Introduction

Explor Dig Dis

EDD

Exploration of Digestive Diseases

2833-6321

Open Exploration Publishing

10.37349/edd.2023.00018

100518

Review

Immunophenotyping to improve the mechanistic understanding of idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury: clinical implications and future directions

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5861-9250

Cueto-Sánchez

Alejandro

¹ ^†

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9068-0518

Zeo-Sánchez

Daniel E. Di

¹ ² ^†

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3421-1792

Segovia-Zafra

Antonio

¹ ²

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8295-6708

Matilla-Cabello

Gonzalo

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2706-5202

Bodoque-García

Ana

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9586-4896

Lucena

María Isabel

¹ ² ³ ^*

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4728-201X

Villanueva-Paz

Marina

¹ Ding

Wen-Xing

Academic Editor University of Kansas Medical Center, USA

¹Departamento de Farmacología, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga y Plataforma en Nanomedicina (IBIMA Plataforma Bionand), 29590 Málaga, Spain ²Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd), 28029 Madrid, Spain ³Service of Clinical Pharmacology, University Hospital Virgen de la Victoria, IBIMA Plataforma Bionand, Universidad de Málaga, 29010 Málaga, Spain

†

These authors share the first authorship.

^* Correspondence: María Isabel Lucena, Departamento de Farmacología, Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga y Plataforma en Nanomedicina (IBIMA Plataforma Bionand), Calle Severo Ochoa, 35, 29590 Málaga, Spain. lucena@uma.es

2023

26 04 2023

2 2 56 76 16 12 2022 14 02 2023

This is an Open Access article licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, for any purpose, even commercially, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

The late event onset of a fraction of idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury (DILI) cases and the link observed by genome-wide association studies (GWASs) of certain human leucocyte antigen (HLA) alleles with DILI due to specific drugs support the crucial role of the immune system (both innate and adaptive) in the pathogenesis of DILI. Recent advances in both flow and mass cytometry have allowed the profiling of all major immune cell types in a given sample. Therefore, determining the lymphocyte populations in samples from patients with DILI would facilitate the development of specific biomarkers for DILI diagnosis and prognosis. To date, a few studies have explored the immune landscape in DILI. In a recent study of leukocyte immunophenotyping using flow cytometry from the Spanish DILI Registry, an important role of adaptive immune response in DILI is suggested. DILI patients had significantly higher levels of T helper 1 (Th1) cells and activated helper and cytotoxic T cells than healthy controls. Furthermore, the increased expression of negative immune checkpoints and ligands in DILI patients could reflect a restoration of the immune homeostasis. Differences in the profile of cytokines in DILI patients from the Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) also suggest an involvement of both innate and adaptive immune systems in DILI development and prognosis. Moreover, several studies based on immunophenotyping of liver infiltrates showed a distinctive pattern of cellular infiltrates in patients with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)-DILI, with lower levels of plasma cells, CD20⁺ B cells and CD4⁺ T cells than in autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) patients. These pioneering studies highlight the importance of immunophenotyping for the mechanistic understanding of DILI. In this review, available data on immunophenotyping in DILI are gathered, and the potential clinical applications of cutting-edge, novel immunophenotyping techniques are discussed.

Hepatotoxicity drug-induced liver injury (DILI) immune tolerance immune system immunophenotyping diagnosis mechanisms

Introduction

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is a hepatic condition that occurs at a relatively low frequency when an adverse reaction is triggered by exposure to certain drugs, herbs, or xenobiotics. DILI can be categorized into three types based on a combination of features: mechanism, latency, causative drugs, dosage administered, predictability, clinicopathological phenotypes, and rate of occurrence. Therefore, when hepatotoxicity is predictable, direct, and dose-dependent, DILI is classified as intrinsic. If the injury has little or no intrinsic toxicity and is caused by agents that induce hepatotoxicity only on very rare occasions, DILI is considered idiosyncratic (hereinafter, DILI) [1]. Patients who experience a DILI episode are individuals with intrinsic susceptibility; thus, it is believed that a mixture of genetic and environmental factors is responsible for the development of hepatic damage [2, 3]. The third type is indirect DILI, which was recently proposed to englobe cases induced by drugs that aggravate the underlying liver conditions. Agents that can promote immune-mediated hepatotoxicity by modifying the immune system may also elicit indirect DILI. However, this last group remains controversial [4, 5].

The incidence of DILI is difficult to estimate, since its diagnosis is uncertain, and is normally established after ruling out other causative conditions of liver injury, such as autoimmune or viral hepatitis. Therefore, there are currently no homogeneous diagnostic criteria. Another issue that makes diagnosis challenging is the lack of laboratory tests that allow the identification of the causative agent when patients have been taking a variety of drugs, herbal supplements, or other xenobiotics, as well as when they have a pre-existing liver condition [6]. For these reasons, to date, most clinical data have been obtained from retrospective database studies.

In terms of severity, DILI has a wide range of potential outcomes. Most patients make a full recovery after discontinuation of the culprit drug, but the progression of DILI can be dramatic [7]. In fact, up to 10% of patients with drug-induced jaundice fulfilling “Hy’s Law” criteria will progress to acute liver failure (ALF) [8], and some of these patients will require liver transplantation or ultimately die. Therefore, DILI reactions remain a major public concern, accounting for a significant proportion of all ALF cases [9]. In addition, DILI poses an economic challenge and is a leading cause of drug withdrawals [10].

At present, the most widely accepted idea regarding the pathogenesis underlying DILI is that a combination of different factors, whether individual, environmental, or drug-related, may increase the susceptibility to an episode. This idea is known as the “multiple determinant hypothesis” [11]. The molecular background that supports this hypothesis is that when the agent enters the organism, it can be metabolized by hepatic enzymes that can transform them into chemically reactive metabolites (CRMs) which in turn may interfere with the proper functioning of hepatocytes. CRMs can also induce cholestatic injury, which can lead to hepatocyte death by altering bile acids (BAs) metabolism and canalicular transport [12]. Additionally, CRMs can form adducts with individual proteins, generating compounds that the body recognizes as antigens. Eventually, damaged hepatocytes undergo different processes of cell death, such as apoptosis and necrosis [13]. Furthermore, intestinal permeability can be affected by changes in the gut microbiota owing to the release of pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), which presumably trigger an inflammatory response that indirectly may lead to liver injury [14].

Moreover, immune system activation and liver immune tolerance imbalance are thought to be crucial in DILI development [15]. Since these processes are highly difficult to reproduce by using in vitro or animal models, patients’ samples are needed to study the immune profiling of the disease.

Immunophenotyping assays constitute a set of techniques based on antigen expression which is used for the identification of immune cell subsets. There is a dichotomous classification made to categorize the main immune cell populations, which consists of lymphoid-derived cells and myeloid-derived cells. Lymphoid-derived cells include B cells, T cells, natural killer (NK) cells, and invariant natural killer T (iNK-T) cells, whereas myeloid-derived cells include macrophages, neutrophils, monocytes, and dendritic cells [16, 17] (Table 1).

Table 1

Human immunophenotyping standard panels. This table lists the combination of markers frequently used to analyze different immune cells populations

Parental populations	Parental markers	Subpopulation	Subpopulation markers	Ref.
CD4 T cells	CD3⁺/CD20^–/CD8⁻/CD4⁺	Naive	CCR7⁺/CD45RA⁺	[18, 19]
		Central memory	CCR7⁺/CD45RA⁻
		Terminal effector	CCR7⁻/CD45RA⁺
		Effector memory	CCR7⁻/CD45RA⁻
		Treg	CD127^low/CD25^Hi/CCR4⁺
		Th1	CD25^low/−/CXCR5⁻/CD45RA⁻/CXCR3⁺/CCR6⁻	[19]
		Th2	CD45RA^–/CCR4⁺/CCR6^–/CXCR3⁺	[20]
		Th1Th17	CD45RA^–/CCR4^–/CCR6⁺/CXCR3⁺	[20]
		Th17	CD25^low/−/CXCR5⁻/CD45RA⁻/CXCR3⁻/CCR6⁺	[19]
		Th22	CD194⁺/CD196⁺/CCR10⁺	[21]
CD8 T cells	CD3⁺/CD20^–/CD8⁺/CD4^–	Naive	CCR7⁺/CD45RA⁺	[18, 19, 22]
		Central memory	CCR7⁺/CD45RA⁻
		Terminal effector	CCR7⁻/CD45RA⁺
		Effector memory	CCR7⁻/CD45RA⁻
Unconventional T cells	CD3⁺/CD20^–	NKT cells	TCRVα24JαQ⁺	[19]
		MAIT cells	CD161⁺/TCRVα7.2⁺
		γδ T cells	TCRVαβ⁻/TCRVγδ⁺
NK cells	CD3⁻/CD56⁺	-	-	[19]
Granulocytes	CD45⁺/CD3^–/CD19^–	Neutrophils	CD16⁺	[23]
		Basophils	CD123⁺/HLA-DR^–
		Eosinophils	CD16^–
B cells	CD3^–/CD20⁺	Transitional	CD10⁺/CD27⁻	[19]
		Naive	CD27⁻/CD10⁻
		Memory	CD27⁺/CD10⁻
Monocytes	CD45⁺/CD3^–/CD19^–/CD123^–/HLA-DR⁺/CD11c⁺	Classical	CD14⁺CD16^–	[23]
		Intermediate	CD14⁺CD16⁺
		Non-classical	CD14^–CD16⁺
Dendritic cells	CD45⁺/CD3^–/CD19^–	Myeloid	CD123^–CD11c⁺/CD16^–CD14^–/HLA-DR⁺⁺	[23]
Dendritic cells	CD45⁺/CD3^–/CD19^–	Plasmacytoid	CD123⁺/HLA-DR⁺	[23]

CCR7: C-C chemokine receptor type 7; CXCR5: C-X-C motif chemokine receptor 5; HLA: human leucocyte antigen; MAIT: mucosal-associated invariant T; Th1: T helper 1; Treg: regulatory T cell; -: none

Bone marrow and spleen are the main tissues of choice for studying immune cell populations in immunophenotyping procedures using rodent models and human peripheral blood [24]. However, when doing children’s diagnosis, it is suggested to use bone marrow samples for the first test [25].

Cytometric methods, such as flow cytometry, are the most frequently used for identifying human immune subsets [26]. Specific antibodies are coupled to fluorescent compounds such that it is possible to measure the expression of a particular protein within a cell population by binding the fluorophore-coupled antibody to the antigen. This enables the identification of each immune cell subtype based on a set of intracellular and/or extracellular markers [27].

In addition to classical multicolour flow cytometry, different cytometric methods have been developed for immunophenotyping, each of which has been designed for different purposes including hyperspectral flow cytometry, imaging flow cytometry (IFC), mass cytometry, and imaging mass cytometry (IMC) (Table 2) [24, 28].

Table 2

Advantages and drawbacks of cytometry techniques. This table lists the most representative advantages and disadvantages of the different immunophenotyping procedures, as well as some references that collect applications of these techniques in DILI research

Immunophenotyping techniques	Description and applications	Advantages	Drawbacks	Applications in DILI research
IFC	IFC platform combines features of flow cytometry and fluorescent microscopy with data-processing algorithms, allowing for the evaluation of morphological and fluorescent data and analysing protein expression in single cells in heterogeneous cell populations	Spatial information beyond a single cell Static or kinetic analysis of the sample Reduced overlapping of fluorescence Different cellular structures can be simultaneously visualized	Challenging analysis A high percentage of acquired images are eliminated after processing	[29]
Multicolor flow cytometry	Technology that uses multiple fluorescent markers to identify and characterize cellular subpopulations of interest with the possibility of isolating pure, viable populations by cell sorting	Analysis of live and/or fixed cells Cells can be retrieved for further analysis Automatic data acquisition Viability analysis can be performed	Possible overlapping of fluorophores’ emissions The number of cell parameters that can be quantified is very limited	[30–33]
Mass cytometry	Mass cytometry utilizes elemental mass spectrometry to detect metal-conjugated antibodies bound intracellularly or extracellularly to antigens of interest on single cells, allowing the simultaneous analysis of a great number of cellular features	The use of rare metal isotopes instead of fluorochromes highly reduces the overlap between different signals More than forty proteins can be detected in a single experiment	After the analysis, the cells used cannot be recovered for further studies Cell function cannot be detected Slow analysis	[33–35]
Hyperspectral flow cytometry	Single-cell analysis technique that combines ultrafast optical spectroscopy and flow cytometry. This technology uses diffraction gratings or prism-based monochromators to disperse fluorescence signals from multiple labels onto linear detector arrays	The capture signal covers the entire spectrum Combination of chemometric methods of data processing and spectroscopy hardware with the single cell flow cytometry system Intracellular spatial and quantitative information is obtained	Expensive technique A wide hypercube data which requires precise and complex data processing is generated Slow analysis	No data

Immunophenotyping is commonly used to diagnose specific types of cancers, such as different kinds of lymphoma and leukemia [36]. Cellular biomarkers provide essential information regarding the lineage and differentiation of hematological malignancies to properly characterize the complexity and diversity of blood cancers. When diagnostics are performed, panels with a large number of markers are recommended for the detection of immunophenotypic features relevant to subsequent investigations of minimal residual diseases [37].

Recently, immunophenotyping techniques have been applied to the research and diagnosis of different diseases in which the immune system is involved, such as DILI.

In this article, we review data on immunophenotyping in DILI and discuss the potential avenues that open this approach to better understand the molecular mechanisms underlying DILI pathogenesis and to facilitate and make a more accurate and efficient diagnosis by finding immuno-fingerprints.

Involvement of the immune system in DILI

Idiosyncratic DILI is thought to be immune-mediated. This is mainly due to evidence emerging from genetic studies, including genome-wide association studies (GWASs), which showed different associations of DILI with HLA haplotypes [38] and polymorphisms in other genes, such as a variant in the interleukin-10 (IL-10) allele [39], a variant in protein tyrosine phosphatase non-receptor type 22 (PTPN22) [40], or the expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) snip rs1363907, which produces a reduced liver expression of the endoplasmic reticulum aminopeptidase 2 (ERAP2) [41]. Additionally, the histological findings and clinical characteristics of the disease highlight the importance of the immune system in DILI [42].

Although innate immunity also plays an important role in DILI (especially in the early phases of these immune responses, i.e., between drug administration and the start of the adaptive response [43]), adaptive immunity is the best-characterized response that explains the mechanisms and severity of these idiosyncratic reactions, particularly the cellular arm of this immunity, although humoral immunity is also involved [15].

Pathophysiology of DILI and role of the immune system

The formation of CRMs can cause direct damage in hepatocytes for instance, through disruption of BAs homeostasis, production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), and induction of organelle stress (such as mitochondrial and endoplasmic reticulum stress [44]) that leads to the release—mainly by extracellular vesicles—of damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) [45]. These molecules, such as the high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) protein or DNA [46], are recognized by pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) expressed on the surface of some immune cells [including Kupffer cells (KCs) or dendritic cells], causing proinflammatory effects [for example, the production of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, IL-1, vasoactive amines, and ROS] [47].

In addition to these inflammatory processes, the mechanism of injury may also involve the formation of a complex by covalent binding between the parent drug itself—or its CRMs—and host proteins. This drug-protein adduct may act as a neoantigen and can be taken up by antigen-presenting cells (APCs) and presented in lymph nodes by major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I and II to CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ naive T cells, respectively, to prime them [15, 42]. For priming to be successful, three activation signals must occur: the first is the one described above, the second is produced by the contact of naive T cells with co-stimulatory molecules (CD40, CD80, and CD86) expressed on the surface of APCs, and the third is given by the environment of cytokines that allow T cell proliferation and determine the subtype of CD4⁺ helper T cells produced [42]. These effector T cells then migrate to the liver and exert their function when recognizing the neoantigen presented on MHC-I (expressed in all nucleated cells, e.g., hepatocytes) for CD8⁺ T cell cytotoxic effects or MHC-II (expressed in APCs) in the case of CD4⁺ T cells, which activate other immune cells and orchestrate diverse responses via the production of different sets of cytokines [15].

Moreover, presumably, increased permeability due to microbiota changes would induce a leakage of PAMPs through the intestinal barrier into the bloodstream, potentiating the immune reaction, even leading to cell death [48]. This would induce the release of additional specific cell-death-type DAMPs that may exacerbate the response and promote a chronic immune process in the liver [49]. This theory, known as the hapten hypothesis [50], does not explain why only a small number of patients develop DILI induced by drugs known to form haptens. Furthermore, flucloxacillin, a well-known hepatotoxicant, can activate the adaptive immune system by both hapten-dependent and hapten-independent mechanisms [51], raising the possibility of additional immunological pathways involved in the pathogenesis of DILI.

Therefore, two additional hypotheses have been proposed: (i) the pharmacological interaction (p-i) concept states that the drug may interact non-covalently with HLA and T cell receptor (TCR) molecules, leading to their activation [52]. In recent years, several drugs such as sulfamethoxazole [53] and carbamazepine [54] have been described to trigger the immune system through p-i-based stimulation. Finally, (ii) the altered peptide repertoire model states that the non-covalent binding of certain drugs with their respective HLA molecules may alter its conformation (including the antigen-binding cleft) and the repertoire of self-peptides that can present [55]. However, the T cell response to the altered peptide repertoire model has only been observed for abacavir and HLA-B^*57:01 [56], and may not be generalizable to other drug hypersensitivities.

Liver immune tolerance

Because the liver is constantly exposed to multiple exogenous antigens that come from the gastrointestinal tract via the portal vein, it is known to be an immune-privileged organ [57]. Immune tolerance is a necessary adaptation to protect liver cells from constant damage of the immune system [58] and is given by different elements that maintain liver integrity and homeostasis, such as regulatory immune cells. For instance, Tregs can suppress the activation, proliferation, and effector functions of T cells and block the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines [59]. Besides, myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) may inhibit, in addition to the adaptive immune response, the innate immune response through the alteration of the cytokine production pattern of macrophages [60]. Other immune tolerance mechanisms involve the existence of tolerogenic APCs in the liver (such as KCs), which may not be effective enough to activate T cell responses [57]. These processes prevent progression from mild to severe injury and lead to spontaneous resolution despite continued drug intake (i.e., clinical adaptation) [58].

Therefore, disruption or impairment of immune tolerance, known as “defective adaptation” [58, 61], may explain why some patients develop a clinically relevant liver injury, whereas others do not [62]. This range of possible host responses could partially explain why the intake of a drug can provoke severe injury in some patients but not in others, although other factors may be implicated [43].

The causes of disruption of immune tolerance are not completely understood, but it is known that APCs can switch from tolerogenic to immunogenic phenotypes during an infectious process or as a response to neoantigen contact [57]. Other key events that may fail and provoke a loss of tolerance include antigen presentation control, the state of anergy, clonal deletion through apoptosis of antigen-specific T cells, and immune deviation (increase in the ratio Th2/Th1 [43, 58]). Finally, low levels of the endotoxin lipopolysaccharide (LPS) are important for maintaining the pattern of cytokines such as IL-10 and TNF-α secreted into the microenvironment by KCs [63], provoking the expansion of Tregs and hampering T cell activation, contributing to the immune tolerance status. Hence, changes in gut microbiota may affect intestinal permeability and LPS exposure in the liver, thus contributing to the breakdown of tolerance [58].

The study of the hepatic immune system has revealed the cellular landscape of the healthy liver [64, 65] and has also shed light on the mechanisms involved in the onset and progression of different hepatic diseases. Recently, Zhao et al. [66] observed a distinct intrahepatic B cell landscape in samples from patients with acute-to-chronic liver failure (ACLF) patients compared to healthy controls, highlighting the importance of B cell mediation in ACLF therapy. Liver immunophenotyping of hepatocellular carcinoma has also identified specific populations associated with poor prognosis [67]. Furthermore, novel immune-mediated mechanisms involved in liver cirrhosis have been proposed by characterizing specific subpopulations of macrophages in the cirrhotic liver [68], providing a new rationale for the discovery of therapeutic targets. Similarly, unraveling the immune microenvironment of the liver in DILI may be crucial to identifying potential treatments.

Immunophenotyping in DILI Blood immunophenotyping of DILI

Immunophenotyping has been applied in studies of liver pathologies that share an inflammatory background. Communication between resident liver immune cells, hepatocytes, and infiltrating immune cells may affect disease progression. Characterizing liver infiltrates in the liver tissue of patients with DILI may enable a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying the disease [69]. Infiltration of CD3⁺CD8⁺ cytotoxic lymphocytes was observed in the liver tissue of a patient with floxacillin-induced DILI [70]. In another study, differences in leucocyte infiltrate in liver tissue were observed in DILI compared with idiopathic autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) and viral hepatitis. The DILI cases, as well as the other groups, showed high levels of CD8⁺ cytotoxic T cells and macrophages. In contrast, DILI cases presented lower numbers of B cells than other groups. In addition, DILI has been reported a lower level of NK cells than viral hepatitis, which may be explained by the importance of these cells in fighting infections [30]. However, despite these promising results, this type of study is limited because liver biopsies are not usually performed to diagnose DILI. Instead, immunophenotyping of peripheral blood could reflect inflammatory events occurring in the liver and may be an alternative to biopsy-based studies.

Following this approach, several studies have identified peripheral drug-specific T cells in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from DILI patients. Monshi et al. [71] observed that PBMCs from patients with flucloxacillin-DILI were activated in vitro after flucloxacillin exposure, and detected flucloxacillin-responsive CD8⁺ and CD4⁺ clones. Using a similar strategy, Kim et al. [72] isolated both amoxicillin- and clavulanic acid-responsive CD8⁺ and CD4⁺ clones from patients with amoxicillin-clavulanate DILI, showing that both drugs contribute to the T cell response that develops in patients. Immune-based mechanisms for DILI due to antituberculosis (TB) drugs [73], tolvaptan [74], and atabecestat [75] have also been inferred following the characterization of patient PBMCs in vitro.

Recently, the first study on peripheral blood broad immunophenotyping of patients with DILI has been published by our group. In this study, we performed a broad characterization of 17 different leukocyte populations and the expression of eight immune checkpoints. This study enabled not only the comparison between DILI and controls without liver injury, but also the comparison of DILI with additional liver aetiologies, including viral hepatitis, metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD), and AIH. Interestingly, DILI and viral hepatitis patients showed an increased proportion of activated Th cells (CD4⁺/HLA-DR⁺) and activated cytotoxic T cells (CD8⁺/HLA-DR⁺) compared to MAFLD patients and healthy controls (Figure 1). Since HLA-DR is considered a late-activating marker, its detection at elevated levels in the acute phase of injury reinforces the importance of adaptive immune response in DILI. Regarding immune checkpoints, the detected increase in the immune receptor inducible co-stimulator (ICOS) on Th cells is in line with the activation observed in both CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells. This receptor is expressed on naive-T cells at low levels but increases when the cells are activated. Increased intracellular cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) expression was also observed in CD4⁺ T cells at an early stage of DILI compared to MAFLD patients, which is likely an effect of peripheral tolerance regulation. Although only viral hepatitis patients presented significantly higher programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) levels than healthy controls, increased levels of the programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in all liver damage groups compared to healthy controls were observed. Moreover, interestingly, DILI patients showed lower levels of PD-L1-expressing monocytes compared to AIH patients. PD-1 and PD-L1 binding is involved in the inhibition of the immune response while maintaining peripheral immune tolerance. The increased expression of inhibitory immune checkpoint proteins in DILI (Figure 1) supports the role of immune tolerance and reduced cell damage, in line with recuperation [21].

Figure 1

Immunophenotyping comparison between DILI patients, healthy controls, and patients with acute liver damage due to different aetiologies, including viral hepatitis and AIH. FSC: forward scatter; SSC: side scatter

No “immune fingerprint” for DILI was observed in this study. However, both viral hepatitis and DILI onset of liver injury were associated with an increase in the activation of helper and cytotoxic T cells and upregulation of CTLA-4 and PD-1 expression. These observations can shed light on shared unknown hepatotoxicity mechanisms that can be useful for understanding transaminitis commonly associated with adeno-associated virus (AAV)-based gene therapies [76]. Recently, valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene therapy (Roctavian) for haemophilia A [77] and etranacogene dezaparvovec gene therapy (Hemgenix) for haemophilia B [78] have been approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), respectively. Both therapies are based on AAV which contains the factor VIII or IX gene (to treat haemophilia A or B). Once administered to a patient as a one-off infusion, they carry the respective factor gene into the hepatocytes, enabling them to produce the missing factor.

The most common adverse reactions associated with Roctavian and Hemgenix include liver enzyme elevations, which occur in the majority of treated patients, usually at later time points [77, 78]. The precise pathophysiological basis for transaminitis remains unknown, in part because it has not been possible to recapitulate this toxicity in animal models [79, 80], which is similar to that observed in DILI pathophysiology [81]. Moreover, the pathogenesis of liver toxicity may differ between patients. Therefore, immunophenotyping of patients at the time of liver injury would be useful to unravel the pathogenetic details of liver toxicity and to stop using empiric aggressive therapies (such as corticosteroids or alternative immune regulatory agents, when hepatotoxicity is unresponsive to oral steroids) to mitigate these adverse events.

Subsequently, our group published another study [32] on extended immunophenotyping of DILI and MAFLD, focusing particularly on the iNK-T population. The highest level of iNK-T was found in PBMCs from MAFLD patients with significant liver fibrosis, suggesting a role for iNK-T in MAFLD progression. In contrast, PBMCs from patients with DILI had iNK-T levels similar to those of healthy controls. These results suggest a more relevant role for iNK-T cells in the pathogenesis of MAFLD than for DILI, which may represent a differential immunological feature between these two entities. Hence, immunophenotyping can provide information on a potential immunologic fingerprint of DILI, which may be different from that of other liver pathologies. Further lymphocyte population studies are required to identify unique patterns that can be used for diagnosis. On the other hand, research on cytokines profiles of patients can also give information about DILI mechanisms of progression.

Cytokines are small proteins responsible for intercellular communication, mainly between cells of the immune system, and they play a key role in the inflammatory process. Changes in the profile of cytokines and chemokines (cytokines involved in chemotaxis) have been suggested as possible biomarkers of liver pathologies such as DILI [82]. In the healthy liver, resident immune cells produce a small amount of these cytokines, but a significant increase in cytokine and chemokine expression is known to occur during damage or infection. Cytokines are produced by cells present in the blood and different tissues and are constantly released into the bloodstream. Their identification in the blood can provide information on the state of the immune system in a given organ.

Cytokine profiling has allowed the differentiation of cases of hepatocarcinoma, viral hepatitis (HBV and HCV infection), and both hepatocarcinoma and viral hepatitis [83]. The potential role of cytokines in disease prognosis has also been highlighted. Recently, in a study on the effect of MAFLD in 94 patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Patients with concomitant MAFLD who progressed to critical COVID-19 showed a distinct cytokine profile characterized by higher levels of IL-6, -8, -10, and interferon (IFN)-β. Furthermore, IL-8 and IL-10 levels were found to have prognostic potential for time to recovery [84].

Studies identifying cytokines levels in DILI are scarce. A study analyzing polymorphisms in genes encoding the cytokines IL-10, IL-4, and TNF-α showed that DILI with severe outcomes presented a haplotype that produced lower levels of IL-10 [85]. It has been reported that Th1 cells may release IL-10 to prevent uncontrolled inflammation, and reduced IL-10 may subsequently increase the risk of cell damage [86]. Another study found that an increase in blood IL-22 levels in DILI cases was associated with an increase in Th22 levels. In addition, DILI cases with better prognoses presented higher levels of IL-22, suggesting that IL-22 may play a hepatoprotective role [87].

Other studies have investigated a more complete cytokine and chemokine profile for DILI. Steuerwald et al. [88] analysed 27 different analytes in patients with DILI and in healthy controls. The DILI group presented a diverse cytokine pattern, with an increased presence of cytokines associated with the innate immune system in some cases, and cytokines associated with the adaptive immune system in others. However, low levels of IL-9, IL-17, platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF)-bb, regulated on activation, normal T cell expressed and secreted (RANTES), and serum albumin were associated with an increased risk of fatal outcomes. Subsequently, the authors expanded the number of DILI cases to validate the previous results and analyzed the profile of these analytes in other liver pathologies. Interestingly, low RANTES and serum albumin levels maintained the ability to predict the worst outcomes in DILI [89].

Therefore, characterization of immune profiles provides novel information that may help us to understand the mechanistic roles of cytokines and chemokines in the pathogenesis of DILI.

Immunophenotyping of DILI hepatic microenvironment

As stated above, the study of the human peripheral immune system in DILI has recently led to important findings about the pathophysiology of the disease [21] and has even helped to improve the diagnosis [90]. However, many of these studies focused on blood samples or PBMCs are limited in their consideration of the hepatic microenvironment and the interaction of the local immune system with liver cells during a DILI episode. The liver harbors many resident immune cell populations that in many cases differ in composition and function from peripheral cells [91, 92]. Understanding the role of immune cell infiltration and tissue-resident cells in DILI may therefore be essential to fully comprehend disease mechanisms.

Due to the large contribution of individual background to the occurrence of DILI, working directly with patient-derived samples has so far been the gold standard in the study of the influence of the immune system on this disease. However, addressing the immune system in the liver environment represents an additional challenge as liver biopsies are not routinely performed in most cases of suspected DILI. Therefore, the availability of histological samples from patients for immunophenotyping studies is low. While the European Association of the Study of the Liver (EASL) Clinical Practice Guidelines [93, 94] stated that liver biopsy may be a reasonable procedure for considering DILI in some cases, the Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) [95], which is the most widespread case definition method for DILI, and its recent Revised Electronic Causality Assessment Method (RECAM) [96] do not consider liver biopsy essential for DILI diagnosis.

Despite the scarcity of samples, several histological studies have described the immunological features of DILI. A systematic evaluation of DILI hepatic histological findings in 249 patients showed that severe inflammation was more abundant in patients with hepatocellular injury than in those with cholestatic injury. Eosinophils and granulomas were found more often in those with milder injury, which is a potential sign of better prognosis, whereas neutrophils are associated with either severe or fatal injury. This information has helped to establish better clinical associations [7]. Wuillemin et al. [70] characterized the infiltration of cytotoxic CD3⁺ CD8⁺ lymphocytes into the liver using immunohistochemical staining of a liver biopsy from a patient with floxacillin-DILI and demonstrated the important role of activated drug-reacting T cells in DILI development. A comparison of resident macrophages from liver biopsies of acetaminophen (APAP)-DILI with either circulating macrophages or biopsies from other liver diseases showed that the macrophage population expanded in areas of necrosis, suggesting a regenerative role of these cells after injury [97]. Liver immunohistochemistry of macrophages from biopsies also showed differences in pigmented cells among the three clinical DILI injury types [98].

In recent years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become an essential antitumor therapeutic resource for the treatment of various cancers. Unfortunately, they have also become a source of immune-mediated hepatotoxicity, the mechanisms of which remain unknown [99]. Immunostaining of clinical liver samples revealed important information about immune infiltration in ICIs-DILI, predominantly lymphocytes [100]. It has been found that anti-CTLA-4 infiltrating cells predominantly consist of CD8⁺ cells, while anti-PD-1/PD-L1 liver biopsies show a similar abundance of CD8⁺ and CD4⁺ T cells. Johncilla et al. [101] characterized the histological features of ipilimumab-DILI and observed an inflammatory infiltrate consisting predominantly of CD8⁺ T lymphocytes, admixed histiocytes, scattered plasma cells, and eosinophils.

A recent study by Gudd et al. [102] showed a reduction in total monocytes and an increase in soluble CD163 levels in the peripheral circulation of ICIs-hepatitis patients compared with healthy controls. A second step of transcriptional profiling of different immune cells demonstrated the presence of activated monocyte and enhanced effector CD8⁺ T cell populations in ICIs-hepatitis patients. Moreover, subsequent liver immunochemistry confirmed the presence of CD8⁺ T cells and CD163⁺CCR2⁺ macrophage aggregates in the livers of ICIs-hepatitis patients, indicating that, in those patients, peripheral changes observed are mirrored in the liver.

Histological studies based on immunophenotyping of liver infiltrates from biopsies have also served to identify differences between DILI and other non-DILI acute liver injuries. For example, DILI biopsies have shown lower levels of mature B cells than AIH and viral hepatitis, and lower NK cells than viral hepatitis [30]. Interestingly, histological studies comparing ICIs-DILI with other forms of liver injury showed that the number of plasma cell infiltrates was significantly lower in ICI-DILI than in AIH [103], whereas CD20⁺ B cells and CD4⁺ T cells were fewer in ICI-DILI than in AIH or DILI [104]. The histological patterns of ICIs-DILI may help differentiate this type of injury from AIH and DILI [105].

Clinical implications of DILI immunophenotyping

Immunophenotyping is a powerful diagnostic tool that can be used for a wide variety of diseases involving the immune system. When used as a clinical test, immunophenotyping is a non-invasive method to investigate the type and cause of specific immune diseases. Examples of the diagnostic abilities of immunophenotyping include acute myeloid leukemia [106], eosinophilic otitis media [107], common variable immunodeficiency [108], non-small cell lung cancer [109], and different myelodysplastic syndromes [110].

Moreover, immunophenotyping could help support the clinical diagnosis if the physician is unsure. For example, both AIH and DILI can present with acute liver injury and share several clinical features. However, the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms involving the immune system remain unclear. Recently, Bozward et al. [34] reported for the first time an NK cell population difference between patients with DILI and AIH. The authors performed deep immunophenotyping of PBMCs from patients and healthy controls using cytometry of time of flight (CyTOF) and observed that NK cells from AIH patients in remission showed significantly higher positivity for both CD27 and CXCR3 when compared with healthy controls. Although the DILI samples showed a similar tendency, the differences compared to the controls were not significant.

Additionally, obtaining an immunological fingerprint for DILI offers an opportunity to expand our understanding of the immunological mechanisms involved in the disease, and it could also become a non-invasive diagnostic and prognostic tool, considering the specific immune populations of DILI patients as biomarkers. Thus, the role of liver immune tolerance in the multiple possible clinical presentations of DILI is gaining importance. The mechanisms of liver immune tolerance have been reviewed in this review (Section “Liver immune tolerance”) and in many other studies [58, 111–113]. However, the relationship between liver immune tolerance and the occurrence of a DILI event remains a subject of study, as it remains unclear why only a subset of patients with risk‐associated HLA alleles experiences a DILI event. One proposed explanation is that clinical adaptation failure is necessary for the occurrence of DILI episodes. Then, when the state of immune tolerance against a drug or its metabolite as an immunogen fails in an individual with a predisposition to DILI, a clinically relevant liver injury episode occurs. Different animal models of DILI obtained by manipulating pathways of immune tolerance leading to a failure of adaptation support this hypothesis [81, 114–116].

Therefore, approaches comparing the immunophenotype of DILI patients due to the same drug but with different clinical manifestations (asymptomatic vs. those who develop overt liver injury) could provide clues about the role of liver immune tolerance in DILI pathophysiology and even discover new pathways in DILI.

Moreover, research on possible immunophenotypic alterations in DILI may also lead to the discovery of new genetic alterations involved in the disease that could be used as new targets for specific DILI treatments, as currently, the principal therapeutic strategy at admission is stopping the use of the drug implicated, following by glucocorticoids (GCs) treatment in selected patients.

Finally, stratification of DILI patients based on their immunophenotype is necessary to improve prognosis or even determine which therapies, if any, will benefit the patient. For example, possible differences in PD-1 and PD-L1 levels in patients with DILI may explain the distinct capacity of each individual to modify their immune tolerance, as temporary upregulation of PD-1 and PD-L1, which occurs during different acute infections, is thought to be a way of regulating peripheral tolerance [117, 118].

Future perspectives

In recent years, several innovative technologies capable of extracting large amounts of immunophenotypic information have emerged. Examples include high-dimensional and multiparametric fluorescent flow cytometry, single-cell messenger RNA (mRNA) sequencing, and mass cytometry [119].

Mass cytometry or CyTOF is a powerful technique for immunophenotyping studies as it overcomes many of the limitations of traditional fluorescence-based flow cytometry. In CyTOF, immune cells are stained with antibodies bound to metal particles, which reduces interference by autofluorescence signals and signal overlap. In addition, the broader spectrum of available metal isotopes allows for the accurate quantification of more than 40 parameters in single cells [120]. This approach has recently been used to immunophenotype human blood samples from various immune-mediated liver diseases such as primary biliary cholangitis [120], viral hepatitis [121], and AIH [122]. McGuire et al. [33] combined immunohistochemistry and multiplex immunofluorescence with mass cytometry to comprehensively immunophenotype corticosteroid-resistant T cells after episodes of ICIs-DILI caused by PD-1 blockers. Similarly, CyTOF was also recently applied to better understand autoimmune liver toxicity after treatment with phosphatidylinositol 3 kinase inhibitors, showing that an increase in activated CD8 T cells with activation of Th17 T cells may be related to the toxicity of these drugs [35]. Therefore, CyTOF can be used to dissect the DILI immune landscape.

Immunohistochemistry and fluorescence imaging are traditional methods used to assess the local immune background in DILI. These approaches have been of great help, particularly in ruling out other forms of liver damage at diagnosis or providing prognostic information. However, the spatial characterization of the local immune response in DILI has so far been superficial. Most studies do not delve into immunophenotyping of the diversity of immune subpopulations, probably due to the low multiplexing capacity, lack of robustness, and alterations in tissue morphology due to the available fluorescence-based techniques. Following the principles of mass cytometry, IMC might be a tool for overcoming traditional limitations while deepening our understanding of the hepatic immune system in DILI [123, 124]. IMC has allowed the complex characterization of hepatic adaptive and innate immune subsets that correlate with hepatocellular injury or histological fibrosis using liver biopsies from patients with hepatitis B [125]. In a recent study, Csernalabics et al. [29] used IMC to analyze intrahepatic immune cell infiltration in patients with hepatitis due to the COVID-19 vaccine and found pathophysiological differences when compared with classical AIH.

Another promising way to assess the individual immune background behind DILI is single-cell methodologies, such as single-cell RNA-sequencing [126]. Recently, this technique was used to generate a map of the cellular landscape of the human liver, identifying 20 different cell populations of hepatocytes, endothelial cells, cholangiocytes, hepatic stellate cells, B cells, conventional and non-conventional T cells, NK-like cells, and various monocyte populations [65].

This approach has been already proposed as s way to better understand the roles of the immune system in different mice and human models of hepatic diseases, such as chronic liver injury [127], alcoholic liver disease (ALD), non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), DILI [128], and hepatitis B [129]. Both in vitro and in vivo models have been used to study the specific aspects of the immune system in DILI.

Recent attempts to study the immune system’s role in DILI in vitro have developed cell culture methods aimed at characterizing primary T cell responses to drugs. For example, Usui et al. [130] examined T cell priming with drugs associated with HLA risk alleles and control compounds by using cells derived from 14 HLA-typed healthy donors.

Moreover, in vitro models can be used to study the interaction between the liver and the immune system. Kato and Uetrecht [131] treated hepatocarcinoma cells with drugs associated with severe DILI. After putting in contact human monocytic cells (THP-1) with the supernatant of hepatic cells treated with the drugs of interest, macrophages showed an increased caspase-1 activity and production of IL-1β. The same results were observed by Oda et al. [132] and Ogese et al. [133] by using different immune and hepatic cell types.

Similarly, the use of in vivo models is gaining increasing interest in the study of the liver microenvironment in DILI, since their use may circumvent the difficulties associated with obtaining human samples. Buchweitz et al. [134] reproduced the human chlorpromazine hepatotoxicity in rats after a pre-treatment with LPS (a strategy called “the inflammagen model”). A few years later, following the hypothesis that immune tolerance prevents progression to liver failure, Metushi et al. [114] developed an amodiaquine-induced liver injury model using PD-1 knockout (KO) mice co-treated with an antibody against CTLA-4 in order to break the inhibition of cytotoxic T lymphocyte activation.

Very recently, mouse models combining both humanized liver and immune system are emerging in order to detect any human-specific DILI. The introduction of a complete human HLA system to the liver-humanized mice models displays a more complete overview of the prediction of DILI. For example, Song et al. [135] attempted to reproduce abacavir-induced liver injury in HLA-B^*57:01 transgenic mice. The cotreatment with abacavir and a Toll-like receptor 9 (TLR9) agonist resulted in a marked increase in alanine aminotransferase (ALT), pathological changes in the liver, increased numbers of activated CD8 T cells, and tissue infiltration by immune cells in transgenic mice.

However, different studies have shown that mimicking genetic susceptibility in mice is not sufficient for reproducing the complex pathogenesis leading to DILI in humans [116, 136, 137], thus maybe the strategy needs to be directed toward the use of patient-derived samples.

Conclusions

Immunophenotyping has largely contributed to the mechanistic understanding of DILI. Infiltration of CD3⁺CD8⁺ cytotoxic lymphocytes has been observed in the liver tissue of patients with DILI due to various drugs; however, there are only a few studies using DILI liver tissue due to the scarcity of this type of sample. Drug-specific peripheral blood T cells have also been detected in PBMCs from patients with DILI due to various drugs, as well as increased levels of activated helper T cells and cytotoxic T cells compared to healthy controls. The current lack of specific markers to distinguish DILI from other liver diseases makes it difficult to apply immunophenotyping to the diagnostic criteria. To date, classical techniques, such as flow cytometry has failed to provide an “immune fingerprint” for DILI. However, the use of more complex approaches such as mass cytometry, or single-cell RNA-seq could extend the number of populations studied and allow the identification of specific markers in immune cells derived from DILI patients. Unfortunately, the use of novel immunophenotyping techniques in the field of DILI still faces several challenges, including a lack of consensus on the most appropriate procedures to be performed and the parameters to be analyzed. Furthermore, verification of the correlation between blood and liver immunophenotyping in patients with DILI is necessary to strengthen the feasibility of using peripheral blood samples to infer DILI mechanisms. Due to the low incidence of DILI, access to samples and data for researchers is limited to single centers or small consortia of DILI teams. Therefore, the establishment of a multidisciplinary network of clinicians, immunologists, and professionals with different scientific profiles is necessary to determine which parameters are more informative in DILI research and to establish standard techniques that would contribute to greater comparability across studies, with the ultimate goal of translating immunophenotyping to clinical practice.

Abbreviations

AIH

autoimmune hepatitis

APCs

antigen-presenting cells

CCR7

C-C chemokine receptor type 7

COVID-19

coronavirus disease 2019

CRMs

chemically reactive metabolites

CTLA-4

cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4

CXCR5

C-X-C motif chemokine receptor 5

CyTOF

cytometry of time of flight

DILI

drug-induced liver injury

HLA

human leucocyte antigen

ICIs

immune checkpoint inhibitors

ICOS

immune receptor inducible co-stimulator

IFC

imaging flow cytometry

IL-10

interleukin-10

IMC

imaging mass cytometry

iNK-T

invariant natural killer T

KCs

Kupffer cells

LPS

lipopolysaccharide

MAFLD

metabolic-associated fatty liver disease

MHC

major histocompatibility complex

natural killer

PBMCs

peripheral blood mononuclear cells

PD-1

programmed cell death-1

PD-L1

programmed cell death-ligand 1

Th1

T helper 1

TNF

tumor necrosis factor

Treg

regulatory T cell

Declarations Author contributions

ACS: Writing—original draft. DEDZS: Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. ASZ, GMC, and ABG: Writing—review & editing. MIL: Conceptualization, Writing—review & editing, Supervision. MVP: Conceptualization, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing, Supervision. All authors contributed to the manuscript revision, and read and approved the submitted version.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent to publication

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Funding

This work was supported by grants from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III cofounded by Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER), contract numbers: [PI21/01248], [PI19-00883], [PT 20/00127], [UMA18-FEDERJA-194], [PY18-3364]; and grants from Consejería de Salud de Andalucía cofounded by FEDER, contract number: [PEMP-0127-2020]. Marina Villanueva-Paz holds a Sara Borrell [CD21/00198] research contract from Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII) and Consejería de Salud de Andalucía. Alejandro Cueto-Sánchez holds an i-PFIS: Doctorados IIS-empresa en Ciencias y Tecnologías de la Salud [IFI18/00047] research contract from ISCIII. Daniel E. Di Zeo-Sánchez holds an i-PFIS: Doctorados IIS-empresa en Ciencias y Tecnologías de la Salud [IFI21/00034] research contract from ISCIII. Gonzalo Matilla-Cabello holds a Garantía Juvenil [SNGJ5Y6-09] research contract with Junta de Andalucía and the European Social Fund. Antonio Segovia-Zafra holds a Jaume Bosch Training Action 2022 from Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBEREHD). Ana Bodoque-García holds a Garantía Juvenil [POEJ-00041-IBIMA] research contract from Junta de Andalucía and the European Social Fund. Spanish Clinical Research Network (SCReN) and CIBEREHD are funded by ISCIII. This publication is based on work from COST Action ‘CA17112—Prospective European Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network’ supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology), www.cost.eu. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Andrade

Chalasani

Björnsson

Suzuki

Kullak-Ublick

Watkins

et al.

Drug-induced liver injury

Nat Rev Dis Primers 2019 5

10.1038/s41572-019-0105-0

31439850

Garcia-Cortes

Robles-Diaz

Stephens

Ortega-Alonso

Lucena

Andrade

Drug induced liver injury: an update

Arch Toxicol 2020 94 3381 407

10.1007/s00204-020-02885-1

32852569

Chen

Suzuki

Borlak

Andrade

Lucena

Drug-induced liver injury: interactions between drug properties and host factors

J Hepatol 2015 63 503 14

10.1016/j.jhep.2015.04.016

25912521

Hoofnagle

Björnsson

Drug-induced liver injury - types and phenotypes

N Engl J Med 2019 381 264 73

10.1056/NEJMc1911063

31577895

Villanueva-Paz

Morán

López-Alcántara

Freixo

Andrade

Lucena

et al.

Oxidative stress in drug-induced liver injury (DILI): from mechanisms to biomarkers for use in clinical practice

Antioxidants (Basel) 2021 10

390

10.3390/antiox10030390

33807700

PMC8000729

Hassan

Fontana

The diagnosis and management of idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury

Liver Int 2019 39 31 41

10.1111/liv.13931

30003672

Kleiner

Chalasani

Lee

Fontana

Bonkovsky

Watkins

et al.

; Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN). Hepatic histological findings in suspected drug-induced liver injury: systematic evaluation and clinical associations

Hepatology 2014 59 661 70

10.1002/hep.26709

24037963

PMC3946736

Robles-Diaz

Lucena

Kaplowitz

Stephens

Medina-Cáliz

González-Jimenez

et al.

; Spanish DILI Registry; SLatinDILI Network; Safer and Faster Evidence-based Translation Consortium. Use of Hy’s law and a new composite algorithm to predict acute liver failure in patients with drug-induced liver injury

Gastroenterology 2014 147 109 18.e5

10.1053/j.gastro.2014.03.050

24704526

Reuben

Tillman

Fontana

Davern

McGuire

Stravitz

et al.

Outcomes in adults with acute liver failure between 1998 and 2013: an observational cohort study

Ann Intern Med 2016 164 724 32

10.7326/M15-2211

27043883

PMC5526039

Kullak-Ublick

Andrade

Merz

End

Benesic

Gerbes

et al.

Drug-induced liver injury: recent advances in diagnosis and risk assessment

Gut 2017 66 1154 64

10.1136/gutjnl-2016-313369

28341748

PMC5532458

Ulrich

Idiosyncratic toxicity: a convergence of risk factors

Annu Rev Med 2007 58 17 34

10.1146/annurev.med.58.072905.160823

16958561

Morgan

Trauner

van Staden

Lee

Ramachandran

Eschenberg

et al.

Interference with bile salt export pump function is a susceptibility factor for human liver injury in drug development

Toxicol Sci 2010 118 485 500

10.1093/toxsci/kfq269

20829430

Iorga

Dara

Kaplowitz

Drug-induced liver injury: cascade of events leading to cell death, apoptosis or necrosis

Int J Mol Sci 2017 18

1018

10.3390/ijms18051018

28486401

PMC5454931

Yang

Liu

Dong

Sun

Zhu

et al.

Gut microbiota associated with pulmonary tuberculosis and dysbiosis caused by anti-tuberculosis drugs

J Infect 2019 78 317 22

10.1016/j.jinf.2018.08.006

30107196

Gerussi

Natalini

Antonangeli

Mancuso

Agostinetto

Barisani

et al.

Immune-mediated drug-induced liver injury: immunogenetics and experimental models

Int J Mol Sci 2021 22

4557

10.3390/ijms22094557

33925355

PMC8123708

Ziegler-Heitbrock

Ancuta

Crowe

Dalod

Grau

Hart

et al.

Nomenclature of monocytes and dendritic cells in blood

Blood 2010 116 e74 80

10.1182/blood-2010-02-258558

20628149

Kawamoto

Minato

Myeloid cells

Int J Biochem Cell Biol 2004 36 1374 9

10.1016/j.biocel.2004.01.020

15147715

Finak

Langweiler

Jaimes

Malek

Taghiyar

Korin

et al.

Standardizing flow cytometry immunophenotyping analysis from the Human ImmunoPhenotyping Consortium

Sci Rep 2016 6

20686

10.1038/srep20686

26861911

PMC4748244

Payne

Salomon

OMIP-063: 28-color flow cytometry panel for broad human immunophenotyping

Cytometry A 2020 97 777 81

10.1002/cyto.a.24018

32298042

Aldridge

Ekwall

AKH

Mark

Bergström

Andersson

Gjertsson

et al.

T helper cells in synovial fluid of patients with rheumatoid arthritis primarily have a Th1 and a CXCR3⁺Th2 phenotype

Arthritis Res Ther 2020 22

245

10.1186/s13075-020-02349-y

33066816

PMC7566124

Cueto-Sanchez

Niu

Del

Campo-Herrera E

Robles-Díaz

Sanabria-Cabrera

Ortega-Alonso

et al.

Lymphocyte profile and immune checkpoint expression in drug-induced liver injury: an immunophenotyping study

Clin Pharmacol Ther 2021 110 1604 12

10.1002/cpt.2423

34543448

Rha

Shin

Activation or exhaustion of CD8⁺ T cells in patients with COVID-19

Cell Mol Immunol 2021 18 2325 33

10.1038/s41423-021-00750-4

34413488

PMC8374113

Kužílková

Puñet-Ortiz

Aui

Fernández

Fišer

Engel

et al.

Standardization of workflow and flow cytometry panels for quantitative expression profiling of surface antigens on blood leukocyte subsets: an HCDM CDMaps Initiative

Front Immunol 2022 13

827898

10.3389/fimmu.2022.827898

35222411

PMC8874145

Newton

Dobrovolskaia

Immunophenotyping: analytical approaches and role in preclinical development of nanomedicines

Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2022 185

114281

10.1016/j.addr.2022.114281

35405297

Dworzak

Buldini

Gaipa

Ratei

Hrusak

Luria

et al.

; International-BFM-FLOW-network. AIEOP-BFM consensus guidelines 2016 for flow cytometric immunophenotyping of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia

Cytometry B Clin Cytom 2018 94 82 93

10.1002/cyto.b.21518

28187514

Bleesing

JJH

Fleisher

Immunophenotyping

Semin Hematol 2001 38 100 10

10.1016/s0037-1963(01)90044-7

11309692

Mahnke

Roederer

Optimizing a multicolor immunophenotyping assay

Clin Lab Med 2007 27 469 85

10.1016/j.cll.2007.05.002

17658403

PMC2034273

McKinnon

Flow cytometry: an overview

Curr Protoc Immunol 2018 120 5.1.1 11

10.1002/cpim.40

9660728

PMC5939936

Csernalabics

Boettler

Salié

Luxenburger

Wischer

Zoldan

et al.

Immune-mediated hepatitis associated with SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination

Z Gastroenterol 2022 60

e48

Foureau

Walling

Maddukuri

Anderson

Culbreath

Kleiner

et al.

Comparative analysis of portal hepatic infiltrating leucocytes in acute drug-induced liver injury, idiopathic autoimmune and viral hepatitis

Clin Exp Immunol 2015 180 40 51

10.1111/cei.12558

25418487

PMC4367092

Metushi

Zhu

Chen

Gardam

Uetrecht

Mild isoniazid-induced liver injury in humans is associated with an increase in Th17 cells and T cells producing IL-10

Chem Res Toxicol 2014 27 683 9

10.1021/tx500013z

24564876

Caballano-Infantes

García-García

Lopez-Gomez

Cueto

Robles-Diaz

Ortega-Alonso

et al.

Differential iNKT and T Cells activation in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and drug-induced liver injury

Biomedicines 2021 10

10.3390/biomedicines10010055

35052736

PMC8772872

McGuire

Shklovskaya

Edwards

Trevillian

McCaughan

Bertolino

et al.

Anti-PD-1-induced high-grade hepatitis associated with corticosteroid-resistant T cells: a case report

Cancer Immunol Immunother 2018 67 563 73

10.1007/s00262-017-2107-7

29289977

PMC5860100

Bozward

Astbury

Atallah

Wootton

Grove

Patel

et al.

CXCR3pos CD27pos CD161pos NK cells in autoimmune and drug induced liver injury position around lectin like transcript-1 expressing Kupffer cells and CD70pos dendritic cells

J Hepatol 2021 75

S303

Gadi

Griffith

Tyekucheva

Wang

Rai

Vartanov

et al.

A T cell inflammatory phenotype is associated with autoimmune toxicity of the PI3K inhibitor duvelisib in chronic lymphocytic leukemia

Leukemia 2022 36 723 32

10.1038/s41375-021-01441-9

34743191

PMC8891037

Akanni

Palini

Immunophenotyping of peripheral blood and bone marrow cells by flow cytometry

EJIFCC 2006 17 17 21

29795718

PMC5954430

Béné

Nebe

Bettelheim

Buldini

Bumbea

Kern

et al.

Immunophenotyping of acute leukemia and lymphoproliferative disorders: a consensus proposal of the European LeukemiaNet Work Package 10

Leukemia 2011 25 567 74

10.1038/leu.2010.312

21252983

Daly

Pharmacogenomics of adverse drug reactions

Genome Med 2013 5

10.1186/gm409

23360680

PMC3707028

Aithal

Ramsay

Daly

Sonchit

Leathart

JBS

Alexander

et al.

Hepatic adducts, circulating antibodies, and cytokine polymorphisms in patients with diclofenac hepatotoxicity

Hepatology 2004 39 1430 40

10.1002/hep.20205

15122773

Cirulli

Nicoletti

Abramson

Andrade

Bjornsson

Chalasani

et al

A missense variant in PTPN22 is a risk factor for drug-induced liver injury

Gastroenterology 2019 156 1707 16.e2

10.1053/j.gastro.2019.01.034

30664875

PMC6511989

Nicoletti

Dellinger

Barnhart

Chalasani

Fontana

et al

Identification of reduced ERAP2 expression and a novel HLA allele as components of a risk score for susceptibility to liver injury due to amoxicillin-clavulanate

Gastroenterology 2023 164 454 66

10.1053/j.gastro.2022.11.036

36496055

Jee

Sernoskie

Uetrecht

Idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury: mechanistic and clinical challenges

Int J Mol Sci 2021 22

2954

10.3390/ijms22062954

33799477

PMC7998339

Sernoskie

Jee

Uetrecht

The emerging role of the innate immune response in idiosyncratic drug reactions

Pharmacol Rev 2021 73 861 96

10.1124/pharmrev.120.000090

34016669

Noureddin

Kaplowitz

Overview of mechanisms of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and key challenges in DILI research In

Chen M, Will Y, editors. Drug-induced liver toxicity. New York, NY: Springer New York

2018. pp. 3–18.

Fleshner

Crane

Exosomes, DAMPs and miRNA: features of stress physiology and immune homeostasis

Trends Immunol 2017 38 768 76

10.1016/j.it.2017.08.002

28838855

PMC5624844

Khambu

Yan

Huda

Yin

Role of high-mobility group box-1 in liver pathogenesis

Int J Mol Sci 2019 20

5314

10.3390/ijms20215314

31731454

PMC6862281

Zindel

Kubes

DAMPs, PAMPs, and LAMPs in immunity and sterile inflammation

Annu Rev Pathol 2020 15 493 518

10.1146/annurev-pathmechdis-012419-032847

31675482

Amarante-Mendes

Adjemian

Branco

Zanetti

Weinlich

Bortoluci

Pattern recognition receptors and the host cell death molecular machinery

Front Immunol 2018 9

2379

10.3389/fimmu.2018.02379

30459758

PMC6232773

Lucena

Sanabria

García-Cortes

Stephens

Andrade

Drug-induced liver injury in older people

Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020 5 862 74

10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30006-6

32818465

Megherbi

Kiorpelidou

Foster

Rowe

Naisbitt

Goldring

et al.

Role of protein haptenation in triggering maturation events in the dendritic cell surrogate cell line THP-1

Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2009 238 120 32

10.1016/j.taap.2009.05.001

19427879

Wuillemin

Adam

Fontana

Krähenbühl

Pichler

Yerly

HLA haplotype determines hapten or p-i T cell reactivity to flucloxacillin

J Immunol 2013 190 4956 64

10.4049/jimmunol.1202949

23596311

Pichler

Pharmacological interaction of drugs with antigen-specific immune receptors: the p-i concept

Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2002 2 301 5

10.1097/00130832-200208000-00003

12130944

Schnyder

Mauri-Hellweg

Zanni

Bettens

Pichler

Direct, MHC-dependent presentation of the drug sulfamethoxazole to human alphabeta T cell clones

J Clin Invest 1997 100 136 41

10.1172/JCI119505

9202065

PMC508173

Wei

Chung

Huang

Chen

Hung

Direct interaction between HLA-B and carbamazepine activates T cells in patients with Stevens-Johnson syndrome

J Allergy Clin Immunol 2012 129 1562 9.e5

10.1016/j.jaci.2011.12.990

22322005

Illing

Vivian

Dudek

Kostenko

Chen

Bharadwaj

et al.

Immune self-reactivity triggered by drug-modified HLA-peptide repertoire

Nature 2012 486 554 8

10.1038/nature11147

22722860

Norcross

Luo

Boyne

Gomarteli

Rennels

et al.

Abacavir induces loading of novel self-peptides into HLA-B^*57: 01: an autoimmune model for HLA-associated drug hypersensitivity

AIDS 2012 26 F21 9

10.1097/QAD.0b013e328355fe8f

22617051

PMC4155923

Reilly

Role of immune reactions in drug-induced liver injury (DILI)

Drug Metab Rev 2012 44 107 15

10.3109/03602532.2011.645579

22235834

Dara

Liu

Kaplowitz

Mechanisms of adaptation and progression in idiosyncratic drug induced liver injury, clinical implications

Liver Int 2016 36 158 65

10.1111/liv.12988

26484420

PMC4718752

Sakaguchi

Miyara

Costantino

Hafler

FOXP3⁺ regulatory T cells in the human immune system

Nat Rev Immunol 2010 10 490 500

10.1038/nri2785

20559327

Liu

Zeng

Liu

Chen

et al.

the immunological mechanisms and immune-based biomarkers of drug-induced liver injury

Front Pharmacol 2021 12

723940

10.3389/fphar.2021.723940

34721020

PMC8554067

Watkins

Idiosyncratic liver injury: challenges and approaches

Toxicol Pathol 2005 33 1 5

10.1080/01926230590888306

15805049

Mak

Uetrecht

The combination of anti-CTLA-4 and PD1^-/- mice unmasks the potential of isoniazid and nevirapine to cause liver injury

Chem Res Toxicol 2015 28 2287 91

10.1021/acs.chemrestox.5b00305

26529122

Knolle

Schlaak

Uhrig

Kempf

Meyer

zum Büschenfelde KH

Gerken

Human Kupffer cells secrete IL-10 in response to lipopolysaccharide (LPS) challenge

J Hepatol 1995 22 226 9

10.1016/0168-8278(95)80433-1

7790711

Aizarani

Saviano

Sagar Mailly

Durand

Herman

et al.

A human liver cell atlas reveals heterogeneity and epithelial progenitors

Nature 2019 572 199 204

10.1038/s41586-019-1373-2

31292543

PMC6687507

MacParland

Liu

Innes

Bartczak

Gage

et al.

Single cell RNA sequencing of human liver reveals distinct intrahepatic macrophage populations

Nat Commun 2018 9

4383

10.1038/s41467-018-06318-7

30348985

PMC6197289

Zhao

Wang

Cui

Yang

You

et al.

Characterization of intrahepatic B cells in acute-on-chronic liver failure

Front Immunol 2022 13

1041176

10.3389/fimmu.2022.1041176

36505417

PMC9732531

Zhang

Luo

Patel

Han

Gao

et al.

Landscape and dynamics of single immune cells in hepatocellular carcinoma

Cell 2019 179 829 45.e20

10.1016/j.cell.2019.10.003

31675496

Ramachandran

Dobie

Wilson-Kanamori

Dora

Henderson

BEP

Luu

et al.

Resolving the fibrotic niche of human liver cirrhosis at single-cell level

Nature 2019 575 512 8

10.1038/s41586-019-1631-3

31597160

PMC6876711

Adams

Ramaiah

Uetrecht

Jaeschke

Mechanisms of immune-mediated liver injury

Toxicol Sci 2010 115 307 21

10.1093/toxsci/kfq009

20071422

PMC2871750

Wuillemin

Terracciano

Beltraminelli

Schlapbach

Fontana

Krähenbühl

et al.

T cells infiltrate the liver and kill hepatocytes in HLA-B^∗57:01-associated floxacillin-induced liver injury

Am J Pathol 2014 184 1677 82

10.1016/j.ajpath.2014.02.018

24731753

Monshi

Faulkner

Gibson

Jenkins

Farrell

Earnshaw

et al.

Human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-B^*57:01-restricted activation of drug-specific T cells provides the immunological basis for flucloxacillin-induced liver injury

Hepatology 2013 57 727 39

10.1002/hep.26077

22987284

Kim

Saide

Farrell

Faulkner

Tailor

Ogese

et al.

Characterization of amoxicillin- and clavulanic acid-specific T cells in patients with amoxicillin-clavulanate-induced liver injury

Hepatology 2015 62 887 99

10.1002/hep.27912

25998949

Usui

Whitaker

Meng

Watson

Antoine

French

et al.

Detection of drug-responsive T-lymphocytes in a case of fatal antituberculosis drug-related liver injury

Chem Res Toxicol 2016 29 1793 5

10.1021/acs.chemrestox.6b00393

27933861

Gibson

Hammond

Jaruthamsophon

Roth

Mosedale

Naisbitt

tolvaptan- and tolvaptan-metabolite-responsive T cells in patients with drug-induced liver injury

Chem Res Toxicol 2020 33 2745 8

10.1021/acs.chemrestox.0c00328

33085478

PMC7672698

Thomson

Kafu

Meng

Snoeys

Bondt A

Maeyer D

et al.

Drug-specific T-cell responses in patients with liver injury following treatment with the BACE inhibitor atabecestat

Allergy 2021 76 1825 35

10.1111/all.14652

33150583

Batty

Lillicrap

Hemophilia gene therapy: approaching the first licensed product

Hemasphere 2021 5

e540

10.1097/HS9.0000000000000540

33604517

PMC7886458

Ozelo

Mahlangu

Pasi

Giermasz

Leavitt

Laffan

et al.

; GENEr8-1 Trial Group. Valoctocogene roxaparvovec gene therapy for hemophilia A

N Engl J Med 2022 386 1013 25

10.1056/NEJMoa2113708

35294811

Shah

Kim

Sivamurthy

Monahan

Fries

Comprehensive analysis and prediction of long-term durability of factor IX activity following etranacogene dezaparvovec gene therapy in the treatment of hemophilia B

Curr Med Res Opin 2023 39 227 37

10.1080/03007995.2022.2133492

36285399

Simioni

Tormene

Tognin

Gavasso

Bulato

Iacobelli

et al.

X-linked thrombophilia with a mutant factor IX (factor IX Padua)

N Engl J Med 2009 361 1671 5

10.1056/NEJMoa0904377

19846852

Finn

Nichols

Svoronos

Merricks

Bellenger

Zhou

et al.

The efficacy and the risk of immunogenicity of FIX Padua (R338L) in hemophilia B dogs treated by AAV muscle gene therapy

Blood 2012 120 4521 3

10.1182/blood-2012-06-440123

22919027

PMC3512231

Segovia-Zafra

Zeo-Sánchez DE

López-Gómez

Pérez-Valdés

García-Fuentes

Andrade

et al.

Preclinical models of idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury (iDILI): moving towards prediction

Acta Pharm Sin B 2021 11 3685 726

10.1016/j.apsb.2021.11.013

35024301

PMC8727925

Shi

Hong

Senior

Tong

Biomarkers for drug-induced liver injury

Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010 4 225 34

10.1016/j.apsb.2021.11.013

35024301

PMC8727925

Estevez

Chen

Podlaha

Vutien

et al.

Differential serum cytokine profiles in patients with chronic hepatitis B, C, and hepatocellular carcinoma

Sci Rep 2017 7

11867

10.1038/s41598-017-11975-7

28928388

PMC5605527

Papic

Samadan

Vrsaljko

Radmanic

Jelicic

Simicic

et al.

Distinct cytokine profiles in severe COVID-19 and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

Life (Basel) 2022 12

795

10.3390/life12060795

35743825

PMC9225218

Pachkoria

Lucena

Crespo

Ruiz-Cabello

Lopez-Ortega

Fernandez

et al.

; Spanish Group for the Study of Drug-Induced Liver Disease (Grupo de Estudio para las Hepatopatías Asociadas a Medicamentos (GEHAM)). Analysis of IL-10, IL-4 and TNF-α polymorphisms in drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and its outcome

J Hepatol 2008 49 107 14

10.1016/j.jhep.2008.03.017

18485518

Trinchieri

Interleukin-10 production by effector T cells: Th1 cells show self control

J Exp Med 2007 204 239 43

10.1084/jem.20070104

17296790

PMC2118719

Lai

Xiang

Bao

Wang

Guo

et al.

Protective effect of Th22 cells and intrahepatic IL-22 in drug induced hepatocellular injury

J Hepatol 2015 63 148 55

10.1016/j.jhep.2015.02.004

25681556

Steuerwald

Foureau

Norton

Zhou

Parsons

Chalasani

et al.

Profiles of serum cytokines in acute drug-induced liver injury and their prognostic significance

PLoS One 2013 8

e81974

10.1371/journal.pone.0081974

24386086

PMC3873930

Bonkovsky

Barnhart

Foureau

Steuerwald

Lee

et al.

; US Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network and the Acute Liver Failure Study Group. Cytokine profiles in acute liver injury—results from the US Drug-Induced Liver Injury Network (DILIN) and the Acute Liver Failure Study Group

PLoS One 2018 13

e0206389

Erratum in: PLoS One. 2019;14:e0212394.

10.1371/journal.pone.0206389

30359443

PMC6201986

Whritenour

Zong

Wang

Tartaro

Schneider

et al.

Development of a modified lymphocyte transformation test for diagnosing drug-induced liver injury associated with an adaptive immune response

J Immunotoxicol 2017 14 31 8

10.1080/1547691X.2016.1254305

28121193

PMC5505862

Wang

Zhang

The roles of liver-resident lymphocytes in liver diseases

Front Immunol 2019 10

1582

10.3389/fimmu.2019.01582

31379818

PMC6648801

Kubes

Jenne

Immune responses in the liver

Annu Rev Immunol 2018 36 247 77

10.1146/annurev-immunol-051116-052415

29328785

Brennan

Cartlidge

Manship

Dillon

Guideline review: EASL clinical practice guidelines: drug-induced liver injury (DILI)

Frontline Gastroenterol 2022 13 332 6

10.1136/flgastro-2021-101886

35722609

PMC9186030

European Association for the Study of the Liver

EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: drug-induced liver injury

J Hepatol 2019 70 1222 61

10.1016/j.jhep.2019.02.014

30926241

Aithal

Watkins

Andrade

Larrey

Molokhia

Takikawa

et al.

Case definition and phenotype standardization in drug-induced liver injury

Clin Pharmacol Ther 2011 89 806 15

10.1038/clpt.2011.58

21544079

Hayashi

Lucena

Fontana

RECAM: a new and improved, computerized causality assessment tool for DILI diagnosis

Am J Gastroenterol 2022 117 1387 9

10.14309/ajg.0000000000001836

35973138

Antoniades

Quaglia

Taams

Mitry

Hussain

Abeles

et al.

Source and characterization of hepatic macrophages in acetaminophen-induced acute liver failure in humans

Hepatology 2012 56 735 46

10.1002/hep.25657

22334567

Liu

Wang

Liu

Zhang

Liu

et al.

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of 3 diagnostic criteria combined with refined pathological scoring system for drug-induced liver injury

Medicine (Baltimore) 2020 99

e22259

10.1097/MD.0000000000022259

33031266

Shojaie

Ali

Iorga

Dara

Mechanisms of immune checkpoint inhibitor-mediated liver injury

Acta Pharm Sin B 2021 11 3727 39

10.1016/j.apsb.2021.10.003

35024302

PMC8727893

100

Karamchandani

Chetty

Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced gastrointestinal and hepatic injury: pathologists’ perspective

J Clin Pathol 2018 71 665 71

10.1136/jclinpath-2018-205143

29703758

101

Johncilla

Misdraji

Pratt

Agoston

Lauwers

Srivastava

et al.

Ipilimumab-associated hepatitis: clinicopathologic characterization in a series of 11 cases

Am J Surg Pathol 2015 39 1075 84

10.1097/PAS.0000000000000453

26034866

102

Gudd

CLC

Triantafyllou

Shum

Liu

Nathwani

et al.

Activation and transcriptional profile of monocytes and CD8⁺ T cells are altered in checkpoint inhibitor-related hepatitis

J Hepatol 2021 75 177 89

10.1016/j.jhep.2021.02.008

33631227

103

Martin E

Michot

Papouin

Champiat

Mateus

Lambotte

et al.

Characterization of liver injury induced by cancer immunotherapy using immune checkpoint inhibitors

J Hepatol 2018 68 1181 90

10.1016/j.jhep.2018.01.033

29427729

104

Zen

Yeh

Hepatotoxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitors: a histology study of seven cases in comparison with autoimmune hepatitis and idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury

Mod Pathol 2018 31 965 73

10.1038/s41379-018-0013-y

29403081

105

Taherian

Chatterjee

Wang

Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced hepatic injury: a clinicopathologic review

J Clin Transl Pathol 2022 2 83 90

10.14218/jctp.2022.00017

36618338

PMC9815477

106

Chen

Cherian

Acute myeloid leukemia immunophenotyping by flow cytometric analysis

Clin Lab Med 2017 37 753 69

10.1016/j.cll.2017.07.003

29128067

107

Saliba

Alzahrani

Weng

Bestavros

Eosinophilic otitis media diagnosis using flow cytometric immunophenotyping

Acta Otolaryngol 2018 138 110 5

10.1080/00016489.2017.1385845

29037099

108

Wehr

Kivioja

Schmitt

Ferry

Witte

Eren

et al.

The EUROclass trial: defining subgroups in common variable immunodeficiency

Blood 2008 111 77 85

10.1182/blood-2007-06-091744

17898316

109

Wojas-Krawczyk

Kalinka

Grenda

Krawczyk

Milanowski

Beyond PD-L1 markers for lung cancer immunotherapy

Int J Mol Sci 2019 20

1915

10.3390/ijms20081915

31003463

PMC6515086

110

Bento

Correia

Pitangueiras

Mangueira CL

Souza Barroso R

Rocha

Bacal

et al.

The use of flow cytometry in myelodysplastic syndromes: a review

Front Oncol 2017 7

270

10.3389/fonc.2017.00270

29188193

PMC5694750

111

Tiegs

Lohse

Immune tolerance: what is unique about the liver

J Autoimmun 2010 34 1 6

10.1016/j.jaut.2009.08.008

19717280

112

Zheng

Tian

Liver-mediated adaptive immune tolerance

Front Immunol 2019 10

2525

10.3389/fimmu.2019.02525

31787967

PMC6856635

113

Crispe

Immune tolerance in liver disease

Hepatology 2014 60 2109 17

10.1002/hep.27254

24913836

PMC4274953

114

Metushi

Hayes

Uetrecht

Treatment of PD-1^-/- mice with amodiaquine and anti-CTLA4 leads to liver injury similar to idiosyncratic liver injury in patients

Hepatology 2015 61 1332 42

10.1002/hep.27549

25283142

115

Chakraborty

Fullerton

Semple

Chea

Proctor

Bourdi

et al.

Drug-induced allergic hepatitis develops in mice when myeloid-derived suppressor cells are depleted prior to halothane treatment

Hepatology 2015 62 546 57

10.1002/hep.27764

25712247

PMC6528654

116

Cardone

Garcia

Tilahun

Boyd

Gebreyohannes

Yano

et al.

A transgenic mouse model for HLA-B^*57:01-linked abacavir drug tolerance and reactivity

J Clin Invest 2018 128 2819 32

10.1172/JCI99321

29782330

PMC6025983

117

Nishimura

Honjo

PD-1: an inhibitory immunoreceptor involved in peripheral tolerance

Trends Immunol 2001 22 265 8

10.1016/s1471-4906(01)01888-9

11323285

118

Cho

Kang

Lee

Kim

Programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) in viral hepatitis

Int J Mol Sci 2017 18

1517

10.3390/ijms18071517

28703774

PMC5536007

119

Zeo-Sánchez DE

Sánchez-Núñez

Stephens

Lucena

Characterizing highly cited papers in mass cytometry through H-classics

Biology (Basel) 2021 10

104

10.3390/biology10020104

33540586

PMC7912900

120

Jang

Juran

Cunningham

Gupta

Son

Yang

et al.

Single-cell mass cytometry on peripheral blood identifies immune cell subsets associated with primary biliary cholangitis

Sci Rep 2020 10

12584

10.1038/s41598-020-69358-4

32724082

PMC7387528

121

Herderschee

Heinonen

Fenwick

Schrijver

Ohmiti

Moradpour

et al.

; Swiss HIV Cohort Study. High-dimensional immune phenotyping of blood cells by mass cytometry in patients infected with hepatitis C virus

Clin Microbiol Infect 2022 28 611.e1 7

10.1016/j.cmi.2021.08.018

34474121

122

McEachern

Carroll

Fribourg

Schiano

Hartzell

Bin

et al.

Erythropoietin administration expands regulatory T cells in patients with autoimmune hepatitis

J Autoimmun 2021 119

102629

Erratum in: J Autoimmun. 2021;121:102665.

10.1016/j.jaut.2021.102629

33721837

123

Hartmann

Bendall

Immune monitoring using mass cytometry and related high-dimensional imaging approaches

Nat Rev Rheumatol 2020 16 87 99

10.1038/s41584-019-0338-z

31892734

PMC7232872

124

Devine

Behbehani

Mass cytometry, imaging mass cytometry, and multiplexed ion beam imaging use in a clinical setting

Clin Lab Med 2021 41 297 308

10.1016/j.cll.2021.03.008

34020765

125

Traum

Wang

Schwarz

Schug

Wong

DKH

Janssen

HLA

et al.

Highly multiplexed 2-dimensional imaging mass cytometry analysis of HBV-infected liver

JCI Insight 2021 6

e146883

10.1172/jci.insight.146883

33621209

PMC8119221

126

Ramachandran

Matchett

Dobie

Wilson-Kanamori

Henderson

Single-cell technologies in hepatology: new insights into liver biology and disease pathogenesis

Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020 17 457 72

10.1038/s41575-020-0304-x

32483353

127

Wang

Shen

Liu

Dai

Shen

et al.

Dissecting the single-cell transcriptome underlying chronic liver injury

Mol Ther Nucleic Acids 2021 26 1364 73

10.1016/j.omtn.2021.11.008

34900395

PMC8626669

128

Wang

Qian

Zhang

Guo

Lou

et al.

A single-cell transcriptomic atlas characterizes liver non-parenchymal cells in healthy and diseased mice. bioRxiv [Preprint]. 2021 [cited 2022 Dec 15]. Available from: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.06.451396v1

129

Zhang

Zhou

Liu

Peng

She

et al.

Single-cell RNA transcriptomics reveals the state of hepatic lymphatic endothelial cells in hepatitis B virus-related acute-on-chronic liver failure

J Clin Med 2022 11

2910

10.3390/jcm11102910

35629036

PMC9143330

130

Usui

Faulkner

Farrell

French

Alfirevic

Pirmohamed

et al.

Application of in vitro T cell assay using human leukocyte antigen-typed healthy donors for the assessment of drug immunogenicity

Chem Res Toxicol 2018 31 165 7

10.1021/acs.chemrestox.8b00030

29436218

131

Kato

Uetrecht

Supernatant from hepatocyte cultures with drugs that cause idiosyncratic liver injury activates macrophage inflammasomes

Chem Res Toxicol 2017 30 1327 32

10.1021/acs.chemrestox.7b00065

28525267

132

Oda

Matsuo

Nakajima

Yokoi

A novel cell-based assay for the evaluation of immune- and inflammatory-related gene expression as biomarkers for the risk assessment of drug-induced liver injury

Toxicol Lett 2016 241 60 70

10.1016/j.toxlet.2015.10.029

26546780

133

Ogese

Faulkner

Jenkins

French

Copple

Antoine

et al.

Characterization of drug-specific signaling between primary human hepatocytes and immune cells

Toxicol Sci 2017 158 76 89

10.1093/toxsci/kfx069

28444390

134

Buchweitz

Ganey

Bursian

Roth

Underlying endotoxemia augments toxic responses to chlorpromazine: is there a relationship to drug idiosyncrasy?

J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2002 300 460 7

10.1124/jpet.300.2.460

11805205

135

Song

Aoki

Liu

Susukida

Ito

An animal model of abacavir-induced HLA-mediated liver injury

Toxicol Sci 2018 162 713 23

10.1093/toxsci/kfy001

29319822

136

Susukida

Aoki

Kogo

Fujimori

Song

Liu

et al.

Evaluation of immune-mediated idiosyncratic drug toxicity using chimeric HLA transgenic mice

Arch Toxicol 2018 92 1177 88

10.1007/s00204-017-2112-9

29150704

137

Lundgren

Martinsson

Cederbrant

Jirholt

Mucs

Madeyski-Bengtson

et al.

HLA-DR7 and HLA-DQ2: transgenic mouse strains tested as a model system for ximelagatran hepatotoxicity

PLoS One 2017 12

e0184744

10.1371/journal.pone.0184744

28934241

PMC5608249