Stromal cell-derived factor-1alpha (SDF-1alpha) has pleiotropic effects on hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs). We have monitored podia formation, migration, proliferation, and cell-cell adhesion of human HPC under the influence of SDF-1alpha, a peptide agonist of CXCR4 (CTCE-0214), a peptide antagonist (CTCE-9908), and a nonpeptide antagonist (AMD3100). Whereas SDF-1alpha induced migration of CD34(+) cells in a dose-dependent manner, CTCE-0214, CTCE-9908, and AMD3100 did not induce chemotaxis in this concentration range albeit the peptides CTCE-0214 and CTCE-9908 increased podia formation. Cell-cell adhesion of HPC to human mesenchymal stromal cells was impaired by the addition of SDF-1alpha, CTCE-0214, and AMD3100. Proliferation was not affected by SDF-1alpha or its analogs. Surface antigen detection of CXCR4 was reduced upon treatment with SDF-1alpha or AMD3100 and it was enhanced by CTCE-9908. Despite the fact that all these molecules target the same CXCR4 receptor, CXCR4 agonists and antagonists have selective effects on different functions of the natural molecule.
Stromal cell-derived factor-1alpha (SDF-1alpha) has pleiotropic effects on hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs). We have monitored podia formation, migration, proliferation, and cell-cell adhesion of humanHPC under the influence of SDF-1alpha, a peptide agonist of CXCR4 (CTCE-0214), a peptide antagonist (CTCE-9908), and a nonpeptide antagonist (AMD3100). Whereas SDF-1alpha induced migration of CD34(+) cells in a dose-dependent manner, CTCE-0214, CTCE-9908, and AMD3100 did not induce chemotaxis in this concentration range albeit the peptides CTCE-0214 and CTCE-9908 increased podia formation. Cell-cell adhesion of HPC to human mesenchymal stromal cells was impaired by the addition of SDF-1alpha, CTCE-0214, and AMD3100. Proliferation was not affected by SDF-1alpha or its analogs. Surface antigen detection of CXCR4 was reduced upon treatment with SDF-1alpha or AMD3100 and it was enhanced by CTCE-9908. Despite the fact that all these molecules target the same CXCR4 receptor, CXCR4 agonists and antagonists have selective effects on different functions of the natural molecule.
Stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF-1 or CXCL12) is a multifunctional cytokine that is
constitutively expressed and secreted by several tissues, including endothelium and stromal cells [1, 2]. It has a single open reading frame of 282 nucleotides encoding a
polypeptide of 93 amino acids. SDF-1 arises in two forms, SDF-1α (amino acids 24–88) and SDF-1β (amino acids
24–93), by differential splicing [3-5]. SDF-1α is so
far the only proven chemoattractant for primitive hematopoietic
progenitor cells (HPC) [6-8]. Accordingly, SDF-1α is
considered as one of the key regulators for hematopoietic
progenitor cell trafficking between the peripheral circulation and
bone marrow [54].
Our group and others have demonstrated that
SDF-1α induces polarization and podia formation of HPC and
leukemic cells [9, 10], two properties that represent prerequisites for directed locomotion. SDF-1α alone showed a moderate effect on cell proliferation in CD34 cells
[11], and its effect on survival or apoptosis of HPC has remained controversial [12-15]. Furthermore the
SDF-1α/CXCR4 axis plays a crucial role in regulation of
homing and adhesion to the supportive cellular microenvironment in
the stem cell niche [16].The receptor for SDF-1α has been identified as the
7-transmembrane receptor CXCR4 which is also a coreceptor for the
HIV type 1 virus [17, 18]. SDF-1α/CXCR4 interaction was
reported to play an important role during embryonic development,
especially in hematopoiesis, vascular development, and
cardiogenesis. CXCR4 expression on bone marrow endothelial cells
is important for internalization of circulating SDF-1α,
resulting in its translocation into the bone marrow [2]. CXCR4 is also expressed on primitive CD34HPC [11]. Signal transduction pathways initiated by the binding of SDF-1α to CXCR4 are not fully understood. Mechanisms involved in CXCR4 signaling include Gi-protein-mediated activation
of PI3K and the phospholipase C cascade [6, 19, 20].The function of SDF-1α can be mimicked by small peptide
agonists [21]. Such molecules have several advantages over the natural one such as the ease of manufacturing and that they
can be more resistant to serum modification and inactivation
[22]. CTCE-0214, for example, is an analog in which the C-terminal of SDF-1α is connected to the N-terminal region by a short bifunctional linker. A recent publication suggested
that CTCE-0214 might improve ex vivo expansion and
engraftment of HPC in a mouse model [23]. CTCE-0214 has also been reported to increase circulating HPC concentrations when
administered to a murine model, indicating that this SDF-1α
peptide agonist could be used for mobilization [24].
CTCE-9908 is another small peptide analog that comprises a
dimerized sequence of the disordered N-terminal region of
SDF-1α and was designed to block the CXCR4 receptor.
Furthermore, nonpeptide compounds have been used to interfere with
the SDF-1α/CXCR4 axis. AMD3100, for example, is a bicyclam
in which the two cyclam rings are tethered by an aromatic bridge.
It was first designed as an inhibitor of virus replication of
HIV-1 and HIV-2 [25]. However, AMD3100 has been shown to be a very potent and selective inhibitor of CXCR4 and both experimental
and clinical data suggest that AMD3100 might mobilize a more
primitive and hence multipotent HPC population than G-CSF
[26, 27].
The different peptide and nonpeptide analogs might have a more
selective effect with respect to the different functions of the
native molecule SDF-1α (Figure 1). Here, we have compared effects of SDF-1α, CTCE-0214, CTCE-9908, and AMD3100 on polarization, migration, adhesion, proliferation, and
CXCR4 receptor internalization in humanCD34 cells.
Figure 1
SDF-1α/CXCR4
axis and interaction with small molecules. The chemokine stromal
cell-derived factor-1 alpha (SDF-1α or CXCL12) is
secreted by stromal cells with various effects on hematopoietic
progenitor cells (HPCs). It binds to the CXCR4 receptor and this
interaction can be influenced by the peptide agonist CTCE-0214 as
well as by the peptide antagonists CTCE-9908 or the nonpeptide
antagonist AMD3100.
2. METHODS
2.1. Isolation of hematopoietic progenitor cells
HPCs were collected from fresh umbilical cord blood after informed
consent using guidelines approved by the Ethic Committee on the
Use of Human Subjects at the University of Heidelberg. Mononuclear
cells (MNCs) were isolated after density gradient centrifugation
on Ficoll-hypaque technique (Biochrom KG, Berlin, Germany).
CD34 cells were enriched by labeling with a monoclonal anti-CD34 antibody conjugated with magnetic MICROBEADS in an
AutoMACS system (Miltenyi Biotec, Bergisch-Gladbach, Germany).
Further purification was achieved using the automatic cell
depositing unit on an FACS-Vantage-SE flow cytometry sorting
system after additional staining with anti-CD34-phycoerythrin (PE)
(Becton Dickinson (BD), San Jose, Calif, USA). Staining with
propidium iodide (PI) was performed prior to sorting to allow
exclusion of nonviable cells.
2.2. CXCR4 agonists and antagonists
The following analogs of SDF-1α were used: SDF-1α (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, Mo, USA); CTCE-0214, peptide agonist
of CXCR4 (amino acid sequence: KPVSLSYRAPFRFF-Linker-LKWIQEYLEKALN) [23, 24];
CTCE-9908, peptide antagonist of CXCR4 (amino acid sequence:
KGVSLSYR-X-RYSLSVGK; both compounds were kindly donated by
Chemokine Therapeutics Corporation, Vancouver, Canada); and
AMD3100, nonpeptide antagonist of CXCR4 (courtesy of AnorMED,
Langley, Canada).
2.3. In vitro two-chamber migration assay
Chemotaxis was assessed by a transwell-migration assay. Iscove's
Modified Dulbecco's medium (IMDM; Cambrex, Walkersville, Md, USA)
with 20% FCS and different concentrations of CXCR4 agonists or
antagonists as mentioned above were added to the lower chamber of
a Falcon Transwell (3 μm pore size, Becton Dickinson).
Equal cell numbers were seeded in the upper chamber in medium
without CXCR4 agonists or antagonists. After 2 hours, the
transwells were removed and cells that had migrated through the
micropores into the lower chamber were counted in a counting
chamber. As the cell numbers of available CD34 cells varied between experiments, the fold-increase of migrating cells
was calculated relative to the corresponding control without
cytokines.
2.4. Cell morphology analysis by microscopy
CD34+ cells were seeded in IMDM medium with 20% FCS with SDF-1α, CXCR4 agonists or antagonists for 4 hours. Cell
morphology was assessed with an Olympus IX70 fluorescence
microscope (Olympus Optical, Hamburg, Germany). Phase contrast
pictures were taken from at least 3 regions in each well in each
of five independent experiments. The ratio of round cells compared
to polarized cells with a prominent uropod was determined.
2.5. Cell division analysis upon CFSE staining
CD34 cells were labeled with carboxyfluorescein diacetate N-succinimidyl ester (CFSE; Sigma-Aldrich, Steinheim,
Germany) to monitor cell division. In brief, cells were washed in
PBS with 0.1% FCS and then stained with CFSE at a final
concentration of 0.3 μM for 10 minutes at
37°C. Staining reaction was stopped with ice cold RPMI with 20% FCS for
5 minutes with three subsequent washes. The labelled cells were
cultured for 7 days in RPMI-1640 medium with 20% FCS with CXCR4
agonists or antagonists (500 ng/mL) as mentioned above.
Alternatively, the cells were cultured for 5 days in Myelocult
(Stem Cell Technology, Vancouver, Canada) supplemented with a
cytokine cocktail (2.5 U/mL erythropoietin, 10 ng/mL
interleukin-3, 500 U/mL interleukin-6, 10 ng/mL
granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, 2.5 ng/mL
basic fibroblast growth factor, 10 ng/mL insulin-like growth
factor-1, 50 ng/mL stem cell factor, and 2.5 ng/mL
fibroblast growth factor-beta) as described previously
[28, 29]. Cells were then analyzed by flow cytometry according
to their CFSE staining. Dead cells were discriminated as PI
positive. The number of cell divisions could be estimated by the
periodical dilution of residual CFSE dye to daughter cells.
2.6. Adhesion assay
Adhesive cell-cell interaction was analyzed on a feeder layer of
human mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) from human bone marrow (BM), which were isolated in the culture medium described by Reyes et al. [30] and Wagner et al. [31, 32]. Negative control adhesion was
analyzed on glass surface upon coating for 15 minutes with
10 ng/mL fibronectin (Sigma-Aldrich) or 2.5 g/dL bovineserum albumin (BSA; PAA, Cölbe, Germany). The percentage of
adherent cells was quantified with our novel adhesion assay
[33]. In brief, adhesive press-to-seal silicone isolators with eight wells, 9 mm diameter, 1.0 mm deep (Invitrogen,
Karlsruhe, Germany) were fixed on glass slides. Feeder layer cells
were seeded in these wells in a density of about
105 cells/cm2 and were grown for 24–72 hours at
37°C and 5% CO until they formed a confluent cell layer. All adhesion experiments were performed in IMDM
supplemented with 20% FCS, Penicillin 1000 U/mL, and
Streptomycin 100 U/mL. HPCs were stained with the fluorescent
membrane dye PKH26 (Sigma-Aldrich) before use [34-37].
About 10 000 HPC were seeded per well and were allowed to settle
for 15 minutes. A cover slide was sealed airtight on the silicone
spacer and cells were allowed to adhere for additional 45 minutes.
HPCs were then analyzed on the feeder layer cells with an Olympus
IX70 fluorescence microscope (Olympus Optical, Hamburg, Germany)
using a dual-band fluorescence filter set FITC/Cy3 (AHF
Analysetechnik, Tübingen, Germany). The microscope was
equipped with an incubation box to keep a constant temperature of
37°C and 5% CO. The experimental setting was then inverted 180°. Adherent cells remained attached to feeder layer cells, whereas nonadherent cells dropped down and
could be observed on the focus level of the cover slide.
Fluorescent images were always taken from the same region before
the inversion (all cells on the feeder layer = ALL) as
well as after the inversion in the focus level of feeder layer
cells (adherent cells = ADH), and on the lower glass
slide level (nonadherent cells = NON-ADH). Cells were
counted in 3–6 different regions in each well. Three independent
experiments were performed in duplicate with each of the
SDF-1α analogs, and a control without these compounds was
always analyzed in parallel. Percentage of adherent cells was
always calculated by two methods: (1) ADH/ALL;
(2) ADH/(ADH + NON-ADH), and these
results were always consistent.
2.7. Flowcytometric analysis of CXCR4
Auto-MACS enriched CD34 cells or BM-MSC were incubated with SDF-1α analogs (500 ng/mL) for 30 minutes at 37°C. Cells were then either washed twice with ice-cold PBS before antibody staining or the antibodies were incubated
together with the SDF-1α analogs. Cells were stained with
anti-CXCR4-phycoerythrin (PE; clone 12G5) and anti-CD34-allophycocyanin (APC) (both BD Biosciences) for additional 30 minutes at 4°C, washed in PBS 4°C, and immediately analyzed by flow cytometry to determine surface
expression of CXCR4.
2.8. Statistics
All results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. To
estimate the probability of differences, we have adopted the
paired Student t test. Probability value of P < .05 denoted statistical significance.
3. RESULTS
3.1. Effects on migration
Chemotaxis of CD34 cells towards a gradient of SDF-1α and CXCR4 agonists or antagonists was assessed in a transwell migration assay. The number of migratory cells increased
continuously with the SDF-1α concentration of up to
500 ng/mL SDF-1α [9]. In contrast, neither the agonist CTCE-0214 nor the antagonists CTCE-9908 or AMD3100 induced
any significant migration under these conditions (Figure 2(a)). However, a further increase in the concentration of CTCE-0214 (100 μg/mL) resulted in a moderate increase in migration of CD34 cells.
Figure 2
Effects on cell migration and podia formation.The effect
of the SDF-1α, CXCR4 agonist, and CXCR4 antagonists on
migration of human CD34 cells was assessed in transwell migration experiments. The fold increase in migration upon
treatment with these compounds was determined in relation to the
corresponding control in four to eight independent experiments.
SDF-1α induced chemoattraction in a dose-dependent manner.
The same concentration of the peptide agonist CTCE-0214 and the
peptide antagonist CTCE-9908 did not have any significant effect
on migration of CD34 cells although there was a significant effect using much higher concentrations of CTCE-0214.
(a) *P < .05. SDF-1α has a dose-dependent effect on the polarization and podia formation of CD34 cells. The morphology was analyzed in five independent experiments with simultaneous comparison of the compounds. The peptide agonist
CTCE-0214 and the peptide antagonist CTCE-9908 also showed a
significant effect on uropod formation. (b) *P < .05.
3.2. Effects on podia formation
Polarization and podia formation are prerequisites for directed
locomotion of HPC. We have analyzed the podia formation of
CD34 cells upon 4-hour treatment with SDF-1α, CXCR4 agonists or CXCR4 antagonists. Consistent with our previous report 15% (±2%) of the cells demonstrated an elongated morphology with a prominent uropod in the control experiments
[9]. The percentage of polarized cells with a prominent uropod increased under treatment with SDF-1α in a
concentration-dependent manner (up to 40% ± 10% in SDF-1α 500 ng/mL). Surprisingly, a significant increase
in podia-forming cells was also achieved by the agonist CTCE-0214
or the antagonist CTCE-9908. Thus, these compounds might induce
podia formation, probably via cytoskeletal rearrangements, but did
not induce directed migration in concentrations between
10 ng/mL to 500 ng/mL. AMD3100 did not affect uropod
formation (Figure 2(b)).
3.3. Effects on survival and proliferation
CD34 cells were cultured in a culture
medium supplemented with a cytokine cocktail (Epo, IL-3, IL-6,
GM-CSF, SCF, bFGF, and IGF-1) as described before [28, 29]. A high cell viability was observed and less than 1% of the cell population was PI positive upon treatment with any of the CXCR4 agonists or antagonists. Most of the cells divided up to six times
after five days and cell division kinetics were not affected by
the compounds (Figures 3(a) and 3(b)). Thus, we reasoned that a cytokine deprived culture condition might be more suitable for analysis of survival and proliferation.
Culturing of enriched CD34 cells in RPMI-1640 medium with 20% FCS for seven days without any supplements resulted in a reduced cell viability. According to forward scatter (FSC) and
side scatter (SSC), the cell population could be clearly
distinguished and represented about 30% of the counted events.
About 3.1% ± 0.9% of these cells were positive for propidium
iodide (Figure 3(a)). The addition of SDF-1α, CTCE-0214, CTCE-9908, or AMD3100 (500 ng/mL each) did not have
any significant impact on the cell number according to counted
events, nor on the percentage of PI positive cells (3.9% ±
0.7%; 3.0% ± 0.4%; 2.0% ± 1.3%; 3.4% ± 1.2%;
3.3% ± 0.5%, resp.). Of the remaining cells approximately
50% have divided as determined by dilution of CFSE dye.
SDF-1α and its analogs did not have any significant effect
on proliferation of CD34 cells although there was a tendency towards more cell divisions with CTCE-0214
(Figure 3(c)).
Figure 3
Effects on Proliferation. CD34 cells were stained with CFSE and subsequently grown for 5 days in culture
medium with a cytokine cocktail (Epo, IL-3, IL-6, GM-CSF, SCF,
bFGF, and IGF-1) or for 7 days in culture medium without cytokine
supplements. Cultivation with the cytokine cocktail resulted in a
very high viability of > 95%, whereas without cytokines the cell
population could be distinguished according to forward scatter
(FSC) and side scatter (SSC) from cell fragments (black spots: PI
positive; grey spots: PI negative). (a) The number of cell
divisions was estimated within the PI negative cell population by
the dilution of CFSE dye. Whereas the CD34 cells demonstrated a high proliferation with the cytokine cocktail, only
about 50% of the cells proliferated without these cytokines. (b)
SDF-1α, the peptide agonist CTCE-0214, the peptide
antagonist CTCE-9908, and the nonpeptide antagonist AMD3100 did
not have a significant effect on the fraction of proliferating
cells (c) nor on the percentage of PI negative cells (three independent experiments).
3.4. Effects on adhesion
The SDF-1α/CXCR4 pathway plays a significant role in homing
and mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells. Human mesenchymal
stromal cells from bone marrow (BM-MSC) represent a surrogate
model for studying molecular mechanisms of adhesion of humanHPC
towards the cellular determinants of the niche. This heterotypic
cell-cell adhesion was analyzed using a novel adhesion assay
[33]. By means of gravitational force, HPCs were separated into those adherent to the feeder layer and those that dropped to
the original covering glass upon inversion of the culture
preparations. Furthermore, we have analyzed adhesion of HPC to a
protein coated glass surface without feeder layer cells. About
20% ± 1% of the cells demonstrated unspecific binding to BSA
and 28% ± 6% remained attached to fibronectin coated surfaces
[33]. In contrast, 74% ± 10% of the CD34+ adhered
to BM-MSC under control conditions without addition of
SDF-1α analogs. As demonstrated in Figure 4, there was a significant reduction in cell adhesion upon treatment
with SDF-1α (55% ± 13%; P = .014), CTCE-0214 (46% ± 16%; P = .7) and AMD3100 (32% ± 11%;
P = 7 × 10−5). The peptide
antagonist CTCE-9908 did not have an effect on cell adhesion
(74% ± 8%).
Figure 4
Effects on adhesion.
Adhesion of CD34 cells was either analyzed on
protein-coated surfaces (white bars) or on mesenchymal stromal
cells (MSCs) from human bone marrow (black bars) in culture media
supplemented with SDF-1α, CTCE-0214, CTCE-9908, or AMD3100.
Adhesion was significantly reduced by SDF-1α, peptide
agonist CTCE-0214, as well as by the mobilization agent AMD3100
(three independent experiments; ‡P = .014; #P = .007; †P = .7 × 10−4; ¶P = .002).
3.5. Effects on surface expression of CXCR4
Various reports demonstrated that SDF-1α induced
internalization of the CXCR4 receptor [38-40]. In this
study, we have analyzed surface expression of CXCR4 and CD34
either under treatment with CXCR4 agonists and antagonist (n =
4) or after two additional washing steps upon treatment with
CXCR4 agonists and antagonists (n = 4). In four individual
experiments without additional washing steps, 41.6% ± 7.9% of
the cells within the CD34 fraction expressed CXCR4 on the cell surface and this proportion was even higher in the
residual CD34 cells (61.4% ± 14.9%, P = .07).
Pretreatment with SDF-1α reduced the CXCR4 expression
within the CD34 cells (30.0% ± 13.9%, P = .13).
Detection of CXCR4 was significantly reduced upon pretreatment
with AMD3100 (6.5% ± 0.8%, P = .002). The peptide agonist CTCE-0214 did not show any effect on CXCR4 expression (43.9% ± 12.9%), whereas the peptide antagonist CTCE-9908 enhanced the
proportion of CXCR4 cells (47.0% ± 6.1%, P = .02). A representative experiment of four is shown in Figure 5. Additional washing steps with ice-cold PBS to remove SDF-1α agonists and antagonists prior to antibody staining revealed the same tendency, although CXCR4 detection was
higher upon removal of AMD3100 (control 32.8% ± 3.3%;
SDF-1α 20.7% ± 5.2%, P = .06; CTCE-0214 31.2% ± 5.2%; CTCE-9908 33.9% ± 4.7%; AMD3100 22.5% ± 6.1%,
P = .02). In addition, cells were permeabilized upon treatment
with the SDF-1α agonists and antagonists. In the control,
nearly all cells (98.45%) were positive for CXCR4 and no decrease
in CXCR4 detection was observed after cytokine stimulation.
Figure 5
Effects on surface levels of CXCR4 detected by flow cytometry. Surface expression of CXCR4 (phycoerythrin; PE) and CD34 (allophycocyanin, APC) was
analyzed on the surface of CD34 enriched cells upon treatment with CXCR4 agonist and antagonist without additional
washing steps. Demarcation of autofluorescence is indicated by
black lines. The proportion of CXCR4 cells was higher in residual CD34 cells compared to the CD34 fraction. CXCR4 detection was reduced upon treatment with SDF-1α and AMD3100. The peptide agonist CTCE-0214 did not affect the proportion of CXCR4 cells, whereas the peptide antagonist CTCE-9908 increased this proportion. Concentration of cytokines was 500 ng/mL. Representative plots
of four independent experiments are shown.
4. DISCUSSION
To examine the potentials of agonists and antagonists of CXCR4, we
have monitored directed migration, podia formation, adhesion
behavior, and proliferation of humanHPC under the influence of
SDF-1α, a peptide agonist of CXCR4 (CTCE-0214), a peptide
antagonist (CTCE-9908), and a nonpeptide antagonist (AMD3100).
Despite the rationale that all of the SDF-1α analogs act
on the same CXCR4 receptor, we have demonstrated that these
compounds might have differential effects on different functional
properties of SDF-1α. It might be speculated that the
SDF-1α analogs induce different conformational changes of
the CXCR4 receptor or that other coreceptors are involved. These
results suggest that the signal cascade induced by SDF-1α
is not a monocausal succession (SDF-1α binding to CXCR4
activating G-proteins further activating downstream mediators) but
rather a complex network [6, 20]. Analysis of the downstream targets in signal cascades such as
calcium flux or MAPKp42/42 activation is concurrently under way
and might help to clarify some of the effects of CXCR4 agonists
and antagonists.SDF-1α is a powerful chemoattactant for primitive human
hematopoietic progenitor cells [20, 41, 42]. Chemotaxis of
CD34 cells can be enhanced by SDF-1α in a dose-dependent manner in concentrations ranging from 0.01
μg/mL to 0.5 μg/mL [9, 41]. Zhong et al. have
previously reported that the peptide agonist CTCE-0214 can also enhance migration of CD34 cells in a transwell
migration assay [24]. These authors used concentrations of CTCE-0214 up to 100 μg/mL and they described a six-fold increase in migration of CD34 cells from mobilized peripheral blood as compared to unstimulated cells. In analogy, we observed a moderate increase in cell migration using 100 μg/mL CTCE-0214. However, using the same concentration range as
for SDF-1α (0.01 μg/mL–0.5 μg/mL), we demonstrated that neither CTCE-0214 nor CTCE-9908 or AMD3100 exerted significant effects on migration of CD34 cells from umbilical cord blood. Thus, in comparison to SDF-1α and on a μg to μg basis, none of the agonists and antagonists were a potent chemoattractant.We have previously demonstrated that the primitive fraction of
slow dividing cells has a higher proportion of elongated cells
with a prominent uropod [28]. Furthermore, HPCs adhere to supportive feeder layer cells with their uropod at the trailing
edge [37]. We and others have previously demonstrated that SDF-1α affects podia formation in various AML cell lines [9, 10]. In this study, we have shown that polarization and
formation of an prominent uropod can be increased in
CD34 cells in a dose-dependent manner by SDF-1α. This effect can probably be attributed to cytoskeleton
rearrangements of actin-containing protrusions [43]. Surprisingly the peptide agonist and the peptide antagonist also
had a significant impact on podia formation although they did not
induce directed migration. Thus, directed migration in chemotaxis
does not directly correlate with podia formation.Survival of CD34 cells in culture could be maintained to a limited extent by cytokines such as thrombopoietin (TPO),
stem cell factor (SCF), or flt-3 ligand alone or in combination.
Some studies have indicated that SDF-1α also might have a
moderate effect on survival of CD34 cells and this effect was significantly enhanced in combination with other
cytokines [11–13, 15]. In analogy, it has been shown that CTCE-0214 alone did not increase the viability of CD34 cells, whereas a synergistic activity of CTCE-0214 in conjunction
with other growth factors has been described [23]. In this study, we have demonstrated that neither the native molecule
SDF-1α nor the agonist nor the antagonists alone had a
significant impact on proliferation or survival of CD34 cells. We cannot exclude the possibility that SDF-1α
agonists or antagonists might induce proliferation when applied in
conjunction with other chemokines as described before. It has been
reported that AMD3100 was able to mobilize a CD34 population with higher proliferative potential than upon
mobilization with G-CSF [44]. These observations are most likely due to different subfractions of CD34 cells mobilized by AMD3100 as we did not observe a significant effect of
this compound on proliferation.Human BM-MSC represents a surrogate in vitro model for
studying the specific molecular mechanisms of adhesion of HPC
towards the cellular niche [33]. The adhesion assay described here was used to test different compounds in parallel and it might
be suitable for testing new chemical compounds that play a role on
heterotypic cell-cell adhesion. We have demonstrated in this study
that adhesion of CD34 cells to BM-MSC was significantly reduced upon treatment with SDF-1α, CTCE-0214, or AMD3100. In contrast, the antagonist CTCE-9908 did not affect cell
adhesion. Other authors demonstrated that cell adhesion is
increased by SDF-1α [43, 45, 46]. However, in these studies adhesion was usually analyzed upon interaction with
extracellular matrix components such as fibronectin, and
nonadherent cells were separated by a washing step at one time
point. In contrast, in our standardized adhesion assay without
shear stress, gravitational force is affecting cell-cell
interaction over a time course of one hour. An explanation for the
increased migratory activity upon treatment with SDF-1α is
that cell adhesion is temporarily loosened and these cells would
then detach and add to the no-adherent fraction. Furthermore, it
has been reported that CXCR4 activation is also important for
mediating specific migration of bone marrow stromal cells although
this receptor seems to be only present at very low levels at the
surface of MSC [47-49]. Thus, in contrast to previous
studies that analyzed adhesion of HSC to fibronectin, we have
analyzed adhesion to MSC with and without the addition of
SDF-1α, its agonists, and antagonists. Our results are
compatible with the observation that both agonist and antagonists
of the SDF-1α/CXCR4 axis have been shown to effectively
mobilize primitive HPC to the peripheral blood. Elevated plasma
levels of SDF-1α induce mobilization of HPC to the
peripheral blood [16]. In the murine system, injection of CTCE-0214 led to an increase of primitive HPC in the peripheral
blood [24]. AMD3100 has been reported to mobilize HSC from the bone marrow to peripheral blood efficiently [26]. The increase of HPC is rapid after a single injection and the
corresponding clinical trials have been conducted successfully in
patients who have failed to respond to granulocyte colony
stimulating factors alone.In our previous work, we provided evidence that more primitive
fractions of HPC adhere significantly more than their more
differentiated counterparts (CD34 versus
CD34, CD34 versus
CD34, slow dividing fraction versus fast dividing fraction of CD34 cells) [33]. Furthermore, there is evidence that AMD3100 and G-CSF
might mobilize a more primitive and hence multipotent HPC
population than G-CSF alone [26, 27]. Thus, it could be speculated that
CXCR4 agonists and antagonists affect the specific interaction of
primitive HPCs and their cellular microenvironment.The proportion of CXCR4 cells was reduced upon stimulation with SDF-1α and AMD3100. Buul et al. have previously demonstrated that SDF-1α induced redistribution and internalization of a CXCR4-fusion protein in KG1a cells
[38]. This phenomenon has also been shown for other leukemic cell lines [40]. Dar et al. reported that CXCR4-dependent internalization of and resecretion of SDF-1α by endothelial and stromal cells played an essential role to establish an
SDF-1α gradient that assisted directed migration of
CD34 cells [2]. Multiple residues within the CXCR4 C-terminal tail appeared to mediate this receptor internalization [39]. In this context, our data have provided evidence that CXCR4 is also internalized in CD34 cells upon stimulation with SDF-1α. Hatse et al. reported long-term interaction of AMD3100 with CXCR4 that blocked binding of the same antibody (clone 12G5) at the cell membrane [50]. Furthermore, they described that AMD3100 inhibits SDF-1α-induced internalization of CXCR4 in U87-CD4 cells. This is in line with
our observation that CXCR4 surface detection by the 12G5 antibody
is abolished by AMD3100, whereas additional washing steps
increased the detection of CXCR4. Thus, further analysis of
internalized receptor revealed no effect of AMD3100 treatment on
intracellular CXCR4 detection. On the other hand, our results
provide evidence that CTCE-0214 does not affect receptor
internalization, whereas the peptide antagonist CTCE-9908 enhanced
the proportion of CXCR4 cells, and this observation is compatible with reduced receptor internalization. The G-protein
coupled receptor CXCR4 is not an adhesion protein itself. However,
recently crosstalk between the CXCR4/SDF-1α axis and other
adhesion proteins such as VLA-4, VLA-5, and CD164 has been shown
[51], and hence internalization of CXCR4 upon stimulation with agonists and antagonists might be associated with
redistribution of these adhesion proteins, and thereby reducing
intercellular adhesion.Peptide and nonpeptide analogs have several advantages compared to
the native molecules. The ease of synthesis, lower manufacturing
costs, improved bioavailability, and lower immunogenicity of
peptides or analogs may make them more accessible for clinical
applications. Recent results have also suggested that the
SDF-1α/CXCR4 axis is also used by cancer cells for
metastatic dissemination in many types of solid tumours
[52, 53]. In addition to mobilization of HPC, CXCR4 agonists
and antagonists might have the potential for treatment of
metastatic diseases. If confirmed, precise knowledge of homing and
adhesion and their specific manipulation might have significant
therapeutic potentials and implications.
Authors: A E Frimberger; C I McAuliffe; K A Werme; R A Tuft; K E Fogarty; B O Benoit; M S Dooner; P J Quesenberry Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: J Kijowski; M Baj-Krzyworzeka; M Majka; R Reca; L A Marquez; M Christofidou-Solomidou; A Janowska-Wieczorek; M Z Ratajczak Journal: Stem Cells Date: 2001 Impact factor: 6.277
Authors: K Hattori; B Heissig; K Tashiro; T Honjo; M Tateno; J H Shieh; N R Hackett; M S Quitoriano; R G Crystal; S Rafii; M A Moore Journal: Blood Date: 2001-06-01 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: K Imai; M Kobayashi; J Wang; N Shinobu; H Yoshida; J Hamada; M Shindo; F Higashino; J Tanaka; M Asaka; M Hosokawa Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: Abraham Zepeda-Moreno; Isabel Taubert; Isabelle Hellwig; Van Hoang; Larissa Pietsch; Vinoth Kumar Lakshmanan; Wolfgang Wagner; Anthony D Ho Journal: Cell Adh Migr Date: 2011-05-01 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Boris Tchernychev; Yong Ren; Pallavi Sachdev; Jay M Janz; Lynn Haggis; Adam O'Shea; Ed McBride; Richard Looby; Qing Deng; Thomas McMurry; Manija A Kazmi; Thomas P Sakmar; Stephen Hunt; Kenneth E Carlson Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-12-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: John D Glawe; Eleni M Mijalis; William C Davis; Shayne C Barlow; Neslihan Gungor; Robert McVie; Christopher G Kevil Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2013-06-28 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: William J Janssen; Zulma X Yunt; Alaina Muldrow; Mark T Kearns; Angela Kloepfer; Lea Barthel; Donna L Bratton; Russell P Bowler; Peter M Henson Journal: COPD Date: 2013-11-01 Impact factor: 2.409
Authors: Daniel Kaemmerer; Christiane Reimann; Elisa Specht; Ralph M Wirtz; Manal Sayeg; Richard P Baum; Stefan Schulz; Amelie Lupp Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2015-02-20