ReachRxResearch
Home
Research
Sign Up
  1. Home
  2. Research Hub
  3. Continuous succinate administration indu…

Continuous succinate administration induces eosinophilic enteritis via the tuft cell-IL-25 axis in mice

Allergology International·August 22Open Access
AllergyLimited evidenceEosinophilic EnteritisEosinophilic Gastrointestinal DisordersAnimal Study (Mechanistic Mouse Model)Cytokine Pathway ModulationMixedSuccinate

Summary

View source

What was studied

This study tested whether continuous oral succinate administration (150 mM in drinking water for 21 days) could model eosinophilic enteritis (EoN) in 4-week-old C57BL/6J mice, and used multiple knockout strains (Pou2f3, Il25, Il5, Il13, Rag2) to map the immunological pathway driving disease.

Key findings

Succinate administration caused significant ileal eosinophil infiltration (p < 0.05) and failure to thrive (p < 0.001) via a tuft cell–IL-25–IL-5 axis; Pou2f3-knockout mice showed **complete** abolition of both inflammation and growth failure, while IL-13 deficiency selectively blocked tuft cell proliferation. Transcriptomic signatures overlapped with human eosinophilic colitis, especially IL-13 and serotonin receptor pathways.

Study limitations

- Mouse model only; direct translation to human non-EoE EGID pathogenesis is unconfirmed. - Transcriptomic overlap was with eosinophilic **colitis** datasets, not eosinophilic enteritis specifically, which may limit mechanistic conclusions. - Full-text was inaccessible; quantitative details (e.g., eosinophil counts, body weight deltas) could not be verified beyond the abstract.

Clinical implications

While not yet clinically actionable, this model identifies the tuft cell–IL-25–ILC2 axis as a central driver of eosinophilic enteritis, suggesting IL-25 and IL-5 as potential therapeutic targets worth investigating in non-EoE EGIDs.

Caveats

  • Full text was inaccessible due to a publisher paywall/CAPTCHA; all extracted data are based solely on the abstract and results excerpt.
  • Sample size (number of mice per group) was not reported in the abstract; the sample_size tag was omitted.
  • Study design tag reflects a preclinical animal mechanistic study, which does not map neatly to standard clinical evidence hierarchies — level of evidence assigned as 5 (animal/laboratory study).
Show all 4
  • The transcriptomic comparison was made against human eosinophilic colitis datasets, not eosinophilic enteritis; this distinction may affect interpretation of translational relevance.

Related Questions

Explore related topics

What are current treatment options for non-EoE eosinophilic gastrointestinal disorders in adults?How does the tuft cell–ILC2 axis contribute to type 2 gut inflammation?Which IL-5 or IL-25 targeted therapies are in trials for eosinophilic enteritis or colitis?

Publication Details

Year
2026
Journal
Allergology International
Source
View article
Keep scrolling
More content below.
Up Next