| Literature DB >> 32325674 |
Luana Greco1, Valentina Russo1, Cinzia Rapino2, Clara Di Germanio3, Filomena Fezza4, Nicola Bernabò1, Paolo Berardinelli1, Alessia Peserico1, Domenico Fazio5, Mauro Maccarrone5,6, Mauro Mattioli1, Barbara Barboni1.
Abstract
Amniotic epithelial cells (AEC) have been proposed as promising clinical candidates for regenerative medicine therapies due to their immunomodulatory capacity. In this context, the <span class="Chemical">endocannabinoid system (ECS) has been identified as mediating the immune-stem cell dialogue, even if no information on AEC is available to date. Therefore, this study was designed to assess whether ECS is involved in tuning the constitutive and <span class="Chemical">lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced ovine AEC anti-inflammatory and pro-inflammatory interleukin (IL-10, IL-4, and IL-12) profiles. Firstly, interleukins and ECS expressions were studied at different stages of gestation. Then, the role of cannabinoid receptors 1 and 2 (CB1 and CB2) on interleukin expression and release was investigated in middle stage AEC using selective agonists and antagonists. AEC displayed a degradative more than a synthetic endocannabinoid metabolism during the early and middle stages of gestation. At the middle stage, cannabinoid receptors mediated the balance between pro-inflammatory (IL-12) and anti-inflammatory (IL-4 and IL-10) interleukins. The activation of both receptors mediated an overall pro-inflammatory shift-CB1 reduced the anti-inflammatory and CB2 increased the pro-inflammatory interleukin release, particularly after LPS stimulation. Altogether, these data pave the way for the comprehension of AEC mechanisms tuning immune-modulation, crucial for the development of new AEC-based therapy protocols.Entities:
Keywords: amniotic epithelial cells; cannabinoid receptors; immunomodulation
Year: 2020 PMID: 32325674 PMCID: PMC7226065 DOI: 10.3390/cells9041008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cells ISSN: 2073-4409 Impact factor: 6.600
Primer sequences used for real-time qPCR.
| Sheep Gene | Forward (5′→3′) | Reverse (5′→3′) |
|---|---|---|
|
| CTGTCTTGGGGCCTTGGAAC | GGCTCTAAATAATGCTCACTTGC |
|
| CCTTGGGAGCAGAGGTTTCA | AGAGACTTGAGGTTGCTGGC |
|
| TGCTGAGCGAGGATGCTATG | CAAGTCACTGGGGTGAGTCC |
|
| CACCGAGGTAGTCACCCACT | CTGATCACCTCCGACCAAGT |
|
| GAAGCGACGTTCACAGGAGA | GCAGCAGTCCTGGAAGATCC |
|
| TGACCATGTCTGTGTCCACG | AGACGCTTCTGGGTTTCGAG |
|
| CATCGACCGCTACCTCTGTC | AGGTAGGACACCAATGCAGC |
|
| AACCAAGCCCCACAGCTTC | GGACAGCTGCCTGACACAC |
|
| AAGCCCTCAGCTAAGCTCAAGTC | AGGCATCACAGGCTCAAGTC |
|
| CCAGGATGGTGACTCGACTAG | TGGCTCTGCTCTCCCAGAAC |
|
| TCAAACCAGACCCACCCAAG | CACAGATGCCCATTCACTCC |
|
| TCGGAGTGAACGGATTTGGC | CCGTTCTCTGCCTTGACTGT |
Figure 1Endocannabinoid system (ECS) gene expression modulation in amniotic epithelial cells (AEC) collected at different stages of gestation. Real-time qPCR gene expression analyses of enzymes involved in the anandamide (AEA) and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG). (A) Synthesis (N-acylphosphatidyl ethanolamine (NAPE)-specific phospholipase D (NAPE-PLD), diacylglycerol-lipases α and β (DAGLα/β), (B) degradation (fatty acid amide hydrolase, FAAH), monoacylglycerol lipase (MAGL)), and (C) receptors (cannabinoid receptor (CB)1, CB2, transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 (TRPV1)). Each analysis was performed using AEC isolated at different stages of fetal development. Relative quantification was performed using the ΔΔCt method. GAPDH was used as housekeeping gene quantification. Data are the mean ± SD obtained from at least n = 3 independent experiments performed using two different fetuses (a middle vs. early; b late vs. early; c middle vs. late).
Figure 2CB binding affinity in AEC in early, middle, and late stages of gestation. The binding activity assay was performed on intact cells at different CP55,940 concentrations (0.5, 1, and 2.5 nM) and gestational stages (early, middle, and late). Data are the mean ± SD obtained from n = 3 independent experiments performed using three fetuses for each gestational stage (in each gestational stage * 1 vs. 0.5; § 2.5 vs. 0.5).
Figure 3Anti-inflammatory and pro-inflammatory interleukin expression profile modulation during gestation in AEC. Constitutive (white bars) and lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced (grey bars) interleukin (IL)-10, IL-4, and IL-12 mRNA expressions were studied in AEC isolated at different stages of gestation. Relative quantification was performed using the ΔΔCt method. GAPDH was used as housekeeping gene quantification. The data are mean ± SD of three replicates (n = 3 experimental replicates) performed in AEC collected from at least two fetuses/gestation stages (n = 2 biological replicates). Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t-tail test. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. ( LPS vs. constitutive (CTR); a middle vs. early; b late vs. early; c middle vs. late).
Figure 4CB controlled both constitutive and LPS-activated interleukin expression in the middle stage of gestation. Comparison between mRNA profiles of key anti-inflammatory (IL-4 and IL-10) and pro-inflammatory interleukin (IL-12) recorded in middle stage AEC after 24 h of culture in the absence (constitutive) or presence of LPS stimulus (LPS-induced). Gene profiles were assessed by exposing the cells to 1 μM of selective CB1 or CB2 agonists (ACEA or JWH-015, respectively) or antagonists (AM281 or SR144282, respectively). Relative quantification was performed using the ΔΔCt method. GAPDH was used as housekeeping gene quantification. The data are mean ± SD of three independent replicates (n = 3 experimental replicates) performed using two different fetuses at middle stage of gestation (n = 2 biological replicates). Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t-tail test. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant (# values significantly different from CTR; a value statistically different between agonist and antagonist treatments).
Figure 5Constitutive and LPS-induced interleukin releasing response in the middle stage of gestation was under CB1 and CB2 modulation. Comparison between protein profiles of anti-inflammatory (IL-4 and IL-10) and pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-12) measured in conditioned media (CM), collected from the middle stage of AEC incubated for 24 h in absence (A) constitutive release) or in the presence of LPS stimulus (B) LPS-induced release). Protein profiles were ELISA-assessed by exposing the cells to the selective CB1 or CB2 agonist (ACEA or JWH-015, respectively; 1 μM) and antagonist (AM281 or SR144282, respectively; 1 μM). The data reported are the mean ± SD obtained from at least n = 3 independent experiments (n = 3 experimental replicates) performed using two different fetuses at middle stage gestation (n = 2 biological replicates). Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t-tail test. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant (# indicates values significantly different from CTR; a indicates values significantly different between agonist and antagonist treatments).
Figure 6CB2 activation modulated the immune activity of AEC in both constitutive and LPS-induced conditions by triggering a pro-inflammatory releasing profile of interleukins in the middle stage of gestation. The histograms show the ratios between IL-12 and both the anti-inflammatory cytokine (IL-4 or IL-10) levels in the CM under constitutive and LPS-induced conditions, in the presence or absence of 1 μM CB1 or CB2 agonists (ACEA or JWH-015, respectively). The background color gradient indicates the AEC immune activity pattern—red and green colors for the pro-inflammatory (ratios > 1) and anti-inflammatory (ratios < 1) profiles, respectively.
Figure 7ECS-dependent interleukin release in AEC under constitutive and LPS-induced conditions. The picture summarizes the modulatory effect of ECS on pro- and anti-inflammatory interleukin expression and releasing profiles in the middle stage of gestation. The modulation of interleukin gene expression is indicated by means of different acid nucleic sizes. Changes in quantity of released/secreted interleukin proteins is indicated by different arrow sizes (upregulation and downregulation). (A) CB1 activation by agonist ACEA; (B) CB2 activation by agonist JWH-015 in the constitutive (blue panel) and LPS-induced (pink panel) conditions.