Non-myeloablative busulfan chimeric mouse models are less pro-inflammatory than head-shielded irradiation for studying immune cell interactions in brain tumours.
Animals
Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating
/ pharmacology
Bone Marrow Cells
/ drug effects
Brain Neoplasms
/ immunology
Busulfan
/ pharmacology
Cell Line, Tumor
Chimera
Cytokines
/ blood
Female
Glioblastoma
/ pathology
Immunity, Cellular
/ drug effects
Inflammation
/ chemically induced
Leukocyte Common Antigens
/ genetics
Mice
Mice, Inbred C57BL
Neoplasm Transplantation
Radiation Chimera
Chimeric mouse model
Glioblastoma
Head-shielded irradiation
Inflammation
Macrophages
Microglia
Non-myeloablative conditioning
Journal
Journal of neuroinflammation
ISSN: 1742-2094
Titre abrégé: J Neuroinflammation
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101222974
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 Feb 2019
05 Feb 2019
Historique:
received:
20
09
2018
accepted:
17
01
2019
entrez:
7
2
2019
pubmed:
7
2
2019
medline:
2
7
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Chimeric mouse models generated via adoptive bone marrow transfer are the foundation for immune cell tracking in neuroinflammation. Chimeras that exhibit low chimerism levels, blood-brain barrier disruption and pro-inflammatory effects prior to the progression of the pathological phenotype, make it difficult to distinguish the role of immune cells in neuroinflammatory conditions. Head-shielded irradiation overcomes many of the issues described and replaces the recipient bone marrow system with donor haematopoietic cells expressing a reporter gene or different pan-leukocyte antigen, whilst leaving the blood-brain barrier intact. However, our previous work with full body irradiation suggests that this may generate a pro-inflammatory peripheral environment which could impact on the brain's immune microenvironment. Our aim was to compare non-myeloablative busulfan conditioning against head-shielded irradiation bone marrow chimeras prior to implantation of glioblastoma, a malignant brain tumour with a pro-inflammatory phenotype. Recipient wild-type/CD45.1 mice received non-myeloablative busulfan conditioning (25 mg/kg), full intensity head-shielded irradiation, full intensity busulfan conditioning (125 mg/kg) prior to transplant with whole bone marrow from CD45.2 donors and were compared against untransplanted controls. Half the mice from each group were orthotopically implanted with syngeneic GL-261 glioblastoma cells. We assessed peripheral blood, bone marrow and spleen chimerism, multi-organ pro-inflammatory cytokine profiles at 12 weeks and brain chimerism and immune cell infiltration by whole brain flow cytometry before and after implantation of glioblastoma at 12 and 14 weeks respectively. Both non-myeloablative conditioning and head-shielded irradiation achieve equivalent blood and spleen chimerism of approximately 80%, although bone marrow engraftment is higher in the head-shielded irradiation group and highest in the fully conditioned group. Head-shielded irradiation stimulated pro-inflammatory cytokines in the blood and spleen but not in the brain, suggesting a systemic response to irradiation, whilst non-myeloablative conditioning showed no cytokine elevation. Non-myeloablative conditioning achieved higher donor chimerism in the brain after glioblastoma implantation than head-shielded irradiation with an altered immune cell profile. Our data suggest that non-myeloablative conditioning generates a more homeostatic peripheral inflammatory environment than head-shielded irradiation to allow a more consistent evaluation of immune cells in glioblastoma and can be used to investigate the roles of peripheral immune cells and bone marrow-derived subsets in other neurological diseases.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Chimeric mouse models generated via adoptive bone marrow transfer are the foundation for immune cell tracking in neuroinflammation. Chimeras that exhibit low chimerism levels, blood-brain barrier disruption and pro-inflammatory effects prior to the progression of the pathological phenotype, make it difficult to distinguish the role of immune cells in neuroinflammatory conditions. Head-shielded irradiation overcomes many of the issues described and replaces the recipient bone marrow system with donor haematopoietic cells expressing a reporter gene or different pan-leukocyte antigen, whilst leaving the blood-brain barrier intact. However, our previous work with full body irradiation suggests that this may generate a pro-inflammatory peripheral environment which could impact on the brain's immune microenvironment. Our aim was to compare non-myeloablative busulfan conditioning against head-shielded irradiation bone marrow chimeras prior to implantation of glioblastoma, a malignant brain tumour with a pro-inflammatory phenotype.
METHODS
METHODS
Recipient wild-type/CD45.1 mice received non-myeloablative busulfan conditioning (25 mg/kg), full intensity head-shielded irradiation, full intensity busulfan conditioning (125 mg/kg) prior to transplant with whole bone marrow from CD45.2 donors and were compared against untransplanted controls. Half the mice from each group were orthotopically implanted with syngeneic GL-261 glioblastoma cells. We assessed peripheral blood, bone marrow and spleen chimerism, multi-organ pro-inflammatory cytokine profiles at 12 weeks and brain chimerism and immune cell infiltration by whole brain flow cytometry before and after implantation of glioblastoma at 12 and 14 weeks respectively.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Both non-myeloablative conditioning and head-shielded irradiation achieve equivalent blood and spleen chimerism of approximately 80%, although bone marrow engraftment is higher in the head-shielded irradiation group and highest in the fully conditioned group. Head-shielded irradiation stimulated pro-inflammatory cytokines in the blood and spleen but not in the brain, suggesting a systemic response to irradiation, whilst non-myeloablative conditioning showed no cytokine elevation. Non-myeloablative conditioning achieved higher donor chimerism in the brain after glioblastoma implantation than head-shielded irradiation with an altered immune cell profile.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Our data suggest that non-myeloablative conditioning generates a more homeostatic peripheral inflammatory environment than head-shielded irradiation to allow a more consistent evaluation of immune cells in glioblastoma and can be used to investigate the roles of peripheral immune cells and bone marrow-derived subsets in other neurological diseases.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30722781
doi: 10.1186/s12974-019-1410-y
pii: 10.1186/s12974-019-1410-y
pmc: PMC6362590
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating
0
Cytokines
0
Leukocyte Common Antigens
EC 3.1.3.48
Busulfan
G1LN9045DK
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
25Subventions
Organisme : Royal College of Surgeons of England
ID : Fellowship
Références
Immunology. 1999 Apr;96(4):642-8
pubmed: 10233753
Cancer Res. 2000 Oct 1;60(19):5470-8
pubmed: 11034090
Exp Neurol. 2003 Sep;183(1):25-33
pubmed: 12957485
Blood. 1959 Feb;14(2):187-93
pubmed: 13618375
Exp Neurol. 2005 Dec;196(2):290-7
pubmed: 16153641
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1991 Aug 15;88(16):7438-42
pubmed: 1651506
J Exp Med. 2006 May 15;203(5):1259-71
pubmed: 16636135
J Immunol. 2008 Oct 15;181(8):5425-32
pubmed: 18832699
Neuroscience. 2009 Jul 7;161(3):806-12
pubmed: 19374937
Brain Res. 2009 Sep 15;1289:79-84
pubmed: 19559679
Nat Neurosci. 2011 Jul 31;14(9):1142-9
pubmed: 21804537
PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e23902
pubmed: 21901144
Cell Transplant. 2012;21(6):1149-59
pubmed: 21944997
Mol Ther. 2012 Aug;20(8):1610-21
pubmed: 22547151
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Sep 11;109(37):15018-23
pubmed: 22923692
Front Oncol. 2012 Aug 24;2:102
pubmed: 22937525
Front Oncol. 2012 Sep 19;2:119
pubmed: 23050243
Br J Pharmacol. 2013 Feb;168(3):591-606
pubmed: 23062197
Mol Ther. 2013 Apr;21(4):868-76
pubmed: 23423338
PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e58544
pubmed: 23526995
Haematologica. 2014 Aug;99(8):1380-6
pubmed: 24816236
Cancer Res. 2014 Jul 15;74(14):3727-39
pubmed: 24820020
Cancer. 2015 Jan 15;121(2):226-33
pubmed: 25204639
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 23;9(9):e107649
pubmed: 25247590
Int J Cancer. 2015 Jul 15;137(2):278-88
pubmed: 25477239
Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Jul 15;21(14):3274-85
pubmed: 25829396
Nat Immunol. 2015 Jun;16(6):609-17
pubmed: 25915731
Biochim Biophys Acta. 2016 Mar;1862(3):310-22
pubmed: 26432480
Acta Neuropathol. 2016 Mar;131(3):365-78
pubmed: 26718201
Trends Neurosci. 2016 Sep;39(9):581-586
pubmed: 27460561
Lancet Haematol. 2016 Nov;3(11):e526-e536
pubmed: 27746112
Elife. 2017 Mar 10;6:
pubmed: 28282024
Neuroscientist. 2017 Oct;23(5):454-465
pubmed: 28466758
Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol. 2018 Apr 20;:null
pubmed: 29679380
EMBO Mol Med. 2018 Jul;10(7):
pubmed: 29884617
Blood. 1993 May 15;81(10):2744-9
pubmed: 7683928
Blood. 1994 Apr 15;83(8):2360-7
pubmed: 8161803
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1977 Jan-Feb;2(1-2):117-21
pubmed: 849894
Blood. 1998 Apr 1;91(7):2508-16
pubmed: 9516152
Cancer Immunol Immunother. 1998 Jul;46(5):277-82
pubmed: 9690456