Abstract
Interleukin-6 (IL-6) plays a critical role in the pathogenesis of various chronic inflammatory diseases,
tracked across numerous fields of research. Despite this, a crucial aspect often overlooked in studies is the
differentiation between IL-6 classic-signaling and trans-signaling, leading to potential confounding of their
findings; less than half of selected IL-6 studies included differentiation. This review delves into the
distinction between IL-6 classic- and trans-signaling and their role in chronic inflammatory diseases and
endometriosis. The unique pro-inflammatory nature of IL-6 trans-signaling, contrasted with the anti-
inflammatory character of IL-6 classic-signaling, presents significant implications for research
methodology, particularly in studies investigating anti-inflammatory interventions or interleukin
inhibitors. Diagnostic failure to account for these distinct pathways may inadvertently misrepresent
beneficial immune responses or the efficacy of interventions, posing significant challenges in predicting
health outcomes. Interventions that do not differentiate these pathways could face reduced efficacy or
safety. This review proposes adjustments to research methodologies and stresses the importance of careful
interpretation of inflammatory markers in IL-6-related research. Examples of differentiation issues are
discussed across the topics of endometriosis and multiple inflammatory diseases. By addressing this
methodological issue, researchers could potentially improve patient outcomes, enhance the efficacy of
interventions, and contribute to public health advancements.
Keywords
Inflammation, interleukin-6, endometriosis, cytokines, biomarkers, inflammatory diseases
Introduction
Interleukin-6 (IL-6), a pleiotropic cytokine, has drawn considerable attention for its central role in the
pathogenesis of various chronic inflammatory diseases [1]. Its dual functionality can be attributed to the
existence of two distinct signaling mechanisms: IL-6 classic-signaling and IL-6 trans-signaling. IL-6 classic-
signaling has been recognized for its regulatory and protective roles, contributing to immune resilience [2].
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 477
Conversely, IL-6 trans-signaling has been implicated in instigating and perpetuating inflammatory
responses, exacerbating disease progression. Each of these pathways carries unique physiological and
pathological implications, however, much of the extant literature investigating the efficacy of anti-
inflammatory interventions fails to differentiate between them. This lack of specificity potentially
confounds our understanding of the therapeutic effects and hinders the development of precision
interventions [3].
The study of endometriosis, where conventional therapies are often dependent on early and accurate
diagnostics, offers a valuable perspective toward the importance of the differential effects of IL-6 classic-
and trans-signaling [4]. From a clinical perspective, the reliance on IL-6 levels for diagnosing endometriosis
is fraught with challenges. The heterogeneity of endometriosis manifestations means that IL-6 levels can
vary widely among patients, influenced by disease stage, lesion location, and individual immune responses.
Unreliable IL-6 measurements may lead to misdiagnosis or underdiagnosis, particularly in cases where IL-6
levels are incongruent with clinical symptoms. This discrepancy complicates the development of
standardized diagnostic criteria and can delay appropriate treatment interventions [5].
The treatment of endometriosis often involves managing symptoms and controlling disease
progression through hormonal therapies and surgical interventions. Given IL-6’s involvement in
inflammatory processes, therapies targeting IL-6 signaling have been proposed as potential treatments.
However, without accurate and reliable measurements of IL-6 and an understanding of its signaling
context, it is challenging to predict therapeutic outcomes or tailor treatments to individual patient profiles
[6].
This review seeks to underscore the importance of differentiating between IL-6 classic- and trans-
signaling in the study of chronic inflammatory diseases and in particular endometriosis. The subsequent
sections will delve into the unique roles of these signaling pathways in inflammation and health, explore
how their conflation could confound existing research, and propose potential directions for future studies
in this area. Ultimately, the aim is to enhance our understanding of IL-6 signaling and facilitate the
development of more targeted and efficacious therapeutic interventions for chronic inflammatory diseases.
IL-6 signaling: classic vs. trans
IL-6, a frequently tracked cytokine in immunological studies, operates through two distinct signaling
pathways: IL-6 classic-signaling and IL-6 trans-signaling [7]. The division of these pathways, first identified
in 1994, enables IL-6 to assume roles ranging from modulating inflammation to bolstering immune
defenses, a balance that is gaining recognition as vital for human health [8].
IL-6 classic-signaling is limited to specific cells equipped with the membrane-bound IL-6 receptor (IL-
6R), including hepatocytes and certain leukocytes. This signaling commences with IL-6 attaching to IL-6R,
then pairing with the universally expressed signal-transducing receptor protein, glycoprotein 130 (gp130).
This event triggers a succession of intracellular signals, culminating in the activation of diverse genes that
drive the cellular response to IL-6. The selective character of IL-6 classic-signaling ensures its effects are
predominantly on cells possessing the necessary receptor apparatus, thereby maintaining a restricted
influence.
In contrast, IL-6 trans-signaling involves the soluble IL-6R (sIL-6R). This receptor is unattached to the
cell membrane and can circulate freely and bind to IL-6. The resulting sIL-6R/IL-6 complex can engage with
gp130 on the surfaces of practically all cells, instigating the same intracellular signal cascade as classic-
signaling. This mechanism broadens IL-6’s influence on cells lacking the membrane-bound IL-6R,
drastically augmenting the potential scope of its action.
These two signaling routes play contrasting roles within the immune system and inflammation, as
demonstrated in Figure 1. IL-6 classic-signaling is tied to host defense functions, aiding the activation and
differentiation of T cells and B cells-vital components of the immune response to infections that culminate
in anti-inflammatory action [9]. Conversely, IL-6 trans-signaling has been linked to pro-inflammatory
responses and is considered a major player in the pathogenesis of numerous chronic inflammatory
diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 478
Figure 1. The different signaling pathways for IL-6
Note. Reprint with permission from “IL-6-induced classic and trans-signalling” by Schaper F. [cited 2024 Feb 16]. Available from
https://www.systembiologie.ovgu.de/en/-p-176.html
Despite these crucial distinctions between IL-6 classic- and trans-signaling, many research
investigations probing anti-inflammatory interventions often neglect this differentiation. Failing to
distinguish between these signaling mechanisms when assessing IL-6 levels could lead to data
misinterpretation, and subsequently an over- or under-estimation of the efficacy of anti-inflammatory
interventions. Such an oversight could unintentionally compromise the evaluation of potential side effects
and the overall effectiveness of therapeutic strategies [10].
For example:
If an anti-inflammatory IL-6 inhibitor suppresses both IL-6 classic- and trans-signaling, it may
inadvertently impede beneficial immune responses, leading to unintended consequences like
heightened susceptibility to infections.
•
Conversely, interventions that selectively inhibit IL-6 trans-signaling, could be successfully treating
inflammatory symptoms but still present high IL-6 reports in undifferentiated biomarker tests [11].
•
Neglecting these differences can potentially obstruct progress in devising effective therapies for
chronic inflammatory diseases, and may also complicate our understanding of the relationship between
inflammation, IL-6 signaling, and the treatment of chronic inflammatory diseases. Hence, future research
initiatives should make deliberate efforts to distinguish between these IL-6 signaling pathways when
investigating anti-inflammatory interventions.
Lack of differentiation
The demarcation between IL-6 classic-signaling and IL-6 trans-signaling is essential to comprehending the
multifaceted roles of IL-6 in health and disease. However, this distinction is frequently glossed over in
biomedical research, especially in studies centered on chronic inflammatory disease and endometriosis.
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 479
A significant contributor to this oversight is the technical challenge of differentiating between these
two signaling pathways in vivo. While in vitro studies can utilize techniques such as receptor blockade to
distinguish between IL-6 classic- and trans-signaling, these methods are less practical in living organisms
due to the universal expression of gp130 and the potential unintended effects of blocking agents [12].
Additionally, the most commonly employed assays for quantifying IL-6 levels in biological specimens
do not differentiate between IL-6 bound to soluble or membrane-bound IL-6R, thus failing to encapsulate
the distinction between the two pathways.
Another element contributing to this oversight is the relatively recent elucidation of the disparate roles
IL-6 classic- and trans-signaling play. While IL-6 has been a point of interest in immunology for several
decades, the concept of trans-signaling was introduced only in the mid 1990s [13]. Given this relatively
recent evolution and the topic’s complexity, many researchers may not fully comprehend the significance of
differentiating between these two signaling pathways when interpreting IL-6 measurements.
This failure to distinguish between IL-6 classic- and trans-signaling is especially relevant in behavioral
medicine, which frequently employs anti-inflammatory interventions to enhance well-being and prolong
healthspan. These interventions, encompassing mindfulness meditation, yoga, and acupuncture, among
others, have been shown to affect IL-6 levels. However, the specific impacts of these interventions on IL-6
classic- vs. trans-signaling remain largely uncharted territory [14].
A meta-analysis compared measurements of IL-6 in response to both inflammatory diseases and anti-
inflammatory interventions [15]. This analysis found that different collections of biomarkers labeled as
undifferentiated “IL-6” were impacted with significant effect sizes in response to both pro-inflammatory
and anti-inflammatory catalysts. The study proposed that these metrics were in fact capturing both IL-6
trans and classic, respectively, and had thus been underreporting the efficacy of the anti-inflammatory
treatments. When IL-6 trans and classic were incorporated into the analysis, interventions expected to
focus on IL-6 trans ranked higher in efficacy, as seen in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Biomarker measurements indicating an increase in pro-inflammatory action (orange) via IL-6 trans from COVID-19,
while anti-inflammatory actions (blue) were associated with melatonin, vitamin D3, and meditation. Conversely, meditation and
vitamin D3 were associated with anti-inflammatory action (blue) via IL-6 classic
Note. Adapted with permission from “Implications for Systemic Approaches to COVID-19: Effect Sizes of Remdesivir,
Tocilizumab, Melatonin, Vitamin D3, and Meditation.” by Castle RD, Williams MA, Bushell WC, Rindfleisch JA, Peterson CT,
Marzolf J, et al. J Inflamm Res. 2021;14:4859–76 (https://doi.org/10.2147/JIR.S323356). CC BY-NC.
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 480
Differentiating between IL-6 classic- and trans-signaling is a pivotal aspect of interpreting IL-6
measurements in research but is frequently overlooked, particularly in addressing complex, chronic
conditions. The impacts of this lack of distinction can be found in the fields of endometriosis, neuroscience,
and many chronic inflammatory diseases, though these are only examples of a far broader issue.
Acknowledging and addressing this oversight is necessary to foster a more nuanced understanding of the
effects of anti-inflammatory interventions, ultimately contributing to the formulation of more targeted and
effective therapies.
Discussion
Unpredictable IL-6 metrics in endometriosis research
Endometriosis, a chronic inflammatory condition, affects approximately 10% of reproductive-aged women
worldwide [16]. Characterized by the growth of endometrial-like tissue outside the uterus, endometriosis
Results
in pain and fertility issues among the afflicted. The molecular and cellular mechanisms
underpinning the pathology of endometriosis have been the subject of intensive study, with IL-6 emerging
as a pivotal cytokine in this context. Research has suggested that IL-6, especially through the trans-signaling
pathway, contributes to pain in endometriosis patients by promoting endometrial lesions [17].
Furthermore, IL-6 can also facilitate angiogenesis, supporting the survival and proliferation of ectopic
lesions [18]. The nuanced roles of IL-6 classic- and trans-signaling in endometriosis bear implications for
the diagnosis, treatment, and overall understanding of the condition.
The misinterpretation of inflammatory responses is a significant concern stemming from this lack of
differentiation. The anti-inflammatory nature of IL-6 classic-signaling, particularly in tissue regeneration,
contrasts sharply with the pro-inflammatory tendencies of trans-signaling [8]. Consequently, an inaccurate
assessment of the inflammatory milieu in endometriosis patients could arise, potentially misleading
clinicians in gauging the severity of the disease or the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. Given the
centrality of IL-6 measurements in endometriosis research, such misinterpretations may also result in
therapeutic strategies that inadvertently suppress the beneficial effects of classic-signaling, thereby
potentially prolonging patient recovery and undermining tissue repair and regeneration [19]. Without
precise differentiation, the potential for IL-6’s dual nature to serve as a nuanced biomarker for
endometriosis regulation and dysregulation remains largely untapped, reducing treatment efficacy
assessments [20].
This oversight is particularly visible in chronic inflammatory diseases like endometriosis. Figure 3
demonstrates the lack of studies incorporating differentiation between the signaling pathways of IL-6.
Searches through PubMed were conducted on multiple search strings relating to endometriosis and IL-6,
with an increasing focus on pathway differentiation. While endometriosis studies incorporating IL-6 were
common, only a fifth of those studies mentioned signaling pathways. When specific pathways were
articulated, results became negligible. There were only eight results for a search of endometriosis and IL-6
trans vs. classic, and only seven studies actually incorporated any differentiation between IL-6 trans and IL-
6 classic.
This steep drop off reflects not only a significant gap in the state of research, but a disproportionate
lack of focus in ongoing research. Table 1 consists of a network analysis of the preceding and proceeding
citations of endometriosis studies relating to IL-6 examined the number of citations studies received and a
similarity factor rating, based on how closely the studies list reflected the initial search parameter.
The number of citations for papers related to endometriosis and undifferentiated IL-6 was 235%
higher than for endometriosis IL-6 trans.
•
The similarity factor rating for undifferentiated IL-6 was 352% higher than for endometriosis and IL-
6 trans.
•
There is a clear and significant difference in number of citations for the top 40 articles related to either
differentiated or undifferentiated IL-6 and endometriosis. It is likely this reflects far less activity and
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 481
Figure 3. Results of searches through PubMed (accessed 2024 Feb 17) for studies on endometriosis and IL-6, with and without
differentiation
ongoing research into the differentiation of IL-6 signaling pathways within endometriosis diagnosis and
care. The low numbers of similarly clustered studies relating to endometriosis and differentiated IL-6
suggests problematic heterogeneity in the different studies related to the topic. Diagrams using weighted
clustering can visually depict the distance between studies with or without differentiation. Figure 4 and
Figure 5 illustrates how a network analysis of IL-6 trans and endometriosis produced distant, disparate
clustering, whereas the network analysis of undifferentiated IL-6 and endometriosis is close and evenly
clustered.
Taken together, there is a scarcity of endometriosis studies specifically incorporating IL-6
differentiation, a relatively low number of citations related to endometriosis and any focus on IL-6 trans,
and a low network analysis rating of IL-6 differentiated studies. These factors strongly suggest the study of
endometriosis diagnostics and treatments do not commonly incorporate differentiation of IL-6 signaling
pathways. It is believed endometriosis is indicative of similar disparities relating to many other chronic
inflammatory diseases.
There are several potential consequences for this disparity. From a clinical perspective, the reliance on
IL-6 levels for diagnosing endometriosis is common and highly influential. The heterogeneity of
endometriosis manifestations means that IL-6 levels can vary widely among patients, influenced by disease
stage, lesion location, and individual immune responses, requiring precise measurement. Unreliable IL-6
measurements may lead to misdiagnosis or underdiagnosis, particularly in cases where undifferentiated IL-
6 levels are incongruent with clinical symptoms [21]. This discrepancy complicates the development of
standardized diagnostic criteria and can delay appropriate treatment interventions. Timely diagnosis of
endometriosis is critical for proper care, with serious health impacts resulting from misdiagnosis or
underdiagnosis [22].
Moreover, the treatment of endometriosis often involves managing symptoms and controlling disease
progression through hormonal therapies and surgical interventions. However, without accurate and
reliable measurements of IL-6 and an understanding of its signaling context, it is challenging to predict
therapeutic outcomes or tailor treatments to individual patient profiles. For instance, indiscriminate
blockade of IL-6 could dampen its beneficial effects in tissue protection and repair, leading to unclear side
effects and obscured therapeutic outcomes. For example, two different studies into the use of tocilizumab
as an IL-6 inhibitor in rats produced comparable clinical results, but starkly different IL-6 measurements.
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 482
Table 1. The top 40 studies in a network analysis of searches for endometriosis and IL-6 as well as endometriosis and IL-6
trans
Endometriosis IL-6-trans Endometriosis IL-6
Citations Refs Similarity Citations Refs Similarity
7 0 100 42 31 100
4 0 10.9 138 51 20.9
16 57 9.4 52 25 20.7
6 27 9.1 43 81 20.4
15 73 7.7 131 64 19.4
3 74 7.3 127 54 18.1
11 61 6.8 85 49 18.1
7 40 6.2 145 36 16.3
13 37 6.2 49 54 16.2
50 54 6 34 43 15.8
16 45 6 38 38 14.7
13 42 5.8 27 36 14.5
7 54 5.6 60 24 14
14 49 5.5 68 41 13.5
13 148 5.5 177 66 13.4
13 28 5.5 75 29 13.2
8 69 5.4 37 67 12.8
0 109 5.4 33 76 12.8
43 162 5.3 134 70 12.6
59 68 5.3 111 49 12.6
15 48 5.2 32 89 12.4
108 37 5.2 230 65 12.4
9 43 5.2 41 28 12.2
73 36 5.1 90 173 12.1
52 44 5.1 228 24 11.9
25 57 5.1 141 63 11.8
27 128 5 137 57 11.8
18 135 5 41 49 11.6
239 125 5 47 49 11.6
38 190 5 35 43 11.4
50 46 4.9 53 54 11.3
9 37 4.9 20 23 11
6 46 4.9 282 271 11
1 0 4.8 22 65 11
1 45 4.8 63 28 11
1 0 4.8 152 150 11
1 87 4.8 57 21 10.9
1 54 4.8 95 60 10.9
13 227 4.8 64 114 10.8
1 46 4.7 35 79 10.6
1 21 4.7 81 160 10.6
1,007 - 228.7 3,552 - 539.3
Multiple search terms were used to identify synonyms and largest returns were utilized. Relative similarities were color coded
from strong to weak on a respective blue-red spectrum. Bold numbers at the bottom indicate total sums of the fields above. -:
blank cell
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 483
Figure 4. A visualization of the network analysis of search parameter “endometriosis IL-6-trans” as seen in Table 1, organized
by citation. Clustering is by weighted similarity factor, studies that are more closely linked are more closely clustered. Created
with Connected Papers accessed 2024 Feb 18, which is connected to the Semantic Scholar Paper Corpus (licensed under
ODC-BY)
One study, which did not differentiate IL-6 trans and classic, reported no discernible IL-6 changes after the
intervention [23]. The other study, which included signal differentiation in its measurements, reported
sharp reductions in IL-6 trans [24]. If IL-6 measurements are not consistent, inflammation measurements
can be unreliable.
The challenges extend to monitoring disease progression and treatment efficacy. IL-6 has been
investigated as a biomarker for disease activity, however, variable IL-6 levels, influenced by both biological
fluctuations and measurement inaccuracies, can obscure the correlation between cytokine levels and
disease state [25]. This uncertainty complicates the clinician’s ability to make informed decisions about
treatment adjustments or to accurately predict disease prognosis.
Given IL-6’s involvement in inflammatory processes, narrow inhibitor therapies targeting IL-6
signaling have been proposed as potential treatments [26]. Research into olamkicept has focused on
targeting IL-6 trans-signaling while leaving IL-6 classic-signaling intact [27]. The results have been
promising for IBD and ulcerative colitis, reducing clinical inflammatory symptoms without the
immunosuppressant side effects of total IL-6 inhibition. The success of precise targeting indicates the value
of widespread differentiation.
A practical dimension where greater differentiation of IL-6 pathways might prove valuable is in
symptom management. Pain, a predominant symptom of endometriosis, has been linked to IL-6 mediated
nerve fiber growth in ectopic lesions [28]. By understanding and targeting the specific IL-6 signaling
pathways responsible, pain management could see substantial advancements, enhancing patient quality of
life. Differentiated IL-6 inhibitors have been widely explored for the treatment of COVID-19, and a similar
focus may be warranted for endometriosis and other inflammatory diseases.
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 484
Figure 5. A visualization of the network analysis of the search parameter “endometriosis IL-6” as seen in Table 1, organized by
citation. Clustering is by weighted similarity factor, studies that are more closely linked are more closely clustered. Created with
Connected Papers accessed 2024 Feb 18, which is connected to the Semantic Scholar Paper Corpus (licensed under ODC-BY)
By addressing the oversight in differentiation several benefits could emerge that may significantly
improve endometriosis management. Tailored therapeutic strategies that specifically target IL-6 trans-
signaling could mitigate the pro-inflammatory aspects of endometriosis more effectively without disrupting
the beneficial effects of classic-signaling [29]. Such specificity in treatment could herald improved outcomes
and reduced side effects. Furthermore, the diagnostic precision in endometriosis can be significantly
enhanced. Accurately differentiated IL-6 signaling can offer clinicians insights into disease severity,
progression, and earlier detection, a critical component of endometriosis care that can inform treatment
decisions and prognostic evaluations [30].
Implications for chronic inflammatory illnesses
As seen in the focus on endometriosis, IL-6 plays a pivotal role in the immune response and has also been
implicated in the pathogenesis of a wide range of inflammatory diseases, including rheumatoid arthriti,
systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), and IBD.
In the context of RA IL-6 trans is a key driver of inflammation and joint destruction. Some therapies
that inhibit IL-6, such as monoclonal antibodies against IL-6R, have demonstrated significant efficacy in
reducing disease activity and improving clinical outcomes. However, by inhibiting both signaling pathways,
these therapies may also interfere with the protective roles of IL-6, such as its involvement in host defense
and tissue regeneration. A more selective approach that targets only the trans-signaling pathway can
preserve the cytokine’s homeostatic functions while effectively mitigating inflammation and disease
progression [31]. Similarly, in diseases like IBD, where IL-6 levels correlate with disease severity and
inflammation, selectively targeting the trans-signaling pathway could reduce intestinal inflammation and
promote mucosal healing, offering a novel approach to treatment that minimizes the risk of systemic side
effects [32]. Differentiated targeting of IL-6 trans inhibition has shown significant promise as a useful anti-
inflammatory intervention, with awareness of differentiation being the limiting factor in adoption [33].
The differentiation of IL-6 signaling pathways also has profound implications for the development of
diagnostic tools and the monitoring of disease activity in chronic inflammatory conditions. Inflammatory
markers, including IL-6, play an essential role in diagnostics, and treatment decision-making. Elevated IL-6
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 485
levels have been associated with disease activity in several chronic inflammatory diseases, serving as a
useful biomarker for disease progression and response to therapy. However, the common lack of specificity
in distinguishing between the signaling pathways of IL-6 limits the utility of this cytokine as a biomarker.
By encouraging diagnostic assays that can differentiate between classic- and trans-signaling activities of IL-
6, clinicians could gain valuable insights into the underlying mechanisms driving disease activity, allowing
for more personalized and precise treatment strategies. Such advancements in diagnostics could facilitate
early intervention, improve disease management, and potentially lead to better patient outcomes by
enabling the timely adjustment of therapies based on specific inflammatory profiles [34].
The precise differentiation of IL-6 signaling pathways holds significant promise for enhancing the
treatment of chronic inflammatory diseases by providing a basis for the development of targeted therapies
that minimize adverse effects while maximizing therapeutic efficacy [35]. Moreover, the differentiated
measurement of IL-6 activity could improve the use of inflammatory markers in diagnostics and treatment
monitoring, leading to more informed clinical decision-making and improved patient care.
Limitations
This review presents an examination of the role of IL-6 signaling in relation to chronic inflammatory
diseases and the complexities inherent in the differentiation between IL-6 classic-and trans-signaling. This
has significant implications, especially in the research of endometriosis, but there are several limitations
worth noting.
While this review is comprehensive it is not exhaustive. Though it is among the most often measured,
IL-6 is only one of many cytokines involved in immune response and inflammation. A focus solely on IL-6
does not provide a full picture of the dynamic nature of immune reactions and inflammation. The very
problem addressed in this paper also limits the conclusions that can be derived from this paper. The
involvement of other cytokines and signaling pathways with IL-6 signaling is both complex and unclear.
The review also relies heavily on published literature, which may be subject to publication bias. Studies
with null or negative findings are less likely to be published, which may skew the body of literature toward
studies that report significant effects. This bias could potentially impact the interpretation and conclusions
of this review [36].
Finally, while this review highlights a methodological issue in the measurement of IL-6 and proposes
potential solutions, the practical implementation of these solutions may be challenging. The differentiation
between IL-6 classic- and trans-signaling in research settings is not straightforward and requires technical
development [37]. Additionally, the proposed methodologies may not be feasible in all research settings
due to cost, technical complexity, or lack of resources.
While this review provides a critical perspective on the role of IL-6 in endometriosis research, these
Limitations
should be taken into consideration when interpreting the findings and suggestions put forth.
Conclusions
The examination of IL-6 signaling pathways and their distinct roles in the pathology of endometriosis
highlights a growing issue in the study of chronic inflammatory diseases. This differentiation is not merely a
molecular distinction but a pivotal factor that influences the direction of research, the development of
diagnostic criteria, and the formulation of therapeutic interventions for endometriosis and potentially other
chronic inflammatory diseases. The current research landscape, as indicated by the analysis of publications
and citation patterns, demonstrates a pronounced disparity in focus, with a very limited number of studies
addressing the different roles of IL-6 signaling pathways. This gap underscores a significant oversight in the
field, limiting the understanding of IL-6’s dual roles in inflammation and tissue regeneration and its
implications for disease management.
These gaps in research reveal critical vulnerabilities in the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis, a
condition marked by significant pain and fertility issues in women of reproductive age. The predominance
of studies that fail to differentiate between IL-6 pathways may lead to a misinterpretation of the cytokine’s
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 486
role in endometriosis, potentially delaying diagnosis or guiding therapeutic strategies that inadvertently
suppress beneficial signaling mechanisms. This oversight, as highlighted in the tocilizumab studies,
highlights a critical need for a shift towards incorporating IL-6 pathway differentiation in endometriosis
research and inflammatory measurements.
The significance of IL-6 differentiation extends beyond the example of endometriosis, suggesting
broader applications for the management of chronic inflammatory conditions. A more nuanced focus on IL-
6 signaling such as that seen in olamkicept could inform biomarker interpretations for diseases like RA and
IBD, where IL-6 plays a key role in pathogenesis. The potential for targeted inhibition of IL-6 trans-
signaling, while preserving the protective effects of classic-signaling, offers a promising avenue for
developing treatments that are both effective and exhibit fewer side effects. Progress in this field is unlikely
unless the significance of IL-6-trans-specific inhibitors is discussed more widely.
Addressing the disparities in IL-6 research requires concerted efforts to prioritize studies that explore
the distinct functions of IL-6 signaling pathways. This entails not only increased discussion and focus on
research in this area but also the adoption of more advanced diagnostic tools capable of distinguishing
between IL-6 signaling mechanisms. Such tools could provide clinicians with critical insights into the
inflammatory status of patients, facilitating more informed treatment decisions and potentially improving
patient outcomes.
The improved differentiation of IL-6 signaling pathways presents a critical step in the research and
treatment of endometriosis and other chronic inflammatory diseases. Bridging the current research gap
offers the promise of more accurate diagnostics, comprehensive therapeutic strategies, and a deeper
understanding of inflammatory pathologies. As the scientific community moves forward it is imperative to
embrace the complexity of cytokine signaling, recognizing its potential to transform the landscape of
disease diagnosis and management. Through targeted research and clinical application, the nuanced roles
of IL-6 trans and IL-6 classic in health and disease can be better understood, paving the way for
advancements in patient care and treatment efficacy.
Abbreviations
gp130: glycoprotein 130
IBD: inflammatory bowel disease
IL-6: interleukin-6
IL-6R: interleukin-6 receptor
RA: rheumatoid arthritis
sIL-6R: soluble interleukin-6 receptor
Declarations
Acknowledgments
During the preparation of this work, the author used ChatGPT 4 in order to assess readability and identify
typographical errors. After using this tool/service, the author reviewed and edited the content as needed
and take full responsibility for the content of the publication. The author also thanks to Pubmed and
Connected Papers.
RDC: Conceptualization, Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Visualization,
Author contributions
Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing. The author read and approved the submitted version.
Conflicts of interest
The author declares that there are no conflicts of interest.
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 487
Ethical approval
Not applicable.
Consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent to publication
Not applicable.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Funding
Not applicable.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2024.
References
Uciechowski P, Dempke WCM. Interleukin-6: A Masterplayer in the Cytokine Network. Oncology.
2020;98:131–7. [DOI] [PubMed]
1.
Tanaka T, Narazaki M, Masuda K, Kishimoto T. Regulation of IL-6 in Immunity and Diseases. Adv Exp
Med Biol. 2016;941:79–88. [DOI] [PubMed]
2.
Nara H, Watanabe R. Anti-Inflammatory Effect of Muscle-Derived Interleukin-6 and Its Involvement in
Lipid Metabolism. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22:9889. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
3.
Soliman AM, Fuldeore M, Snabes MC. Factors Associated with Time to Endometriosis Diagnosis in the
United States. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2017;26:788–97. [DOI] [PubMed]
4.
Laganà AS, Garzon S, Götte M, Viganò P, Franchi M, Ghezzi F, et al. The Pathogenesis of Endometriosis:
Molecular and Cell Biology Insights. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20:5615. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
5.
Abramiuk M, Grywalska E, Małkowska P, Sierawska O, Hrynkiewicz R, Niedźwiedzka-Rystwej P. The
Role of the Immune System in the Development of Endometriosis. Cells. 2022;11:2028. [DOI]
[PubMed] [PMC]
6.
Scheller J, Chalaris A, Schmidt-Arras D, Rose-John S. The pro- and anti-inflammatory properties of the
cytokine interleukin-6. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2011;1813:878–88. [DOI] [PubMed]
7.
Rose-John S, Heinrich PC. Soluble receptors for cytokines and growth factors: generation and
biological function. Biochem J. 1994;300:281–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
8.
Rose-John S. IL-6 trans-signaling via the soluble IL-6 receptor: importance for the pro-inflammatory
activities of IL-6. Int J Biol Sci. 2012;8:1237–47. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
9.
Jones SA, Jenkins BJ. Recent insights into targeting the IL-6 cytokine family in inflammatory diseases
and cancer. Nat Rev Immunol. 2018;18:773–89. [DOI] [PubMed]
10.
Rose-John S, Jenkins BJ, Garbers C, Moll JM, Scheller J. Targeting IL-6 trans-signalling: past, present
and future prospects. Nat Rev Immunol. 2023;23:666–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
11.
Jones SA, Richards PJ, Scheller J, Rose-John S. IL-6 transsignaling: the in vivo consequences. J
Interferon Cytokine Res. 2005;25:241–53. [DOI] [PubMed]
12.
Rose-John S. Therapeutic targeting of IL-6 trans-signaling. Cytokine. 2021;144:155577. [DOI]
[PubMed]
13.
Giudice MD, Gangestad SW. Rethinking IL-6 and CRP: Why they are more than inflammatory
biomarkers, and why it matters. Brain Behav Immun. 2018;70:61–75. [DOI] [PubMed]
14.
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 488
Castle RD, Williams MA, Bushell WC, Rindfleisch JA, Peterson CT, Marzolf J, et al. Implications for
Systemic Approaches to COVID-19: Effect Sizes of Remdesivir, Tocilizumab, Melatonin, Vitamin D3,
and Meditation. J Inflamm Res. 2021;14:4859–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
15.
Giudice LC. Clinical practice. Endometriosis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:2389–98. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
16.
Bo C, Wang Y. Angiogenesis signaling in endometriosis: Molecules, diagnosis and treatment (Review).
Mol Med Rep. 2024;29:43. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
17.
Machado DE, Berardo PT, Palmero CY, Nasciutti LE. Higher expression of vascular endothelial growth
factor (VEGF) and its receptor VEGFR-2 (Flk-1) and metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) in a rat model of
peritoneal endometriosis is similar to cancer diseases. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2010;29:4. [DOI]
[PubMed] [PMC]
18.
Mihara M, Hashizume M, Yoshida H, Suzuki M, Shiina M. IL-6/IL-6 receptor system and its role in
physiological and pathological conditions. Clin Sci (Lond). 2012;122:143–59. [DOI] [PubMed]
19.
Hou W, Jin Y, Kang HS, Kim BS. Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and IL-17 synergistically promote viral
persistence by inhibiting cellular apoptosis and cytotoxic T cell function. J Virol. 2014;88:8479–89.
[DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
20.
Ammendola R, Parisi M, Esposito G, Cattaneo F. Pro-Resolving FPR2 Agonists Regulate NADPH
Oxidase-Dependent Phosphorylation of HSP27, OSR1, and MARCKS and Activation of the Respective
Upstream Kinases. Antioxidants (Basel). 2021;10:134. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
21.
Cromeens MG, Carey ET, Robinson WR, Knafl K, Thoyre S. Timing, delays and pathways to diagnosis of
endometriosis: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open. 2021;11:e049390. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
22.
Taskin MI, Gungor AC, Adali E, Yay A, Onder GO, Inceboz U. A Humanized Anti-Interleukin 6 Receptor
Monoclonal Antibody, Tocilizumab, for the Treatment of Endometriosis in a Rat Model. Reprod Sci.
2016;23:662–9. [DOI] [PubMed]
23.
Taskin MI, Topcu O, Yay A, Erken G, Balcioğlu E, Adali E, et al. Prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation
syndrome in a rat model: comparison of the efficacy of tocilizumab with that of ranibizumab,
cabergoline, and a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015;31:949–54.
[DOI] [PubMed]
24.
Ritter A, Kreis N, Louwen F, Yuan J. Obesity and COVID-19: Molecular Mechanisms Linking Both
Pandemics. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21:5793. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
25.
Zhang S, Chen B, Wang B, Chen H, Li Y, Cao Q, et al. Effect of Induction Therapy With Olamkicept vs
Placebo on Clinical Response in Patients With Active Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
JAMA. 2023;329:725–34. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
26.
Schreiber S, Aden K, Bernardes JP, Conrad C, Tran F, Höper H, et al. Therapeutic Interleukin-6 Trans-
signaling Inhibition by Olamkicept (sgp130Fc) in Patients With Active Inflammatory Bowel Disease.
Gastroenterology. 2021;160:2354–66.e11. [DOI] [PubMed]
27.
McKinnon BD, Bertschi D, Bersinger NA, Mueller MD. Inflammation and nerve fiber interaction in
endometriotic pain. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2015;26:1–10. [DOI] [PubMed]
28.
Matsuzaki S, Pouly JL, Canis M. Persistent activation of signal transducer and activator of transcription
3 via interleukin-6 trans-signaling is involved in fibrosis of endometriosis. Hum Reprod. 2022;37:
1489–504. [DOI] [PubMed]
29.
Ahn SH, Monsanto SP, Miller C, Singh SS, Thomas R, Tayade C. Pathophysiology and Immune
Dysfunction in Endometriosis. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:795976. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
30.
Berg AF, Ettich J, Weitz HT, Krusche M, Floss DM, Scheller J, et al. Exclusive inhibition of IL-6 trans-
signaling by soluble gp130FlyRFc. Cytokine X. 2021;3:100058. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
31.
Allocca M, Jovani M, Fiorino G, Schreiber S, Danese S. Anti-IL-6 treatment for inflammatory bowel
diseases: next cytokine, next target. Curr Drug Targets. 2013;14:1508–21. [DOI] [PubMed]
32.
Explor Immunol. 2024;4:476–89 | https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00153 Page 489
Colás-Algora N, Muñoz-Pinillos P, Cacho-Navas C, Avendaño-Ortiz J, Rivas Gd, Barroso S, et al.
Simultaneous Targeting of IL-1-Signaling and IL-6-Trans-Signaling Preserves Human Pulmonary
Endothelial Barrier Function During a Cytokine Storm-Brief Report. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol.
2023;43:2213–22. [DOI] [PubMed]
33.
Ziegler L, Lundström A, Havervall S, Thålin C, Gigante B. IL-6 signalling biomarkers in hospitalised
patients with moderate to severe SARS-CoV-2 infection in a single centre study in Sweden. Cytokine.
2022;159:156020. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
34.
Monsour M, Croci DM, Agazzi S, Borlongan CV. Contemplating IL-6, a double-edged sword cytokine:
Which side to use for stroke pathology? CNS Neurosci Ther. 2023;29:493–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [PMC]
35.
Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet. 1991;
337:867–72. [DOI] [PubMed]
36.
Scheller J, Garbers C, Rose-John S. Interleukin-6: from basic biology to selective blockade of pro-
inflammatory activities. Semin Immunol. 2014;26:2–12. [DOI] [PubMed]
37.
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.