Call: +1.631.470.9640
Mon - Fri 10:00 am - 02:00 pm EST
24 March 2017: Laboratory Research
Identification and Evaluation of New Immunoregulatory Genes in Mesenchymal Stromal Cells of Different Origins: Comparison of Normal and Inflammatory Conditions
Mohammad Fayyad-Kazan ABCDEF 1, Mehdi Najar ABCDEFG 2, Hussein Fayyad-Kazan ABCDEF 3*, Gordana Raicevic ABDF 2, Laurence Lagneaux ABCDEFG 2
DOI: 10.12659/MSMBR.903518
Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2017; 23:87-96
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) possess potent immunomodulatory properties that increase their value as a cell-based therapeutic tool for managing various immune-based disorders. Over the past years, accumulated results from trials using MSCs-based therapy have shown substantial contradictions. Although the reasons underlying these discrepancies are still not completely understood, it is well known that the immunomodulatory activities mediated by distinct MSCs differ in a manner dependent on their tissue origin and adequate response to inflammation priming. Thus, characterization of new molecular pathway(s) through which distinct MSC populations can exert their immunomodulatory effects, particularly during inflammation, will undoubtedly enhance their therapeutic potential.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: After confirming their compliance with ISCT criteria, quantitative real time-PCR (qRT-PCR) was used to screen new immunoregulatory genes in MSCs, derived from adipose tissue, foreskin, Wharton’s jelly or the bone-marrow, after being cultivated under normal and inflammatory conditions.
RESULTS: FGL2, GAL, SEMA4D, SEMA7A, and IDO1 genes appeared to be differentially transcribed in the different MSC populations. Moreover, these genes were not similarly modulated following MSCs-exposure to inflammatory signals.
CONCLUSIONS: Our observations suggest that these identified immunoregulatory genes may be considered as potential candidates to be targeted in order to enhance the immunomodulatory properties of MSCs towards more efficient clinical use.
Keywords: Immunomodulation, mesenchymal stromal cells
Background
Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) are adult multipotent cells capable of differentiating into different tissue lineages [1,2], thus representing an attractive candidate for tissue regeneration and repair. Besides their stem/progenitor characteristics, MSCs possess robust immunomodulatory capacities that enable them to modulate most immune cells, particularly T lymphocytes [3,4]. In fact, MSCs can inhibit the activation and proliferation of T cells, thus rendering them in a state of anergy [3,4]. Due to their immunosuppressive potential, MSCs have been used in both animal models and clinical trials to treat various immune disorders, including graft versus host disease [5], systemic lupus erythematosus [6], and rheumatoid arthritis [7]. The immunomodulatory capacity of MSCs is reported to be dependent on the surrounding inflammatory microenvironment. Indeed, MSCs act like biosensors that detect disease specific inflammatory fingerprints and after migration to the site of injury, they deliver the most beneficial response to the host, thereby, lowering the chances of systemic side effects [8]. Alteration of MSCs’ immunomodulatory potency by external stimuli, in particular inflammatory cytokines, is reported to be accompanied with an increase in MSCs-mediated secretion of immune regulatory factors [8]. Intriguingly, the
A comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms regulating the immune responses in MSCs’ field remains a major challenge towards improving their clinical applications. In this work, we aimed at identifying new immunoregulatory genes in different MSCs and characterizing their sensitivities to inflammatory signals. Accordingly, we assessed the transcription profiles, within MSCs derived from BM, WJ, AT, or FSK, of a set of genes known to serve important immunomodulatory roles. Our results identified
Material and Methods
ETHICAL GUIDELINES:
This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (1964) and approved by the local ethics committee of the Institut Jules Bordet (Belguim). All samples were collected from healthy donors after giving informed written consent.
ISOLATION, CULTURE, CHARACTERIZATION AND PRIMING OF HUMAN MSCS:
Once obtained, BM, WJ, FSK, and AT were processed according to our previous protocols [15,16]. Cell cultures were incubated at 37°C in a 5% CO2 humidified atmosphere. After 48 hours, non-adherent cells were removed by washing, and the medium was changed twice a week. When sub-confluency (80–90%) was achieved, adherent cells were harvested by TrypLE Select (Lonza) and replated at a lower density (1,000 cells/cm2). MSCs of different origins were characterized for their morphology, phenotype and multi-lineage potential according to our previous work [17]. MSCs were cultivated under basic or inflammatory conditions. As previously described [18], inflammation priming was performed upon treating MSCs, for overnight, with a cocktail of pro-inflammatory cytokines, specifically IL-1β (Peprotech, Rocky Hill, NJ, USA) (25 ng/mL), TNF-α (50 ng/mL), IFN-α (10 ng/mL), and IFN-γ (50 ng/mL) (all from Prospec Inc., Rehovot, Israel).
QUANTITATIVE REAL-TIME PCR (QRT-PCR):
Total RNA was isolated from cord blood mononuclear cells (CBMC), adult purified monocytes (CD14+ selection, Mylteniyi Biotech), human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC, PromoCell, Heidelberg, Germany), and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), and each MSC type, and was extracted in a single step using TriPure Isolation Reagent (Roche Applied Science, Vilvoorde, Belgium). For human placenta tissue, human brain tissue, and human umbilical cord, RNA was directly provided by Stratagene Europe. We performed the reverse transcription reaction with 1 mg RNA using qScript cDNA SuperMix (Quanta Biosciences). Transcripts were quantified by qRT-PCR using 20 ng of cDNA, SYBR Green PCR Master Mix (Applied Biosystems, Lennik, Belgium) and 0.32 mM forward and reverse primers. The primers were designed with Primer Express 2.0 software (Applied Biosystems) or ProbeFinder online software (Roche) and are available in Supplementary Table 1. To control variations in input RNA amounts, the GAPDH gene was used as a housekeeping gene to quantify and normalize the results. The reactions were carried out using the ABI Prism 7900 HT system (Applied Biosystems). In all cases, dissociation curves were generated and the specificity of the PCR reactions was confirmed. The comparative ΔΔCt method was used for data analysis. To evaluate the fold change, data were normalized with the GAPDH gene to obtain the ΔCt and were then calibrated with the geometric mean of the GAPDH ΔCt to generate the ΔΔCt. Fold changes were then calculated as fold change=2−ΔΔCt.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:
Data are presented as means ±SEM of three independent experiments and statistical significance of gene transcription between control and treated cells was determined according to unpaired Mann-Whitney U test.
Results
IDENTIFICATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF IMMUNOREGULATORY GENES IN DIFFERENT MSCS:
Learning how to control the plasticity of MSCs’ immunoregulatory function, both endogenously and exogenously, may provide an important new modality for better therapeutic applications of MSCs, as well as improved understanding of MSCs’ role in different stages of disease. Accordingly, a transcription profiling was carried out to identify key immunoregulatory genes in distinct MSCs. It is noteworthy that before starting this screen, we confirmed that all populations of MSCs tested in this study were compliant with ISCT criteria (morphology, phenotype, multi-lineage potential). Thus, cells in culture were adherent, presenting as typical fibroblast-like cells and were capable of providing colony forming unit-fibroblasts (CFU-F), a specific character of MSCs. The phenotype of these cells was established by flow cytometry using a panel of surface markers. Accordingly, representative flow cytometry histograms (Supplementary Figure 1) demonstrate the positivity of the cells for MSC-markers CD73, CD90, and CD105 as well as their negativity for CD45, CD34, CD14, CD19, and HLA-Dr hematopoietic markers. CD146 was specifically expressed, even at different levels, in the distinct MSCs populations and thus considered a marker distinguishing MSCs from fibroblasts [19]. We have also confirmed the multi-lineage potential of these cells by inducing adipogenesis, osteogenesis, and chondrogenesis using specific media and highlighting these cell differentiations by using specific staining techniques. Representative images of adipocytes (lipid vacuoles stained by Oil Red O), osteoblasts (calcium deposit stained by Alizarin red) and chondrogenic pellets (proteoglycans synthesis stained by Alician blue) are provided in Supplementary Figure 2.
In a second step, and upon using individual quantitative Real-Time qPCR (qRT-PCR), the transcription status of a predefined set of immunomodulatory genes (ARG1, CD163, FGL2, GAL, IDO1, IDO2, SEMA3A, SEMA4A, SEMA7A, SEMA4D, and SEMA6D) was characterized in MSCs, derived from BM, WJ, AT, and FSK, and being cultivated under basic (non-inflammatory) conditions (Figure 1). FGL2 appeared to be strongly transcribed in AT-MSCs but only weakly in FSK-MSCs (Figure 1A). On the other hand, BM- and WJ-MSCs showed only minimal FGL2 mRNA levels (Figure 1A). GAL gene was transcribed in both AT- and FSK-MSCs, with the latter showing higher transcription levels (Figure 1B). On the contrary, only minimal GAL transcription was detected in BM- and WJ-MSCs (Figure 1B). SEMA4D and IDO1 genes exhibited minimal transcription in the different tested MSCs being grown under basic conditions (Figure 1C, 1E, respectively). SEMA7A appeared to be differentially transcribed in the distinct MSCs studied, with BM-MSCs showing highest transcription levels followed by FSK- and AT-MSCs and finally WJ-MSCs being characterized by minimal SEMA7A mRNA levels (Figure 1D). No significant transcription was detected in the case of ARG1, CD163, IDO2, SEMA3A, SEMA4A, and SEMA6D genes in any of the four mentioned MSCs types (data not shown).
In a next step, we aimed at examining the effect of inflammatory signals on the transcriptional profiles of the mentioned genes. Interestingly, the high FGL2 mRNA levels exhibited by AT-MSCs were clearly reduced, to less than half, upon cultivating these cells in an inflammatory milieu (Figure 1A). On the contrary, the inflammatory signals positively affected FGL2 transcription in FSK-MSCs, mainly, and to a lesser extent in in BM- and WJ-MSCs (Figure 1A). Following inflammation-priming, GAL transcription was significantly reduced in AT-MSCs but strikingly induced in FSK-MSCs (Figure 1B). On the other hand, no significant alterations in GAL transcriptional profiles were detected following inflammation-priming of BM- or WJ-MSCs (Figure 1B). The minimal SEMA4D and IDO1 transcription levels were strongly induced following inflammation-priming of AT-MSCs and FSK-MSCs, with the former showing much higher levels (Figure 1C, 1E). On the other hand, only a slight induction of SEMA4D and IDO1 mRNA levels was detected in inflammation-primed BM- and WJ-MSCs (Figure 1C, 1E). Following inflammation-priming, SEMA7A transcription levels were strongly enhanced in BM-MSCs, moderately elevated in AT-MSCs, slightly increased in WJ-MSCs but partly reduced in FSK-MSCs (Figure 1D). It is noteworthy that ARG1, CD163, IDO2, SEMA3A, SEMA4A, and SEMA6D genes showed no detectable transcription levels following inflammation-priming of the different tested MSCs. This led us to ask whether the used primers were not efficient in terms of gene-product amplification and thus resulted in false negative results. In order to test this possibility, validation of the primers’ efficiency was performed upon assaying the transcription levels of all tested genes using total RNA extracts prepared from seven other cell types (CBMC, PBMC, HUVECs -with and w/o inflammation-priming-, monocytes as well as brain-, placental- and umbilical cord-cells). CD163 was differentially transcribed in these cells with monocytes showing highest mRNA levels followed by placental cells (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). Lower CD163 transcription levels were detected in umbilical cord- and brain-cells as wells as in CBMCs and PBMCs. However, no transcription was detected in HUVECs (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). ARG1 appeared to be highly transcribed in CBMCs but modestly in PBMCs (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). Lower ARG1 mRNA levels were also observed in monocytes, umbilical cord- and placental-cells (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). FGL2 appeared to be transcribed in the different tested cells, with monocytes showing the highest transcription levels (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). GAL gene was strongly transcribed in HUVECs, being cultivated under basic or inflammatory conditions, but only weakly in brain- and placental-cells (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). Except for CBMCs and monocytes, SEMA3A mRNA levels were detected in the different tested cells (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). Except for HUVECs, all tested cells exhibited SEMA4A and 4D transcription (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). Except for monocytes, CBMCs and PBMCs, SEMA6D was differentially transcribed in the distinct tested cells (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). SEMA7A transcription was detected in all tested cells with HUVECs showing minimal mRNA levels (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). IDO1 transcription was observed mainly in inflammation-primed HUVECs, whilst IDO2 mRNA levels were detected mostly in umbilical cord cells (Supplementary Figure 3, Supplementary Table 2). Altogether these observations indicate that the utilized primers were able to drive the transcription of each of the tested genes within at least one out of the seven examined cells types, indicating that the absence of gene transcription observed for ARG1, CD163, IDO2, SEMA3A, SEMA4A, and SEMA6D genes in BM-, WJ-, FSK- and AT-MSCs was not due to primer inefficiency.
Discussion
Although the immunomodulatory capacities of MSCs are widely described, the nature and role of the immunoregulatory factors involved in mediating these effects are, yet, not clearly demonstrated. Accordingly, profiling MSCs’ transcriptome is necessary to identify key immunoregulatory genes that can be targeted to improve MSCs-immunomodulatory potential. In this context, murine MSCs were screened, in a previous work, for new genes with immuno-therapeutic potential [20]. However, in this study, we screened different populations of human MSCs for their transcription profiles of a defined set of immunomodulatory genes. Moreover, we examined the effect of inflammatory signals on those transcription patterns. Besides identifying
In fact, literature mining revealed that our identified genes were described to be involved in different important immunologic roles. For instance, fibrinogen-like protein 2 (FGL2), a member of the fibrinogen-like protein family, possesses prothrombinase activity and potent immune regulatory functions. FGL2 acts as a Treg effector molecule by suppressing T-cell activities in a FoxP3-dependent manner [21] and also suppresses dendritic cell- (DC) and B cell-functions by binding to FcγRIIB [22]. Moreover, by inducing multiple immune-suppression mechanisms, FGL2 may promote glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) progression via increasing the expression levels of PD-1 and CD39, thus expanding the frequency of tumor-supportive M2 macrophages via the FcγRIIB pathway, and enhancing the number of MDSCs and CD39+ regulatory T cells [23]. Collectively, these observations highlight FGL2 as a key immune-suppressive modulator where blocking FGL2 has therapeutic promise for cancer immunotherapy [23]. In our results, a high
The galanin (
Semaphorins (SEMAs) are newcomers to the growing collection of immunoregulatory proteins. The SEMAs, originally identified as guidance cues in axonal growth, possess critical functions in the immune system [28]. The “immune semaphorins” (
Conclusions
In conclusion, our work identified certain immunoregulatory genes to be differentially transcribed in distinct MSCs in a manner dependent on both MSCs-tissue origin and the surrounding inflammatory status. Intriguingly, given that MSCs-immunoregulatory capacities do not occur spontaneously but are acquired in response to a cocktail of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IFN-γ, TNF-α, and IL-1β), our observations regarding the
References
1. Friedenstein AJ, Deriglasova UF, Kulagina NN: Exp Hematol, 1974; 2; 83-92, pmid: 4455512
2. Pittenger MF, Mackay AM, Beck SC, Multilineage potential of adult human mesenchymal stem cells: Science, 1999; 284; 143-47, pmid: 10102814
3. Bartholomew A, Sturgeon C, Siatskas M: Exp Hematol, 2002; 30; 42-48, pmid: 11823036
4. Zappia E, Casazza S, Pedemonte E, Mesenchymal stem cells ameliorate experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis inducing T-cell anergy: Blood, 2005; 106; 1755-61, pmid: 15905186
5. Le Blanc K, Rasmusson I, Sundberg B, Treatment of severe acute graft-versus-host disease with third party haploidentical mesenchymal stem cells: Lancet (London, England), 2004; 363; 1439-41
6. Carrion FA, Figueroa FE, Mesenchymal stem cells for the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus: Is the cure for connective tissue diseases within connective tissue?: Stem Cell Res, Ther, 2011; 2; 23, pmid: 21586107
7. Papadopoulou A, Yiangou M, Athanasiou E, Mesenchymal stem cells are conditionally therapeutic in preclinical models of rheumatoid arthritis: Ann Rheum Dis, 2012; 71; 1733-40, pmid: 22586171
8. Wang Y, Chen X, Cao W, Shi Y, Plasticity of mesenchymal stem cells in immunomodulation: Pathological and therapeutic implications: Nat Immunol, 2014; 15; 1009-16, pmid: 25329189
9. Kim N, Cho S-G, Overcoming immunoregulatory plasticity of mesenchymal stem cells for accelerated clinical applications: Int J Hematol, 2016; 103; 129-37, pmid: 26662288
10. Shi Y, Su J, Roberts AI, How mesenchymal stem cells interact with tissue immune responses: Trends Immunol, 2012; 33; 136-43, pmid: 22227317
11. Zuk PA, Zhu M, Mizuno H, Multilineage cells from human adipose tissue: Implications for cell-based therapies: Tissue Eng, 2001; 7; 211-28, pmid: 11304456
12. Campagnoli C, Roberts IA, Kumar S, Identification of mesenchymal stem/progenitor cells in human first-trimester fetal blood, liver, and bone marrow: Blood, 2001; 98; 2396-402, pmid: 11588036
13. Najar M, Raicevic G, Fayyad-Kazan H, Immune-related antigens, surface molecules and regulatory factors in human-derived mesenchymal stromal cells: The expression and impact of inflammatory priming: Stem Cell Rev, 2012; 8; 1188-98, pmid: 22983809
14. El Omar R, Beroud J, Stoltz J-F, Umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells: The new gold standard for mesenchymal stem cell-based therapies?: Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 2014; 20; 523-44, pmid: 24552279
15. Najar M, Raicevic G, Fayyad-Kazan H, Impact of different mesenchymal stromal cell types on T-cell activation, proliferation and migration: Int Immunopharmacol, 2013; 15; 693-702, pmid: 23499510
16. Najar M, Raicevic G, André T, Mesenchymal stromal cells from the foreskin: Tissue isolation, cell characterization and immunobiological properties: Cytotherapy, 2016; 18; 320-35, pmid: 26857227
17. Fayyad-Kazan H, Faour WH, Badran B, The immunomodulatory properties of human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal cells are defined according to multiple immunobiological criteria: Inflamm Res, 2016; 65; 501-10, pmid: 26956767
18. Raicevic G, Rouas R, Najar M, Inflammation modifies the pattern and the function of Toll-like receptors expressed by human mesenchymal stromal cells: Hum Immunol, 2010; 71; 235-44, pmid: 20034529
19. Halfon S, Abramov N, Grinblat B, Ginis I, Markers distinguishing mesenchymal stem cells from fibroblasts are downregulated with passaging: Stem Cells Dev, 2011; 20; 53-66, pmid: 20528146
20. Pedemonte E, Benvenuto F, Casazza S, The molecular signature of therapeutic mesenchymal stem cells exposes the architecture of the hematopoietic stem cell niche synapse: BMC Genomics, 2007; 8; 65, pmid: 17341312
21. Wang J, Vuitton DA, Müller N: PLoS Negl Trop Dis, 2015; 9; e0003755, pmid: 25955764
22. Chan CWY, Kay LS, Khadaroo RG, Soluble fibrinogen-like protein 2/fibroleukin exhibits immunosuppressive properties: Suppressing T cell proliferation and inhibiting maturation of bone marrow-derived dendritic cells: J Immunol, 2003; 170; 4036-44, pmid: 12682232
23. Yan J, Kong L-Y, Hu J, FGL2 as a multimodality regulator of tumor-mediated immune suppression and therapeutic target in gliomas: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2015; 107(8) pii: djv137
24. Evans H, Baumgartner M, Shine J, Herzog H, Genomic organization and localization of the gene encoding human preprogalanin: Genomics, 1993; 18; 473-77, pmid: 7508413
25. Heppelmann B, Just S, Pawlak M, Galanin influences the mechanosensitivity of sensory endings in the rat knee joint: Eur J Neurosci, 2000; 12; 1567-72, pmid: 10792434
26. Trejter M, Brelinska R, Warchol JB, Effects of galanin on proliferation and apoptosis of immature rat thymocytes: Int J Mol Med, 2002; 10; 183-86, pmid: 12119556
27. Louridas M, Letourneau S, Lautatzis M-E, Vrontakis M: Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2009; 390; 867-71, pmid: 19840773
28. Yazdani U, Terman JR, The semaphorins: Genome Biol, 2006; 7; 211, pmid: 16584533
29. Delaire S, Billard C, Tordjman R, Biological activity of soluble CD100. II. Soluble CD100, similarly to H-SemaIII, inhibits immune cell migration: J Immunol, 2001; 166; 4348-54, pmid: 11254688
30. Delaire S, Elhabazi A, Bensussan A, Boumsell L, CD100 is a leukocyte semaphorin: Cell Mol Life Sci, 1998; 54; 1265-76, pmid: 9849618
31. Kumanogoh A, Kikutani H, Biological functions and signaling of a transmembrane semaphorin, CD100/Sema4D: Cell Mol Life Sci, 2004; 61; 292-300, pmid: 14770294
32. Kumanogoh A, Watanabe C, Lee I, Identification of CD72 as a lymphocyte receptor for the Class IV Semaphorin CD100: Immunity, 2000; 13; 621-31, pmid: 11114375
33. Angelisová P, Drbal K, Cerný J, Characterization of the human leukocyte GPI-anchored glycoprotein CDw108 and its relation to other similar molecules: Immunobiology, 1999; 200; 234-45, pmid: 10416131
34. Holmes S, Downs AM, Fosberry A, Sema7A is a potent monocyte stimulator: Scand J Immunol, 2002; 56; 270-75, pmid: 12193228
35. Czopik AK, Bynoe MS, Palm N, Semaphorin 7A is a negative regulator of T cell responses: Immunity, 2006; 24; 591-600, pmid: 16713976
36. Dai W, Gupta SL, Molecular cloning, sequencing and expression of human interferon-gamma-inducible indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase cDNA: Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 1990; 168; 1-8, pmid: 2109605
37. Najfeld V, Menninger J, Muhleman D: Cytogenet Cell Genet, 1993; 64; 231-32, pmid: 8404046
38. Mellor AL, Munn DH, Ido expression by dendritic cells: Tolerance and tryptophan catabolism: Nat Rev Immunol, 2004; 4; 762-74, pmid: 15459668
39. Johnson BA, Baban B, Mellor AL, Targeting the immunoregulatory indoleamine 2,3 dioxygenase pathway in immunotherapy: Immunotherapy, 2009; 1; 645-61, pmid: 20161103
40. François M, Romieu-Mourez R, Li M, Galipeau J, Human MSC suppression correlates with cytokine induction of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase and bystander M2 macrophage differentiation: Mol Ther, 2012; 20; 187-95, pmid: 21934657
41. Meisel R, Zibert A, Laryea M, Human bone marrow stromal cells inhibit allogeneic T-cell responses by indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase-mediated tryptophan degradation: Blood, 2004; 103; 4619-21, pmid: 15001472
42. Spaggiari GM, Capobianco A, Abdelrazik H, Mesenchymal stem cells inhibit natural killer-cell proliferation, cytotoxicity, and cytokine production: Role of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase and prostaglandin E2: Blood, 2008; 111; 1327-33, pmid: 17951526
DOI :10.12659/MSMBR.942097
Med Sci Monit Basic Res 2023; 29:e942097








