| Literature DB >> 35565377 |
Tanja Groll1,2,3, Miguel Silva1, Rim Sabrina Jahan Sarker1,2, Markus Tschurtschenthaler4,5,6,7, Theresa Schnalzger6,8, Carolin Mogler1,2, Daniela Denk1,2,3, Sebastian Schölch9,10,11, Barbara U Schraml12,13, Jürgen Ruland5,6,8, Roland Rad4,5,6,14, Dieter Saur4,5,6,7, Wilko Weichert1,2,5, Moritz Jesinghaus1,15, Kaspar Matiasek3, Katja Steiger1,2.
Abstract
Mast cells (MCs) are crucial players in the relationship between the tumor microenvironment (TME) and cancer cells and have been shown to influence angiogenesis and progression of human colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the role of MCs in the TME is controversially discussed as either pro- or anti-tumorigenic. Genetically engineered mouse models (GEMMs) are the most frequently used in vivo models for human CRC research. In the murine intestine there are at least three different MC subtypes: interepithelial mucosal mast cells (ieMMCs), lamina proprial mucosal mast cells (lpMMCs) and connective tissue mast cells (CTMCs). Interepithelial mucosal mast cells (ieMMCs) in (pre-)neoplastic intestinal formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens of mouse models (total lesions n = 274) and human patients (n = 104) were immunohistochemically identified and semiquantitatively scored. Scores were analyzed along the adenoma-carcinoma sequence in humans and 12 GEMMs of small and large intestinal cancer. The presence of ieMMCs was a common finding in intestinal adenomas and carcinomas in mice and humans. The number of ieMMCs decreased in the course of colonic adenoma-carcinoma sequence in both species (p < 0.001). However, this dynamic cellular state was not observed for small intestinal murine tumors. Furthermore, ieMMC scores were higher in GEMMs with altered Wnt signaling (active β-catenin) than in GEMMs with altered MAPK signaling and wildtypes (WT). In conclusion, we hypothesize that, besides stromal MCs (lpMMCs/CTMCs), particularly the ieMMC subset is important for onset and progression of intestinal neoplasia and may interact with the adjacent neoplastic epithelial cells in dependence on the molecular environment. Moreover, our study indicates the need for adequate GEMMs for the investigation of the intestinal immunologic TME.Entities:
Keywords: adenoma-carcinoma sequence; colorectal cancer; genetically engineered mouse models; human; interepithelial mucosal mast cells; tumor microenvironment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35565377 PMCID: PMC9105816 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14092248
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.575
Semiquantitative evaluation of murine interepithelial mucosal mast cells (ieMMCs).
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 0 | No positive ieMMCs in the evaluated area |
| 1 | Positive staining of single ieMMCs (≤5/hpf 1) per hotspot 2 |
| 2 | Positive staining of few diffuse ieMMCs (≤10/hpf) per hotspot |
| 3 | Positive staining of some diffuse ieMMCs (≤20/hpf) per hotspot |
| 4 | Positive staining of many diffusely distributed or possibly clustered ieMMCs (≤30/hpf) per hotspot |
| 5 | Positive staining of many ieMMCs (>30/hpf) and dense clustering per hotspot |
1 high-power field (hpf; 40× field; Aperio ImageScope x64 v.12.4.0.7018); 2 one hotspot (= hpf with the highest MC density per tumor) was counted and scored; the number of positive ieMMCs was considered in two hotspots (one hotspot of tumor-adjacent normal tissue and one hotspot of the neoplastic area).
Semiquantitative evaluation of human ieMMCs.
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| 0 | No positive ieMMCs in ten × 20 fields 1 |
| 1 | Single positive (≤5) ieMMCs in ten × 20 fields |
| 2 | Few positive (≤10) ieMMCs in ten × 20 fields |
| 3 | Moderate number of positive (≤20) ieMMCs in ten × 20 fields |
| 4 | Many (≤30) ieMMCs in ten × 20 fields |
| 5 | Dense (>30) ieMMCs in ten × 20 fields |
1 Ten × 20 fields (Aperio ImageScope x64 v.12.4.0.7018) were randomly selected throughout the neoplastic and normal mucosal area and separately scored.
Figure 1Identification of interepithelial mucosal mast cells (ieMMCs; arrowheads) in murine (A–C) and human (D–F) intestine. (A) Immunohistochemical sequential double staining of basal lamina (collagen IV) and ieMMCs (MCPT1) clearly reveals interepithelial localization of murine ieMMCs; (B) PAS reaction and ieMMC IHC (MCPT1) confirms interepithelial location of MCPT1+ cells; (C) Prominent accumulation of small, round cells containing large, brightly eosinophilic granules located in intestinal hyperplastic epithelium of a hematoxylin-eosin (H.E.) section; (D) Immunohistochemical sequential double staining of basal lamina (collagen IV) and ieMMCs (MC-Chymase; MCC) clearly reveals interepithelial localization of human ieMMCs; (E) Serial sections of MCC and; (F) MC-Tryptase (MCT) immunohistochemistry (IHC) in a human intestinal adenoma.
Figure 2Analysis of ieMMCs in murine colon rolls. (A) Intestinal lesions were graded and annotated (red line) in an H.E. section; (B) Accordingly, a serial section of MCPT1 IHC was annotated; (C) Hotspots of MCPT1+ mast cells (MCs) were identified in neoplastic mucosa (black frame) and normal mucosa (green frame); (D) Mast cell numbers were counted in one 40× field (high-power field, hpf) of the respective hotspot. A semiquantitative score was applied (Figure S4) (Table 1); (E) In the adjacent normal mucosa, MC numbers were counted and scored accordingly.
Figure 3(A–C) In murine intestinal neoplasia (n = 274), MCPT1+ ieMMC were generally more abundant in the apical two thirds of the lesion (luminal site; arrowheads) compared to the basal, lower third of tumor tissue (submucosal site). The dotted line divides the different zones; (D–E) Generally, ieMMC scores were higher in the apical (D) than in the basal (E) areas of intestinal neoplastic lesions; (D) Kruskal–Wallis test (KWT) of ieMMC scores in the apical aspects of tumors during adenoma-carcinoma progression. Scores for ieMMC were higher in precursors (atypical hyperplasia and low- and high-grade adenomas) than in carcinomatous lesions (KWT *** p < 0.001); (E) KWT of ieMMC scores in the basal aspects of tumors during adenoma-carcinoma progression (KWT *** p < 0.001). * = extreme statistical outliers; ° = mild statistical outliers.
Reactivity for MC subtypes for each of the primary antibodies.
| Marker | ieMMC 1 (Mouse) | lpMMC 2 (Mouse) | ieMMC | ITSMC 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MCPT1 (mMCP-1) 4 | + | - | - | - |
| Anti-human MC-Chymase | n/a 6 | n/a | + | + |
| Anti-human MC-Tryptase | n/a | n/a | + | + |
| TPSAB1 (mMCP-6) 5 | + | + | + | + |
| Histamine | - | - | - | + |
| Granzyme B | + | + | n/a | n/a |
| CD117 (c-kit) | n/a | n/a | + | + |
A “+” sign indicates that the respective mast cell subtype expresses the marker and a “-” sign indicates that the subtype does not express the marker. 1 Interepithelial mucosal mast cell (ieMMC); 2 lamina proprial mucosal mast cell (lpMMC); 3 intratumoral stromal mast cell (ITSMC); 4 mast cell protease 1 (MCPT1); murine mast cell protease 1 (mMCP-1); 5 tryptase alpha-1 and beta-1 (TPSAB1); murine mast cell protease 6 (mMCP-6); 6 not available (n/a) as markers were not assessed in or not appropriate for the respective species (n/a).
(A) Interepithelial mucosal mast cell (ieMMC) counts (mean) in ten × 20 fields and scores (median) of human intratumoral intestinal mucosa (MCT, MCC, CD117). (B) Interepithelial mucosal mast cell (ieMMC) scores (median) of murine intratumoral and adjacent intestinal mucosa.
| ( | ||||
|
|
|
|
| |
| Low-grade adenoma | 17 | 14.35 ± 11.784 | 3 ± 2 | |
| High-grade adenoma | 12 | 4.17 ± 3.040 | 1 ± 1 | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 75 | 0.47 ± 1.605 | 0 ± 0 | |
| 104 | < 0.0001 | |||
|
|
|
|
| |
| Low-grade adenoma | 17 | 4 ± 4.287 | 1 ± 1 | |
| High-grade adenoma | 12 | 1.25 ± 2.137 | 0 ± 1 | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 75 | 0.16 ± 0.698 | 0 ± 0 | |
| 104 | < 0.0001 | |||
|
|
|
|
| |
| Low-grade adenoma | 17 | 3.29 ± 9.841 | 0 ± 1 | |
| High-grade adenoma | 12 | 0.67 ± 1.371 | 0 ± 1 | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 22 | 0.05 ± 0.213 | 0 ± 0 | |
| 51 | 0.019 | |||
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hyperplasia | 52 | 2 ± 3 | 42 | 1 ± 2 |
| Low-grade adenoma | 40 | 1 ± 2 | 34 | 1 ± 2 |
| High-grade adenoma | 122 | 2 ± 2.25 | 115 | 1 ± 2 |
| Adenocarcinoma | 60 | 1 ± 2 | 57 | 0 ± 1 |
| 274 | < 0.001 | 248 | < 0.001 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hyperplasia | 52 | 2 ± 3 | 49 | 0 ± 0 |
| Low-grade adenoma | 40 | 2 ± 2.75 | 40 | 0 ± 0 |
| High-grade adenoma | 121 | 2 ± 3 | 121 | 0 ± 1 |
| Adenocarcinoma | 58 | 1 ± 2 | 58 | 0 ± 1 |
| 271 | < 0.001 | 268 | 0.69 | |
1 Standard deviation (SD); 2 mast cell tryptase (MCT); 3 interquartile range (IQR); 4 Kruskal–Wallis test (KWT), p < 0.05 statistically significant. 4 mast cell chymase (MCC). 5 In mice, the hotspot with the highest ieMMC score throughout the whole tumor was considered to be representative; ieMMCs positive for 6 mast cell protease 1 (MCPT1); 7 mast cell protease 6 (MCPT6).
Figure 4(A–I) In the context of human adenoma-carcinoma progression (A–C), ieMMCs (arrowheads) positive for MCT (D–F) and MCC (G–I) decreased from low-grade (LG) to high-grade (HG) adenoma and adenocarcinoma (ACA) (serial sections); (J,K) Generally, median scores for ieMMCs in adenomas were higher for MCT (KWT, pairwise comparison of ACA-LG **** p < 0.0001; ACA-HG **** p < 0.0001) (J); than for MCC (KWT, pairwise comparison of LG-HG * p = 0.022; HG-ACA *p = 0.017; LG-ACA **** p < 0.0001) (K). * = extreme statistical outliers; ° = mild statistical outliers.
Figure 5(A–D) Interepithelial mucosal mast cell (ieMMC) (arrowheads) in normal vs. neoplastic colonic mucosa of murine (A,C) and human (B,D) intestine; (E) Generally, scores of ieMMCs were higher in (pre-)neoplastic lesions of mice (Mann-Whitney U test (MWU), **** p = 0.000); (F) Contradictory, human ieMMC scores were higher in normal adjacent tissue (MWU, *** p < 0.001); (G) IeMMCs in the adjacent normal mucosa of mice increased in the course of adenoma-carcinoma progression (KWT, p = 0.690, not significant (ns)); (H) In humans, density of ieMMCs in adjacent normal mucosa decreased from LG adenoma to carcinoma to HG adenoma (KWT, * p = 0.047). * = extreme statistical outliers; ° = mild statistical outliers.
Figure 6(A–D) In the context of murine adenoma-carcinoma progression (A) ieMMC scores generally decreased from low-grade adenoma to carcinoma (KWT, pairwise comparisons, * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; **** p < 0.0001; not significant (ns) p > 0.05). IeMMCs were identifiable using MCPT1 (B), MCPT6 (C), and granzyme B (D) IHC; (E) Higher ieMMC scores were connected to a higher proliferation in terms of % Ki-67+ tumor cells in a neoplastic lesion (n = 271) (KWT, *** p < 0.001). * = extreme statistical outliers; ° = mild statistical outliers.
Figure 7(A,B) Scores for ieMMCs over all tumor grades were compared according to genotype groups (KWT, **** p < 0.0001). For details on the pseudonymized genetically engineered mouse groups, please refer to Supplementary Table S1 (A); additionally, group comparison according to mode of tumor induction was performed (KWT, p < 0.0001) (B). (A) Scores assessed in lesions of Braf mice (BRAF) (n = 20; median score 0.5) were generally low, while scores were highest in lesions of the Catnb model (βCAT) (n = 26; median score 3.5); (B) Scores in Adeno-Cre-induced tumors were lower than in AOM-DSS-induced (KWT, pairwise comparison **** p < 0.0001) and in endogenous models’ scores (KWT, pairwise comparison **** p < 0.0001). There was no statistically significant effect between AOM-DSS and endogenous models (p = 0.636; not significant (ns)). * = extreme statistical outliers; ° = mild statistical outliers.
Figure 8(A) Scores for ieMMCs were generally lower in murine colonic tumors (n = 162) than in murine small intestinal tumors (n = 112) (KWT, *** p < 0.001); (B) Scores for ieMMCs decreased from atypical hyperplasia to carcinoma in the colon (KWT, *** p < 0.001); (C) However, in the small intestine scores for ieMMCs did not decrease from precursors to invasive neoplasia (KWT, p = 0.222, not significant (ns)). ° = mild statistical outliers.