Skip to content
PaperFren

Host–pathogen

Apical-out enteroids for pathogen access

Co JY, Margalef-Català M, Li X, et al. · Cell reports · 2019

Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC

Suspending human enteroids without ECM flips polarity so microbes can meet the apical face.

Study at a glance

Design
Animal / in-vitro — Human enteroids cultured in suspension without BME to reverse polarity for apical pathogen assays
N
Enteroid lines from multiple donors; assays often scored ~10 enteroids per well across experiments — no single primary N
Population
Human intestinal enteroids
Outcome
β1-integrin–dependent epithelial polarity orientation for host–pathogen assays

Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.

Key findings

Polarity reversed within hours; β1 integrin oriented polarity for apical pathogen assays.

Methodology

Human enteroids were cultured in suspension without BME; β1-integrin roles in polarity were tested.

Limitations

Not a clinical infection trial; enteroids only approximate gut immunity.

How this study connects

Role on claims

Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.

  • SupportsConfocal Microscopymethod

    Human enteroids cultured in suspension without basement-membrane extract reversed polarity within hours; β1 integrin oriented that polarity so apical surfaces became accessible for pathogen assays. Confocal polarity markers are the readout; this is not a clinical infection trial, and enteroids only approximate gut immunity.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsConfocal Microscopymethod

    Confocal is used here for polarity reversal (enteroids), plasmodesmal targeting (PDLP), and vesicle itineraries (Bt OMVs in ~15 min; E. coli OMVs to NOD sensors). Those are different spatial questions — which face of an epithelium, which plant cell-wall channel, which endocytic route — and cannot be pooled as one 'trafficking phenotype'.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • Enteroid polarity reversed within hours without BME, with β1 integrin orienting apical pathogen access. Spike LYQD mutants altered S2 glycosylation mobility, and palmitoylation at cysteine clusters I/II was required for Golgi/plasma-membrane targeting and ACE2-mediated fusion. Those localisation phenotypes are IF/trafficking stains; enteroids are not a clinical gut, and much spike work uses pseudoviruses.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • IF is a screening camera in Vero cells (berzosertib 100 nM, 48 hpi), a tissue census in TB lung (35 patients), a trafficking assay for Smo/Rab5/spike, and a polarity assay in enteroids. 'Positive staining' in a drug screen is not the same claim as PD-1 on human tissue-resident T cells or as K140/K165 moving Rab5 off endosomes.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • Permeabilized-sperm SNARE timing and live epithelial polarity/spike trafficking disagree about how much native membrane regulation is still present. In-vitro sperm may miss in-vivo layers; enteroids and pseudovirus spike assays only approximate infection of a human airway or gut.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

Open questions

Tensions this paper is part of

From concept pages' “where studies disagree.” Disagreement means the same question; scope means different assays, populations, or outcomes.

Related papers in this topic

Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.