The liver has a remarkable regeneration capacity, and, after surgical removal of its mass, the remaining tissue undergoes rapid regeneration through compensatory growth of its constituent cells. Although hepatocytes synchronously proliferate under the control of various signaling molecules from neighboring cells, there have been few detailed analyses on how biliary cells regenerate for their cell population after liver resection. The present study was undertaken to clarify how biliary cells regenerate after partial hepatectomy of mice through extensive analyses of their cell cycle progression and gene expression using immunohistochemical and RT-PCR techniques. When expression of PCNA, Ki67 antigen, topoisomerase IIα and phosphorylated histone H3, which are cell cycle markers, was immunohistochemically examined during liver regeneration, hepatocytes had a peak of the S phase and M phase at 48-72 h after resection. By contrast, biliary epithelial cells had much lower proliferative activity than that of hepatocytes, and their peak of the S phase was delayed. Mitotic figures were rarely detectable in biliary cells. RT-PCR analyses of gene expression of biliary markers such as Spp1 (osteopontin), Epcam and Hnf1b demonstrated that they were upregulated during liver regeneration. Periportal hepatocytes expressed some of biliary markers, including Spp1 mRNA and protein. Some periportal hepatocytes had downregulated expression of HNF4α and HNF1α. Gene expression of Notch signaling molecules responsible for cell fate decision of hepatoblasts to biliary cells during development was upregulated during liver regeneration. Notch signaling may be involved in biliary regeneration.
The liver has a remarkable regeneration capacity, and, after surgical removal of its mass, the remaining tissue undergoes rapid regeneration through compensatory growth of its constituent cells. Although hepatocytes synchronously proliferate under the control of various signaling molecules from neighboring cells, there have been few detailed analyses on how biliary cells regenerate for their cell population after liver resection. The present study was undertaken to clarify how biliary cells regenerate after partial hepatectomy of mice through extensive analyses of their cell cycle progression and gene expression using immunohistochemical and RT-PCR techniques. When expression of PCNA, Ki67 antigen, topoisomerase IIα and phosphorylated histone H3, which are cell cycle markers, was immunohistochemically examined during liver regeneration, hepatocytes had a peak of the S phase and M phase at 48-72 h after resection. By contrast, biliary epithelial cells had much lower proliferative activity than that of hepatocytes, and their peak of the S phase was delayed. Mitotic figures were rarely detectable in biliary cells. RT-PCR analyses of gene expression of biliary markers such as Spp1 (osteopontin), Epcam and Hnf1b demonstrated that they were upregulated during liver regeneration. Periportal hepatocytes expressed some of biliary markers, including Spp1 mRNA and protein. Some periportal hepatocytes had downregulated expression of HNF4α and HNF1α. Gene expression of Notch signaling molecules responsible for cell fate decision of hepatoblasts to biliary cells during development was upregulated during liver regeneration. Notch signaling may be involved in biliary regeneration.
While the liver is an internal organ that is responsible for the metabolism and storage of
nutrition, it has a remarkable regeneration capacity. After surgical removal of 70% of its
mass, the remaining tissue undergoes rapid regeneration which completes, usually within 10
days after surgery, through compensatory growth of each hepatic constituent cell, including
hepatocytes [7, 30]. Hepatocytes rapidly and synchronously exit the G0 phase and enter
the cell cycle in response to resection. It is proposed that there is an initial activation
of the TNFα cascade in Kupffer cells, which stimulates multiple diverse growth factor and
metabolic pathways in hepatocytes [2, 3, 5, 13, 18, 25, 37]. Biliary
cell proliferation occurs in a late phase in case of rats, compared with that of hepatocytes
[10, 22].
Although biliary epithelial cells may restore their cell population through proliferation of
their own population during liver regeneration, there have been few detailed analyses on
their cell cycle progression. By contrast, in rodent models of liver injury using some drugs
such as 2-acetylaminofluorene or D-galactosamine, liver stem-like or progenitor-like cells,
which are known as oval cells, extensively proliferate and are postulated to generate both
cell populations of both hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells [6, 21]. Liver stem-like or
progenitor-like cells may locate in the canals of Hering (bile ductules) [6, 21]. Recent cell
labeling studies, in which hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells are genetically labeled,
gave controversial results for their origin, showing that oval cells are derived from
hepatocytes, or that they originate from biliary epithelial cells or ductular cells [9, 23, 28, 31]. It may be
intriguing to examine whether hepatocytes can generate biliary cells or not during liver
regeneration after resection. Upregulation of Notch signaling can induce adult mature
hepatocytes to give rise to biliary epithelial cells as demonstrated in biliary development
at fetal stages [24, 35, 38]. During biliary development, the
induction may include Jag1/Notch2 signaling; the Jag1 signal of portal mesenchyme cells is
received through the Notch2 receptor of periportal biliary progenitors [24, 35]. The Notch
signaling may activate transcription of the HES (hairy and enhancer of split)/HEY
(HES-related with YRPW motif) family member genes, including HES1, which encode bHLH/orange
domain transcriptional repressors [17, 20]. TNFα and FGF signaling also play decisive roles in
the oval cell reaction [14, 16, 19, 34]. However, it remains to be revealed which signaling operates in
biliary cell proliferation after resection of liver pieces.In the present study, we immunohistochemically examined the cell cycle of biliary
epithelial cells, and expression of biliary markers during regeneration after partial
hepatectomy using mice. We found that biliary epithelial cells had much lower proliferation
activity than that of hepatocytes, and that biliary gene expression, including osteopontin
and cytokeratins expression, was detectable in periportal hepatocytes during liver
regeneration.
Materials and Methods
Animals
C57BL/6J strain male mice (8 week old; CLEA Japan, Tokyo) were used. Animals anesthetized
with isoflurane (Wako Pure Chemical Industries, Osaka, Japan) underwent 70% partial
hepatectomy (PH) according to methods described by Higgins and Anderson [11], and Mitchell and Willenbring [26]. Sham operations were also carried out for control
experiments (SH). At least three animals for each time point except for liver samples at 0
h and 336 h after partial hepatectomy (PH0 and PH336), and ten sections for each animal
were examined. All animal experiments were carried out in compliance with the “Guide for
Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” of Shizuoka University.
Histology and immunohistochemistry
For histology and immunohistochemistry, liver tissues were fixed in a cold mixture of 95%
ethanol and acetic acid (99:1 v/v) overnight, and embedded in paraffin. Paraffin sections
were cut at 6 µm.When a peroxidase-labeled secondary antibody was used, endogenous peroxidase activity in
dewaxed sections was blocked by treatment with PBS containing 3%
H2O2 for 10 min before incubation with the primary antibody. The
antigenicities of HNF4α, HNF1α, SOX9, topoisomerase IIα, Ki67 and cytokeratin no. 19
(CK19) on paraffin sections were retrieved by TE (10mM Tris, 1mM EDTA
[ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid], 0.05% [w/v] Tween 20, pH 9.0) treatment at 95°C for 10
min after dewaxing. In case of mouse monoclonal anti-proliferating cell nuclear antigen
(PCNA) antibody (Dako Japan, Tokyo, Japan), sections were blocked for endogenous mouse IgG
with M.O.M. Kit (Vector Laboratories, Burlingame, CA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s
instructions. For Ep-CAM immunoshistochemistry, frozen sections were used.Hydrated sections were incubated with the primary antibodies listed in Table 1 overnight at 4°C. The primary antibodies were diluted in 5% normal donkey
serum (Jackson ImmunoResearch Lab., West Grove, PA, USA). After thorough washing with PBS
containing 0.1% Tween (PBS/T), sections were incubated with a species-specific
peroxidase-labeled anti-mouse, rat, goat or rabbit IgG antibody (Jackson ImmunoResearch)
for 2 h. After thorough washing, sections were stained with 3, 3′-diaminobenzidine (DAB),
and then with hematoxylin. For immunofluorescence, sections were incubated with a
species-specific fluorochrome-labeled secondary antibody (Jackson ImmunoResearch) diluted
in PBS/T for 2 h at room temperature, washed again, and mounted in buffered glycerol
containing p-phenylenediamine [15]. In some immunofluorescence experiments, nuclei were stained with 4’,
6-diamidine-2’-phenylindole dihydrochloride (DAPI). Double immunofluorescent analyses were
carried out for osteopontin and carbamoylphosphate synthase I (CPSI), osteopontin and
HNF4α, HNF4α and CPSI, HNF1α and CPSI, and CK19 and CPSI using a species-specific
different fluorochrome-labeled secondary antibody. Control incubations were carried out in
5% normal donkey serum in place of the primary antibodies. The specificities of the
antibodies against transcription factors from Santa Cruz Technology were checked by
preabsorption experiments with antigenic peptides.
Rabbit anti-mouse carbamoylphosphate synthase I
(CPSI) antibody
Nitou et al., 2002
1:500
Rabbit anti-mouse Ki67 antibody
Novus Biologicals, Littleton, CO, USA
1:500*
Rat anti-mouse cytokeratin no.19 antibody
Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank, Iowa City,
IA, USA
1:100*
Rat anti-mouse Ep-CAM antibody
Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank, Iowa City,
IA, USA
1:200**
*Antigen retrieval treatment (TE treatment for 10 min) was carried out in paraffin
sections. **Frozen sections fixed in MEMFA were used.
*Antigen retrieval treatment (TE treatment for 10 min) was carried out in paraffin
sections. **Frozen sections fixed in MEMFA were used.Immunohistochemical detection of nuclear localization of PCNA, Ki67, topoisomerase IIα
and phosphorylated histone H3 (P.H3) was used as markers for late G1-M phase,
late G1-M phase, S phase and M phase of the cell cycle, respectively [27, 36].Dewaxed and dehydrated sections were incubated with fluorescein isothionate-labeled
soybean agglutinin (SBA) or Dolichos biflorus agglutinin (DBA) (Vector
Laboratories, Burlingame, CA) for 30 min [33].
After thorough washing in PBS, the sections were observed using a fluorescent
microscope.Hematoxylin-eosin (H-E) staining was carried out for demonstration of histology and
mitoses.
RT-PCR
Total RNA was extracted from regenerating livers using IsogenII (Nippon Gene, Tokyo,
Japan). Complementary DNA was synthesized from total RNA (2 µg) in 20
µl of reaction mixture containing 2.5 µM oligo dT
primer, 0.25 mM dNTP, 2 U/µl RNase inhibitor, and 10
U/µl PrimeScriptR II Reverse Transcriptase (Takara Bio Inc.,
Otsu, Japan), according to the manufacturer’s instructions.PCR reaction was conducted in 20 µl of the reaction mixture, using
Ex-Taq DNA polymerase (Takara Bio Inc.; 0.025 U/µl). Primers listed in
Table 2 were used at 0.5 µM. After various dilutions of template
cDNA, we optimized the concentration for each primer. In these concentrations,
amplification by PCR did not reach a plateau and could be used for semi-quantitative
analysis. PCR cycles were as follows: initial denaturation at 94°C for 1.5 min, followed
by 20–36 cycles at 94°C for 30 sec, at 60°C for 30 sec, at 72°C for 1 min, and final
extension at 72°C for 10 min. PCR products were separated by 1% agarose gel
electrophoresis.
Tumor necrosis factor receptor
superfamily, member 12a (Fn14)
NM_013749.2
F: 5’-GACCACACAGCGACTTCTGC -3’
258
R: 5’-GAATGAATGGACGACGAGTG-3’
Tnfsf12
Tumor necrosis factor (ligand)
superfamily, member 12 (TWEAK)
NM_011614.3
F: 5’- CCCCTACTTATCCCTGACTCC-3’
299
R: 5’-CCCCTTCCCACAATCTTCA-3’
F, forward primer; R, reverse primer.
F, forward primer; R, reverse primer.
In situ hybridization
cDNA coding for partial sequences of mouseSpp1 mRNA was cloned by
RT-PCR. The primers used were designed based on the sequence of mouse gene (NCBI Accession
Number, NM_001204203.1; sequence 45~538 [size of RNA probe, 494 bases]). Both sense and
antisense digoxigenin-labeled riboprobes were synthesized from plasmids containing its
cDNA by using a DIG RNA labeling kit (Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany). Liver tissues
for in situ hybridization were fixed using MEMFA (3.7% formaldehyde,
100mM MOPS [3-morpholinopropanesulfonic acid], 2mM EGTA [O,O’-bis (2-aminoethyl)
ethyleneglycol-N,N,N’,N’-tetraacetic acid], 1mM MgSO4 [pH7.4]), and then frozen
sections were cut. In situ hybridization on frozen sections was carried
out according to Akai et al. [1]
with some modifications, which included changing the hybridization temperature from 70 to
65°C. The proteinase K concentration was 2 µg/ml, and the length of the
proteinase K treatment was modified according to the size of the tissue.
Results
Cell cycle progression during liver regeneration
Many PCNA-, Ki67-, and topoisomerase IIα-positive hepatocyte nuclei were detected at 48
and 72 h after partial hepatectomy (Figs.
1A-E; Supplementary Figs. 1A-L). Stages with the highest proportion of hepatocytes with
positive nuclei for each cell cycle marker in all hepatocytes were at 48 h for PCNA and
topoisomerase IIα, and at 72 h for Ki67 (Figs.
1A-C). Mitotic figures of hepatocytes and P.H3-positive staining of hepatocyte
nuclei, including their mitotic figures, were most often observed at 48 h, and gradually
decreased during liver regeneration (Figs. 1D
and E; Supplementary Figs. 1M-P).
Fig. 1.
Cell cycle progression during mouse liver regeneration. A, Percentage of
hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells with PCNA-positive nuclei. B, Percentage of
hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells with Ki67-positive nuclei. C, Percentage of
hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells with topoisomerase IIα-positive nuclei. D,
Percentage of hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells with P.H3-positive nuclei. E,
Mitotic index of hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells. Over 1,000 cells per
liver were counted. Data are shown as mean +/− standard deviation. While most
hepatocytes semi-synchronously enter the S or M phase at PH48 and PH72, biliary
epithelial cells have delayed and slow cell cycle progression (A-E). The number in
parentheses is the number of animals examined.
Cell cycle progression during mouse liver regeneration. A, Percentage of
hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells with PCNA-positive nuclei. B, Percentage of
hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells with Ki67-positive nuclei. C, Percentage of
hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells with topoisomerase IIα-positive nuclei. D,
Percentage of hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells with P.H3-positive nuclei. E,
Mitotic index of hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells. Over 1,000 cells per
liver were counted. Data are shown as mean +/− standard deviation. While most
hepatocytes semi-synchronously enter the S or M phase at PH48 and PH72, biliary
epithelial cells have delayed and slow cell cycle progression (A-E). The number in
parentheses is the number of animals examined.The positive immunoreaction of biliary epithelial cell nuclei with anti-PCNA, Ki67 and
topoisomerase IIα antibodies commenced at various stages; Ki67-, PCNA- and topoisomerase
IIα-positive biliary cell nuclei appeared at 0, 48 and 72 h after liver resection,
respectively (Figs. 1A-C; Supplementary Figs.
1A-L). Stages with the highest proportion of biliary cells with positive nuclei for PCNA
and Ki67 markers in all biliary epithelial cells were at 72 and 120 h, respectively. That
for topoisomerase IIα-positive biliary cells was between 72 and 120 h. The proportion of
topoisomerase IIα−positive biliary cells was significantly much smaller than those of
hepatocytes (Figs. 1A-C). Biliary epithelial
cells had few mitotic figures in H-E stained slides, and P.H3 immunohistochemistry also
supported the data (Figs. 1D and E;
Supplementary Figs. 1M-P).Immunoreaction of hepatocytes and biliary epithelial cells for each cell cycle marker in
livers of sham operations was similar to that at PH0 (Supplementary Figs. 1Q-T).
Gene expression of hepatocyte and biliary markers
When Spp1, Sox9, Hnf1b,
Krt19, and Epcam mRNAs of biliary markers were
examined during liver regeneration using RT-PCR, they were upregulated between 48 and 168
h after liver resection (Fig. 2B). Hepatocyte markers (Cps1 and Alb mRNAs) did not
significantly change their expression during liver regeneration (Fig. 2A). Expression of Afp mRNA was transiently
upregulated between 48 and 168 h after liver resection.
Fig. 2.
RT-PCR analyses of expression of hepatocyte and biliary markers during liver
regeneration. A, Expression of Alb, Cps1, and
Afp mRNAs. Afp mRNA is transiently upregulated
at PH48-168 during liver regeneration. B, Expression of Spp1,
Epcam, Krt19, Sox9,
Hnf1b, Tweak, Fn14,
Fgf7, Fgfr2b, Jag1 and
Notch2 mRNAs. Biliary markers such as Spp1,
Epcam, Krt19, Sox9,
Hnf1b mRNAs, and mRNAs of signaling molecules for oval cell
reactions or controling biliary differentiation (Tnfsf12a [TWEAK],
Tnfrsf12a [Fn14], Fgf7, Fgfr2b,
Jag1 and Notch2) are slightly or moderately
upregulated at PH72-168 during liver regeneration. The numbers in parentheses denote
cycles of each PCR.
RT-PCR analyses of expression of hepatocyte and biliary markers during liver
regeneration. A, Expression of Alb, Cps1, and
Afp mRNAs. Afp mRNA is transiently upregulated
at PH48-168 during liver regeneration. B, Expression of Spp1,
Epcam, Krt19, Sox9,
Hnf1b, Tweak, Fn14,
Fgf7, Fgfr2b, Jag1 and
Notch2 mRNAs. Biliary markers such as Spp1,
Epcam, Krt19, Sox9,
Hnf1b mRNAs, and mRNAs of signaling molecules for oval cell
reactions or controling biliary differentiation (Tnfsf12a [TWEAK],
Tnfrsf12a [Fn14], Fgf7, Fgfr2b,
Jag1 and Notch2) are slightly or moderately
upregulated at PH72-168 during liver regeneration. The numbers in parentheses denote
cycles of each PCR.
Expression of osteopontin and its mRNA in periportal hepatocytes
Whereas osteopontin expression was immunohistochemically detectable in biliary epithelial
cells and ductular cells, it was absent in all hepatocytes of normal livers and SH livers
(Figs. 3A and H). Osteopontin protein expression started to be detectable in periportal hepatocytes
at 72 h after liver resection in addition to periportal biliary cells (Fig. 3B). At 96–168 h, the osteopontin
immunostaining in periportal hepatocytes was very remarkable, although some portal veins
did not have osteopontin-positive hepatocytes (Figs.
3C-F). At 336 h, its expression was immunohistochemically returned to a normal
level (Fig. 3G). In situ
hybridization analyses of Spp1 mRNAs demonstrated that some periportal
hepatocytes expressed Spp1 at 72 and 144 h during liver regeneration
(Figs. 4B and C). Spp1 mRNA was expressed only in biliary epithelial cells in
normal liver (Fig. 4A). Spp1
mRNA and its protein were not detectable in nonperiportal hepatocytes, including
pericentral ones, throughout liver regeneration (data not shown).
Fig. 3.
Immunohistochemical detection of osteopontin expression during liver regeneration.
After immunohistochemistry of osteopontin, sections were counterstained with
hematoxylin. A, liver section at PH0. B, liver section at PH72. C, D, liver section
at PH96. E, F, liver section at PH144. G, liver section at PH336. H, liver section
at SH144. Only biliary epithelial cells express osteopontin protein at PH0 and SH144
(A, H). At PH72, periportal hepatocytes become positive for osteopontin in addition
to biliary epithelial cells (arrowhead) (B). Positive staining of osteopontin in
periportal hepatocytes is conspicuous at PH96 and PH144 (C, E). Periportal
hepatocytes (arrow) are positive around small portal veins, which are not
accompanied by bile ductules (D). Portal area where osteopontin expression of
periportal hepatocytes is not remarkable is observed at PH144 (F). Periportal
hepatocytes express osteopontin at PH336 similarly to those of PH0 livers (G). pv,
portal vein. Bar indicates 20 µm.
Fig. 4.
In situ hybridization analyses of Spp1 expression
during liver regeneration. A, liver section at PH0. B, liver section at PH72. C,
liver section at PH144. Spp1 mRNA is expressed only in biliary
epithelial cells at PH0 (A), but is also expressed in some periportal hepatocytes at
PH72 (B) and PH144 (C) (arrowheads). pv, portal vein. Bars indicate 20
µm.
Immunohistochemical detection of osteopontin expression during liver regeneration.
After immunohistochemistry of osteopontin, sections were counterstained with
hematoxylin. A, liver section at PH0. B, liver section at PH72. C, D, liver section
at PH96. E, F, liver section at PH144. G, liver section at PH336. H, liver section
at SH144. Only biliary epithelial cells express osteopontin protein at PH0 and SH144
(A, H). At PH72, periportal hepatocytes become positive for osteopontin in addition
to biliary epithelial cells (arrowhead) (B). Positive staining of osteopontin in
periportal hepatocytes is conspicuous at PH96 and PH144 (C, E). Periportal
hepatocytes (arrow) are positive around small portal veins, which are not
accompanied by bile ductules (D). Portal area where osteopontin expression of
periportal hepatocytes is not remarkable is observed at PH144 (F). Periportal
hepatocytes express osteopontin at PH336 similarly to those of PH0 livers (G). pv,
portal vein. Bar indicates 20 µm.In situ hybridization analyses of Spp1 expression
during liver regeneration. A, liver section at PH0. B, liver section at PH72. C,
liver section at PH144. Spp1 mRNA is expressed only in biliary
epithelial cells at PH0 (A), but is also expressed in some periportal hepatocytes at
PH72 (B) and PH144 (C) (arrowheads). pv, portal vein. Bars indicate 20
µm.
Expression of other biliary markers in periportal hepatoctyes
Periportal hepatocytes were positively immunostained for polyclonal anti-cytokeratin
antibody in addition to biliary cells during liver regeneration, whereas the antibody
marked only biliary cells in normal liver (Supplementary Figs. 2A-C). This antibody
reacted with almost all hepatocytes at 48 h after partial hepatectomy (Supplementary Fig.
2B). For CK19 immunostaining, hepatocytes, including periportal ones, were negative, and
only biliary epithelial cells and ductular cells were labeled throughout liver
regeneration (Supplementary Figs. 2D-F). Ep-CAM immunostaining also exhibited similar
reactivity to that of CK19, and reacted only with biliary cells, but not with hepatocytes
(Supplementary Figs. 2G-I). The anti-SOX9 antibody reacted only with nuclei of biliary
cells in normal liver, but also bound to nuclei of many hepatocytes at 72 h (Supplementary
Figs. 2J and K). The positive immunoreaction was gradually confined to periportal
hepatocytes during liver regeneration (Supplementary Fig. 2L). Fluorescein
isothionate-labeled DBA and SBA reacted with some biliary cells, especially on their
apical side, in normal liver. This staining pattern did not change for biliary epithelial
cells throughout liver regeneration (data not shown).
Double immunofluorescent analyses of expression for biliary and hepatocyte markers in
periportal hepatoctyes
Double immunofluorescent analyses demonstrated that CPSI- and HNF4α-positive hepatocytes
expressed osteopontin in periportal regions, and that CK19 expression was confined to only
biliary cells, which did not express CPSI, during liver regeneration (Figs. 5A-L). HNF4α expression was downregulated in some periportal hepatocytes at 144 h (Figs. 5G and I). At 72 h, negative or very weak
HNF4α and HNF1α staining was also noted in some periportal hepatocytes (Figs. 6A-C). In these hepatocytes, CPSI expression was not downregulated. Downregulation of
HNF4α and HNF1α expression was not detected in nonperiportal hepatocytes, including
pericentral hepatocytes, during liver regeneration.
Fig. 5.
Double immunofluorescent analyses of expression of biliary and hepatocyte marker
proteins. A, B, C, Osteopontin immunostaining, CPSI immunostaining and their double
immunostaining at PH168, respectively. D, E, F, CK19 immunostaining, CPSI
immunostaining and their double immunostaining at PH168, respectively. G, H, I,
HNF4α immunostaining, CPSI immunostaining and their double immunostaining at PH144,
respectively. J, K, L, HNF4α immunostaining, osteopontin immunostaining and their
double immunostaining at PH168, respectively. Arrows indicate osteopontin- and
CPSI-positive periportal hepatocytes (A-C), HNF4α-weakly positive and CPSI-positive
periportal hepatocytes (G-I), and HNF4α-weakly positive and osteopontin-positive
periportal hepatocytes (J-L). CK19-positive signals are restricted in biliary
epithelial cells, and not expressed in CPSI-positive periportal hepatoctyes (D-F).
pv, portal vein. Bar indicates 20 µm.
Fig. 6.
Double immunofluorescent analyses of expression of CPSI (green) and HNF4α or HNF1α
(red) during liver regeneration (PH72). Nuclei were stained with DAPI (blue). Some
periportal hepatocytes have HNF4α- or HNF1α-negative or very weakly positive nuclei
at this time point (arrowheads)(A-C). pv, portal vein. Bars indicate 20
µm.
Double immunofluorescent analyses of expression of biliary and hepatocyte marker
proteins. A, B, C, Osteopontin immunostaining, CPSI immunostaining and their double
immunostaining at PH168, respectively. D, E, F, CK19 immunostaining, CPSI
immunostaining and their double immunostaining at PH168, respectively. G, H, I,
HNF4α immunostaining, CPSI immunostaining and their double immunostaining at PH144,
respectively. J, K, L, HNF4α immunostaining, osteopontin immunostaining and their
double immunostaining at PH168, respectively. Arrows indicate osteopontin- and
CPSI-positive periportal hepatocytes (A-C), HNF4α-weakly positive and CPSI-positive
periportal hepatocytes (G-I), and HNF4α-weakly positive and osteopontin-positive
periportal hepatocytes (J-L). CK19-positive signals are restricted in biliary
epithelial cells, and not expressed in CPSI-positive periportal hepatoctyes (D-F).
pv, portal vein. Bar indicates 20 µm.Double immunofluorescent analyses of expression of CPSI (green) and HNF4α or HNF1α
(red) during liver regeneration (PH72). Nuclei were stained with DAPI (blue). Some
periportal hepatocytes have HNF4α- or HNF1α-negative or very weakly positive nuclei
at this time point (arrowheads)(A-C). pv, portal vein. Bars indicate 20
µm.
Gene expression for biliary signaling
Gene expression for biliary signaling such as FGF and Notch was examined using RT-PCR.
Jag1 and Notch2 expression was transiently upregulated
after 48 or 72 h after liver resection (Fig.
2B). Fgf7, Fgfr2b, Tnfsf12 and
Tnfrsf12a, mRNAs for FGF7, its receptor FGFr2b, TWEAK (tumor necrosis
factor-like weak inducer of apoptosis) and its receptor Fn14 (FGF-inducible 14),
respectively, were also slightly or moderately upregulated between 48 and 168 h during
liver regeneration (Fig. 2B).To demonstrate active Notch signaling during liver regeneration, nuclear localization of
HES1 protein was immunohistochemically examined. As a result, some periportal hepatocytes
had positive nuclear staining of HES1 in addition to nuclei of biliary epithelial cells at
72 h after liver resection (Fig. 7B). At PH0, nuclear immunostaining was detectable only in biliary epithelial cells,
but not in hepatocytes (Fig. 7A). Nuclei of
nonperiportal hepatocytes were not reactive with our HES1 antibody throughout liver
regeneration.
Fig. 7.
Immunohistochemical detection of nuclear localization of HES1 protein (red) in
periportal hepatocytes during liver regeneration. Nuclei were stained with DAPI
(blue). A, liver section at PH0. B, liver section at PH72. Nuclear localization of
HES1 protein is detectable only in biliary epithelial cells (arrowheads) at PH0 (A),
but a periportal hepatocyte having weakly HES1-positive nucleus (arrow) is observed
in addition to biliary cells with moderately positive nuclei at PH72 (B). pv, portal
vein. Bar indicates 20 µm.
Immunohistochemical detection of nuclear localization of HES1 protein (red) in
periportal hepatocytes during liver regeneration. Nuclei were stained with DAPI
(blue). A, liver section at PH0. B, liver section at PH72. Nuclear localization of
HES1 protein is detectable only in biliary epithelial cells (arrowheads) at PH0 (A),
but a periportal hepatocyte having weakly HES1-positive nucleus (arrow) is observed
in addition to biliary cells with moderately positive nuclei at PH72 (B). pv, portal
vein. Bar indicates 20 µm.
Discussion
Our immunohistochemical analyses of several cell cycle markers, including PCNA, Ki67,
topoisomerase IIα and P.H3, and histological analyses of mitotic index demonstrated that the
cell cycle of hepatocytes was semi-synchronously progressed during mouse liver regeneration,
and that the first peaks of the S phase and M phase in hepatocytes were approximately at
48–72 h in our liver resection protocol. By contrast, biliary epithelial cells had much
poorer cell cycle progression than hepatocytes did. Immunohistochemical detection of
topoisomerase IIα and P.H3 proteins and mitotic index data showed that a very low proportion
of biliary epithelial cells is proliferating during liver regeneration, although both
anti-PCNA and Ki67 antibodies reacted with nuclei of many biliary epithelial cells. PCNA may
also be involved in DNA repair, suggesting that PCNA can be expressed by cells that are not
proliferating [27, 36]. Ki67 protein, which is thought to be exclusively expressed in proliferating
cells, may be associated with ribosomal RNA transcription in quiescent and proliferating
cells [4]. These may be the reasons why many biliary
epithelial cells expressed both PCNA and Ki67 proteins in their nuclei during liver
regeneration. In any event, our data for the cell cycle of hepatocytes and biliary
epithelial cells during mouse liver regeneration agree with data of the rat in the paper by
Grisham [10], in which 3H-thymidine
incorporation was used for cell cycle evaluation.The present data for the cell cycle progression of hepatocytes indicate that hepatocytes
may restore their original cell population or whole mass mainly through cell proliferation
after liver resection. In contrast, our data for biliary epithelial cells suggest that their
proliferation, which was poor during liver regeneration, may not account for whole
restoration of their population. Although the biliary duct system can restore its original
volume or length through cell elongation and cell arrangement after liver resection,
remarkable morphological changes in bile ducts did not occur during liver regeneration (data
not shown).It is of note that expression of osteopontin and its mRNA, which is biliary markers and was
undetectable in hepatocytes of normal mouse liver, was upregulated in periportal hepatocytes
during liver regeneration. Furthermore, the present study, for the first time, demonstrated
that some periportal hepatocytes had remarkably downregulated HNF4α and HNF1α expression,
and nuclear localization of HES1 protein during liver regeneration, which suggests active
Notch signaling, although their number was small. From these data, it is possible that
biliary epithelial cells partially restore their population from transdifferentiation of
periportal hepatocytes. Nishikawa et al. [29] indicated that hepatocytes could generate biliary epithelial cells when they
are cultured in vitro. Yanger et al. [38] have shown that upregulated Notch signaling in adult
hepatocytes induces biliary differentiation. It has been recently demonstrated that
hepatocytes can generate biliary cells in several mouse models of chronic liver injury using
Cre-ERT2-reporter systems for genetic cell labeling [28, 31]. During liver development,
periportal hepatoblasts, one of liver progenitor cells, may give rise to biliary cells under
the influence of portal mesenchymal cells [12, 24, 32].On the other hand, we indicated that both CK19 and Ep-CAM proteins, markers of biliary
epithelial cells, were expressed only in biliary epithelial cells during liver regeneration,
but not in periportal hepatocytes coexpressing osteopontin and mature hepatocyte markers
such as CPSI. Downregulation of CPSI in periportal hepatocytes was not immunohistochemically
detected at 72 and 144/168 h. If the transdifferentiation of periportal hepatocytes into
biliary cells can occur, periportal hepatocytes coexpressing CPSI and CK19 or Ep-CAM are
supposed to be detected. However, we did not observe such periportal hepatocytes in our
immunohistochemical analyses, suggesting that the transdifferentiation does not happen.
Thus, detailed cell lineage analyses using Cre-ERT2-reporter systems for genetic cell
labeling are required for biliary regeneration after partial hepatectomy.Font-Burgada et al. [8] have
recently shown that normal periportal hepatocytes express osteopontin, which is not
consistent with our data. The difference may be due to those of antibodies used or
sensitivities for immunohistochemical detection. Although osteopontin-positive preiportal
cells appearing after partial hepatectomy, which we showed, can be originated from
“periportal hybrid cells” expressing hepatocyte markers and low amounts of SOX9 and other
bile-duct-enriched genes, observed by Font-Burgada et al. [8], our data indicated that proliferation activities in
hepatocytes were similar in three zones of the hepatic lobule, implying that special
expansion of “periportal hybrid cells” does not occur during liver regeneration.When gene expression for biliary signaling such as Jag1-Notch2 signaling, which works
during fetal biliary development [12, 24, 35], was
examined using RT-PCR in the present study, this signaling was transiently upregulated at
72–168 h during regeneration after liver resection. This result suggests that Jag1-Notch2
signaling act in biliary regeneration after liver resection.It is also intriguing that mRNAs for FGF7-FGFR2b signaling were upregulated in liver
regeneration after resection as demonstrated in the present study, which may act in oval
cell reactions during liver regeneration caused by some chemicals [34]. TWEAK ligand and its receptor Fn14 mRNAs, and AFP
mRNA were also slightly or moderately upregulated in our liver regeneration experiments.
These data suggest that molecular mechanisms underlying regeneration in injured livers such
as FGF7-FGFR2b and TWEAK signaling can also operate in cellular signaling during liver
regeneration after partial hepatectomy.
Authors: Chang-Goo Huh; Valentina M Factor; Aránzazu Sánchez; Koichi Uchida; Elizabeth A Conner; Snorri S Thorgeirsson Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2004-03-30 Impact factor: 11.205