The development of more complex in vitro models for the assessment of novel drugs and chemicals is needed because of the limited biological relevance of animal models to humans as well as ethical considerations. Although some human-cell-based assays exist, they are usually 2D, consist of single cell type, and have limited cellular and functional representation of the native tissue. In this study, we have used biomimetic porous electrospun scaffolds to develop an immunocompetent 3D model of the human respiratory tract comprised of three key cell types present in upper airway epithelium. The three cell types, namely, epithelial cells (providing a physical barrier), fibroblasts (extracellular matrix production), and dendritic cells (immune sensing), were initially grown on individual scaffolds and then assembled into the 3D multicell tissue model. The epithelial layer was cultured at the air-liquid interface for up to four weeks, leading to formation of a functional barrier as evidenced by an increase in transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER) and tight junction formation. The response of epithelial cells to allergen exposure was monitored by quantifying changes in TEER readings and by assessment of cellular tight junctions using immunostaining. It was found that epithelial cells cocultured with fibroblasts formed a functional epithelial barrier at a quicker rate than single cultures of epithelial cells and that the recovery from allergen exposure was also more rapid. Also, our data show that dendritic cells within this model remain viable and responsive to external stimulation as evidenced by their migration within the 3D construct in response to allergen challenge. This model provides an easy to assemble and physiologically relevant 3D model of human airway epithelium that can be used for studies aiming at better understanding lung biology, the cross-talk between immune cells, and airborne allergens and pathogens as well as drug delivery.
The development of more complex in vitro models for the assessment of novel drugs and chemicals is needed because of the limited biological relevance of animal models to humans as well as ethical considerations. Although some human-cell-based assays exist, they are usually 2D, consist of single cell type, and have limited cellular and functional representation of the native tissue. In this study, we have used biomimetic porous electrospun scaffolds to develop an immunocompetent 3D model of the human respiratory tract comprised of three key cell types present in upper airway epithelium. The three cell types, namely, epithelial cells (providing a physical barrier), fibroblasts (extracellular matrix production), and dendritic cells (immune sensing), were initially grown on individual scaffolds and then assembled into the 3D multicell tissue model. The epithelial layer was cultured at the air-liquid interface for up to four weeks, leading to formation of a functional barrier as evidenced by an increase in transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER) and tight junction formation. The response of epithelial cells to allergen exposure was monitored by quantifying changes in TEER readings and by assessment of cellular tight junctions using immunostaining. It was found that epithelial cells cocultured with fibroblasts formed a functional epithelial barrier at a quicker rate than single cultures of epithelial cells and that the recovery from allergen exposure was also more rapid. Also, our data show that dendritic cells within this model remain viable and responsive to external stimulation as evidenced by their migration within the 3D construct in response to allergen challenge. This model provides an easy to assemble and physiologically relevant 3D model of human airway epithelium that can be used for studies aiming at better understanding lung biology, the cross-talk between immune cells, and airborne allergens and pathogens as well as drug delivery.
Respiratory diseases
such as asthma are becoming increasingly prevalent,
with reduced longevity and quality of life for those affected as well
as causing an economic burden upon healthcare systems worldwide.[1] Consequently, there is a need to develop more
effective therapies to prevent and treat respiratory diseases. Developing
new therapies requires extensive testing to ensure efficacy and safety,
which is both time-consuming and costly. Therapies that show promise
during the first stage preclinical in vitro tests may be taken forward
for further studies. For all new medications, regulatory authorities
insist upon acquiring information from animal studies because the
effect upon the whole body can be observed. However, the limited biological
relevance of animal models to human diseases means that data obtained
from such studies could not always be relied on.In vitro models
of human tissues that are biomimetic and closely
represent the functional properties of their respective tissues could
enable better understanding of disease processes, hence providing
more physiologically relevant platforms for identification of targets
for therapy as well as testing the efficacy and safety of new drug
leads. Using such in vitro models in drug discovery cycle could in
turn substantially reduce the number of drug leads that need to be
taken forward to preclinical studies and, therefore, reducing the
number of animals required for such experiments.[2] In addition to providing scientific advantages (e.g., identification
of more efficacious targets for therapy), using biomimetic in vitro
tissue models also conforms with the “3Rs” principles
of refinement, replacement, and reduction of animal experimentations
in research wherever possible.[3]The
respiratory system is constantly exposed to potentially harmful
particles, allergens, and pathogens. To maintain sterility of the
lung the respiratory system has a series of defense mechanisms and
the capability to respond to environmental challenges. Epithelial
cells are the predominant cell type in contact with the air and as
such the airway epithelium forms the first line of defense against
airborne insults. Epithelial cells are structurally arranged to form
a continuous layer and are joined via protein junctions to create
a paracellular barrier to shield interstitial tissue from the airway.
As well as a physical barrier, the epithelium forms a chemical barrier
via cellular secretions, for example, mucus that entraps infiltrating
particles. Furthermore, contact with invading pathogens prompts epithelial
cells to release lysozymes and phospholipase that destabilize bacterial
membranes, defensins that have antimicrobial activity, and surfactants
that promote phagocytosis of invading particles.[4]If the epithelial barrier is compromised, the epithelial
cells
not only change morphologically and functionally but also communicate
reciprocally via paracrine[5] or contact-dependent
signaling with other cell types, such as underlying stromal and immune
cells including macrophages, DCs, lymphocytes, neutrophils, and mast
cells.[6,7] Summoning support from underlying cells
can assist in restoring the epithelial barrier or initiate an immune
response through expression of adhesion molecules and release of mediators
including cytokines and chemokines.[4] The
synergistic interactions of cells within human lung tissue remains
largely understudied; in particular, few in vitro lung models report
the inclusion of immune cells that are essential for sensing cellular
and environmental changes as well as exerting a crucial role in the
pathogenesis of lung diseases. The tissue engineering of lung models
has largely focused toward engineering tracheal replacements due to
the simpler nature of this tissue.[8] The
robust architecture of the trachea can withstand the decellularization
process and subsequent repopulation, whereas it proves difficult to
repopulate decellularized tissue from deeper within the lung that
has a more complex construction. The specific structural and cellular
architecture of complex lung tissue can be retained for experimentation
by using ex vivo tissue explants. These biopsy samples are practical
for short-term experimentation, though interindividual variability
can have an impact upon the results and the availability of such tissue
is limited. To allow high-throughput screening of samples and, particularly,
longer-term experiments, it is preferable to have a sustainable source
of reproducible tissue models.The use of commercially available
two-dimensional (2D) platforms
upon which epithelial cells can be cultured at the air–liquid
interface (ALI) is widely practiced. Although information regarding
cellular interaction can be identified using these methods, the 2D
platforms fail to represent the cellular arrangement seen in vivo
and, therefore, are not amenable to direct cell–cell interaction,
thus only permitting observation of paracrine interactions. The use
of a 3D tissue equivalent is favorable over 2D cell culture providing
more in-vivo-like morphology, function, and intercellular interactions
enabling greater resemblance to physiological conditions.[9,10] Encapsulating cells within synthetic or natural hydrogels has been
widely used for culturing cells in a 3D environment and provide greater
cell–cell contact compared to culturing upon a solid 2D substrate.[11] In addition, hydrogels could provide a cellular
microenvironment resembling the native extracellular matrix (ECM),
hence supporting key functional properties of different cell types.[12,13] Although many cell types seem to thrive within the 3D environment
of hydrogels, encapsulating epithelial cells whose primary function
is barrier formation could be counterintuitive. Therefore, other types
of 3D matrix such as porous fiber sheets could be a favorable alternative
for culturing epithelial cells, providing closer morphological resemblance
to the basement membrane in barrier tissues such as skin and respiratory
epithelium.[14] Obviously, this does not
preclude use of hydrogel based scaffolds with the optimal topography
for 3D culture of epithelial cells.Methods to create fibrous
3D platforms include phase separation,[15] electrospraying,[16] or electrospinning.[17] We show that the
ECM of lung tissue has a randomly arranged network of nanometer-sized
fibers, and as such, the electrospinning method proves a suitable
choice to create a matrix that mimics this arrangement for culturing
lung associated cells. The porous network of polymer fibers that is
produced can be tailored in morphology and dimensions to mimic the
native ECM of the cells being cultured. Electrospun scaffolds may
be constructed from a plethora of materials. Although there has been
some success in the construction of pure protein electrospun scaffolds
(e.g., collagen[18] and fibrinogen[19]), poor structural strength limits their use.
Synthetic polymers offer the choice of well-defined batches with a
greater range of mechanical and chemical properties than those of
natural materials. Furthermore, synthetic polymers may adsorb ECM
proteins in solution or can be surface modified for enhanced cell
attachment if necessary.[14,20] Synthetic polymers
PLA and PLGA are the more extensively studied, having been explored
for both in vitro[21] and in vivo research.[22] However, PLA and PLGA are biodegradable and,
in our preliminary experiments, were found to become quite fragile
and difficult to handle after few days of cell culture, hence proving
unsuitable to support long-term cell cultures for the 3D lung model.
Thus, use of other nonbiodegradable and biologically nonfouling polymers
such as poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET), which was reported to
support cell culture, was considered.[23]Subsequently, in this study, we have used electrospun fibers
of
PET to create a 3D model of airway epithelium, comprising epithelial
cells, dendritic cells, and fibroblasts, cultured at ALI. The model
has been characterized with regards to its barrier function, responses
to environmental stimuli, and migratory properties of the immune cells
after allergen challenge.This model possesses reasonable cellular
and structural representation
of the airway epithelium and is amenable to in situ monitoring, and
as such, it presents an invaluable tool for academic and pharmaceutical
research within the fields of lung biology, disease modeling, and
drug discovery and delivery.
Experimental Section
Materials
All
materials were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich,
U.K., unless stated otherwise.
Electrospun scaffolds were produced
by dissolving polyethylene terephthalate
(PET) in 1:1 trifluoroacetic acid (TFA):dichloromethane (DCM) (Fisher
Chemicals, U.K.) to create a 10% (w/v) solution. The polymer solution
was loaded into a syringe (20 mL), and an 18 gauge needle (BD Falcon,
U.K.) was attached. The syringe was securely fitted to a syringe pump-driver
(Harvard Apparatus Ltd., U.K.). The needle tip was positioned 15 cm
from a grounded steel collector plate. The PET solution was delivered
at a constant flow rate of 0.5 mL/hour at 14 kV for 4 h. The scaffolds
were air-dried in a fumehood for 24 h to allow residual solvent to
evaporate.
Propagation of Epithelial Cells and Fibroblasts
The
epithelial (Calu-3) and fibroblast (MRC-5) cell lines (LGC Standards
cell, U.K.) were routinely cultured at 37 °C and 5% CO2 in DMEM-F12 Ham or MEM media, respectively. Both culture media were
supplemented with fetal calf serum (FCS) (10% (v/v)), l-glutamine
solution (2 mM) (1% (v/v)), and an antibiotic/antimycotic solution
(1% v/v) comprised of penicillin (10 000 units/mL), streptomycin
sulfate (100 mg/mL), and amphotericin B (25 μg/mL).
Generation
of Dendritic Cells
Dendritic cells (DC)
were generated from peripheral blood monocytes as we have previously
described. Briefly, peripheral blood mononuclear cells were isolated
from human blood buffy coat (National Blood Transfusion Service, U.K.)
using Histopaque density gradient centrifugation. Monocytes were isolated
using CD14+ magnetic beads (Milteny Biotech, U.K.) to the purity of
>98%.[13,24] Purified monocytes were cultured with GM-CSF
(50 ng/mL) and IL-4 (250 IU/ml) (R&D Systems) for 6 days to generate
immature DCs. DC phenotype was determined by flow cytometry after
staining for cell surface markers including CD11c, CD83, CD83, and
HLA-DR.[25]
Assembly of Epithelial–Fibroblast
Cocultures
Electrospun scaffolds were cut to a size of 2
cm2 and
sterilized by irradiating with ultraviolet (UV) light at a distance
of 8 cm for 15 min each side. The scaffolds were sterilely transferred
to a 12 well culture plate and a steel ring was placed on top to secure
the scaffold before further sterilization in an antibiotic/antimycotic
solution overnight (37 °C, 5% CO2). The sterilizing
solution was removed and the scaffold washed with PBS before submerging
the scaffold in the appropriate cell culture media to precondition
the scaffold. Calu-3 and MRC-5 cells were inoculated inside of the
steel ring onto separate PET scaffolds at a density of 3 × 105 cells/scaffold (1 × 106 cells/mL in 300 μL)
and incubated for 72 h (37 °C, 5% CO2) (Figure 1A).
Figure 1
Steel rings are used to submerge the electrospun scaffolds
and
define the cell seeding area (A). The use of ScaffHolders (B–E)
allow the 3D tissue engineered constructs of lung tissue to be cultured
under appropriate conditions where epithelial cells are at the ALI
(E) and fibroblast cells remain submerged, mimicking in vitro lung
conditions.
Steel rings are used to submerge the electrospun scaffolds
and
define the cell seeding area (A). The use of ScaffHolders (B–E)
allow the 3D tissue engineered constructs of lung tissue to be cultured
under appropriate conditions where epithelial cells are at the ALI
(E) and fibroblast cells remain submerged, mimicking in vitro lung
conditions.Following 72 h culture,
single culture scaffolds were transferred
from steel rings into a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) platform support
(ScaffHolder), which was designed and fabricated in-house (Figure 1B–D). The epithelial scaffold monolayer was
placed on top of the fibroblast scaffold layer inside the ScaffHolder
to form the coculture model. This layer-on-layer approach is described
in Figure 2. Single culture controls were assembled
by combination of either a Calu-3 or MRC-5 scaffold with an acellular
scaffold (i.e., without cells). To ensure there is no possibility
of separation or movement during culture, scaffolds are secured in
place within the ScaffHolder. Alignment of cell layers is ensured
because the internal diameter of the steel ring matches that of the
ScaffHolder (Figure 1). The cells were submerged
in cell media for a further 12 h; the cell media for cocultures comprised
a 50:50 mixture of the MRC-5 and Calu-3 cell media. Media from the
apical surface of the ScaffHolder was removed to culture epithelial
cells at the ALI (Figure 1E).
Figure 2
Schematic figure showing
different steps of fabrication and configuration
of the 3D tissue engineered airway epithelium. Calu-3 epithelial cells
are seeded onto one PET scaffold and MRC-5 fibroblasts are seeded
onto a second, separate scaffold (A). Following 72 h culture, scaffolds
are combined by layering the epithelial scaffold monolayer on top
of the fibroblast scaffold layer to form the coculture model. Cells
are subsequently cultured for 2 weeks at the ALI to allow for differentiation
of the epithelial cells, including establishment of tight junctions
(B). Monocyte-derived DCs are seeded onto separate PET scaffolds and
then inserted into the coculture model. The upper epithelial scaffold
is temporally lifted away from the lower MRC-5 fibroblast layer so
that the separate third scaffold containing dendritic cells may be
placed on-top of the MRC-5 scaffold layer (C). The Calu-3 layer is
placed on-top of the DC scaffold layer, resulting in the DC layer
sandwiched between the epithelial and fibroblast scaffold layers to
form the triculture model (D).
Schematic figure showing
different steps of fabrication and configuration
of the 3D tissue engineered airway epithelium. Calu-3 epithelial cells
are seeded onto one PET scaffold and MRC-5 fibroblasts are seeded
onto a second, separate scaffold (A). Following 72 h culture, scaffolds
are combined by layering the epithelial scaffold monolayer on top
of the fibroblast scaffold layer to form the coculture model. Cells
are subsequently cultured for 2 weeks at the ALI to allow for differentiation
of the epithelial cells, including establishment of tight junctions
(B). Monocyte-derived DCs are seeded onto separate PET scaffolds and
then inserted into the coculture model. The upper epithelial scaffold
is temporally lifted away from the lower MRC-5 fibroblast layer so
that the separate third scaffold containing dendritic cells may be
placed on-top of the MRC-5 scaffold layer (C). The Calu-3 layer is
placed on-top of the DC scaffold layer, resulting in the DC layer
sandwiched between the epithelial and fibroblast scaffold layers to
form the triculture model (D).
Assembly of Epithelial–Dendritic–Fibroblast Tri-Cultures
Epithelial–fibroblast cocultures were assembled and cultured
for 14 days at the ALI prior to insertion of the DC layer. The cell
culture media composition remained as a 50:50 mixture of Calu-3 and
MRC-5 cell media.Immature DCs (Day 6) were prestained with
Hoescht nuclear stain (5 μg/mL) (Invitrogen, U.K.) and inoculated
onto PET electrospun scaffolds at a density of 2 × 105 cells/scaffold and incubated for 24 h (37 °C, 5% CO2). The culture medium was aspirated to remove DCs that had not attached
prior to insertion in between Calu-3 and MRC-5 layers in an established
coculture model to form an immunocompetent triculture model. A schematic
describing the layer-on-layer approach to assembling epithelial and
fibroblast cocultures and subsequent insertion of the DC layer is
described in Figure 2.
Stimulation of Triculture
Model
Triculture models were
stimulated with house dust mite extract (HDM) (10 μg/mL) (GREER,
U.S.A.) and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) (100 ng/mL) (Sigma-Aldrich, U.K.)
or PBS control and incubated for 36 h prior to analysis. The triculture
models were fixed with 4% (v/v) paraformaldehyde (Electron Microscopy
Sciences, U.S.A.) in PBS, and the three scaffold layers were separated
and immunostained with pancytokeratin (epithelial cell marker). Scaffolds
were then examined by confocal microscopy (Leica SP2 confocal laser
scanning microscope) (Leica Microsystems Ltd., U.K.) with postvisualization
performed using Volocity software (Perkin-Elmer, U.K.).
Trans-epithelial electrical
resistance (TEER) measurements were performed
across the epithelial cell monolayer of cells cultured at the ALI.
Measurements were performed using an EVOM volt-ohm-meter and STX2
chopstick electrodes (World Precision Instruments, U.K.). Prior to
recording TEER, chopstick electrodes were sterilized (70% v/v ethanol
in distilled water) and cell culture media was added to the upper
chamber (500 μL) and lower chamber (1.5 mL total volume) and
allowed to equilibrate for 30 min (37 °C, 5% CO2).
Control measurements were performed using acellular scaffolds.
Scanning
Electron Microscopy
Cellular samples of PET
electrospun scaffold were placed onto carbon-coated electron microscope
stubs and sputter-coated with gold (5 min, Blazers SCD 030 Blazers
Union Ltd., Liechtenstein) under an argon atmosphere (BOC, U.K.) prior
to analysis. Samples were imaged using SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy)
analysis (JEOL JMS-6060 LV microscope, JEOL Ltd., U.K.) operating
at an accelerating voltage of 10 kV. Cellular samples were fixed in
3% (v/v) glutaraldehyde overnight at 4 °C before dehydration
through an ascending series of ethanol concentrations prior to SEM
imaging.
Scaffold Histology
Histology preparation was performed
by Nottingham University Advanced Microscopy Unit (AMU). Briefly,
cellular scaffolds were fixed with 10% buffered formalin, excised,
and embedded in paraffin. The paraffin embedded blocks were then sectioned
and stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) before imaging.
Immunocytochemistry
Scaffold samples were washed with
PBS prior to fixation with paraformaldehyde (4% (w/v)) or methanol
(100% (v/v)) for 15 min at room temperature (RT). Samples were washed
in PBS (3 × 5 min each) before being permeabilized using Triton
X-100 (0.5% (v/v)) for 5 min at room temperature. Following a further
wash in PBS (3 × 5 min each), nonspecific antibody binding was
blocked with goat serum (10% (v/v) in PBS for 5 min at room temperature.
Samples were incubated with primary antibody (1:100) overnight at
4 °C. Primary antibodies used were Anti-Mucin 5AC [45M1] (ab3649,
AbCam, U.K.), mouse anti-ZO1 (Invitrogen, U.K.), anti-fibronectin
(ab 23750, AbCam, U.K.), Anti-Ki67 (ab15580, AbCam, U.K.), anti-collagen
(ab34710, AbCam, U.K.), and pan-cytokeratin PK110 (SantaCruz Biotech,
U.K.). Samples were then washed with PBS (3 × 5 min each) and
incubated with species-appropriate fluorescently labeled secondary
antibodies (1:100) for 30 min at room temperature. Secondary antibodies
included goat antimouse IgG Rhodamine Red X (Invitrogen, U.K.), goat
antirabbit IgG FITC (Invitrogen, U.K.), and Alexa Fluor 488 goat antimouse
IgM (μ chain) (Invitrogen, U.K.). Samples were washed in PBS
(3 × 5 min each), incubated with Hoechst (5 μg/mL) for
5 min at room temperature, and mounted using Fluoromount mounting
medium. Immunostaining was observed using a confocal microscope (Leica
SP2 confocal laser scanning microscope, images processed with Leica
confocal software) with postvisualization performed using Volocity
software.
Application of Papain
A papain (60U/mL)
solution was
prepared with l-cysteine (5 mM) to reconstitute the cysteine
active site, and an aliquot (300 μL) was applied to the apical
surface of Calu-3 cells. TEER measurements were performed to monitor
epithelial barrier integrity prior and post application.
Results
The present study presents a multilayered 3D electrospun PET lung
model capable of incorporating multiple cell types each supported
upon their own individual electrospun layer. The porous network of
electrospun PET fibers can permit cell interaction through both direct
cell–cell contact and paracrine factors within the 3D model.
We report the incorporation of lung associated epithelial cells and
fibroblasts and monocyte-derived DCs within the 3D model and determine
how culturing these cells together influences their behavior.
Assembly of
3D Coculture Lung Model
SEM analysis of
decellularised human lung tissue (from healthy sections of lung tissue
obtained from patients undergoing surgical procedures (Nottingham
University Hospitals NHS Trust) after informed consent and ethics
approval) revealed a porous network of nanometer-sized fibers (Figure 3A). Accordingly, we used a nonbiodegradable polymer
(namely, PET) to fabricate a nanoscale porous scaffold (Figure 3B). The mean fiber diameter of the PET scaffold
(240 nm ±70) was similar to the mean diameter of lung ECM (245
nm ±83) (Figure 3C). The average thickness
of the PET scaffold, calculated using histological sections, was 60
± 10 μm. Owing to its robust physical properties, the PET
electrospun scaffold is capable of withstanding repeat handling allowing
separation of individual cell layers for assessment following experimentation.
Figure 3
Comparisons
of scanning electron micrographs of decellularised
lung tissue (A) with PET electrospun scaffold (B) showing morphological
similarities. The fiber diameter of decellularised lung tissue and
PET electrospun scaffolds were measured and show comparable dimensions
(C).
Comparisons
of scanning electron micrographs of decellularised
lung tissue (A) with PET electrospun scaffold (B) showing morphological
similarities. The fiber diameter of decellularised lung tissue and
PET electrospun scaffolds were measured and show comparable dimensions
(C).The main structural cell types
of the lung, epithelial, and fibroblast
cells were each cultured upon separate PET scaffolds. To incorporate
an immune component into the model, a triculture system was formed
by culturing DCs upon a third PET scaffold and inserting this between
the epithelial and fibroblast layers of an established epithelial–fibroblast
coculture (Figure 2).
Epithelial Barrier Formation
and Integrity
Epithelial
and fibroblast cells were each inoculated onto individual PET scaffold
layers and cultured submerged in media to allow cells to establish
growth upon the scaffold, following which the cell inoculated scaffolds
were assembled together within our developed ScaffHolders allowing
physiologically relevant positioning of the construct. Epithelial
cells were cultured upon the uppermost layer allowing culture at ALI
where the upper cell surface is in contact with the air. Culturing
epithelial cells at the ALI mimics in vivo conditions by providing
apical–basal polarity, which leads to full differentiation
of epithelial cells and development of a functional barrier.[26] The underlying fibroblasts were positioned directly
beneath the epithelial inoculated scaffold and remained submerged
in media much as they would in vivo.The production and maintenance
of barrier integrity in epithelial cells cultured upon PET electrospun
scaffolds and positioned at the ALI using ScaffHolders was assessed
using TEER measurements and permeability studies. Barrier formation
was compared when epithelial cells were cultured alone (single culture)
or with fibroblasts (coculture). TEER is widely used to monitor barrier
integrity, where an increase in resistance to flow of current is due
to greater integrity of the barrier, attributed to the formation of
cellular tight junctions.[27]An acellular
control scaffold was monitored in order to report
a control value, as it is known that TEER values reportedly vary according
to the material upon which the epithelial cells are cultured.[28] In addition, a single culture of MRC-5 fibroblasts
was monitored as a control, as an increase in TEER value was not expected
owing to MRC-5 fibroblasts characteristically not forming tight junctions.Statistical analysis was performed using two-way ANOVA with Sidak̀s
multiple comparison showed that TEER measurements of cocultures produced
readings that were significantly greater than those of epithelial
cells cultured alone (Figure 4A).
Figure 4
The TEER measurements
of cocultures are significantly higher than
those of epithelial cells cultured alone. Error bars show standard
error of the mean. Statistical analysis was performed using two-way
ANOVA with Sidak̀s multiple comparison with the difference between
coculture and single Calu-3 culture having a p value
<0.0001 (A). SEM images of epithelial cells from single and coculture
where the upper surface that has been imaged is thought to be predominantly
formed from ECM protein presence. The micrographs show that epithelial
cells from coculture have a smoother surface than those from single
culture (B).
The TEER measurements
of cocultures are significantly higher than
those of epithelial cells cultured alone. Error bars show standard
error of the mean. Statistical analysis was performed using two-way
ANOVA with Sidak̀s multiple comparison with the difference between
coculture and single Calu-3 culture having a p value
<0.0001 (A). SEM images of epithelial cells from single and coculture
where the upper surface that has been imaged is thought to be predominantly
formed from ECM protein presence. The micrographs show that epithelial
cells from coculture have a smoother surface than those from single
culture (B).The TEER measurements
show that after 14 days in culture epithelial
cells cultured alone, without fibroblasts, attained measurements of
∼130 Ω cm2. The greatest increase was seen
for cocultures of epithelial and fibroblast cells attaining measurements
of ∼200 Ω cm2. Thus, epithelial cells cultured
together with fibroblasts appeared to achieve a confluent differentiated
state earlier than single cultures of epithelial cells as shown by
earlier and greater increases in TEER measurements (Figure 4 A). The TEER values of the controls, an acellular
scaffold and MRC-5 single culture, did not increase, maintaining baseline
TEER measurements of ∼100 Ω cm2. Although
human lung ex vivo TEER results are not available in the literature,
ex vivo rabbit airway epithelium has been reported to be 260–320
Ω cm2 for the trachea[29] and 266 Ω cm2 for the bronchus.[30] Thus, the maximal TEER recorded in our 3D model are comparable
to the data available for animal ex vivo TEERs.The topography
of the confluent epithelial cell layer was observed
using SEM. The SEM micrographs of epithelial cells from single culture,
coculture, and fibroblasts from cocultures showed what is thought
to be the presence of ECM protein deposition (Figure 4B).H&E staining of the epithelial layer from single
and cocultures
indicated that single cultures formed a single thin layer of cells,
whereas the cocultured epithelial cells had a more dense and layered
arrangement after 14 days at ALI (Figure 5).
Furthermore, epithelial cells within cocultures appeared to produce
mucus earlier than single cultures as shown by immunocytochemical
staining (Figure 5).
Figure 5
After 14 days at the
ALI. Histological staining shows the presence
of epithelial cells on the uppermost surface of the PET scaffold with
a greater number of cells found in cocultures compared to single cultures.
Mucin production (red) was greater from coculture than single culture,
where cell nuclei are stained with DAPI (blue).
After 14 days at the
ALI. Histological staining shows the presence
of epithelial cells on the uppermost surface of the PET scaffold with
a greater number of cells found in cocultures compared to single cultures.
Mucin production (red) was greater from coculture than single culture,
where cell nuclei are stained with DAPI (blue).Immunocytochemical staining of the deposition of ECM proteins
indicated
that the epithelial cells deposit collagen and fibronectin when cultured
upon PET electrospun scaffolds (Figure 6).
There appeared to be enhanced production of these ECM proteins from
cocultured epithelial cells. The expression of the cell proliferation
marker Ki67 showed that epithelial cells in coculture had lower levels
of Ki67, possibly indicating their tendency toward an earlier full
differentiated state as also evidenced by an accelerated increase
in TEER readings in cocultures compared with single cultures of epithelial
cells (Figure 7A). Fibroblast cell growth has
not been adversely affected when positioned beneath the epithelial
cell layer during coculture experimentation; the fibroblast cells
are still present and in a state of active growth as indicated by
the production of Ki67 and have retained the ability to produce ECM
proteins collagen and fibronectin (Figure 6).
Figure 6
ECM staining following 14 days culture at the ALI shows the presence
of ECM proteins: collagen and fibronectin, predominantly found in
epithelial and fibroblast cells and also Ki67, showing that the cells
are in active growth. Epithelial cells in cocultures appear to express
lower levels of Ki67 (compared to single cultures), indicating their
tendency toward full differentiation.
Figure 7
Following the 14 days at the ALI, the enzyme papain was applied
to the epithelial surface of single and cocultures, which was shown
to disrupt tight junctions demonstrated by the measurement of TEERs
(A) and by confocal imaging of ZO1 protein (B). The disruption to
tight junctions from coculture was observed to be less than that of
single cultures. TEER measurements were then performed for a further
14 days to monitor the healing process. The cocultures were observed
to be recovering from the disruption with increase in TEERS and increase
in the presence of ZO1. Single cultures did not appear to recover
so well with TEER measurements remaining around the same value as
when the cells were subjected to papain. Statistical analysis was
performed using two-way ANOVA with Sidak̀s multiple comparison,
showing that the difference between coculture and single Calu-3 culture
that had been subjected to papain having a p value
<0.0001.
ECM staining following 14 days culture at the ALI shows the presence
of ECM proteins: collagen and fibronectin, predominantly found in
epithelial and fibroblast cells and also Ki67, showing that the cells
are in active growth. Epithelial cells in cocultures appear to express
lower levels of Ki67 (compared to single cultures), indicating their
tendency toward full differentiation.Following the 14 days at the ALI, the enzyme papain was applied
to the epithelial surface of single and cocultures, which was shown
to disrupt tight junctions demonstrated by the measurement of TEERs
(A) and by confocal imaging of ZO1 protein (B). The disruption to
tight junctions from coculture was observed to be less than that of
single cultures. TEER measurements were then performed for a further
14 days to monitor the healing process. The cocultures were observed
to be recovering from the disruption with increase in TEERS and increase
in the presence of ZO1. Single cultures did not appear to recover
so well with TEER measurements remaining around the same value as
when the cells were subjected to papain. Statistical analysis was
performed using two-way ANOVA with Sidak̀s multiple comparison,
showing that the difference between coculture and single Calu-3 culture
that had been subjected to papain having a p value
<0.0001.
Epithelial Repair
The 3D lung model was cultured at
the ALI for 14 days before papain was applied to the epithelial surface
of single and cocultures. Papain is an allergen with cysteine protease
activity and is known to disrupt tight junctions in respiratory epithelium
using its enzymatic activity, mimicking the action of other airborne
allergens such as house dust mite, which also have a cysteine protease
activity.[31] The application of papain on
day 14 ALI was shown to disrupt epithelial tight junctions in both
single and coculture as demonstrated by a sharp reduction in TEER
values (Figure 7A) and disintegration of ZO1
protein visualized by immunostaining followed by confocal imaging
(Figure 7B). The disruption to tight junctions
from coculture was thought to be less than that of single cultures,
where almost no ZO1 could be observed post papain. TEER measurements
were performed for a further 14 days to monitor the epithelial repair
process, and further examination of ZO1 expression was carried out.
The cocultures were observed to be recovering from the disruption
with increased TEERS and increased presence of ZO1 (Figure 7A and B). However, TEER measurements did not appear
to recover in single cultures during the same time frame and remained
at approximately the same value as when the cells were subjected to
papain (Figure 7A). The confocal microscopy
images on day 15 (post papain) of single culture shows that the cell
growth has been disrupted by papain and that tight junctions are not
present over a wide area of the sample. The cells from single cultures
recovered slightly as evidenced by the presence of nondisrupted nuclei
on day 28; however, the presence of tight junctions remain absent
(Figure 7B).
DC Migration within the
3D Triculture Model
In a proof-of-concept
experiment, an immunocompetent triculture model comprising of epithelial,
dendritic, and fibroblast layers was constructed and DC migration
within the model monitored. The triculture model was stimulated with
HDM extract (a common airborne allergen) and toll-like 4 receptor
agonist LPS (abundant in most airborne bacterial pathogens), and subsequently,
the migration of DCs was assessed by confocal microscopy. Epithelial
cells were identified using pancytokeratin and DCs had been prestained
using the nuclear stain Hoescht.[32] Assessment
of the uppermost scaffold (bearing epithelial cells) revealed that
after 36 h in the triculture, most DCs seemed to have migrated to
this layer and were present in close proximity to the basal (in unstimulated
samples) or apical side (in stimulated samples) of the epithelial
cell layer (Figure 8A). The DCs migration was
further confirmed by the fact that DCs were found to be largely absent
from the scaffold upon which they were originally inoculated (middle
scaffold) (Figure 8B). Typically, not many
DCs could be observed in the majority of lower scaffolds (fibroblast
layer) in either stimulated or unstimulated samples (Figure 8C).
Figure 8
Confocal microscopy images (×10 mag) of DC migration
36 h
after allergen stimulation in 3D tricoculture. The upper scaffold
contained the Calu-3 epithelial layer (A), a middle layer to which
DCs were seeded (B), and a lower scaffold containing MRC-5 (C). DCs
were prestained with Hoescht nuclear stain (blue) and Calu-3 cells
were poststained with pancytokeratin (green). In single culture, DCs
remained on the middle scaffold where they had been inoculated. In
the triculture, most DCs migrated from middle scaffold (B) to upper
scaffold (A). Upon treatment of the triculture with house dust mite
extract (HDM) (10 μg/mL) and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) (100 ng/mL),
DCs appeared to primarily migrate to the apical surface of the epithelial
layer, whereas in unstimulated samples they appear to be mainly localized
in the basal region of the epithelial layer (A). Experiments were
performed in duplicates.
Confocal microscopy images (×10 mag) of DC migration
36 h
after allergen stimulation in 3D tricoculture. The upper scaffold
contained the Calu-3 epithelial layer (A), a middle layer to which
DCs were seeded (B), and a lower scaffold containing MRC-5 (C). DCs
were prestained with Hoescht nuclear stain (blue) and Calu-3 cells
were poststained with pancytokeratin (green). In single culture, DCs
remained on the middle scaffold where they had been inoculated. In
the triculture, most DCs migrated from middle scaffold (B) to upper
scaffold (A). Upon treatment of the triculture with house dust mite
extract (HDM) (10 μg/mL) and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) (100 ng/mL),
DCs appeared to primarily migrate to the apical surface of the epithelial
layer, whereas in unstimulated samples they appear to be mainly localized
in the basal region of the epithelial layer (A). Experiments were
performed in duplicates.
Discussion
Using electrospun porous fibers, we have
engineered a 3D triculture
of airway epithelial cells, dendritic cells, and fibroblasts at ALI
creating a modular construct that mimics the cellular orientation
and some functional properties of human airway epithelium. The epithelium
in vivo provides the first line of defense against environmental insults,
and as such, it is capable of rapidly repairing any cellular damage
caused. Epithelial cells in vivo are thought to respond to insult
and injury through a cascade of events of which there are three distinct
stages: dedifferentiation, proliferation, and differentiation.[33] The first stage is the dedifferentiation of
underlying stromal cells, such as fibroblasts, that are initially
exposed to the environment following injury to epithelial cells. The
stromal cells are thought to migrate to the wound site to assist repair
by dedifferentiation helping to cover the site of injury and assist
in restoring barrier integrity through proliferation.[34] The final stage in restoring barrier integrity is the differentiation
of cells involved in the repair process, including the restoration
of full function to epithelial cells, particularly their ability to
form junctional protein to “seal” the barrier.[35]The exact mechanisms controlling cell
fate during epithelium repair
are not clear; however, it is thought that multiple paracrine factors
and direct cell–cell contact are key parameters required to
restore barrier integrity and function.[36] It is, therefore, important to consider these factors when configuring
tissue engineering strategies to create in vitro models of epithelial
tissue.[36b]This study developed a
3D multicellular lung model that is capable
of forming a more physiologically relevant representation of lung
tissue than culturing cells alone or in 2D systems. Our studies corroborate
the relevance of culturing multiple cell types found in lung tissue
together, as results demonstrate that when epithelial cells were subjected
to chemical insult (i.e., an enzymatically active allergen), they
recovered earlier in cocultures than single cultures. This supports
the relevance of cocultures as it is thought that the cells signal
and respond in alliance.This study also assembled a triculture
model in a proof-of-concept
experiment to examine whether DC migration could occur within the
lung model following stimulation.A large number of DCs were
found to migrate from the scaffold in
which they were initially inoculated (middle layer) through to the
uppermost scaffold bearing the epithelial cells. This occurred both
in the presence and absence of stimulation and may suggest that DCs
were responding to epithelial secretions.[37] However, in samples stimulated with LPS and HDM, most DCs were located
closer to the apical side of the epithelial barrier, whereas in unstimulated
samples they were mainly located close to the basal side. These results
prove that the 3D lung model is amenable to cell migration and that
cell–cell contact is feasible. Individual scaffolds are typically
60 ± 10 μm thick and the results of the DC migration study
demonstrate that scaffold thickness does not seem to impede DC migration.
The pattern of migration observed in this experiment substantiates
DC migration in vivo, where upon activation, DCs migrate to the epithelium
and survey the immune environment before migrating through the subepithelial
compartment before traveling to lymph nodes.[7,37,38] This enables future studies focused on inhaled
drug delivery systems as well as allergen and inhaled drugs uptake
by DCs. We would estimate the triculture would be limited to one week
due to migration of DCs and their phenotypical/functional changes
upon stimulation, which should provide enough time for performing
drug uptake/delivery experiments. Limitations to in vitro models,
particularly those generated from commercially available 2D inserts,
are that the surface upon which cells grow is planar, so cell–cell
interaction is restricted. Cell interactions can occur through the
pores of the insert; however, these are thought to be constrained
to paracrine interactions because the pore size of the substrate upon
which the epithelial cells are commonly cultured to allow barrier
formation are too small, thus preventing cell migration. A 3D human
skin triculture model comprising of keratinocytes, DCs, and fibroblasts
has been reported.[14] This model shares
similarities with the model developed in this work, including a physiologically
relevant arrangement of the cell layers each supported on separate
3D scaffolds and the establishment of a differentiated epithelial–fibroblast
coculture prior to DC insertion. In the skin triculture model, the
keratinocytes and fibroblasts were supported on 3D microfiber-scale
scaffolds; however, the DC layer was inserted into the model in an
agarose gel rather than on a fibrous scaffold. Migration of DCs in
the skin model was reported from the agarose gel layer to only the
fibroblast layer. Furthermore, the degree of migration appeared to
be far less than that observed in the 3D model developed in this study.
Hence, direct seeding of DCs on the porous scaffolds as opposed to
encapsulation within a hydrogel seems to facilitate cell migration.Epithelial cell lines such as Calu-3, the cell line we have used
in this study, are widely used as surrogates for primary cells.[39] Despite many similarities between Calu-3 and
primary cells, particularly in features like barrier formation and
mucus production, there are also considerable functional differences
(e.g., their cytokine profile). Therefore, use of cell lines somewhat
limits the physiological relevance of the model and future efforts
should focus on replacing cell lines with human primary cells.The 3D immunocompetent lung model presented in this study successfully
supports the culture of multiple cell types on electrospun PET scaffolds
that structurally resemble the native lung ECM. The porous network
of electrospun PET fibers can permit cell interaction through both
direct cell–cell contact and through paracrine factors within
the 3D model as shown by the enhanced formation of a differentiated
epithelial layer, enhanced epithelial repair, and migration of immune
cells incorporated within the model. Furthermore, the modular nature
of our approach means that other relevant structural (e.g., smooth
muscle cells) and immune cells (e.g., mast cells or eosinophils) could
be included into the model with relative ease.Collectively,
we believe this model possesses adequate cellular
and structural representation of the airway epithelium and is amenable
to in situ monitoring; as such, it presents an invaluable tool for
academic and pharmaceutical research within the fields of lung biology,
disease modeling, and drug discovery and delivery with the potential
of reducing the need for some animal experimentation in this area.
Authors: T A Telemeco; C Ayres; G L Bowlin; G E Wnek; E D Boland; N Cohen; C M Baumgarten; J Mathews; D G Simpson Journal: Acta Biomater Date: 2005-06-13 Impact factor: 8.947
Authors: Hamida Hammad; Marcello Chieppa; Frederic Perros; Monique A Willart; Ronald N Germain; Bart N Lambrecht Journal: Nat Med Date: 2009-03-29 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: David Y S Chau; Claire Johnson; Sheila MacNeil; John W Haycock; Amir M Ghaemmaghami Journal: Biofabrication Date: 2013-07-23 Impact factor: 9.954
Authors: Peter Horvath; Nathalie Aulner; Marc Bickle; Anthony M Davies; Elaine Del Nery; Daniel Ebner; Maria C Montoya; Päivi Östling; Vilja Pietiäinen; Leo S Price; Spencer L Shorte; Gerardo Turcatti; Carina von Schantz; Neil O Carragher Journal: Nat Rev Drug Discov Date: 2016-09-12 Impact factor: 84.694
Authors: Byung-Hyun Cha; Su Ryon Shin; Jeroen Leijten; Yi-Chen Li; Sonali Singh; Julie C Liu; Nasim Annabi; Reza Abdi; Mehmet R Dokmeci; Nihal Engin Vrana; Amir M Ghaemmaghami; Ali Khademhosseini Journal: Adv Healthc Mater Date: 2017-08-07 Impact factor: 9.933
Authors: Jennifer H Hammel; Jonathan M Zatorski; Sophie R Cook; Rebecca R Pompano; Jennifer M Munson Journal: Adv Drug Deliv Rev Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 15.470
Authors: Anh Thu Nguyen Hoang; Puran Chen; Sofia Björnfot; Kari Högstrand; John G Lock; Alf Grandien; Mark Coles; Mattias Svensson Journal: J Leukoc Biol Date: 2014-06-04 Impact factor: 4.962
Authors: Jennifer H Hammel; Sophie R Cook; Maura C Belanger; Jennifer M Munson; Rebecca R Pompano Journal: Annu Rev Biomed Eng Date: 2021-04-19 Impact factor: 11.324
Authors: Su Su Htwe; Helen Harrington; Alan Knox; Felicity Rose; Jonathan Aylott; John W Haycock; Amir M Ghaemmaghami Journal: Respir Res Date: 2015-12-01