The formation of the atherosclerotic lesion is a complex process influenced by an array of inflammatory and lipid metabolism pathways. We previously demonstrated that NR4A nuclear receptors are highly induced in macrophages in response to inflammatory stimuli and modulate the expression of genes linked to inflammation in vitro. Here we used mouse genetic models to assess the impact of NR4A expression on atherosclerosis development and macrophage polarization. Transplantation of wild-type, Nur77⁻/⁻, or Nor1⁻/⁻ null hematopoetic precursors into LDL receptor (LDLR)⁻/⁻ recipient mice led to comparable development of atherosclerotic lesions after high-cholesterol diet. We also observed comparable induction of genes linked to M1 and M2 responses in wild-type and Nur77-null macrophages in response to lipopolysaccharides and interleukin (IL)-4, respectively. In contrast, activation of the nuclear receptor liver X receptor (LXR) strongly suppressed M1 responses, and ablation of signal transductor and activator of transcription 6 (STAT6) strongly suppressed M2 responses. Recent studies have suggested that alterations in levels of Ly6C(lo) monocytes may be a contributor to inflammation and atherosclerosis. In our study, loss of Nur77, but not Nor1, was associated with decreased abundance of Ly6C(lo) monocytes, but this change was not correlated with atherosclerotic lesion development. Collectively, our results suggest that alterations in the Ly6C(lo) monocyte population and bone marrow NR4A expression do not play dominant roles in macrophage polarization or the development of atherosclerosis in mice.
The formation of the atherosclerotic lesion is a complex process influenced by an array of inflammatory and lipid metabolism pathways. We previously demonstrated that NR4A nuclear receptors are highly induced in macrophages in response to inflammatory stimuli and modulate the expression of genes linked to inflammation in vitro. Here we used mouse genetic models to assess the impact of NR4A expression on atherosclerosis development and macrophage polarization. Transplantation of wild-type, Nur77⁻/⁻, or Nor1⁻/⁻ null hematopoetic precursors into LDL receptor (LDLR)⁻/⁻ recipient mice led to comparable development of atherosclerotic lesions after high-cholesterol diet. We also observed comparable induction of genes linked to M1 and M2 responses in wild-type and Nur77-null macrophages in response to lipopolysaccharides and interleukin (IL)-4, respectively. In contrast, activation of the nuclear receptor liver X receptor (LXR) strongly suppressed M1 responses, and ablation of signal transductor and activator of transcription 6 (STAT6) strongly suppressed M2 responses. Recent studies have suggested that alterations in levels of Ly6C(lo) monocytes may be a contributor to inflammation and atherosclerosis. In our study, loss of Nur77, but not Nor1, was associated with decreased abundance of Ly6C(lo) monocytes, but this change was not correlated with atherosclerotic lesion development. Collectively, our results suggest that alterations in the Ly6C(lo) monocyte population and bone marrow NR4A expression do not play dominant roles in macrophage polarization or the development of atherosclerosis in mice.
Atherosclerosis remains the leading cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in
developed countries. The formation of atherosclerotic lesion is a complex process that
begins with macrophage scavenging modified LDL species to form foam cells. Further
remodeling of the plaque involves the interaction of the endothelium, smooth muscle
cells, and a multitude of immune cells. The increased abundance of oxidized sterol in
the cellular milieu upregulates a cascade of counter-regulatory responses coordinated by
the liver X receptor (LXR), with the principle goal of reducing cholesterol absorption,
and increasing cholesterol efflux and excretion (1). Other nuclear receptors implicated in the regulation of atherogenesis
include the PPAR family of nuclear receptors as well the NR4A receptors (2–5).The NR4A receptors consists of three highly homologous members, NR4A1, 2, and 3,
otherwise known as Nur77, Nurr1, and NOR1, respectively. Structurally, these receptors
have no ligand-binding pockets and are constitutively active. Regulation of these
receptors occurs at the level of transcription in response to various environmental
stimuli, including increases in cAMP concentration (6). NR4A receptors have been shown to regulate a broad array of biologic
processes that are tissue-specific, including dopaminergic neuron development, thymocyte
apoptosis, tumor suppression in myeloid cell precursors, and glucose metabolism (7–14). Some degree of functional redundancy exists among these receptors,
however, in part related to the ability of all three receptors to transactivate the same
Nur-responsive binding element (9).We previously showed that all three NR4A receptors are rapidly induced in response to
various inflammatory signaling, including exposure to lipopolysaccharides (LPS) and
oxidized lipids (15). In turn, Nur77 affects
the expression of genes linked to inflammatory pathways in macrophage cell lines (16). These findings implicate NR4A receptors as
potential regulators of inflammation and suggest that they may play a role in
atherosclerosis. In vivo studies examining the role of NR4A receptors in modifying
atherosclerotic lesion formation have yielded conflicting results, however. Bruemmer and
colleagues showed that NOR1 deletion reduces neointima formation after vascular injury
(17). In the atherogenic
ApoE−/− setting, NOR1 deletion reduced atherosclerotic
lesion, likely due to diminished monocyte adhesion to the endothelium (5). On the other hand, de Vries and colleagues
reported that overexpression of NR4A receptors in macrophages reduced lipid loading and
proinflammatory response in human macrophages (18) and that transplant of Nur77-deficient bone marrow into LDL receptor
(LDLR)−/− mice increased aortic root lesion size (3). Similarly, Hanna et al. observed increased
aortic lesions in LDLR−/− mice transplanted with Nur77-null bone
marrow, which the authors attributed to polarization of the macrophage inflammatory
response toward the M1 phenotype (4). The
discrepancy between these various findings highlights the need for additional studies to
address the impact of NR4As in macrophage biology and atherogenesis.In this report, we examined the function of Nur77 and NOR1 receptors in modulating the
formation of atherosclerotic lesions. We reconstituted bone marrow of
LDLR−/− mice with Nur77- or NOR1-deficient hematopoietic
precursors in two independent experiments, and we observed no difference in the
formation of atherosclerotic lesions. Cellular analysis of Nur77- and NOR1-null
macrophages revealed comparable levels of response to LPS and IL-4, suggesting that
Nur77 and NOR1 deficiency does not confer polarization of macrophages toward the M1
response in our system. Finally, we observed reduced numbers of Ly6Clo
monocytes in Nur77-null mice in the absence of changes in atherosclerosis. These results
suggest that bone marrow expression of Nur77 is not a dominant factor in the formation
of atherosclerotic lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Generation of aP2-Nur77 transgenic mice and animal husbandry
We modified the pCK4800 expression plasmid by first cloning Nur77 cDNA into the
EcoRI site, and subsequently replacing the 4,800 bp MCK
enhancer with the −5.4 kb aP2 promoter element excised from pGL3-aP2-Luc
(19). The linearized transgene was
injected into pronuclei of C57BL/6 embryo by UCSD DERC Transgenic and Knock-out
Core. Transgene genotype was confirmed by PCR amplification of a 691 bp product,
using the following primers: forward 5′ CCACAATGAGGCAAATCCAT 3′ and
reverse 5′ TCCTCAAACTTGAAGGACGCCGAA 3′. With the exception of Nur77
and NOR1 knockout fetal liver cell transplant (cells harvested from mice on
129SvEv/C57BL6 background), all other mice were on the C57BL/6J background. The
NOR1 knockout mice from the mixed background were further backcrossed 10
generations onto C57BL/6J background prior to using them for the inflammation
and flow cytometry experiments. Nur77 knockout mice were originally provided by
Dr. Pinchas Cohen (UCLA). Signal transducer and activator of transcription 6
(STAT6) knockout and LDLR knockout mice on C57BL/6J mice were originally
purchased from the Jackson Laboratory. Mice were age- and gender-matched for all
experiments. Mice were fed ad libitum and maintained on a 12 h light-dark cycle.
Animal studies were conducted in conformity with the Public Health Service (PHS)
Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and in accordance with UCLA
Animal Research Committee guidelines, the Salk Institute Animal Research
Committee, Baylor College of Medicine Institutional Animal Care and Use
Committee (IACUC), and UCSF IACUC.
Fetal liver cell transplant
Seven-week-old male LDLR−/− mice were irradiated with two
doses of 600 rad 4 h apart at 100 cm. 24 h later, 2 × 106 fetal
liver cells from Nur77−/− or
NOR1−/− mice and wild-type littermates in
129SvEv/C57BL6 background (20, 21) were injected retro-orbitally. After
four weeks of marrow reconstitution, mice were fed the atherogenic diet (Harlan
Teklad, TD94059) for 16 weeks. Fasting plasma cholesterol and triglycerides were
determined by enzymatic assays (Wako Chemicals and Thermo). The following
primers sequences were used for genotyping reconstituted bone marrow:
Nur77−/−: 5′ GTACTCCCAGGAAGTGACTG, 3′
CGGAATAGCTCTCCCCCTCC, Neo CTCGTGCTTTACGGTATCGC (expected band sizes: WT =
1,100 bp, KO = 700 bp); NOR1−/−:
5′GGCCGCAGCTGCACTCAGTC, 3′GTTCTGCCACCACAGAGCATC TTG, Neo
GTGGCGGACCGCTATCAGGAC (expected band sizes: WT = 960 bp, KO =
1,200 bp).
Bone marrow transplant
Bone marrow transplant was performed as previously described (22). Briefly, eight-week-old male
LDLR−/− mice were lethally irradiated with 900 rad
one day prior to tail-vein injection with bone marrow cells collected from male
wild-type, Nur77 knockout, or aP2-transgenic mice. After four weeks of marrow
reconstitution, mice were fed the Western diet (Research Diets, D12079B) for 13
weeks (aP2-Nur77transgenic) or 15 weeks (Nur77−/−) prior
to terminal collection of aorta for lesion analysis. Difference in duration of
Western diet between transgenic and Nur77-knockout groups was related to
logistical availability. Each group was internally controlled with wild-type
mice fed the same duration. Mice were fed ad lib prior to sacrifice. We measured
plasma glucose using the Accu-Chek glucometer (Roche) and triglycerides using
the Sigma Triglyceride Reagent (T2449/F6428). WAKO enzymatic kits were used to
measure total cholesterol (Chol-E) and nonesterified free fatty acids (NEFA-HR)
(2). Bone marrow reconstitution was
determined by Q-PCR measurement of mRNA expression of total Nur77: 5′
ATGCCTCCCCTACCAATCTTC, 3′ CACCAGTTCCTGGAACTTGGA.
Analysis of aortic atherosclerotic lesion
Mice were euthanized and perfused with 7.5% sucrose in paraformaldehyde. Aortas
were dissected, pinned, and stained with Sudan IV. Images were captured with a
CCD camera. Computer-assisted image analysis of the aortic root and descending
aorta (en face) has been previously described. Lesion development is expressed
as the percentage of total aortic surface covered by lesions (23).
Cell culture
Primary peritoneal macrophages were collected four days after thioglycollate
injection and prepared as described (24). Bone marrow cells were differentiated into macrophages by
incubating cells in L929 cell-conditioned media for seven days. For inflammation
studies, macrophages were incubated in 0.5% FBS in DMEM, with 5 μM
simvastatin and 100 μM mevalonic acid. Five to seven hours later, cells were
pretreated with DMSO or 1 μM LXR ligand GW3965 overnight (provided by Tim
Willson and Jon Collins at GlaxoSmithKline), prior to stimulation with either
100 ng/ml lipopolysaccharides (Axxora, ALX-581-008-L002) for 4 h or 10 ng/ml
IL-4 for 30 h (Sigma, I1020).
RNA isolation and quantitative real-time PCR
Total RNA was prepared by Trizol (Invitrogen) per manufacturer protocol. RNA (0.5
μg) was reverse transcribed using iScript cDNA synthesis kit (Bio-Rad). Q-PCR
was performed with Sybrgreen 2× master mix (Diagenode) on the Applied
Biosystems 7900HT sequence detector. Gene expression was normalized to 36B4 and
represents averages of duplicate samples. See supplementary Table I for primer
sequences.
Flow cytometry
Blood samples were collected by retro-orbital sampling under isoflurane
anesthesia from age-matched female mice. Red blood cells were depleted by
hypotonic lysis. Cells were resuspended in PBS with 0.2% BSA and 0.1% sodium
azide. Single-cell suspensions were incubated for 15 min with anti-CD16/32 (Fc
block) and stained for 30 min at 4°C with antibodies described below.
Anti-mouse CD3ϵ (145-2C11), Ly6G (1A8), CD19 (1D3), CD49b (Dx5), and CD115
(AFS98) antibodies were purchased from eBioscience. Anti-mouseLy6C (AL21) and
CD11b (M1/70) antibodies were purchased from BD Biosciences. Cells were analyzed
on FACSCalibur (Becton Dickinson) with FlowJo software v.9.5.2 (Tree Star).
Statistical analysis
Nonpaired Student t-test was used to determine statistical
significance, defined at P-value < 0.05. Unless otherwise noted, error bars
represent standard deviations. For Q-PCR analysis of macrophages, each condition
represents averages of two independent samples.
RESULTS
Loss of Nur77 or NOR1 does not alter atherosclerotic plaque area
We previously showed that all three NR4A transcripts were induced acutely by
lipopolysaccharides (LPS) and nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB), and that
Nur77 modulates the expression of genes linked to inflammatory signaling in
RAW267.4 and J774 macrophage cell lines (15, 16). These findings led
us to hypothesize that NR4A deletion in monocyte/macrophages may alter arterial
wall inflammation and affect the development of atherosclerosis. To examine the
impact of nuclear receptor NR4A subfamily members Nur77 and NOR1 on the
development of atherosclerosis, we reconstituted the bone marrow of irradiated
LDLR−/− male mice with wild-type,
Nur77−/−, or NOR1−/− fetal
liver cells and analyzed plaque area after 16 weeks of exposure to atherogenic
diet (). At time of
sacrifice, we harvested the LDLR−/− bone marrow and
performed PCR genotyping using primers specific for
Nur77−/− or NOR1−/−
constructs. Engraftment was confirmed based on size of PCR product matching that
of the donor genotype (Fig. 1B). The
extent of atherosclerosis was expressed as the percentage of surface area of the
entire aorta covered by lesions. Similar to LDLR−/− mice
reconstituted with wild-type fetal liver cells, mice with NR4A-deficient fetal
liver cells displayed plaques covering an average of approximately 10% of the
total aorta area analyzed (Fig. 1C:
wild-type mean 10.1%, Nur77−/− mean 9.9%,
NOR1−/− mean 10.6%). As expected, the
animal-to-animal variability in lesion development was very high, but a
comparable range was observed in both wild-type and NR4A-transplanted mice, and
there was no statistically significant difference in plaque area between
cohorts. Cholesterol and triglycerides were elevated as expected after 8 and 16
weeks of exposure to atherogenic diet, but they did not vary between wild-type
and NR4A-deficient cohorts overall (). There was also no significant difference
in white blood cell count at the time mice were euthanized (Table 1).
Fig. 1.
Transplantation of NR4A-deficient hematopoietic precursors into
LDLR−/− mice. A. Schematic of fetal liver
cell (FLC) transplantation. B. PCR-genotyping of
LDLR−/− bone marrow collected at time of
sacrifice. Donor genotype was confirmed using primers flanking sequences
deleted in the Nur77−/− or
NOR1−/− constructs. C. Percentage of aorta
surface area with atherosclerotic plaque in transplanted
LDLR−/− mice. N = 12–18.
TABLE 1.
Metabolic profile of LDLR−/− mice transplanted
with Nur77−/− and NOR1−/−
fetal liver cells
Bone Marrow Genotype
WT
Nur77−/−
NOR1−/−
N
19
14
12
Final weight (g)
26.8 ± 2.7
27.5 ± 2.4
23.4 ± 1.7*
Glucose (mg/dl), 16 weeks fasted
171 ± 31
146 ± 39
159 ± 45
Cholesterol (mg/dl), baseline
347 ± 43
340 ± 83
288 ± 70*
Cholesterol (mg/dl), 8-week diet
2075 ± 605
2054 ± 505
1436 ± 385*
Cholesterol (mg/dl), 16-week diet
2509 ± 816
2087 ± 710*
2099 ± 727
TG (mg/dl), baseline
256 ± 102
253 ± 72
240 ± 54
TG (mg/dl), 8-week diet
739 ± 315
564 ± 341
385 ± 144*
TG (mg/dl), 16-week diet
765 ± 350
644 ± 271
638 ± 228
WBC (K/μl), 16-week diet
3.65 ± 2.29
3.52 ± 1.92
4.43 ± 2.88
* P < 0.05 for comparison with
wild-type.
Transplantation of NR4A-deficient hematopoietic precursors into
LDLR−/− mice. A. Schematic of fetal liver
cell (FLC) transplantation. B. PCR-genotyping of
LDLR−/− bone marrow collected at time of
sacrifice. Donor genotype was confirmed using primers flanking sequences
deleted in the Nur77−/− or
NOR1−/− constructs. C. Percentage of aorta
surface area with atherosclerotic plaque in transplanted
LDLR−/− mice. N = 12–18.Metabolic profile of LDLR−/− mice transplanted
with Nur77−/− and NOR1−/−
fetal liver cells* P < 0.05 for comparison with
wild-type.We considered the possibility that the very high cholesterol content of the
atherogenic diet (1.25%) might have masked small phenotypic differences between
control and NR4A-deficient mice. We therefore repeated the study with a moderate
level of cholesterol (Western diet containing 0.21% cholesterol, compared with a
standard mouse chow diet with 0.0014% cholesterol) (). In this study, the source of
hematopoietic precursor cells was wild-type or Nur77-null bone marrow.
Engraftment was confirmed by Q-PCR analysis of bone marrow from recipient mice
collected at time of sacrifice. As expected, recipients of the Nur77-knockout
bone marrow showed a markedly reduced level of Nur77 expression (Fig. 2B). The extent of atherosclerotic
plaque formation was lower than that observed with the 1.25% cholesterol diet,
but again, there was no difference between control and Nur77-null cohorts (Fig. 2D: wild-type 4.52%,
Nur77−/− 5.38%). We have previously observed marked
differences in lesion formation between LDLR−/− mice
transplanted with wild-type and LXR-deficient bone marrow using this protocol
(25). Similar to findings from the
fetal liver cell transplants, the levels of plasma glucose and lipid profiles in
these LDLR−/− recipients were comparable irrespective of
donor genotype (
Fig. 2.
Transplantation of Nur77-null or Nur77-overexpressing bone marrow into
LDLR−/− mice. A. Schematic of bone marrow
transplantation. B, C. Expression of Nur77 in
LDLR-/ bone marrow
posttransplantation. D, E. Percentage of aorta surface area with
atherosclerotic plaque in LDLR−/− mice
transplanted with Nur77-knockout (KO) (D) or Nur77-overexpressing
transgenic (TG) (E) marrow. N = 21–22 for D, N = 17
for E.
TABLE 2.
Metabolic profile of LDLR−/− mice transplanted
with Nur77−/− and aP2-Nur77 transgenic bone
marrow
Bone Marrow Genotype
WT
Nur77−/−
WT
aP2-Nur77
N
10
10
10
10
Glucose (mg/dl)
295 ± 29
262 ± 25
198 ± 19
186 ± 19
Cholesterol (mg/dl)
596 ± 28
599 ± 40
629 ± 32
631 ± 35
TG (mg/dl)
44 ± 6
64 ± 13
138 ± 20
152 ± 17
Non-esterified free fatty acids (mmol/l)
0.87 ± 0.07
0.86 ± 0.07
1.00 ± 0.05
0.99 ± 0.06
Transplantation of Nur77-null or Nur77-overexpressing bone marrow into
LDLR−/− mice. A. Schematic of bone marrow
transplantation. B, C. Expression of Nur77 in
LDLR-/ bone marrow
posttransplantation. D, E. Percentage of aorta surface area with
atherosclerotic plaque in LDLR−/− mice
transplanted with Nur77-knockout (KO) (D) or Nur77-overexpressing
transgenic (TG) (E) marrow. N = 21–22 for D, N = 17
for E.Metabolic profile of LDLR−/− mice transplanted
with Nur77−/− and aP2-Nur77transgenic bone
marrowThe NR4A receptors are highly homologous and functionally redundant (6), raising the possibility that
compensation by other NR4A members may explain the lack of phenotypic difference
in donorNur77−/− or NOR1−/− bone
marrow in atherosclerotic plaque formation. As a complement to our
loss-of-function studies, we used a gain-of-function approach. We generated the
aP2-Nur77transgenic mice that overexpressed Nur77 in adipose tissue and
macrophages. Nur77-overexpressing bone marrow was transplanted into
LDLR−/− recipients as described above. Engraftment
was confirmed by increased expression of Nur77 in the bone marrow from recipient
mice (Fig. 2C). As shown in Fig. 2E and Table 2, overexpression of Nur77 in macrophages did not
alter atherosclerotic lesion formation (wild-type mean 6.14%, aP2-Nur77transgenic mean 5.56%) or metabolic parameters, such as plasma glucose and lipid
profiles. We conclude from our gain- and loss-of-function mouse models that bone
marrow expression of Nur77 and NOR1 is not a dominant factor in atherosclerotic
plaque formation in mice, at least under the conditions employed here.
Preserved response to inflammatory stimuli in Nur77-deficient
macrophages
The formation of atherosclerotic lesion is subject to complex regulation
involving multiple cell types, including endothelial cells, smooth muscle cells,
and a heterogeneous population of monocyte/macrophages. Although we did not
observe any differences in plaque formation, we proceeded with cellular analysis
to determine whether there were intrinsic differences in the inflammatory
response between wild-type and Nur77-null macrophages. We tested this hypothesis
by stimulating wild-type and Nur77-null thioglycollate-elicited peritoneal
macrophages with LPS. Four h after LPS stimulation, the expression of several
genes known to mediate the inflammatory response, including IL-6, IL-12b,
inducible NO synthase (iNOS), and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), was
robustly induced in both control and Nur77-null macrophages. Consistent with our
previous work, LPS-induced inflammatory gene expression was strongly suppressed
by activation of the LXR with the synthetic agonist GW3965, indicating that
nuclear receptor transrepression pathways are functional under the conditions
employed in these studies () (26).
Fig. 3.
Expression of inflammatory response genes in LPS-treated Nur77-null
peritoneal macrophages. Cells were pretreated with DMSO or 1 μM
GW3965 (LXR agonist) overnight prior to the addition of 100 ng/ml LPS.
Gene expression was analyzed by real-time Q-PCR and normalized to 36B4
control.
Expression of inflammatory response genes in LPS-treated Nur77-null
peritoneal macrophages. Cells were pretreated with DMSO or 1 μM
GW3965 (LXR agonist) overnight prior to the addition of 100 ng/ml LPS.
Gene expression was analyzed by real-time Q-PCR and normalized to 36B4
control.We considered the possibility that the activated state of thioglycollate-elicited
peritoneal macrophages could mask subtle changes in inflammatory responses. We
therefore repeated the LPS stimulation with bone marrow-derived macrophages.
Similar to our findings with peritoneal macrophages, LPS elicited comparable
levels of IL-6, iNOS, TNFα, and IL-10 expression between control and
Nur77-null bone marrow-derived macrophages (). This result differs from previous reports
that Nur77-null macrophages exhibit increased expression of proinflammatory
cytokines and reduced expression of the protective cytokine IL-10 in response to
LPS (3, 4). In addition, Nur77-null bone marrow-derived macrophages did not
express higher level of stromal-derived factor 1 alpha (SDF1α), a
chemokine postulated to be suppressed by Nur77 (3), either in the basal or LPS-stimulated state in our studies.
Fig. 4.
Expression of inflammatory response genes in LPS-treated Nur77-null and
NOR1-null bone marrow-derived macrophages. Macrophages were treated as
described in Fig. 3. Gene
expression was analyzed by real-time Q-PCR and normalized to 36B4
control.
Expression of inflammatory response genes in LPS-treated Nur77-null and
NOR1-null bone marrow-derived macrophages. Macrophages were treated as
described in Fig. 3. Gene
expression was analyzed by real-time Q-PCR and normalized to 36B4
control.We further tested whether deletion of NOR1, another member of the NR4A family,
alters the LPS-induced inflammatory response. As shown in Fig. 4, we observed subtly reduced expression of iNOS in
NOR1-null bone marrow-derived macrophages 4 h after LPS stimulation, relative to
wild-type and Nur77-null macrophages. However, the expression of other
inflammatory genes measured (IL-6 and TNFα) was unchanged compared with
wild-type macrophages, suggesting that NOR1 deletion did not cause a global
shift in the inflammatory response. We conclude that, in contrast to LXR
activation, loss of Nur77 does not exert a major effect on the induction of
macrophage M1 responses under the conditions used here.
Preserved alternative macrophage activation in the absence of Nur77
During immune responses, macrophages may become polarized toward either the
classical “proinflammatory” M1- or the alternative
TH2-helper cell-mediated M2 phenotype (27). Derangement of the delicate balance of M1 and M2
responses has been proposed to contribute to a wide range of diseases, including
insulin resistance, asthma, and cancer (28). Recent studies suggested that the genetic absence of Nur77
shifts the balance of macrophage activation toward the M1 phenotype with a
concomitant reduction of M2 response (3,
4). We tested this hypothesis by
activating the M2 response in both peritoneal macrophages and bone
marrow-derived macrophages with IL-4. As shown in , IL-4 promoted comparable level of
expression of classic alternative activation markers arginase 1 (Arg1; found in
inflammatory zone), Fizz1 (also known as Retnla), and chitinase 3-like protein 3
(Ym1), in wild-type and Nur77-null peritoneal macrophages. IL-4 induced the
expression of Fizz1 more robustly in Nur77-null bone marrow-derived macrophages,
although there was no difference in the expression of Arg1 and Ym1 (Fig. 5B). Overall, we did not observe a
reduction in the M2 response from Nur77-null macrophages. Unlike the potent
suppression of LPS-induced inflammatory markers, LXR ligand GW3965 had little
effect on antagonizing IL-4 induced responses. By comparison, the IL-4-induced
response (expression of Arg1, Fizz1, and Ym1) was virtually abolished in
peritoneal macrophages lacking expression of STAT6 (Fig. 5C). Upon IL-4 stimulation, STAT6 dimerizes and
activates downstream effector genes of alternative activation and is known to
act as a key mediator of the M2 phenotype in macrophages (29–31). We
conclude that, unlike STAT6, Nur77 is not a dominant determinant of IL-4-induced
activation of the macrophage M2 response.
Fig. 5.
Comparable expression of IL-4-responsive genes in wild-type and
Nur77-null macrophages. (A) Peritoneal macrophages and (B) bone
marrow-derived macrophages were treated overnight with DMSO or 1 μM
GW3965. Cells were then treated with IL-4 10 ng/ml for 30 h. C.
Expression of IL-4-responsive genes in STAT6-null peritoneal
macrophages. Cells were incubated with IL-4 10 ng/ml for 30 h. Gene
expression was analyzed by real-time Q-PCR and normalized to 36B4
control.
Comparable expression of IL-4-responsive genes in wild-type and
Nur77-null macrophages. (A) Peritoneal macrophages and (B) bone
marrow-derived macrophages were treated overnight with DMSO or 1 μM
GW3965. Cells were then treated with IL-4 10 ng/ml for 30 h. C.
Expression of IL-4-responsive genes in STAT6-null peritoneal
macrophages. Cells were incubated with IL-4 10 ng/ml for 30 h. Gene
expression was analyzed by real-time Q-PCR and normalized to 36B4
control.
Reduced Ly6Clo population in Nur77-null macrophages
Previous studies showed that Nur77 deletion impaired the differentiation of
Ly6Clo monocytes from macrophage dendritic precursors in bone
marrow (32). Hanna et al. postulated
that loss of Ly6Clo monocytes polarizes macrophage response toward
the M1-inflammatory pathway, thereby promoting atherosclerotic lesion formation
(4). To investigate whether the
absence of a proinflammatory phenotype in our system was due to the
“preservation” of the Ly6Clo population in our particular
cohort of Nur77-deficient mice, we analyzed the abundance of Ly6Clo
population in Nur77-null and NOR1-null mice (). The prevalence of
CD11bhiCD115hi monocytes in blood was comparable
between wild-type and Nur77-null mice (Fig.
6C: wild-type 4.75 ± 0.53%, Nur77−/−
3.66 ± 0.41%, P = 0.19). However, there was a
clear reduction in the Ly6Clo population in Nur77-null mice (Fig. 6B, D: wild-type 1.25 ± 0.36%,
Nur77−/− 0.14 ± 0.01%, P
= 0.046), resulting in a relative shift in the proportion of
Ly6Chi versus Ly6Clo monocytes (Fig. 6E). By comparison, there was no difference in the
ratio of Ly6Chi to Ly6Clo monocytes in NOR1-null mice
(Fig. 6F). These findings confirm the
previous report of reduced Ly6Clo monocytes in Nur77-null mice.
However, the lack of correlation between atherosclerotic lesion development,
inflammatory phenotype, and reduction of the Ly6Clo population in our
study suggests that marked reduction in the numbers of Ly6Clo
monocytes alone is not sufficient to alter macrophage polarization and
atherosclerosis in mice.
Fig. 6.
Quantitation of Ly6Clo population in NR4A-deficient mice. A.
Gating strategy for blood monocyte subsets. Cells were plotted for
forward scatter (FSC) by side scatter (SSC). Live,
lineage− (CD3e−,
CD19−, CD49b−,
Ly6G−) cells were plotted for CD115 and CD11b
expression. CD11bhi, CD115hi monocytes were then
sorted by Ly6C expression. B. FACS plot of Ly6C expression among
CD11bhi, CD115hi monocytes. C. Abundance of
CD11bhi, CD115hi monocytes among live
wild-type and Nur77-null white blood cells. N = 3–4. D.
Percentage of Ly6Chi versus Ly6Clo monocytes in
wild-type and Nur77-null monocytes. *P <
0.05. E. Relative proportion of Ly6Chi versus
Ly6Clo in wild-type and Nur77-null monocytes.
**P < 0.01. F. Relative proportion
of Ly6Chi versus Ly6Clo in wild-type and NOR1-null
monocytes. N = 4. Error bars represent standard errors.
Quantitation of Ly6Clo population in NR4A-deficient mice. A.
Gating strategy for blood monocyte subsets. Cells were plotted for
forward scatter (FSC) by side scatter (SSC). Live,
lineage− (CD3e−,
CD19−, CD49b−,
Ly6G−) cells were plotted for CD115 and CD11b
expression. CD11bhi, CD115hi monocytes were then
sorted by Ly6C expression. B. FACS plot of Ly6C expression among
CD11bhi, CD115hi monocytes. C. Abundance of
CD11bhi, CD115hi monocytes among live
wild-type and Nur77-null white blood cells. N = 3–4. D.
Percentage of Ly6Chi versus Ly6Clo monocytes in
wild-type and Nur77-null monocytes. *P <
0.05. E. Relative proportion of Ly6Chi versus
Ly6Clo in wild-type and Nur77-null monocytes.
**P < 0.01. F. Relative proportion
of Ly6Chi versus Ly6Clo in wild-type and NOR1-null
monocytes. N = 4. Error bars represent standard errors.
DISCUSSION
Previous studies demonstrating NR4A receptors regulating inflammatory gene expression
in macrophages suggested that these receptors might play a role in development of
atherosclerotic lesion formation (15, 16). Using a well-established protocol, we
tested this hypothesis by reconstituting bone marrow of
LDLRmice with either Nur77-null
fetal liver cells or bone marrow and subjecting the mice to a high-cholesterol
dietary challenge. We observed no statistically significant difference in the aortic
lesion size in either experiment. Similarly, bone marrow reconstitution with
NOR1-null fetal liver cell did not alter the progression of atherosclerosis in
LDLRmice. Transplant with
Nur77-overexpressing bone marrow cells likewise had no effect on lesion size.
Analysis of wild-type and Nur77-null peritoneal and bone marrow-derived macrophages
revealed comparable levels of expression of markers of classical (M1) and
alternative (M2) activation in response to LPS and IL-4 stimulation, respectively.
We confirmed that Nur77-null mice have a diminished population of Ly6Clo
monocytes as previously reported (32),
without affecting macrophage polarization and lesion size. Our failure to observe a
difference in atherosclerosis using both gain- and loss-of-function mouse models
suggests that Nur77 deficiency alone is not sufficient to affect the formation of
atherosclerotic lesions in mice, at least under the conditions used here.Interestingly, NR4A receptors have been shown to be both pro- and anti-inflammatory
in other diseases involving chronic inflammation. In arthritis models, NR4A
receptors are robustly expressed in synoviocytes and macrophages isolated from
chronically inflamed joints (33). In fact,
Nurr1 (NR4A2) has been shown to promote synoviocyte proliferation and induce the
expression of matrix metalloproteinase 13 (MMP13), consistent with its function in
executing inflammatory signaling and extracellular matrix remodeling (34). At the same time, Nurr1 suppresses the
expression of MMP1 in cartilage (35),
consistent with a biological system with checks and balances built-in to curtail
progression of unrestrained inflammation. Nurr1 is also thought to exert
anti-inflammatory effects in microglia cells by docking the p65 subunit of
NFκB on promoters of inflammatory genes and recruiting the CoREST corepressor
complex (36). On balance, these findings
suggest that acute induction of NR4A receptors by inflammatory signals can trigger
effector pathways in a tissue- and cell type-specific fashion that may help to
contain the infection/insult and mitigate the proinflammatory processes to restore
homeostasis.Our findings differ from two recent studies reporting that Nur77-deletion polarized
macrophages toward an inflammatory phenotype and promoted increased atherosclerotic
lesion formation (3, 4). We speculate that one contributing factor to this
difference may be the control cohorts used in Hanna et al. (4). Given the biologic variation in lesion formation in mice,
a wide distribution is expected in quantification of plaque area. Although the
Nur77−/− cohorts exhibited the expected broad
distribution of lesion area, the control cohorts used in Hanna et al. displayed an
unexpectedly tight distribution and very low lesion burden. We also consider
variability in intestinal microbiota of the mouse colonies as a potential difference
between the experimental systems. Resident intestinal bacterial flora is a rich
source of proinflammatory signals, including LPS and peptidoglycans (37). The abundance and type of microbiota
have been proposed as contributing factors to systemic inflammation of the host and
can potentially modulate the progression of atherosclerosis (38). We suspect that small differences in proinflammatory
signaling may be amplified depending on the particular host-environmental
interactions. Finally, we cannot exclude the possibility that technical differences
in the various approaches to lesion quantification may contribute to the differences
between studies.Previous studies demonstrated that Nur77-null mice have reduced abundance of
Ly6Clo monocytes (32),
although the in vivo function of these cells is unclear. The Ly6Clo
monocytes are analogous to human CD14loCD16hi monocytes,
whereas murineLy6Chi monocytes correspond to human CD14hi
CD16lo monocytes (32, 39). Ly6Chi monocytes are robustly
induced by LPS and thought to be proinflammatory. Ly6Clo monocytes have
been ascribed the role of patrolling endothelium during homeostasis, and may
activate either an “alternative activation” (M2-like) or proinflammatory
(M1-like) transcriptional program, depending on the site of action (40). Gautier et al. recently reported that
Ly6Clo blood and peritoneal macrophages express a higher level of
PPARγ and are more responsive to PPARγ-ligand activation, consistent
with a putative role of PPARγ in tissue repair (41). Despite these findings, clarifying the in vivo function
of Ly6lo monocytes remains a subject of active investigation for the
field. Hanna et al. have proposed that loss of Ly6Clo monocytes in
Nur77-null bone marrow polarizes macrophages toward the proinflammatory phenotype
and contributes to development of atherosclerosis (4). That we did not observe the correlation between Ly6Clo
monocytes and plaque size suggests that loss of Ly6Clo monocytes alone
does not impair modulate macrophage phenotype and atherosclerotic lesion
progression. Additional studies would be required to delineate the developmental
lineage of Ly6Clo monocytes and their in vivo relevance to immune
function.If loss of Nur77 and NOR1 from bone marrow has little effect on lesion size, what
role, if any, do these receptors play in atherosclerosis? Bruemmer and colleagues
have demonstrated that NR4A3 (NOR1) deletion exerts its atheroprotective effects at
the level of smooth muscle and endothelial cells by limiting monocyte adhesion and
neointima formation (5). It is also worth
noting that compound deletion of multiple NR4A family members has uncovered
redundant function for these transcription factors in other contexts. For example,
compound NR4A null mice develop myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms (14). Unfortunately, development of blood
dyscrasias in mice devoid of NR4A1 and NR4A3 precludes the evaluation of NR4A double
deficiency in atherogenesis (13).
Collectively, we conclude that expression of individual NR4A receptors in
macrophages does not appear to be a major determinant of macrophage polarization,
systemic inflammation, or the development of atherogenic lesions in mice.
Authors: Frederic Geissmann; Markus G Manz; Steffen Jung; Michael H Sieweke; Miriam Merad; Klaus Ley Journal: Science Date: 2010-02-05 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Takashi Nomiyama; Yue Zhao; Florence Gizard; Hannes M Findeisen; Elizabeth B Heywood; Karrie L Jones; Orla M Conneely; Dennis Bruemmer Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-01-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Lily C Chao; Kevin Wroblewski; Zidong Zhang; Liming Pei; Laurent Vergnes; Olga R Ilkayeva; Shi Ying Ding; Karen Reue; Matthew J Watt; Christopher B Newgard; Paul F Pilch; Andrea L Hevener; Peter Tontonoz Journal: Diabetes Date: 2009-09-09 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Michelle N Bradley; Cynthia Hong; Mingyi Chen; Sean B Joseph; Damien C Wilpitz; Xuping Wang; Aldons J Lusis; Allan Collins; Willa A Hseuh; Jon L Collins; Rajendra K Tangirala; Peter Tontonoz Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Graham Thomas; Robert Tacke; Catherine C Hedrick; Richard N Hanna Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2015-04-02 Impact factor: 8.311
Authors: Derick Okwan-Duodu; Daiana Weiss; Zhenzi Peng; Luciana C Veiras; Duo-Yao Cao; Suguru Saito; Zakir Khan; Ellen A Bernstein; Jorge F Giani; W Robert Taylor; Kenneth E Bernstein Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun Date: 2019-10-12 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Anouk A J Hamers; Richard N Hanna; Heba Nowyhed; Catherine C Hedrick; Carlie J M de Vries Journal: Curr Opin Lipidol Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 4.776
Authors: Lu Xu; Xiaoyuan Dai Perrard; Jerry L Perrard; Donglin Yang; Xinhua Xiao; Ba-Bie Teng; Scott I Simon; Christie M Ballantyne; Huaizhu Wu Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2015-06-25 Impact factor: 8.311
Authors: Hua Qing; Yi Liu; Yue Zhao; Jun Aono; Karrie L Jones; Elizabeth B Heywood; Deborah Howatt; Cassi M Binkley; Alan Daugherty; Ying Liang; Dennis Bruemmer Journal: Stem Cells Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 6.277
Authors: Anouk A J Hamers; Sven Uleman; Claudia M van Tiel; Daniëlle Kruijswijk; Anne-Marieke van Stalborch; Stephan Huveneers; Carlie J M de Vries; Cornelis van 't Veer Journal: Infect Immun Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 3.441