Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) inhibit T cell responses and are relevant to cancer, autoimmunity and transplant biology. Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) is a commonly used T cell depletion agent, yet the effect of ATG on MDSCs has not been investigated. MDSCs were generated in Lewis Lung Carcinoma 1 tumor-bearing mice. MDSC development and function were assessed in vivo and in vitro with and without ATG administration. T cell suppression assays, RT-PCR, flow cytometry and arginase activity assays were used to assess MDSC phenotype and function. MDSCs increased dramatically in tumor-bearing mice and the majority of splenic MDSCs were of the polymorphonuclear subset. MDSCs potently suppressed T cell proliferation. ATG-treated mice developed 50% fewer MDSCs and these MDSCs were significantly less suppressive of T cell proliferation. In vitro, ATG directly bound 99.6% of MDSCs. CCR7, L-selectin and LFA-1 were expressed by both T cells and MDSCs, and binding of LFA-1 was inhibited by ATG pre-treatment. Arg-1 and PD-L1 transcript expression were reduced 30-40% and arginase activity decreased in ATG-pretreated MDSCs. MDSCs were bound and functionally inhibited by ATG. T cells and MDSCs expressed common Ags which were also targets of ATG. ATG may be helpful in tumor models seeking to suppress MDSCs. Alternatively, ATG may inadvertently inhibit important T cell regulatory events in autoimmunity and transplantation.
Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) inhibit T cell responses and are relevant to cancer, autoimmunity and transplant biology. Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) is a commonly used T cell depletion agent, yet the effect of ATG on MDSCs has not been investigated. MDSCs were generated in Lewis Lung Carcinoma 1 tumor-bearing mice. MDSC development and function were assessed in vivo and in vitro with and without ATG administration. T cell suppression assays, RT-PCR, flow cytometry and arginase activity assays were used to assess MDSC phenotype and function. MDSCs increased dramatically in tumor-bearing mice and the majority of splenic MDSCs were of the polymorphonuclear subset. MDSCs potently suppressed T cell proliferation. ATG-treated mice developed 50% fewer MDSCs and these MDSCs were significantly less suppressive of T cell proliferation. In vitro, ATG directly bound 99.6% of MDSCs. CCR7, L-selectin and LFA-1 were expressed by both T cells and MDSCs, and binding of LFA-1 was inhibited by ATG pre-treatment. Arg-1 and PD-L1 transcript expression were reduced 30-40% and arginase activity decreased in ATG-pretreated MDSCs. MDSCs were bound and functionally inhibited by ATG. T cells and MDSCs expressed common Ags which were also targets of ATG. ATG may be helpful in tumor models seeking to suppress MDSCs. Alternatively, ATG may inadvertently inhibit important T cell regulatory events in autoimmunity and transplantation.
Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) are a heterogeneous population of naturally
occurring immunosuppressive cells.[1] Common myeloid precursors develop into immature myeloid cells (IMCs).[2] Under non-inflammatory conditions, IMCs develop into dendritic cells,
macrophages and neutrophils. In inflammatory environments, molecules such as G-CSF,
IL-2, TGF-β, CXCL1/2 and S100A8/A9 redirect IMCs to develop into immunosuppressive
MDSCs.[3,4] MDSCs suppress T
cell responses through nutrient depletion (via arginase-1), production of NO and
reactive oxygen species, and through the expansion of T-regulatory cells.[5],[6]In mice, MDSCs are defined by the expression of the cell surface markers Gr-1 and
CD11b. Total MDSCs are further categorized into two main subsets: monocytic MDSC
(M-MDSCs) and polymorphonuclear MDSCs (PMN-MDSCs). M-MDSCs and PMN-MDSCs are
differentiated phenotypically by the expression of Ly6C (M-MDSCs,
CD11b+Ly6ChighLy6G−) and Ly6G (PMN-MDSC,
CD11b+Ly6ClowLy6G+). In humancancers, and
likely in transplantation, M-MDSCs and PMN-MDSCs have different immunosuppressive potentials.[1],[7] In tumors, MDSC subset is also associated with location within the tumor microenvironment.[8]Because MDSCs suppress immune responses, they have garnered the attention of cancer,
autoimmunity and transplant investigators.[2],[9] MDSCs are also important in pregnancy, as they contribute to fetal tolerance
at the maternal–fetal interface.[10],[11] Cancerpatients with higher MDSC responses have lower overall survival and
cancer progression-free survival.[12-14] MDSC function is aberrant in
autoimmune processes such as inflammatory bowel disease.[15] With regard to transplantation, MDSCs develop in humans after kidney transplantation,[7] they suppress alloreactive T cell responses,[16-19] and adoptively transferred
MDSCs prolong corneal and skin graft survival.[16],[20] MDSCs also home to transplanted organs and have been suggested as a pathway
towards immunologic tolerance.[2],[19],[21],[22]There are only a few incomplete studies suggesting that immunosuppressive drugs
affect MDSCs, yet the associated mechanisms are undefined.[23],[24] We hypothesized that because ATG is a polyclonal Ab which binds multiple cell
types that ATG may also bind to and/or affect MDSCs. If MDSCs are affected by ATG,
these findings would have implications for cancer, autoimmunity and transplant
care.The mechanism of action underlying the immunosuppressive activity of ATG has been
studied extensively.[25],[26] ATG depletes T cells in peripheral blood and lymphoid tissues through
complement dependent cytotoxicity.[27],[28] ATG also induces apoptosis, deregulates proliferation of B cells[29-31] and impairs
leukocyte/endothelium interactions through modulation of adhesion and
cell-trafficking receptors.[32] Despite its wide range of effects, the impact of ATG on MDSCs is poorly
understood.Here we sought to determine if ATG binds MDSCs. We then sought to determine how
MDSC-ATG binding would affect MDSC function. We found that ATG readily bound MDSCs
and that ATG impaired MDSC function.
Materials and methods
Animals
C57BL/6J and BALB/cJ mice (female, 6–8 wk old) were purchased from The Jackson
Laboratories (Bar Harbor, ME). All mice were maintained in a specific
pathogen-free animal facility. The Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees
(IACUC) of the University of Maryland Baltimore approved all animal study
protocols, and experiments were conducted in compliance with the Guide for the
Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.
Reagents and tumor models
Lewis lung carcinoma (LLC1) cells are highly tumorigenic[33] and stimulate MDSC expansion.[34] LLC1 cells were cultured in RPMI 1640 (Invitrogen Life Technologies,
Carlsbad, CA) supplemented with 10% FBS (Gibco, Grand Island, NY), 100 U/ml
penicillin and 100 µg/ml streptomycin (Gemini, Sacramento, CA) at 37°C in 5%
CO2. For tumor challenge, 1 × 106 LLC1 cells were
injected subcutaneously into the right flank. Tumor growth was monitored twice a
week and all tumors were 1–2 cm diameter within 2–3 wk. Tumor-bearing mice were
euthanized 3 wk after LLC1 inoculation and MDSCs harvested. Mice were sacrificed
if tumors exceeded 2 cm or became ulcerated. ATG was rabbit-anti-mouse and
obtained from Earl Poptic in the Lerner Research Institute (Cleveland Clinic
Hospital, Cleveland, OH), and injected intraperitoneally at 2 mg/kg for 5 d, as
is similar in design to prior studies.[35] PBS and rabbit serum were used as a control.
Abs and flow cytometry
Mouse spleens and lymph nodes were procured and tissues mashed through 70 µm
strainers to generate single cells, which were suspended in PBS. Red blood cells
were removed using an ACK lysis buffer (Lonza, Walkersville, MD). Samples were
washed in magnetic activated cell sorting (MACS) buffer (1× PBS supplemented
with 1% FBS and 2mmol/l EDTA), incubated with Fc receptor block (CD16/32, clone
2.4G; BD Bioscience, San Diego, CA) and stained for 30 min at 4°C with the
relevant Abs. The following Abs were used for flow cytometry: Ly6C, Ly6G, CD11b,
CD3e, CD4, CD4, Gr-1, CD8, B220, CD25FoxP3, CCR7, L-selectin, LFA-1 and PD-L1
(Supplemental Table 1). Functional grade purified anti-CD3e (clone 145-2C11) and
anti-CD28 (clone 37.51) for T cell activation were obtained from BD Pharmingen.
Live/dead fixable aqua-dead stain or DAPI (Invitrogen) were used to assess
viability prior to acquisition on flow cytometer. Samples were analyzed using
the LSRFortessa flow cytometer (BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA) and FlowJo
software (Tree Star, Ashland, OR).
Isolation of CD4+ T cells and MDSCs
CD4+ T cells were isolated from the spleen and lymph nodes of BALB/c
mice using the EasySepTM MouseCD4+ T Cell Isolation Kit (Stem Cell
Technologies, Vancouver, BC, Canada) according to the manufacturer’s
instructions (Stem Cell Technologies, Vancouver, BC, Canada). Purity ranged
between 90 and 99%, as determined by flow cytometry. MDSCs were isolated from
spleens of tumor-bearing mice. After 20 min of blocking the splenocytes with Fc
blocker, cells were stained with PE-conjugated Gr-1 Ab at room temperature
(25°C). PE-conjugated Gr-1+ MDSCs were selected by using magnetic
nanoparticle designed to bind with PE fluorochrome including in The EasySep™
Mouse PE Positive Selection Kit (Catalog #18554, Stem cells) and applying an
EasySep™ magnet. Gr-1 negative cells suspended in the tube were poured off and
Gr-1+ MDSCs bound onto the tube were collected. Total MDSC
(Gr-1+CD11b+), PMN-MDSC
(CD11b+Ly6G+Ly6Clow) and M-MDSC
(CD11b+Ly6G-Ly6Chigh) were isolated by cell sorting
using an ARIA II (Becton Dickinson, San Diego, CA, USA; Supplemental Figure 1).
Purity ranged from 98 to 99%.
T Cell suppression assays
CD4+ T cells were labeled with 5 μM carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl
ester (CFSE, Molecular Probes, Eugene, Oregon) in 1 ml of PBS for 15 min at
37°C. The labeling was halted by adding excess of FBS and the samples were
washed twice with RPMI 1640 supplemented with 10% FBS. A total of
1 × 105 CFSE-labeled CD4+T cells were plated in
complete media (RPMI 1640, 10% FBS, 20 units/ml penicillin, 50 mg/ml
streptomycin) supplemented with 2 mmol/l l-glutamine and 0.05 nmol/l
2-mercaptoethanol onto flat-bottomed 96-well plates (Corning, B.V.) coated with
5 µg/ml anti-CD3 and 2 µg/ml anti-CD28 (eBioscience). MDSCs were added in T
cell:MDSC ratios of 1:0.5, 1:1and 1:2. Cells were cultured for 3 d. MDSCs were
pre-incubated with 10 µg mitomycin C for 1 h prior to co-culture with T
cells.
In-vitro ATG binding assay
For blocking non-specific binding of ATG to Fc receptors, MDSCs were
pre-incubated with purified anti-mouseCD16/32 Ab for 20 min. Then, MDSCs
(1 × 105 cells) were incubated for 30 min with serial dilutions
of ATG (0.25 µg–100 µg) at 4°C. Purified normal rabbit serum (‘normal serum’ or
‘NS’) was used as a control. Following two washes with 1× PBS, a FITC-conjugated
goat-anti-rabbit IgG secondary Ab was added to the cells and further incubated
for 30 min at 4°C. The cells were fixed with 4% PFA for 10 min at 4°C. After
washing, cells were harvested and FITC signal of gated MDSCs was measured by
flow cytometry.
Arginase activity assay
The enzymatic activity of arginase was determined by measuring the conversion of
l-arginine to l-ornithine and urea using the Arginase Activity Assay Kit (Sigma
Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) in Gr-1+ MDSCs and Gr-1-
(Non-MDSC) cells. The procedures were performed according to the manufacturers’
protocols. Briefly, cells were treated with 5 µg/ml or 50 µg/ml of ATG, rabbit
normal serum (NS), or PBS and incubated for 24 h in 5% CO2 incubator
at 37°C. Each group of cells was washed twice with 1× PBS and lysed with 200 µl
of lysis buffer-containing 0.4% Triton X-100, 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5) and 1 µM
Pepstatin and Leupeptin protease inhibitor. After centrifugation at 13,000
g for 10 min, the supernatant was collected and placed into
96-well plates. Arginase was activated by adding l-arginine substrate buffer and
incubation for 2 h at room temperature. l-arginine hydrolysis was done by
incubating the activated lysates with 50 μl of l-arginine (pH 9.7) at 37°C for
60 min. The reaction was stopped by the addition of 200 μl urea stop buffer and
urea concentration was measured at 540 nm after using a spectrophotometer
(Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) followed by incubation at room
temperature for 60 min. One unit of arginase is the amount of enzyme that will
convert 1.0 µmole of l-arginine to ornithine and urea per minute at pH 9.5 and
37°C.
RNA isolation and real-time quantitative RT-PCR
Total RNA isolation was performed using the RNeasy RNA isolation kit according to
the manufacturer’s instructions (Qiagen, Waltham, MA). The quality and integrity
of RNA were evaluated via A260/A280 ratio by using Nanodrop 2000 Spectrometer
(ThermoFisher Scientific). Thereafter, 1–3 µg of total RNA were reversed
transcribed to first-strand cDNA using the RevertAid First Strand cDNA Synthesis
Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). qRT-PCR was performed in duplicate using
All-in-One qPCR Mix (GeneCopoeia, Inc., Rockville, MD). An Eppendorf
Mastercycler Realplex PCR system was used as follows: initial denaturation 95°C
for 10 min, followed by 40 cycles of denaturation at 95°C for 10 s, annealing at
60°C for 20 s and extension at 72°C for 15 s. GAPDH was used as an internal
control for normalization.
Statistical analysis
Where appropriate (MDSC number, spleen mass, continuous numeric values, etc.),
data are presented as mean value ± standard error (SEM). The independent
Student’s t-test was used to compare the difference of mean
between each of two groups. Data were analyzed using Graph Pad Prism V6.0
(LaJolla, CA,).
Results
MDSCs are expanded in tumor-bearing mice
Animals injected with LLC1 cells uniformly developed tumors. Based on prior data
suggesting that MDSCs develop in large numbers by 3 wk,[36] animals were euthanized, and tissues were obtained at this time. Spleens
of tumor-bearing mice were significantly larger than those of naïve animals
(Figure 1a). Spleen
mass and splenocyte number were 4-fold higher (4.09 ± 0.65;
P < 0.001; Figure 1b) and 10-fold higher (10.57 ± 4.4;
P < 0.05; Figure 1c), respectively, compared with controls. Total
Gr-1+CD11b+ MDSCs were compared between animals with
and without tumor. Gr-1+CD11b+ MDSCs increased
(>7-fold) to comprise more than 15% of total splenocytes in tumor-bearing
mice v. less than 4% for naïve mice (Figure 1d). MDSC subsets (PMN-MDSCs and
M-MDSCs) from the spleens of naïve and tumor-bearing mice were also assessed
(Figure 1e and f).
In naïve mice PMN-MDSCs (CD11b+Ly6G+Ly6Clow)
and M-MDSCs (CD11b+Ly6G-Ly6Chigh) comprised 1.7
and 0.7% of splenocytes, respectively, and the ratio of PMN-MDSC:M-MDSC was 2:1.
In tumor-bearing mice PMN-MDSCs and M-MDSCs comprised 20.6 and 2.8% of
splenocytes, respectively, and the ratio between these two populations was
increased to 8:1. Our results thus indicate that LLC1 tumors induced the
expansion of Gr-1+CD11b+ MDSCs, and of these MDSCs the
majority were of the PMN-MDSC subtype.
Figure 1.
MDSCs are significantly expanded in spleen of tumor-bearing C57Bl/6 mice.
One million (1 × 106 cells) of Lewis lung carcinoma LLC1
cells were inoculated in the flank of C57Bl/6 female mice. Three wk
after tumor inoculation, all the mice were burdened with tumor. (a–c)
Spleens from naïve or tumor-bearing mice were harvested and mass and
total number of splenocyte were measured. Splenocytes were subjected to
immunophenotyping by flow cytometry. (d, i and ii). Representative
gating strategy for identification of total MDSCs, M-MDSC and PMN-MDSC.
(f) The frequency of total MDSCs (GR-1+CD11b+) (d)
and M-MDSCs (CD11b+Ly6G-Ly6Chigh)/PMN-MDSCs
(CD11b+Ly6G+ Ly6Clow). M- and
PMN-MDSCs were subsequently identified based on the expression of CD11b,
Ly6C and Ly6G, respectively (n = 5). *:
P < 0.05 for statistically significant
differences between naïve and tumor-bearing mice.
MDSCs are significantly expanded in spleen of tumor-bearing C57Bl/6 mice.
One million (1 × 106 cells) of Lewis lung carcinoma LLC1
cells were inoculated in the flank of C57Bl/6 female mice. Three wk
after tumor inoculation, all the mice were burdened with tumor. (a–c)
Spleens from naïve or tumor-bearing mice were harvested and mass and
total number of splenocyte were measured. Splenocytes were subjected to
immunophenotyping by flow cytometry. (d, i and ii). Representative
gating strategy for identification of total MDSCs, M-MDSC and PMN-MDSC.
(f) The frequency of total MDSCs (GR-1+CD11b+) (d)
and M-MDSCs (CD11b+Ly6G-Ly6Chigh)/PMN-MDSCs
(CD11b+Ly6G+ Ly6Clow). M- and
PMN-MDSCs were subsequently identified based on the expression of CD11b,
Ly6C and Ly6G, respectively (n = 5). *:
P < 0.05 for statistically significant
differences between naïve and tumor-bearing mice.
MDSCs suppress T cell proliferation in vitro
T cell suppression is a defining feature of MDSCs.[37] CD4+ T cells isolated from peripheral lymph nodes and spleen
of BALB/c and were stimulated with anti-mouseCD3/CD28 and co-cultured with or
without MDSCs from tumor-bearing BALB/c or C57BL/6J. MDSCs, in a dose-dependent
fashion, potently suppressed Ab-induced T cell proliferation (Figure 2).
Figure 2.
MDSCs are suppressive of T cell proliferation. CD4 T cells from BALB/c
were labeled with CFSE dye (5 μM) and were stimulated with 5 μg/ml
plate-bound anti-CD3, 2 μg/ml soluble anti-CD28 and co-cultured with
Gr-1+ cells. Gr-1+ cells were isolated from
the spleen of tumor-bearing (a) BALB/C and (b) C57BL/6. T cell
proliferation was monitored 72 h later by flow cytometry as frequency of
cells expressed CD4 and diluted CFSE. Cell proliferation was measured in
triplicates and mean ± SD is shown. *, P < 0.05, **,
P < 0.01, ns: not statistically significant.
MDSCs are suppressive of T cell proliferation. CD4 T cells from BALB/c
were labeled with CFSE dye (5 μM) and were stimulated with 5 μg/ml
plate-bound anti-CD3, 2 μg/ml soluble anti-CD28 and co-cultured with
Gr-1+ cells. Gr-1+ cells were isolated from
the spleen of tumor-bearing (a) BALB/C and (b) C57BL/6. T cell
proliferation was monitored 72 h later by flow cytometry as frequency of
cells expressed CD4 and diluted CFSE. Cell proliferation was measured in
triplicates and mean ± SD is shown. *, P < 0.05, **,
P < 0.01, ns: not statistically significant.
MDSC expansion and function are inhibited by ATG in
vivo
We next assessed the effect of ATG on MDSCs, T cell subsets and B cells in
treated and un-treated tumor-bearing animals. Splenocytes from tumor-bearing
animals were stained with variety of cell surface markers including anti-CD11b,
anti-Gr-1, anti-CD4, anti-CD8, anti-CD25 and anti-B220 to assess phenotype with
and without ATG treatment (Figure 3a). Tumor size and spleen size were not affected by ATG
treatment (data not shown). The total splenic cell number was also unaffected by
ATG treatment when compared with PBS-treated controls (Figure 3b). ATG led to a > 50%
decrease in Gr-1+CD11b+ MDSCs among splenocytes (Figure 3c;
P < 0.05, n = 6), and this was
associated with a concomitant decrease in MDSC absolute number (Supplemental
Figure 2). Consistent with the known effects of ATG, T cell populations were
also decreased by ATG treatment when compared to PBS-treated mice
(n = 6; Figure 3c–f). We did not detect a statistically significant
reduction in B cell numbers in ATG treated mice (Figure 3g). To determine the effects of
ATG on MDSC function, MDSCs isolated from ATG-treated animals were co-cultured
with anti-mouseCD3/CD28 stimulated T cells. In contrast to PBS-treated animals
shown in Figure 4a,
MDSCs isolated from ATG-treated mice failed to suppress T cell proliferation
(Figure 4b),
suggesting that ATG suppressed MDSCs’ suppressive mechanisms.
Figure 3.
The effect of ATG on percentile of immune cells in spleen of tumor
bearing mice. Two wk following tumor cell inoculation, mice were
assigned to two groups (PBS or ATG) and treated for 5 d. Splenocytes
were harvested on the fifth day after treatment and characterization of
immune cells was performed using flow cytometry. Following staining with
anti-CD4, CD8, B220, Gr-1 and CD11b Abs, (a) flow cytometry was
performed and (b) the mass of spleens and (c–g) the average percentile
of each immune cell was measured. Data represents the mean ± SD,
n = 5. *, P < 0.05, **,
P < 0.01, ***, P < 0.001,
ns: not statistically significant.
Figure 4.
The effect of ATG on suppression activity of MDSCs in CD4+ T
cell proliferation. Two wk following tumor cell inoculation, mice were
assigned to two groups (PBS or ATG) and treated with ATG (2 mg/kg body
mass) for 5 d. Single cells were harvested on the fifth day after
treatment from the spleen of (a) PBS-treated and (b) ATG-treated mice.
Gr-1+ MDSCs was isolated and CD4 T cell proliferation was
performed as described in Figure 2. Data represents the mean ± SD,
n = 5. *, P < 0.05, **,
P < 0.01, ***, P < 0.001,
ns: not statistically significant.
The effect of ATG on percentile of immune cells in spleen of tumor
bearing mice. Two wk following tumor cell inoculation, mice were
assigned to two groups (PBS or ATG) and treated for 5 d. Splenocytes
were harvested on the fifth day after treatment and characterization of
immune cells was performed using flow cytometry. Following staining with
anti-CD4, CD8, B220, Gr-1 and CD11b Abs, (a) flow cytometry was
performed and (b) the mass of spleens and (c–g) the average percentile
of each immune cell was measured. Data represents the mean ± SD,
n = 5. *, P < 0.05, **,
P < 0.01, ***, P < 0.001,
ns: not statistically significant.The effect of ATG on suppression activity of MDSCs in CD4+ T
cell proliferation. Two wk following tumor cell inoculation, mice were
assigned to two groups (PBS or ATG) and treated with ATG (2 mg/kg body
mass) for 5 d. Single cells were harvested on the fifth day after
treatment from the spleen of (a) PBS-treated and (b) ATG-treated mice.
Gr-1+ MDSCs was isolated and CD4 T cell proliferation was
performed as described in Figure 2. Data represents the mean ± SD,
n = 5. *, P < 0.05, **,
P < 0.01, ***, P < 0.001,
ns: not statistically significant.
ATG directly binds and inhibits MDSC in vitro
We next assessed whether the observed effects of ATG on MDSCs were the result of
direct ATG–MDSC binding. MDSCs from tumor-bearing mice were isolated and
incubated with serial dilutions of ATG (0.25–100 µg/ml) or normal rabbit serum.
Cells were then washed and stained with FITC-conjugated anti-rabbit IgG (Figure 5a). ATG bound to
MDSCs in a dose-dependent fashion (Figure 5b). Weak binding was observed at
an ATG dose of 1 µg/ml, however, binding increased to 8% at a dose of 2 µg/ml.
More than 59% of MDSCs were bound at 4 µg/ml of ATG. Saturation (> 99%)
occurred at 8 µg/ml (Figure 5b
and c). To assess and avoid non-specific binding of ATG to Fc
receptors (FcR) on MDSCs, FcR blocker was used to pretreat MDSCs in advance of
incubation with ATG. FcR blockade did not affect capacity of ATG to bind MDSCs,
indicating that ATG binding was specific. We then investigated if ATG binding
would affect MDSC function in vitro. Indeed, we found that ATG
treated MDSCs were less suppressive of T cell proliferation (Figure 6a and b,
< 0.001). At a T cell:MDSC ratio of 1:2,
ATG-treated MDSCs were 3× less suppressive of T cell responses when compared
with normal rabbit-serum-treated MDSCs (Figure 6c). Consistent with previous
data, PMN-MDSCs and M-MDSCs were both suppressive of T cell proliferation, and
both subsets were inhibited by ATG.[37] Notably, PMN-MDSCs appeared to be suppressed by ATG to a greater degree
than were M-MDSCs (Figure 6d,
< 0.0001). Together, these data suggest
that ATG treatment, in vitro, inhibited MDSC function.
Figure 5.
ATG bind physically with MDSCs in vitro. A million
number of Gr-1+ MDSCs were incubated with a serial dilution
of ATG (0.25–100 µg/ml) for 30 min at 4°C. Normal serum and PBS (data
not shown) were used as controls. Following washing twice,
FITC-conjugated goat-anti-rabbit IgG was added and further incubated for
30 min. (a) The typical example of flow cytometry and (b) representative
histogram data. (c) Densitometric data indicating the percentile of
cells bound by ATG
Figure 6.
ATG inhibits the suppressive function of MDSCs. Following incubation with
ATG (2 µg/ml) for 30 min, MDSCs were collected and were assessed for
their suppressive activity by co-culturing with CD4 T cells as described
in Figure 2. (a) Representative plot of a sample of T cell proliferation
monitored 72 h later by flow cytometry. (b) Densitometric data and (c)
statistically significant differences between serum and ATG-treated
MDSCs. (d) PMN-MDSCs and M-MDSCs subsets incubated with ATG or control
serum and co-cultured with CD4 T cells for 72 h. Cell proliferation was
measured in triplicates and mean ± SD is shown. *,
P < 0.05, **, P < 0.01, **,
P < 0.001.
ATG bind physically with MDSCs in vitro. A million
number of Gr-1+ MDSCs were incubated with a serial dilution
of ATG (0.25–100 µg/ml) for 30 min at 4°C. Normal serum and PBS (data
not shown) were used as controls. Following washing twice,
FITC-conjugated goat-anti-rabbit IgG was added and further incubated for
30 min. (a) The typical example of flow cytometry and (b) representative
histogram data. (c) Densitometric data indicating the percentile of
cells bound by ATGATG inhibits the suppressive function of MDSCs. Following incubation with
ATG (2 µg/ml) for 30 min, MDSCs were collected and were assessed for
their suppressive activity by co-culturing with CD4 T cells as described
in Figure 2. (a) Representative plot of a sample of T cell proliferation
monitored 72 h later by flow cytometry. (b) Densitometric data and (c)
statistically significant differences between serum and ATG-treated
MDSCs. (d) PMN-MDSCs and M-MDSCs subsets incubated with ATG or control
serum and co-cultured with CD4 T cells for 72 h. Cell proliferation was
measured in triplicates and mean ± SD is shown. *,
P < 0.05, **, P < 0.01, **,
P < 0.001.
MDSCs and T cells express common Ags that are bound by ATG
As ATG is polyclonal, it is possible that MDSC depletion resulted from ATG
binding of T cell Ags also expressed on MDSCs. To determine if T cells and MDSCs
expressed common Ags which might act as ATG targets, we sought to determine if T
cells and MDSCs expressed common Ags which, based on the literature, were also
known targets of ATG (CCR7, L-selectin and LFA-1). In our hands, we observed
that both T cells and MDSCs expressed CCR7, L-selectin and LFA-1 (Figure 7a). We next sought
to determine if ATG pretreatment would block binding of our selected Abs,
suggesting (albeit indirectly) that our selected Ags were also ATG targets. T
cells and MDSCs were pretreated with ATG. Thereafter, we again stained for CCR7,
L-selectin and LFA-1, using their respective Abs. ATG pre-treatment led to
decreased LFA-1 binding, suggesting that LFA-1 was bound by ATG (Figure 7b).
Figure 7.
Expression of common Ags CCR7, L-selectin and LFA-1L on T cells and
MDSCs, and ATG’s effect on expression of Arg-1 and PD-L1 and arginase
levels. Splenocytes were collected and analyzed for the expression of
LFA-1, L-selectin, CCR7 and PD-L1 by flow cytometry in T cells and
MDSCs. (a) Representative histogram showed the expression of tested
markers in CD4+ T cell and CD8+ T cells and
Gr-1+CD11b+ MDSCs. Normal line indicates
isotype control and dotted line indicate designated protein expression.
(b) To determine if ATG bind and affect one of these common Ag, cells
were incubated with 5 µg of ATG for 1h at 4°C prior to staining with
primary Abs. Besides ATG treatment, same flowcytometry procedures were
applied. Each representative histogram showed the difference in the
expression of markers in the cells with or without ATG. Line indicate
rabbit serum treated cells and shaded indicated ATG-treated cells. (c)
Following incubation with ATG (2 µg/ml) for 30 min, MDSCs were collected
and assessed for transcriptional expression of Arg-1 and iNOS, and
PD-L1. (d) Arginase activity was assessed both in Gr-1+ MDSCs
or Gr-1- cells. Each group of cells were incubated 24 h in
the presence of 5 or 50 µg/ml of ATG. Normal rabbit serum (serum) was
used as a control. All the procedures were performed as described in
‘Materials and methods’ and the enzyme activity (unit/l) was calculated
by the formula provided by protocol guideline. In real-time qRT-PCR
assay, expression of the interested genes was normalized to the
expression of GAPDH. *, P < 0.05, **,
P < 0.01, ns: not statistically significant.
Expression of common Ags CCR7, L-selectin and LFA-1L on T cells and
MDSCs, and ATG’s effect on expression of Arg-1 and PD-L1 and arginase
levels. Splenocytes were collected and analyzed for the expression of
LFA-1, L-selectin, CCR7 and PD-L1 by flow cytometry in T cells and
MDSCs. (a) Representative histogram showed the expression of tested
markers in CD4+ T cell and CD8+ T cells and
Gr-1+CD11b+ MDSCs. Normal line indicates
isotype control and dotted line indicate designated protein expression.
(b) To determine if ATG bind and affect one of these common Ag, cells
were incubated with 5 µg of ATG for 1h at 4°C prior to staining with
primary Abs. Besides ATG treatment, same flowcytometry procedures were
applied. Each representative histogram showed the difference in the
expression of markers in the cells with or without ATG. Line indicate
rabbit serum treated cells and shaded indicated ATG-treated cells. (c)
Following incubation with ATG (2 µg/ml) for 30 min, MDSCs were collected
and assessed for transcriptional expression of Arg-1 and iNOS, and
PD-L1. (d) Arginase activity was assessed both in Gr-1+ MDSCs
or Gr-1- cells. Each group of cells were incubated 24 h in
the presence of 5 or 50 µg/ml of ATG. Normal rabbit serum (serum) was
used as a control. All the procedures were performed as described in
‘Materials and methods’ and the enzyme activity (unit/l) was calculated
by the formula provided by protocol guideline. In real-time qRT-PCR
assay, expression of the interested genes was normalized to the
expression of GAPDH. *, P < 0.05, **,
P < 0.01, ns: not statistically significant.
ATG suppresses Arg1 and PD-L1 transcript expression and arginase-1
activity
MDSC-mediated T cell suppression in cancers and in transplantation occurs, among
other mechanisms, through the actions of arginase-1, iNOS and PD-L1. The
expression of each of these molecules was measured with and without ATG
treatment. Real-time PCR analysis showed that, after ATG treatment,
transcriptional expression of Arg-1 was decreased approximately 30% and PD-L1
approximately 40%. Expression of iNOS was unchanged (Figure 7c). Because Arg-1 expression by
PCR was decreased after ATG treatment, we next sought to determine if there was
a coincident decrease in arginase activity with ATG treatment. Arginase activity
was measured in ATG-treated and control MDSCs by lysing MDSCs and collecting the
supernatant. As anticipated,[5] we observed that MDSCs had greater arginase activity than did non-MDSC
splenocytes, consistent with their suppressive phenotype. ATG treatment was
associated with a dose-dependent decrease in MDSC arginase production (Figure 7d). These data
suggest that, outside of ATG mediated depletion, ATG also affects MDSC
function.
Discussion
ATG is a commonly used polyclonal T-cell depleting antibody.[27],[32] Little is known about the effects of ATG on MDSCs.[2] In testing how ATG might affect MDSCs, we observed that ATG binds to MDSCs
directly. ATG binding to MDSC led to MDSC depletion and suppression of MDSC
function. ATG, at least partly, affected MDSCs’ ability to produce arginase. These
effects on MDSCs may have important implications for cancer, autoimmunity and
transplant biology.Few MDSCs were produced in naïve mice and tumor inoculation dramatically induced MDSC
expansion. Different inflammatory milieus (i.e. type of cancer, trauma, etc.) yield
different numbers and ratios of PMN-MDSCs and M-MDSCs v. total MDSCs.[36] For example, when cancer types were compared, sarcoma-bearing mice generated
the fewest number of MDSCs, whereas colon cancers led to much higher levels.[36] Differences in MDSC expansion are likely due to differences in the
inflammatory stimuli which exist between tumor types.[1] M-MDSCs are potently immunosuppressive and are found in greater number
within, rather than external to, tumors.[1],[8] PMN-MDSCs are thought to be less immunosuppressive than M-MDSCs, and can be
identified peripherally.[8] In our hands, a 15-fold increase in MDSC expansion in tumor-bearing mice was
observed. The vast majority of the MDSCs present among splenocytes were PMN-MDSCs
and the ratio of PMN:M-MDSC increased 4-fold in tumor-bearing mice, consistent with
the literature which suggests that approximately 70% of MDSCs outside the tumor are PMN-MDSCs.[1],[6] Furthermore, in vitro, the suppressive activity of PMN-MDSCs
appeared to be disproportionately affected by ATG treatment when compared with
M-MDSCs.In patients with cancer, MDSCs are directed against the host’s own T cells. Thus,
there is no MHC disparity between the T cell and the MDSC. However, in
transplantation, MDSCs or T cells may be from donor (e.g. transplanted leukocytes,
or ‘passenger leukocytes’) or from the recipient.[38],[39] Further, MDSCs develop in human kidney transplant recipients after transplantation.[7] We found that MDSCs efficiently suppressed autologous and MHC disparate T
cell proliferation.[16] These data are important for the present study, because they suggest that ATG
may detrimentally suppress potentially helpful MDSC-mediated T cell regulation after
transplantation.ATG is a polyclonal Ab purified from rabbits immunized with donor T cells.[27],[29] Thus, cells that express Ags common to T cells may also be bound by ATG. ATG
is known to bind multiple immune cell subsets including B cells, natural killer
cells, monocytes and dendritic cells.[27],[30],[31] We hypothesized that MDSCs may also be bound by ATG. Indeed, our ATG binding
assay showed that MDSCs were bound by ATG in a dose-dependent manner. We reasoned
that ATG–MDSC binding likely resulted from the expression by MDSCs of Ags also
expressed by T cells. To test this hypothesis, we reviewed the literature and
identified CCR7, L-selectin and LFA-1 as targets of ATG on T cells.[40-43] In our hands, we observed that
each Ag was expressed on both T cells and MDSCs. To determine which of these shared
Ags were also bound by ATG, we pretreated T cells and MDSCs with ATG and observed a
decrease in LFA-1 binding. CCR7 and L-selectin were not affected by ATG
pre-treatment. This is interesting, because all three of the antigens are known
targets of ATG on T cells.[40-43] It is possible that in
contrast to LFA-1, ATG bound to antigenic epitopes on CCR7 and L-selectin that were
distinct from the antigenic targets of the Abs used to detect these molecules. These
epitope differences may explain why ATG pre-treatment did not affect subsequent CCR7
and L-selectin binding. It is very likely that many other antigens are expressed by
both T cells and MDSCs. A review of the literature suggests that CCR2, CD66b, TGF-β,
IFN-γR and IL-4R may also be expressed by both cell types and therefore recognized
by ATG.[37],[44]Many studies have shown that ATG induces cell death by complement-dependent
cytotoxcity.[45-48] Further, ATG’s complement
dependent cytotoxicity is dose-dependent.[49] Beyond T cells, Cumpelic et al. demonstrated ATG also binds and depletes
platelets in a complement dependent manner.[48] Ayuk et al. suggested that ATG also causes caspase-dependent cell death, but
that this was complement-independent.[27],[50] To this end, we have reasoned that MDSC depletion by ATG treatment is, at
least in part, complement dependent. Beyond MDSC depletion, T cell-MDSC interactions
may have been indirectly affected by ATG. For example, IL-10 is known to maintain
MDSCs in cancer models.[51] Thus, ATG-mediated depletion of IL-10 producing T cells may have negatively
affected MDSC populations. A deeper investigation of these effects was beyond the
scope of this report.T cell suppression by MDSCs is a primary and defining feature of this cell type. MDSC
mediated immunosuppression occurs through several mechanisms. Among these, nutrient
starvation via arginase-1[52] reduces the local level of l-arginine important for T cell proliferation.
MDSCs also generate NO through inducible NO synthase (iNOS).[53] MDSCs can expand the T regulatory cell population, at least in part, through
the expression of PD-L1.[54],[55] MDSCs derived from ATG-treated tumor-bearing mice down-regulated Arg-1 and
PD-L1, perhaps explaining MDSC loss of function. The reduction in Arg-1 mRNA
expression was associated with a decrease in arginase activity. However, arginase
reduction was only partial (c.15% absolute reduction), suggesting
(perhaps) that even small decreases in arginase production translate to substantial
losses of MDSC function. Perhaps more likely, the observed loss of MDSC function was
multifactorial, resulting from a combination of MDSC depletion, steric hindrance of
regulatory proteins via ATG, in addition to ATG-mediated suppression of Arg-1 and
PD-L1.Other immunosuppressive agents also affect MDSCs. Glucocorticoid antagonism
suppresses the MDSC response to inflammation.[56] Cyclosporine may enhance the suppressive nature of MDSCs secondary to iNOS
up-regulation, however the effect of tacrolimus, a calcineurin inhibitor, is poorly understood.[23] mTOR inhibitors such as rapamycin have been shown to suppress MDSC function,
though they are also known to paradoxically upregulate iNOS and Arg1.[57],[58] Monoclonal Abs such as Alemtuzumab, Basliximab and Rituximab are poorly
understood. Beyond induction agents, there are no focused studies of chronic
immunosuppressive agents such as tacrolimus, belatacept, or mycophenolate moffeteil
and their effects on MDSCs in the transplant setting.[23]T cell depletion in blood and peripheral lymphoid tissues is the primary
immunomodulatory effect of ATG, particularly in transplantation.[27],[59] However, accumulating evidence suggests that, beyond T cell depletion, ATG
may also stimulate T regulatory cells (Treg).[60-62] Indeed, Lopez et al. tested
the ability of ATG to induce the generation of Tregs and found that ATG expanded
CD4+CD25+ T cells and up-regulated expression of CTLA-4
and Foxp3 in the expanded cells.[63] In an in-vitro model assessing the impact of ATG, Buszko
et al. recently showed that Foxp3+ Tregs can be expanded with ATG
treatment as well, however, ATG mediated Foxp3+ expansion was transient
and ATG mediated effects appeared to decline 10 d after ATG treatment.[64] These data suggest that ATG has immunomodulatory effects that go beyond T
cell depletion. Thus, Foxp3+ Tregs generated as a result of ATG may have
a protective role in delaying transplant rejection. Boenisch et al. suggested that
ATG reprograms CD4+ T cells to become Tregs, and this transition was STAT3-dependent.[65] Additional evidence suggests that ATG preferentially depletes conventional T
(Tconv) cells, but that it spares Tregs. Taken together, ATG can affect Tregs as
well as MDSCs.[43] Because T cell proliferation in this study was enhanced by ATG
administration, it is possible that ATG had a greater effect on MDSCs than on Tregs,
however this important topic requires additional investigation.MDSCs are potently immunosuppressive and are associated with metastases and poor
survival in cancerpatients.[12],[14] MDSCs suppress T cell responses at the maternal–fetal interface[66] and they display aberrant function in autoimmune settings.[15] Further, MDSCs develop after organ transplants and may prolong graft survival.[7] In this regard, it may be worth studying in detail the effects of ATG in
models of transplantation, specifically examining its effects on MDSCs and how these
might alter transplant outcomes. Beyond transplantation, ATG may have also a role in
targeting MDSCs in cancer treatment. Since the mechanisms underlying ATG-induced
functional modulation are understudied, further investigations of its effects on
MDSC biology are needed to better understand its role in cancer, embryology,
autoimmunity and in transplantation.Click here for additional data file.Supplemental Material for Myeloid-derived suppressor cells are bound and
inhibited by anti-thymocyte globulin by Young Suk Lee, Eduardo Davila, Tianshu
Zhang, Hugh P Milmoe, Stefanie N Vogel, Jonathan S Bromberg and Joseph R Scalea
in Innate Immunity
Authors: Bo Huang; Ping-Ying Pan; Qingsheng Li; Alice I Sato; David E Levy; Jonathan Bromberg; Celia M Divino; Shu-Hsia Chen Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2006-01-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Rajkumar Savai; Alexander Claus Langheinrich; Ralph Theo Schermuly; Soni Savai Pullamsetti; Rio Dumitrascu; Horst Traupe; Wigbert Stephan Rau; Werner Seeger; Friedrich Grimminger; Gamal Andre Banat Journal: Neoplasia Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 5.715
Authors: Indu R Ramachandran; Thomas Condamine; Cindy Lin; Sarah E Herlihy; Alfred Garfall; Dan T Vogl; Dmitry I Gabrilovich; Yulia Nefedova Journal: Cancer Lett Date: 2015-11-27 Impact factor: 8.679
Authors: Tobias Roider; Michael Katzfuß; Carina Matos; Katrin Singer; Kathrin Renner; Peter J Oefner; Katja Dettmer-Wilde; Wolfgang Herr; Ernst Holler; Marina Kreutz; Katrin Peter Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2016-12-11 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Ina N Eckert; Eliana Ribechini; Katja J Jarick; Sandra Strozniak; Sarah J Potter; Andreas Beilhack; Manfred B Lutz Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2021-01-18 Impact factor: 7.561