial progression.

    Microbiological processes at any level, and in particular at the cellular level, are extremely complex and require contributions from different areas of knowledge to advance in their understanding. Our model is a very simple approximation to the interaction dynamics of innate cells (divided between macrophages and the rest of the innate cells without specifying) and Mycobacterium tuberculosis, at the beginning of the Mtb infection.

    Qualitative analysis reveals a forward bifurcation in which the infection-free equilibrium E0 loses its stability when R0=1 and emerges a stable coexistence equilibrium E1. Note that the progression of the infection will depend on a condition very similar to that used in epidemiology for the spread of an infectious disease in a population of host individuals. The key quantity is the basic offspring proportion R0 defined in (3.6), which is interpreted as the number of secondary infections arising from a macrophage during its lifetime when all other innate cells are not infected. The fact that R0 depends on all the parameters of the model except for three parameters associated with internal bacteria dynamics suggests that both macrophages and the rest of innate cells must perform their effector functions appropriately to counteract Mtb pathogenesis. It was verified that the parameters associated with macrophages immunopathology (ε, ν, r, κ, μMU, μMI and α) significantly impact the interaction dynamics. The results above corroborates that macrophages play a fundamental role in the control or dissemination of the bacillus, during the first stage of infection. In addition, the analysis provides new insights that suggest focusing our attention on the rest of the innate cells that participate in the activation of the innate immune response against TB, since the parameters associated with these cells ΛC, α, μC, λ, and η are as relevant as those of the macrophages in the variation of R0.

    The parameter α represents the differentiation rate of cells produced by the bone marrow into mature macrophages capable of performing their effector functions against any pathogen, in particular against Mtb. In reality, this parameter is an oversimplification homeostasis, a process with many unknown aspects at the biological level, but that begins with the production of stem cells in the bone marrow and involves the transition to other cells (such as the differentiation of promonocytic cells into mature monocytes); this process in turn includes self-regulation mechanisms, among other factors. Note that this parameter is associated with responses from macrophages and other innate cells. With the largest range among all the sensitivity indices (,2), the results suggest that it can contribute to either reducing or increasing bacterial progression. Indeed, if ΥR0α(,0) contributes to reducing the value of R0, which will decrease the number of secondary infections. On the other hand, if ΥR0α(0,2) increases secondary infections. Under the set of parameters used to perform the simulations in Figures 1 and 2, positive sensitivity indices were obtained for α. As a consequence, for both cases, the differentiation rate contributed to the progression of the infection. By carrying out a similar procedure, it is verified that the recruitment rate of innate cells ΛC can contribute to the decrease or increase of infection. In fact, in the numerical simulations of Figures 1 and 2, it positively affects the control of infection.

    At the experimental level, there is a large body of literature supporting the theoretical results obtained here, which highlight that Mtb infection can be eliminated by the innate immune system before an adaptive immune response is initiated; this innate protection requires a variety of robust cell-autonomous responses from many different types of host immune cells [6].

    For centuries, TB research has focused on the role of adaptive immunity in TB, leaving aside innate immunity. However, advances in recent decades have shown that the innate immune response determines the outcome of the infection. In this sense, scientific and academic production on the innate immunology of TB has increased, and generated new perspectives. However, there are still many gaps. In this article, we have formulated and analyzed a model whose results corroborate the importance of the innate response of macrophages in TB, and also suggest that other innate cells are also very important during primary infection.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    We want to thank anonymous referees for their valuable comments that helped us to improve the paper. Eduardo Ibarguen-Mondragón and Miller Cerón Gómez acknowledges the partial support from Universidad de Nariño. M. Victoria Otero-Espinar is partially supported by the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Agencia Estatal de Investigación (Spain), Grant PID2020-115155GB-I00 and the Consellería de Educación, Universidade e Formación Profesional (Xunta de Galicia), Grant ED431C 2023/31 with FEDER funds.

    The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.



    [1] Global tuberculosis report 2023, World Health Organization, 2023. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240083851
    [2] D. D. Chaplin, Overview of the immune response, J. Allergy Clin. Immunol., 125 (2010), S3–S23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2009.12.980 doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2009.12.980
    [3] P. Sankar, B. B. Mishra, Early innate cell interactions with Mycobacterium tuberculosis in protection and pathology of tuberculosis, Front. Immunol., 14 (2023), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1260859 doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1260859
    [4] M. M. Ravesloot-Chávez, E. Van Dis, S. A. Stanley, The innate immune responseto mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, Annu. Rev. Immunol., 39 (2021), 611–37. https://10.1146/annurev-immunol-093019-010426
    [5] S. H. E. Kaufmann, How can immunology contribuite to the control of tuberculosis?, Nat. Rev. Immunol., 1 (2001), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1038/35095558 doi: 10.1038/35095558
    [6] T. R. Lerner, S. Borel, M. G. Gutierrez, The innate immune response in human tuberculosis, Cell. Microbio., 17 (2015), 1277–1285. https://doi.org/10.1111/cmi.12480 doi: 10.1111/cmi.12480
    [7] E. Guirado, L. S. Schlesinger, G. Kaplan, Macrophages in tuberculosis: Friend or foe, Semin. Immunol., 35 (2013), 563–583. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00281-013-0388-2 doi: 10.1007/s00281-013-0388-2
    [8] A. Vu, I. Glassman, G. Campbell, S. Yeganyan, J. Nguyen, A. Shin, et al., Host cell death andmodulation of immune response against mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, Int. J. Mol. Sci., 25 (2021), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25116255 doi: 10.3390/ijms25116255
    [9] J. K. Kim, P. Silwal, E. K. Jo, Host-Pathogen dialogues in autophagy, apoptosis, and necrosis during Mycobacterial infection, Immune Netw., 20 (2020), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.4110/in.2020.20.e37 doi: 10.4110/in.2020.20.e37
    [10] D. M. Kelly, A. M. Ten Bokum, S. M. O'Leary, M. P. O'Sullivan, J. Keane, Bystander macrophage apoptosis after Mycobacterium tuberculosis H37Ra infection, Infect. Immun., 76 (2008), 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.00614-07 doi: 10.1128/IAI.00614-07
    [11] F. J. Roca, L. J. Whitworth, S. Redmond, A. A. Jones, L. Ramakrishnan, J. Keane, TNF induces pathogenic programmed macrophage necrosis in tuberculosis through a mitochondrial-lysosomal-endoplasmic reticulum circuit, Cell, 178 (2019), 1344–1361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.08.004 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2019.08.004
    [12] F. Ahmad, A. Rani, A. Alam, S. Zarin, S. Pandey, H. Singh, et al., Macrophage: A cell with many faces and functions in tuberculosis, Front. Immunol., 13 (2022), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2022.747799 doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.747799
    [13] J. Pieters, Mycobacterium tuberculosis and the macrophage: Maintaining a balance, Cell Host Microbe, 3 (2008), 399–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chom.2008.05.006 doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2008.05.006
    [14] J. A. Philips, J. P. Ernst, Tuberculosis pathogenesis and immunity, Annu. Rev. Pathol. Mech. Dis., 7 (2012), 353–384. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-pathol-011811-132458 doi: 10.1146/annurev-pathol-011811-132458
    [15] H. Kim, S. J. Shin, Pathological and protective roles of dendritic cells in Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection: Interaction between host immune responses and pathogen evasion, Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol., 12 (2022), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2022.891878 doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2022.891878
    [16] D. Kirschner, E. Pienaar, S. Marino, J. J. Linderman, A review of computational and mathematical modeling contributions to our understanding of Mycobacterium tuberculosis within-host infection and treatment, Curr. Opin. Syst. Biol., 3 (2017), 170–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coisb.2017.05.014 doi: 10.1016/j.coisb.2017.05.014
    [17] D. Chakraborty, S. Batabyal, V. V. Ganusov, A brief overview of mathematical modeling of the within-host dynamics of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Front. Appl. Math. Stat., 10 (2024), 1355–373. https://doi.org/10.3389/fams.2024.1355373 doi: 10.3389/fams.2024.1355373
    [18] E. Ibargüen-Mondragón, L. Esteva, L. Chávez-Galán, A mathematical model for cellular immunology of tuberculosis, Math. Biosci. Eng., 11 (2011), 973–986. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2011.8.973 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2011.8.973
    [19] E. Ibargüen-Mondragón, L. Esteva, E. M. Burbano-Rosero, Mathematical model for the growth of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the granuloma, Math. Biosci. Eng., 15 (2018), 407–428. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2018018 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2018018
    [20] E. Ibarguen-Mondragon, L. Esteva, L. Chávez-Galán, Estabilidad global para un modelo matemático sobre la respuesta inmune innata de macrófagos contra el Micobacterium tuberculosis, Rev. Sigma., 10 (2010), 1–17.
    [21] G. Pedruzzi, K. V. Rao, S. Chatterjee, Mathematical model of mycobacterium–host interaction describes physiology of persistence, J. Theor. Biol., 376 (2015), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2015.03.031 doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2015.03.031
    [22] D. Gammack, C. R. Doering, D. E. Kirschner, Macrophage response to Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, J. Math. Biol., 48 (2004), 218–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-003-0232-8 doi: 10.1007/s00285-003-0232-8
    [23] F. Clarelli, R. Natalini, A pressure model of immune response to mycobacteriumtuberculosis infection in several space dimensions, Math. Biosci. Eng., 7 (2004), 277–300. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2010.7.277 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2010.7.277
    [24] E. Pienaar, M. Lerm, A mathematical model of the initial interaction between Mycobacterium tuberculosis and macrophages, J. Theor. Biol., 342 (2014), 23–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2013.09.029 doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2013.09.029
    [25] R. V. Carvalho, J. Kleijn, A. H. Meijer, F. J. Verbeek, Modelinginnate immune response to early mycobacterium infection, Comput. Math. Methods Med., 2012 (2012), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/790482 doi: 10.1155/2012/790482
    [26] L. R. Joslyn, J. J. Linderman, D. E. Kirschner, A virtual host model of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection identifies early immune events as predictive of infection outcomes, J. Theor. Biol., 539 (2022), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2022.111042 doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2022.111042
    [27] A. Nisa, F. C. Kipper, D. Panigrahy, S. Tiwari, A. Kupz, S. Subbian, Different modalities of host cell death and their impact on Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, Am. J. Physiol. Cell Physiol., 323 (2022), 1444–1474. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpcell.00246.2022 doi: 10.1152/ajpcell.00246.2022
    [28] M. Divangahi, S. M. Behar, H. Remold, Dying to live: How the death modality of the infected macrophage affects immunity to tuberculosis, Adv. Exp. Med. Biol., 783 (2013), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6111-1_6 doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-6111-1_6
    [29] D. Mahamed, M. Boulle, Y. Ganga, C. M. Arthur, S. Skroch, L. Oom, et al., Intracellular growth of Mycobacterium tuberculosis after macrophage cell death leads to serial killing of host cells, Elife, 6 (2017), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.22028 doi: 10.7554/eLife.22028
    [30] L. Perko, Differential Equations and Dynamical Systems, 2nd edition, Springer Science & Business Media, New York, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0003-8
    [31] D. Sud, C. Bigbee, J. L. Flynn, D. E. Kirschner, Contribution of CD8+ T cells to control of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, J. Immun., 176 (2006), 4296–4314. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.176.7.4296 doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.176.7.4296
    [32] F. Krombach, S. Münzing, A. M. Allmeling, J. T. Gerlach, J. Behr, M. Dörger, Cell size of alveolar macrophages: An interspecies comparison, J. Immun., 105 (1997), 1261–1263. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.97105s51261 doi: 10.1289/ehp.97105s51261
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2025 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(661) PDF downloads(81) Cited by(0)

Figures and Tables

Figures(2)  /  Tables(4)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog