The data presented here demonstrate that IDO, recently recognized to play key physiological and pathophysiological roles in immune counterregulation, play biologically important, contradictory roles during intracellular protozoal infection—facilitating (
T.
gondii) or suppressing (
L.
major) microbial clearance in a pathogen-specific manner. Our finding of an important antimicrobial role for IDO in toxoplasmosis, in the absence of demonstrable effects on the immune response, provides in vivo validation of an extensive in vitro literature going back more than 20 years. As for other protozoa, IDO has also recently been shown to play a critical role in host resistance against
Trypanosoma cruzi in mouse models. In the case of
T.
cruzi, the antimicrobial effects of IDO appear to be mediated by kynurenines [
44]. On the other hand, IDO inhibition has been reported to lead to increased effector T-cell responses in the absence of any robust effects on disease course in a mouse model of malaria [
45].
Despite an extensive in vitro literature on viruses and IDO, viruses are not marked by tryptophan auxotrophy. The mechanisms by which tryptophan restriction leads to suppression of in vitro viral replication have thus not been entirely straightforward. Tryptophan starvation stresses mammalian cells and inhibits their proliferation [
46]. It is perhaps not surprising that such stress renders cells less efficient as hosts for viral replication, whether or not this is actually exploited as an antiviral defense mechanism in vivo. The lack of an evident role for IDO in restricting HSV-1 replication in vivo suggests that such in vitro studies may be misleading and that in vivo studies will be needed to determine whether IDO modulates the course of infection with particular viruses. Indeed, consonant with the hypothesis that IDO activation plays an immunosuppressive role in HIV infection, blockade of IDO during retroviral infection of mice (LP-BM5) and rhesus macaques (simian immunodeficiency virus) led to
decreased viral burdens [
47,
48].
As for other classes of pathogens, despite an in vitro literature on IDO-mediated restriction of
Chlamydiae replication, our preliminary experiments have suggested that IDO inhibition fails to alter pulmonary bacterial burden during lung infection with
Chlamydophila pneumoniae (data not shown). In the case of fungi, the immunoregulatory properties of IDO appear to be essential to limit inflammatory responses to
Aspergillus and
Candida, which, in the absence of such restraint, compromise the hosts’ ability to eradicate infection [
6]. Similar findings have been reported in mouse models of tuberculosis [
49]. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed that infection of mice with
Mycobacterium tuberculosis is associated with dramatic upregulation of IDO-1 expression [
49], something that we have replicated and found to be true in human disease as well (data not shown). Elegant studies employing bone marrow chimeric mice indicate that IDO expression by nonhematopoietic cells in the lung is necessary to limit IL-17 production and harmful neutrophilic inflammation during experimental tuberculosis [
49].
It will be noted that the biologically antagonistic, pathogen-specific roles played by IDO during infection (restraint of microbial replication, restraint of the host response) are remarkably similar, at least superficially, to the activities of another enzyme exploited by both the innate and adaptive immune systems—inducible nitric oxide synthase [
50]. Critical issues remain to be addressed in these and other infection models, including: (1) the relative role of IDO-1 and -2 in immune counterregulation and antimicrobial activity, (2) which IDO-expressing cell types are responsible for these diverse activities, (3) the relative role of tryptophan starvation and tryptophan metabolite production in these activities, and (4) the potential contribution of tryptophan catabolic enzyme expression by pathogens themselves to disease pathogenesis. With regard to the first of these issues, the current studies do not provide much in the way of insight. The fact that IDO-1 and -2 are differentially expressed by distinct cell types at baseline and undergo differential regulation of stimulated expression in vivo suggests that the enzymes are unlikely to be fully functionally redundant [
51]. That said, despite the fact that IDO enzymes play opposing biological roles in experimental toxoplasmosis and leishmaniasis, the similar fold-induction of IDO-1 and -2 mRNA expression in these infections in the face of very different levels of baseline IDO-2 mRNA expression in ear and brain do not suggest an obvious hypothesis for enzyme specificity of the observed dominant biological effect. As a caveat, it should be noted that regulation of IDO is quite complex, including the use of alternate promoters and the generation of diverse splice forms, as well as posttranslational modification of enzyme activity [
51,
52]. As for the last of these issues, while Basic Local Alignment
Search Tool (BLAST) searches suggest that it is unlikely that
T.
gondii and
L.
major express IDO homologs, such searches indicate that several bacterial pathogens of human importance—including
Pseudomonas aeruginosa and
Burkholderia cepacia—do encode IDO homologs (not shown), something that may well be exploitable therapeutically.
While these studies suggest appropriate caution during sustained therapeutic inhibition of IDO (eg, giving secondary chemoprophylaxis to those latently infected with T. gondii), both counterregulatory and antimicrobial activities may provide potential novel therapeutic targets during chronic infection. For infections in which IDO plays a counterregulatory role such as leishmaniasis and HIV, IDO inhibition may be useful as an adjunct to antimicrobial therapy. On the other hand, for latent infections in which IDO plays an antimicrobial role, IDO may also provide a therapeutic target. Eradication of latent infection is hampered by the fact that, in the latent state, pathogens are metabolically inert and thus insensitive to the activity of current antimicrobials. For a latent pathogen against which IDO is an important antimicrobial effector mechanism, IDO inhibition may facilitate pathogen eradication through controlled reactivation, under cover of antibiotics.