L Klein1, T Klein, U Rüther, B Kyewski. 1. Tumor Immunology Program, Divison of Cellular Immunology, German Cancer Research Center, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
Inducible serum proteins whose concentrations oscillate between nontolerogenic and tolerogenic levels pose a particular challenge to the maintenance of self-tolerance. Temporal restrictions of intrathymic antigen supply should prevent continuous central tolerization of T cells, in analogy to the spatial limitation imposed by tissue-restricted antigen expression. Major acute-phase proteins such as human C-reactive protein (hCRP) are typical examples for such inducible self-antigens. The circulating concentration of hCRP, which is secreted by hepatocytes, is induced up to 1,000-fold during an acute-phase reaction. We have analyzed tolerance to hCRP expressed in transgenic mice under its autologous regulatory regions. Physiological regulation of basal levels (<10(-9) M) and inducibility (>500-fold) are preserved in female transgenics, whereas male transgenics constitutively display induced levels. Surprisingly, crossing of hCRP transgenic mice to two lines of T cell receptor transgenic mice (specific for either a dominant or a subdominant epitope) showed that tolerance is mediated by intrathymic deletion of immature thymocytes, irrespective of widely differing serum levels. In the absence of induction, hCRP expressed by thymic medullary epithelial cells rather than liver-derived hCRP is necessary and sufficient to induce tolerance. Importantly, medullary epithelial cells also express two homologous mouse acute-phase proteins. These results support a physiological role of "ectopic" thymic expression in tolerance induction to acute-phase proteins and possibly other inducible self-antigens and have implications for delineating the relative contributions of central versus peripheral tolerance.
Inducible serum proteins whose concentrations oscillate between nontolerogenic and tolerogenic levels pose a particular challenge to the maintenance of self-tolerance. Temporal restrictions of intrathymic antigen supply should prevent continuous central tolerization of T cells, in analogy to the spatial limitation imposed by tissue-restricted antigen expression. Major acute-phase proteins such as humanC-reactive protein (hCRP) are typical examples for such inducible self-antigens. The circulating concentration of hCRP, which is secreted by hepatocytes, is induced up to 1,000-fold during an acute-phase reaction. We have analyzed tolerance to hCRP expressed in transgenic mice under its autologous regulatory regions. Physiological regulation of basal levels (<10(-9) M) and inducibility (>500-fold) are preserved in female transgenics, whereas male transgenics constitutively display induced levels. Surprisingly, crossing of hCRPtransgenic mice to two lines of T cell receptor transgenic mice (specific for either a dominant or a subdominant epitope) showed that tolerance is mediated by intrathymic deletion of immature thymocytes, irrespective of widely differing serum levels. In the absence of induction, hCRP expressed by thymic medullary epithelial cells rather than liver-derived hCRP is necessary and sufficient to induce tolerance. Importantly, medullary epithelial cells also express two homologous mouse acute-phase proteins. These results support a physiological role of "ectopic" thymic expression in tolerance induction to acute-phase proteins and possibly other inducible self-antigens and have implications for delineating the relative contributions of central versus peripheral tolerance.
Tolerance to self is a fundamental property of the immune system. Several mechanisms, including physical
elimination (clonal deletion), receptor downregulation, and
functional inactivation (clonal anergy), acting both on immature and mature T lymphocytes, have been shown to
contribute to tolerance induction in T cells. The individual
contribution of each single mechanism to the complex
phenomenon of T cell tolerance is difficult to assess. Negative selection of developing T cells apparently constitutes
the major mechanism of T cell tolerance. It is estimated
that about one half of all positively selectable T cells are removed from the repertoire due to negative selection (1).
This process requires constant presentation of a given self-antigen on MHC molecules of thymic APCs, and thus can
operate only for those antigens that either are expressed intrathymically (2) or are transported from the tissue of origin
into the thymus (3, 4). In addition to central tolerance, peripheral tolerance has been implicated in the case of “tissue-restricted” self-antigens that are neither expressed nor
cross-presented in the thymus. A number of model systems
have been designed, in most cases with mice expressing an
MHC class I–restricted T cell receptor transgene and a tissue-restricted neo–self-antigen, in which distinct mechanisms of peripheral tolerance induction have been described (5–8).At face value, the prerequisites for tolerance induction to
MHC class II–restricted soluble proteins should be less
complex. Expression of MHC class II molecules is restricted to professional APCs and thymic epithelium, and as
a rule presentation of epitopes on MHC class II requires internalization of a given antigen from the extracellular space.
For CD4 T cells, tolerance should be determined primarily
by the concentration of the circulating protein rather than
the cell type of origin. Constitutively secreted self-antigens
equilibrate between the vascular and interstitial compartments of lymphoid organs and will be presented by peripheral, as well as thymic, MHC class II–positive APCs (9).
Epitopes that are presented above a critical density within
the thymus will thus purge the developing T cell repertoire
of high avidity self-reactive T cells, whereas epitopes presented below a certain threshold will be ignored both in
the thymus and periphery, and thus T cells expressing such
TCRs should not pose a danger to self-tolerance (4, 8). An
additional safeguard in this delicate balance is provided by
the higher sensitivity of central tolerance induction in immature thymocytes versus activation of mature T cells in
the periphery (10).The above considerations apply to MHC class II–restricted
epitopes of proteins that are produced constitutively at constant levels either in the thymus or the periphery. However,
in the case of inducibly secreted proteins with serum levels
that can vary over a wide range, blood-borne antigen may
not be sufficient to ensure tolerance imposition on the developing T cell repertoire. Under such circumstances, temporal limitations of intrathymic antigen supply should prevent continuous central tolerization of CD4 T cells, in
analogy to the spatial limitations imposed by tissue-restricted
antigen expression that prevent central tolerization of specific CD8 T cells. Acute-phase proteins (APPs)1 are a prototypic example of such inducible self-antigens. APPs are a
class of liver-derived serum proteins with circulating concentrations that rapidly oscillate between trace amounts in
healthy individuals and up to 1,000-fold increased levels in
the course of induction under pathological conditions (11).Several particular features would predict strong immunogenicity of APPs upon induction: (a) the presence of
very high serum levels (up to 2 mg/ml); (b) as part of the
innate immune response, APPs accumulate at the site of infection and antigen processing; and (c) the uptake of APPs
by professional APCs may be facilitated by specific surface
receptors (12, 13). How is tolerance maintained under such
conditions? To address this issue, we have studied transgenic mice expressing humanC-reactive protein (hCRP),
the major human APP, under control of all known autologous regulatory cis-acting elements (14, 15). The physiological regulation of hCRP is preserved in female transgenic mice, with basal levels of <10−9 M, which upon
experimental elicitation of an acute phase rise up to 500-fold within a few hours (16). Due to hormonal influences,
basal levels in male hCRPtransgenic mice are elevated (5 ×
10−7 M, which incidentally equals the concentration in induced females) and can be induced 20-fold (17). To date,
few data exist on the concentration range required for induction of intrathymic deletion of CD4 T cells specific for
blood-borne antigens. CD4 T cells specific for the constitutive serum component C5 are deleted at a physiological
concentration of 10−7 M (4). Clonal deletion of thymocytes specific for an immunoglobulin idiotype required
experimentally induced serum levels of >10−6 M (18). In
another model, Ig allotype–specific CD4 T cells were not
deleted at serum concentrations of ∼10−8 M (19). Extrapolating from these observations, basal serum levels of hCRP
in female mice might thus lie below the threshold requirements for central tolerance (notwithstanding parameters
such as efficiency of antigen uptake, processing, and presentation, and TCR affinity). In contrast, hCRP levels observed in female mice after induction may surpass this tolerance threshold and may even be sufficient to activate
peripheral T cells. We previously reported the intriguing
observation that female as well as male transgenic mice, despite widely differing basal serum concentrations, are
equally tolerant to a dominant T cell epitope of hCRP, but
reactive to a subdominant epitope (16). In this study we
have addressed the mechanism of CD4 T cell tolerance at
the clonal level by crossing hCRPtransgenic animals to
two strains of mice expressing transgenicTCRs specific for
either the dominant or the subdominant epitope of hCRP.
T cells of both specificities are deleted early in the thymus
of double transgenic animals. We show that ectopic expression of hCRP by medullary epithelial cells ensures central
tolerance irrespective of fluctuating serum levels.
Materials and Methods
Animals.
C57BL/6 and transgenic mice were kept under specific pathogen–free conditions in the animal facilities of the German Cancer Research Center (Heidelberg, Germany). TCR and
hCRPtransgenic mice were bred as heterozygotes.
Generation of TCR Transgenic Mice.
To generate TCRtransgenic mice, rearranged V(D)J regions of TCRs from the hCRP-specific T cell clones T1CRP6 and T3CRP2 were cloned into
the cassette vectors pTαcass and pTβcass (20; provided by D.
Mathis and C. Benoist, I.G.B.M.C., Strasbourg, France). Both
CD4 T cell clones were derived from a C57BL/6 mouse immunized with hCRP. The TCR from clone T1CRP6 (dominant
epitope [Dep] TCR) recognizes the immunodominant epitope
(amino acid 89–101) of hCRP and the TCR from clone
T3CRP2 (subdominant [Sep] TCR) recognizes the subdominant
epitope (amino acid 80–94) of hCRP, both in the context of
MHC class II I-Ab (21).The variable region of the Dep TCR contains rearranged
Vα11.2/Jα26 and Vβ5.1/D/Jβ1.6 elements. The rearranged regions were amplified by PCR from genomic DNA of the T cell
clone T1CRP6 using the oligonucleotides 5′-GAG GAT CCC
GGG GAT TGG ACA GGG GCC-3′ (sense) and 5′-CAG
GCG GCC GCA TTG TTC AAA ATA C-3′ (antisense) for the
α chain, and 5′-ATC GAC TCG AGA GGA AGC ATG TCT
AAC-3′ (sense) and 5′-CCA AGA CCG CGG TCA TCC AAC
ACA G-3′ (antisense) for the β chain. Both PCR fragments were
digested with appropriate restriction enzymes (α chain: PspAI/
NotI; β chain: XhoI/SstII) and cloned into pBluescript SK+
(Stratagene, Heidelberg, Germany). After verification of the correct sequence, the fragments were subcloned into the cassette
vectors pTαcass and pTβcass resulting in constructs termed
pTαT1CRP6 and pTβT1CRP6.The variable regions of the SepTCR are encoded by Vα4/
Jα17 and Vβ8.3./D/Jβ1.6 elements. The following oligonucleotides were used to amplify these rearrangements: 5′-GAG GAC
CCG GGA ATA CCA CTC TGA AC-3′ (sense) and 5′-TCA
TCC GCG GCC GCC AAA ATA ACC CAC ACA C-3′ (antisense) for the α chain, and 5′-GCA TAC TCG AGT CGC GAG
ATG GGC TCC-3′ (sense) and 5′-CCA AGA CCG CGG TCA
TCC AAC ACA G-3′ (antisense) for the β chain. The amplification products were cloned into pSK+ and then into the respective TCR expression cassettes as described above, yielding the
vectors pTαT3CRP2 and pTβT3CRP2.The constructs were functionally tested in vitro after electroporation into the TCR-negative T cell hybridoma BW58 (see
reference 22). Recognition of the specific peptide–MHC complex by the transfected TCR was assessed by IL-2 production
upon stimulation with BL/6 splenocytes and the respective peptide.Before microinjection, the pTαcass and the pTβcass vectors
were digested with SalI and KpnI, respectively, to remove
prokaryotic regions. The corresponding α and β chain constructs
were coinjected into (C57BL/6 × C3H)F2 zygotes. Transgenic
founders were backcrossed to C57BL/6 for at least 5 generations.
The resulting mouse lines were termed SepTCR-tg and Dep
TCR-tg according to expression of a TCR specific either for the
subdominant or dominant epitope of hCRP.
Thymus Organ Culture.
Fetal thymic lobes were removed
from embryos on day 14 of gestation (E14) and cultured on polycarbonate filters (Costar, Bodenheim, Germany) supported by
sponges (Upjohn, Erlangen, Germany) in 12-well plates containing 2 ml cell culture medium (Iscove's medium, 10% FCS). Cultures were kept in a humidified chamber at 37°C and 7% CO2 for
8 d before analysis.
Thymus Transplantation and Bone Marrow Reconstitution.
Fetal thymic lobes (E15) were cultured in vitro (as described above) for
24 h to allow for genotyping of the donor embryos for the hCRP
transgene by slot blot. Two to four irradiated (5 Gy) lobes were
implanted under the kidney capsule of thymectomized host animals. 4 wk later, recipients were lethally irradiated (9.5 Gy) and
reconstituted with T cell–depleted Dep-tg bone marrow (5 × 106
cells/animal). Immunization or phenotype analysis of grafted animals was carried out after another 6–8 wk.
Immunization and T Cell Proliferation Assays.
Immunizations were
performed as previously described (16). In brief, mice were immunized in the foot pads of the hind legs with 100 μg of peptide
emulsified in CFA (PBS/CFA vol/vol 1:1). 8–9 d later, popliteal
and inguinal lymph nodes were removed. Cells were cultured for
72 h in triplicates at 4 × 105 cells/well in flat-bottomed 96-well
plates in serum-free medium (HL-1; Boehringer Ingelheim, Ingelheim, Germany) in the presence or absence of peptide. Proliferation was measured by incorporation of [3H]Tdr, which was
added for the last 12 h of culture (1 μCi/well).
Flow Cytometric Analysis.
Lymphocytes were stained with
the following antibodies in various combinations according
to standard procedures: FITC-coupled anti-Vβ5.1 (MR9-4; PharMingen, San Diego, CA); RR8-1 (reference 23); FITC-coupled
anti-Vβ8.3 (1B3.3; PharMingen); FITC-coupled anti-pan TCR-β
(H57-579; reference 24); Red-613– or biotin-coupled H129.19
(anti-CD4; Gibco-BRL, Eggenstein, Germany); and Red-613–
or PE-coupled anti-CD8 (53-6.7; Gibco-BRL). mAb anti-Vα11
was detected with an anti–rat F(ab)2 fragment coupled to PE
(Tagoimmunologicals, Biosource, Fleuris, Belgium). Biotinylated
antibodies were detected using Red-670–coupled streptavidin
(Gibco-BRL) or Cy5 (Dianova, Hamburg, Germany). Three-color fluorescence was analyzed on a FACScan® (Becton Dickinson, Heidelberg, Germany) and four-color fluorescence on a
FACSvantage® (Becton Dickinson). Data were collected from viable lymphocytes by appropriate forward and side scatter gating.
Data analysis was performed with Cellquest software (Becton
Dickinson).
Enrichment of Thymic Stromal Cells.
Thymi of young adult
mice were finely minced and then slowly stirred in medium for 5
min at room temperature to release the bulk of free thymocytes.
The tissue fragments were subsequently slowly stirred in a collagenase/dispase mixture (25) for two rounds of 20 min at 37°C.
Tissue fragments remaining after the second round were vigorously pipetted to further facilitate release of epithelial cells. Both
collagenase/dispase fractions were pooled, washed, and filtered
for further cell enrichment. The majority of thymocytes was removed by depletion of CD4-positive cells using mAb GK1.5 (26)
and sheep anti–rat IgG magnetic beads (Dynal, Oslo, Norway).
Subsequently, Fc receptors were blocked by a brief incubation
with Ab 2.4G2. Isolation of stromal cells from this CD4-depleted
cell suspension was performed in two ways. Three successive
rounds of positive selection by magnetic beads (Miltenyi Biotec
GmbH, Bergisch Gladbach, Germany) were applied using a modification of a previously described protocol (27). First, macrophages and dendritic cells (DCs) were enriched using Abs F4/80
(28) and N418 (29); second, cortical epithelial cells were enriched
using Ab CDR1 (30); and third, medullary epithelial cells were
enriched using Ab G8.8 (31). Alternatively, CD4-depleted cells
were divided into three aliquots and each was subjected to a single step of positive selection by magnetic beads using the same
surface markers. The second protocol routinely yielded higher
cell numbers. Hemopoietic cells were separately enriched before
complement lysis using an anti-CD45 Ab (T-200; reference 32).
All Abs except for anti-CD45 were biotinylated and streptavidin
beads or goat anti–rat beads were used as second step reagents.
MiniMACS separation columns (type MS) were used for positive
selection according to the manufacturer's manual. The purity of
cortical and medullary epithelial cells was assessed by costaining of
cytospins for cytokeratin, using mAb Lu-5 (Boehringer Mannheim,
Mannheim, Germany) detected by anti–mouseIgG1-FITC (Dianova) and an independent marker for medullary epithelial cells
TR-5 (33), coupled to Cy3 (Amersham, Braunschweig, Germany). In the G8.8-selected fraction, >90% of keratin-positive
cells coexpressed TR-5.
Reverse Transcriptase PCR Analysis of Acute-phase Gene Expression.
RNA was isolated from tissues using TRIZOL (Gibco-BRL) followed by DNase treatment to remove genomic DNA or from
single cell suspensions using the High Pure RNA Isolation Kit
(Boehringer Mannheim). 2 μg of total RNA were reversely transcribed into cDNA using Superscript II Reverse Transcriptase
(Gibco-BRL). PCR analyses were performed using 1/10 of this
reaction. The following oligonucleotides were used: for hCRP:
hCRP 2 (sense) 5′-CCA TGG AGA AGC TGT TGT G-3′ (−2
to +16), hCRP 3 (antisense) 5′-CTG TGA CTT CAG GAA
CCT C-3′ (306 to 324), and hCRP 1 (antisense) 5′-CAA ATG
TGT ACT GGA GCT AC-3′ (324 to 344); for mouseC-reactive protein: mCRP 1 (sense) 5′-CCA TGG AGA AGC TAC
TCT G-3′ (−2 to +17), mCRP 2 (antisense) 5′-GTG TAG
CCC TTG TGC AG (418 to 434) and mCRP 3 (antisense) 5′-CCC AAG ATG ATG CTT GC-3′ (448 to 464); for mouseserum amyloid P component (mSAP): mSAP 1 (sense) 5′-CAA
GCA TGG ACA AGC TG-3′ (-5 to 12), mSAP 2 (antisense) 5′-CCC AAG TGG TAC ATA GG-3′ (338 to 355), and mSAP 3
(antisense) 5′-CAA CAA TGC CAG AGG AG-3′ (360 to 376).
Figures given in brackets refer to the position of the primers relative to the translation start site. The positions of all sense and respective antisense primers are located in different exons, so that
PCR products originating from contaminating genomic DNA
could be excluded. Efficiency of cDNA synthesis was controlled
using the β-actin–specific oligonucleotides 5′-TGG AAT CCT
GTG GCA TCC ATG AAA C-3′ (sense) and 5′-TAA AACC
GCA GCT CAG TAA CAG TCC G-3′ (antisense) under nonsaturating conditions (<24 cycles).A first round of PCR was performed using the primer pairs
hCRP 1/2, mCRP 1/3, or mSAP 1/3. PCR conditions were
94°C for 3 min, 30 cycles of 94°C for 1 min, 54°C for 1 min,
72°C for 1 min, and a final elongation step of 72°C for 5 min. For
nested reamplification of 1/20 of the PCR products, the primer
combinations hCRP 2/3, mCRP 1/2, or mSAP 1/2 were used.
The number of PCR cycles in the reamplification was adjusted to
a minimum to ensure nonsaturating conditions in order to allow
for semiquantitative estimates of RNA expression. All PCR reactions were carried out in a volume of 50 μl, using 1 U of Taq
Polymerase (MBI Fermentas, Vilnius, Lithuania). Amplification
products (15 μl) were analyzed on 1.5% agarose gels.
Results
Transgenic Expression of α/β-TCRs Recognizing Two
Epitopes of hCRP: Development and Selection.
CD4 T cells
of C57BL/6 mice respond against two epitopes of hCRP
when immunized with complete protein or peptides corresponding to either epitope (16, 21). Transgenic mice expressing hCRP as a neo–self-antigen under control of its
autologous regulatory elements are tolerant to the immunodominant and reactive to the subdominant epitope of
hCRP. Responsiveness to the subdominant epitope is only
revealed by peptide but not by protein immunization. This
differential tolerance is independent of basal serum levels
that can vary by three orders of magnitude. To address the
underlying tolerance mechanisms at the clonal level, we
generated two strains of TCRtransgenic mice.The transgenic line termed Dep expresses a TCR that is
specific for the dominant epitope of hCRP-spanning residues 89–101 and encodes a Vα11 and a Vβ5.1 region. Expression and selection of the Dep TCR during development was followed by costaining for the transgenic Vα and
Vβ chains. Selection of double positive (DP) thymocytes
into the CD4 lineage in H-2b mice is highly efficient with
>90% of CD4 single positive (SP) thymocytes expressing
the Dep TCR and a ratio of CD4/CD8 SP thymocytes of
at least 8:1 (Fig. 1). Selection of the Dep TCR is lost in
mice expressing a reduced diversity of self-peptides, i.e., invariant chaino/o mice (34), EpAbIio/o transgenic mice (reference 35 and our unpublished data), and H-2Mao/o mice
(36). The surface density of the Dep TCR is fivefold increased on DP thymocytes when compared with wild-type
levels, but does not exceed physiological levels on mature
SP thymocytes, as judged by expression of CD3ε (data not
shown). The efficient positive selection is also reflected in
the periphery with a CD4/CD8 ratio of 10:1 and ∼85% of
peripheral CD4 T cells expressing both transgenicTCR
chains at high levels. These cells are activated in vivo upon
intravenous injection of peptide hCRP 89–101, as reflected
by their phenotype 24 h thereafter (CD69+, HSAhi, CD62Llo;
data not shown).
Figure 1
Positive and negative selection of CD4 thymocytes specific
for the dominant epitope of hCRP. Thymocytes of BL/6, TCR single
transgenic Dep, and Dep × hCRP female mice were stained for coexpression of CD4 and CD8 (a) and the transgenic TCR chains Vα11 and
Vβ5.1 (b), and were analyzed by four-color fluorescence. Note the efficient positive selection of TCR transgenic CD4 T cells in single transgenic mice and their deletion at the DP stage in noninduced Dep ×
hCRP mice. The total number of thymocytes (mean ± SD of at least
three animals) and the percentages of subsets per quadrant are indicated.
Male mice displayed an identical phenotype. Fluorescence intensity is
shown on a four-decade logarithmic scale. 6–10-wk-old mice were analyzed.
The second TCRtransgenic line, termed Sep, expresses
a TCR that is specific for the subdominant epitope of
hCRP-spanning residues 80–94 and encodes a Vα4 and a
Vβ8.3 region. Based on the analysis of the Vβ8.3 epitope,
the SepTCR shows a similar expression pattern as the Dep
TCR, i.e., early expression on double negative (DN) thymocytes, a physiological density of CD3 complexes on SP
thymocytes, and a strong CD4 skewing among SP thymocytes and peripheral T cells (Fig. 2). How is the developmental fate and immunocompetence of hCRP-specific
T cells influenced by various levels of this APP depending
on gender or induction status?
Figure 2
Positive and negative selection of CD4 thymocytes specific
for the subdominant epitope of hCRP. Thymocytes of BL/6, TCR single
transgenic Sep, and Sep × hCRP female mice were stained for coexpression of the transgenic TCR chain Vβ8.3, CD4, and CD8, and were analyzed by three-color fluorescence. CD4 versus CD8 expression (a) and
Vβ8.3 expression gated on the CD4 SP subset (b) are shown. Note the
strong bias towards CD4 SP T cells in TCR single transgenic mice and its
reversion in noninduced Sep × hCRP mice. The total number of thymocytes (mean ± SD of at least three animals) and the percentages of subsets per quadrant are indicated. Male mice displayed an identical phenotype. 6–10-wk-old mice were analyzed.
Early Negative Selection of hCRP-specific Thymocytes in
TCR × hCRP Mice: Tolerance Is Epitope-dependent, but Independent of hCRP Serum Levels.
Surprisingly, in both male
and female Dep × hCRPmice the size of the thymus was
at least 10-fold reduced despite widely differing basal serum
levels. This correlated with a relative and absolute reduction of DP and CD4 SP thymocytes. Among the remaining
DP and CD4 SP cells the frequency of Dep TCR-positive
cells was markedly reduced, and thymocytes expressing the
Dep TCR at high levels (TCRhi) were completely missing
(Fig. 1). T cells expressing the Dep TCR were rare in the
periphery (<3%; data not shown). This pattern was already
apparent in newborn mice (data not shown). Thus, deletion of hCRP-reactive thymocytes specific for the dominant epitope starts early during ontogeny and at an early
stage of their intrathymic development, namely the DP
stage. Likewise, several observations indicate that expression of the SepTCR specific for the subdominant epitope
also results in intrathymic deletion. The thymus of Sep ×
hCRP double transgenic mice is reduced in size by 75%
and so is the absolute and relative number of CD4 SP thymocytes when compared with Sep single transgenic mice
(Fig. 2). Moreover, peripheral Vβ8.3+ CD4 T cells express
endogenous TCR Vα elements at higher frequencies (i.e.,
Vα2 + 8 + 11, ∼18%) than do Sep single transgenic mice
(Vα2 + 8 + 11, <2%) indicating selection for Sep-negative or
Sep-low CD4 T cells (data not shown). Taken together,
the observed phenotypes of the TCR × hCRP strains indicate that both T cell specificities are subject to intrathymic deletion. How do these results comply with responsiveness to the subdominant epitope of the polyclonal
repertoire in hCRP single transgenic mice?The observation that only 15% of the CD4 T cells
emerging in the Dep × hCRPmice express the transgenic
β chain suggests that coexpression of an endogenous α
chain in addition to the transgenic chains is not sufficient to
rescue Dep-expressing cells from deletion. In contrast,
>70% of peripheral CD4 SP cells in the Sep × hCRPmice
still do express the transgenic β chain. Thus, negative selection of the transgenicTCR for the subdominant epitope
seems to be less stringent, allowing for exit of low affinity/
avidity T cells from the thymus. However, we cannot exclude that subtle differences in the precise timing or level of
expression of these two transgenicTCRs influence the observed differences in β chain allelic exclusion.The notion of differential tolerance is supported by observations at the functional level. Immunization with peptides corresponding to the antigenic epitope of each TCR
revealed that tolerance by intrathymic deletion is complete
only in Dep × hCRPmice, whereas Sep × hCRPmice,
despite deletion of the transgenicTCR, show a vigorous
proliferative response (Fig. 3). Again these differences were
sex independent within each transgenic line. Thus, T cell
tolerance to hCRP is dictated by epitope hierarchy rather
than circulating levels of antigen.
Figure 3
Epitope-specific T
cell tolerance in hCRP and
hCRP × TCR transgenic mice.
(a) BL/6, hCRP single transgenic, and Dep × hCRP male
and female mice were immunized with a peptide corresponding to the dominant epitope of
hCRP. (b) BL/6, hCRP single
transgenic, and Sep × hCRP female mice were immunized with
a peptide corresponding to the
subdominant epitope of hCRP.
8–10 d later, draining lymph
node cells were assessed for their
proliferative response to the respective peptide. Irrespective of
gender, hCRP single and Dep ×
hCRP mice are tolerant to the
dominant epitope, whereas
hCRP single and Sep × hCRP
mice respond to the subdominant epitope.
Central Tolerance Is Due to Ectopic Expression of hCRP in
the Thymus.
Based on previous reports, the basal levels of
hCRP in male mice of ∼5 × 10−7 M are compatible with
intrathymic deletion due to entry and presentation of
blood-borne antigen (4, 18). The at least 500-fold lower
levels in female mice (≤10−9 M) are more difficult to reconcile with the observed phenotype of early and complete
intrathymic deletion. Moreover, pronounced deletion occurred in fetal thymus organ cultures (FTOC) of Dep ×
hCRP thymi in the absence of blood-borne antigen supply
(data not shown). We thus considered an additional intrathymic source of hCRP leading to continuous and sufficient presentation of hCRP epitopes in the thymic microenvironment irrespective of circulating levels. Two
major cell populations, hemopoietic and radio-resistant epithelial cells, were assessed as a putative source of ectopically expressed hCRP.In view of previous reports on a membrane-bound form
of CRP being expressed by subsets of macrophages in human and rat (13, 37, 38), we first assessed the influence of
hCRPtransgenic hemopoietic cells on the development of
Dep cells. When lethally irradiated B6 mice were reconstituted with bone marrow cells from Dep × hCRPmice,
thereby generating animals in which only hemopoietic cells
carried the hCRP transgene, no deletion of the Dep TCR
was observed. The central and peripheral compartments of
these mice were identical to those of B6 mice reconstituted
with Dep single transgenic bone marrow, i.e., mice lacking
the hCRP transgene (Fig. 4). Bone marrow–derived cells
(macrophages, DCs, and T and B cells) thus do not provide
a source of thymic hCRP that would lead to deletion of
specific T cells. This conclusion is also supported by the
observation that hCRPmice reconstituted with Dep TCR
bone marrow, mice in which all cells except hemopoietic
cells carry the hCRP transgene, exhibit the same degree of
deletion as Dep × hCRPmice (Fig. 4).
Figure 4
Thymic deletion is not due to hemopoietic cell–derived
hCRP. BL/6 and hCRP transgenic mice were lethally irradiated and reconstituted either with bone marrow cells from Dep or Dep × hCRP donors. 8 wk later, intrathymic selection of Dep T cells was analyzed by
four-color fluorescence (see Fig. 1). Coexpression of the transgenic TCR
chains Vα11 and Vβ5.1 on CD4 SP thymocytes is shown. Deletion is independent of the presence of the hCRP transgene in the donor bone
marrow.
To assess the role of thymic epithelial cells in tolerance
to hCRP, we constructed chimeric animals in which only
radioresistant thymic stromal cells, i.e., epithelial cells, carry
the hCRP transgene. Thymectomized B6 mice were
grafted with an irradiated (5 Gy) hCRPtransgenic thymus
and reconstituted with Dep TCR bone marrow. In these
animals, early and profound deletion of the Dep TCR was
observed (Fig. 5
a) indicating that thymic epithelial cells do
produce hCRP and that this source is sufficient to induce
negative selection of specific T cells in the absence of liver-derived antigen. We next asked whether epithelium-derived
hCRP is also necessary for negative selection. Endogenous
hCRPtransgenic thymus in male and female hCRPtransgenic mice was replaced by fetal B6 thymi and, after reconstitution with Dep bone marrow cells, the differentiation of
Dep TCR T cells was followed. In male hCRPtransgenicmice deletion was seen within the B6 thymus graft (Fig. 5
a). Interestingly, the onset and extent of this deletion was
indistinguishable from that observed in double transgenicmice or in a B6 animal grafted with an hCRPtransgenic
thymus (see Figs. 1 and 4). Thymus-derived antigen and
high levels of blood-borne antigen thus cause the same
phenotype of intrathymic deletion. In contrast, in female
hCRPmice carrying a B6 thymus, no intragraft deletion
was observed (Fig. 5
a). The cellular composition of these
grafts was identical to B6 grafts carried by nontransgenic recipients. Immunization of these chimeras resulted in a
strong proliferative response of peripheral Dep T cells (Fig.
5
b) and simultaneous central deletion of Dep thymocytes
(data not shown). The latter is most likely caused by increased serum levels of hCRP due to concomitant induction of an acute phase.
Figure 5
Thymus-derived
hCRP is necessary and sufficient
for tolerance in female hCRP
transgenic mice. Thymectomized male and female hCRP
transgenic mice were grafted
with fetal BL/6 thymi, and
thymectomized female BL/6
mice were grafted with hCRP
transgenic thymi. 4 wk later, animals were lethally irradiated and
reconstituted with Dep transgenic bone marrow. After another 6 wk intrathymic selection
of Dep T cells was analyzed by
four-color fluorescence (see Fig.
1). Coexpression of the transgenic TCR chains Vα11 and Vβ5.1 on CD4 SP thymocytes is shown (a).
The same type of animals were immunized with peptide hCRP 89–100
(see Fig. 3) to assess their tolerance status (b). Thymus-derived hCRP is
necessary in female, but not in male, hCRP transgenic mice for central
deletion of hCRP-specific T cells and tolerance.
In summary, these data show that ectopic expression of
hCRP by thymic epithelial cells is (a) sufficient to cause deletion of a T cell repertoire largely consisting of hCRP-specific cells and (b) necessary to ensure tolerance at low
basal hCRP serum levels in female mice, which correspond
to the levels found in healthy humans.
Transgenic hCRP Mimics Expression of Endogenous Murine
APPs and of hCRP in Humans.
The thymus transplantation experiments did not formally rule out the possibility of
antigen carry-over by intrathymic APCs. Liver-derived antigen might have been taken up by MHC class II–positive
cells from the circulation of the fetal donor and presented
at tolerogenic levels during the experimental period of ∼10
wk. Given the turnover of peptide–MHC complexes on
thymic APCs (39), and the turnover of thymic DCs (40),
this explanation is unlikely. To directly demonstrate the intrathymic origin of hCRP, the expression pattern of hCRP
was analyzed by reverse transcriptase PCR. As expected,
hCRP mRNA was readily detectable in the liver of hCRPtransgenic male mice (Fig. 6
a). A weaker signal was reproducibly obtained with RNA extracts from the thymus of
these mice. Under the same conditions all other organs
tested (spleen, brain, heart, kidney, and lung) did not yield
a signal. Further amplification of the PCR products with
nested primers revealed additional signals in brain, kidney,
and lung (data not shown). The signal in liver and thymus of noninduced female hCRPtransgenic animals was
weaker and sometimes undetectable, but upon induction of
an acute-phase response, the hCRP-specific signals strongly
increased in liver and thymus (data not shown).
Figure 6
Expression pattern of transgenic hCRP and endogenous murine APPs. (a) The organ-specific expression pattern of the hCRP transgene and
the homologous mouse APPs (mCRP and mSAP) was analyzed by reverse transcriptase PCR (35 cycles) in a young adult, noninduced, male hCRP
transgenic mouse. Expression of the hCRP transgene parallels that of endogenous APPs and is confined to liver and thymus. An identical pattern was
identified for induced female hCRP animals under the same PCR conditions. Signals for hCRP and mSAP, but not of mCRP, in liver and thymus of
noninduced females were consistently lower (detection of thymic expression required reamplification with nested primers). The weak mCRP band in the
kidney was not consistently detected. Ht, heart; Br, brain; Sp, spleen; Th, thymus; Lu, lung; Ki, kidney; Li, liver; Co, control. (b) The organ-specific expression pattern of hCRP was analyzed in various human tissues. Expression is confined to liver and thymus. St, stomach; Sk, skin; Ms, muscle. (c) Expression of hCRP in thymus and liver was analyzed during ontogeny in noninduced hCRP transgenic females. Expression in both organs was detected
from day E15 onwards to adulthood. Thymus samples were reamplified with nested primers. (d) Expression of hCRP, mCRP, and mSAP was analyzed
in whole thymocytes and in highly enriched thymic subsets of a noninduced female hCRP mouse (reverse transcriptase PCR; 30 cycles). Expression of
the hCRP transgene and endogenous APP is confined to medullary epithelial cells. Note that detection of APP expression in enriched medullary epithelial cells of noninduced female mice does not require nested reamplification.
Since ectopic expression of transgenes is often attributed
to positional effects, we asked whether intrathymic expression of the hCRP transgene mimics the tissue-specificity of
endogenous APPs. The expression analysis was extended to
two endogenous murineAPPs with homology to hCRP,
namely mouseCRP (mCRP) and mSAP. Messenger RNA
of mCRP could be detected by reverse transcriptase PCR
in liver and thymus of male and female mice irrespective of
experimental induction of an acute phase (Fig. 6
a). This
constitutive expression is in accordance with CRP being a
minor APP in mice, which is only weakly induced during
the course of an acute-phase response. Similarly, expression
of mSAP, the major murine APP, was detectable in the
liver and thymus of noninduced male and female animals
(Fig. 6
a). Upon induction, these signals increased in
strength in the liver, as expected for a major APP, and also
in the thymus (data not shown). Analysis of various human
tissues also revealed ectopic expression of hCRP in the
postnatal human thymus (age 3 mo; Fig. 6
b). Thus, the organ-specific expression and the induction pattern of the
hCRP transgene closely resemble those of its functional
murine homologue mSAP and of hCRP in humans.
Prenatal Onset of Ectopic Expression.
Since central deletion of Dep TCRtransgenic thymocytes already occurred
during the fetal period (data not shown), intrathymic expression of hCRP during ontogeny was assessed. In accordance with the prenatal onset of tolerance induction,
hCRP mRNA was detectable by reverse transcriptase PCR
in fetal thymi of E15 embryos (earliest time point tested;
Fig. 6
c). Likewise, mSAP and mCRP were expressed in
thymi without any gender difference (data not shown).
Thus, both murine APP and the human transgene are expressed in the thymus throughout the pre- and early postnatal period, when the bulk of the T cell repertoire is generated.
Medullary Epithelial Cells Express APPs.
As shown above,
an hCRP source in radioresistant thymic stromal cells
rather than in bone marrow–derived cells was responsible
for deletion of Dep T cells in the absence of liver-derived
hCRP (Figs. 4 and 5). To delineate this cell type more precisely, we enriched hemopoietic cells (mostly thymocytes),
monocytes (macrophages and DCs), cortical epithelial cells,
or medullary epithelial cells using appropriate cell surface
markers. These cell subsets were enriched either sequentially or separately (see Materials and Methods). Since the
marker used for medullary epithelial cells (G8.8) is also
weakly expressed on cortical epithelial cells (31), it was important to deplete cortical epithelial cells before selection of
G8.8-positive cells. Irrespective of the enrichment procedure, reverse transcriptase PCR analyses on cDNA prepared from these thymic cell fractions revealed expression
of transgenichCRP as well as endogenous mCRP and
mSAP exclusively in medullary epithelial cells (Fig. 6
d).
Discussion
The surprising finding of early and profound central deletion of T cells specific for both epitopes of hCRP even at
very low levels of circulating protein, and the striking similarity of intrathymic T cell fate and peripheral reactivity irrespective of 500-fold differing serum levels prompted us
to reanalyze the tissue specificity of hCRP expression.
Transplantation experiments as well as reverse transcriptase
PCR analyses revealed expression of hCRP in medullary
epithelial cells of the thymus. We consider this “ectopic”
expression of the neo–self-antigen to be physiological for
several reasons. (a) The hCRP transgene spans a region of
31 kb containing all known autologous 5′ and 3′ cis-acting
elements (15). Liver-specificity (as formerly assessed by
northern blotting) and inducibility of hepatic gene expression indicate that the trans-acting factors are conserved in
mouse and humans (14). (b) We show that ectopic expression of hCRP is exclusively restricted to medullary epithelial cells of the thymus. Gene-regulation in this cellular
subset of the thymus is comparable to that in hepatocytes
with regard to onset during ontogeny, and, surprisingly, inducibility and sexual dimorphism. (c) Importantly, we demonstrate that hCRP is also expressed in the human thymus
and that the homologous APPs of the mouse (mSAP and
mCRP) show a cell type–specific expression pattern, identical to the hCRP transgene. It is noteworthy that hCRP
and mSAP, two species-specific major APPs, are inducible
in medullary cells of the thymus (data not shown), indicating the presence of all components of the signaling cascade
(cytokine receptors, second messengers, and transcription
factors) that hitherto were thought to be confined to hepatocytes and a macrophage subset (38).Several neo–self-antigens under direction of putatively
tissue-specific promoters have been found to be expressed
in the thymus of transgenic mice. These include the promoters of ratinsulin II (41, 42), rat elastase I (43), guinea
pig α-lactalbumin, human beta globin (44, 45), keratin-IV
(46), and metallothionein (47). Thymic expression of different model antigens driven by these heterologous regulatory elements was often variable and usually found in some
but not all transgenic lines, consistent with the notion that
the integration site and/or the copy number influence expression. In this context it is noteworthy that a truncated
version of the hCRP promoter directing expression of an
MHC class I alloantigen was active in hepatocytes but not
in the thymus (as assessed by selection of specific T cells in
chimeras and PCR analysis; reference 48). In view of the
variability and unpredictability of the thymic activity of
these hybrid transgenes, it was initially difficult to assess the
biological significance of this ectopic gene expression.
However, recent studies revealed a diverse group of endogenous “peripheral” antigens to be expressed in the thymus of rodents or primates, including pancreas-specific
genes (41), components of the myelin sheath (myelin basic
protein and myelin proteolipid protein; references 49–51),
S-100β (52), acetylcholine receptor (53), retinal proteins
(arrestin and interphotoreceptor retinoid–binding protein;
reference 54), and neuro-endocrine hormones (55). Thus,
thymic expression of “tissue-specific” genes seems to be a
common occurrence and to be part of physiological expression patterns. This should result in a more diverse presentation of “self” within the thymus than has been appreciated previously. Although a role of intrathymic
expression of “nonthymic” proteins in the establishment of
self-tolerance has been proposed, it has not been formally
demonstrated. Nevertheless, intriguing correlations between the thymic expression level of self-antigens and the
propensity to spontaneously develop or succumb to experimental induction of autoimmune disease have been recently reported for insulin (56, 57) and two retinal proteins
(54). Our analysis demonstrates for the first time that thymic expression of a secreted neo–self-antigen under its autologous regulatory elements confers tolerance upon the
developing T cell repertoire by deletion of specific T cells
with remarkable efficiency.Expression of several “peripheral” antigens has been assigned to the thymic medulla by histological analysis (50,
52, 58), although delineation of the precise cell type has
been difficult. Expression of hCRP and mouse APP is
clearly confined to radio-resistant stromal cells as shown by
transplantation experiments, and more precisely to medullary epithelial cells as shown by cell separation and subsequent reverse transcriptase PCR. Medullary epithelial cells
have been previously implicated in tolerance induction
both by deletion or anergy induction (46, 59–61). How
does the restriction of hCRP expression to the medulla
comply with the profound deletion phenotype, in particular the lack of immature DP thymocytes, most of which reside in the cortex? We suggest that hCRP is secreted by
medullary epithelial cells and subsequently presented by
MHC class II–positive APCs, including DCs and medullary and cortical epithelial cells. Such intercellular antigen
transfer and “cross presentation” within the thymic microenvironment has been described for an MHC class II–
restricted membrane protein (62). Recognition of specific
peptide–MHC complexes on cortical epithelial cells would
result in deletion of hCRP-specific cells at the transition
from the DN to DP stage as soon as they become susceptible to apoptotic signals via the TCR (63; note that DN
thymocytes prematurely express the transgenicTCR at
high levels [Fig. 1]). Interestingly, an identical phenotype
of early intrathymic deletion is observed when hCRP is
derived either exclusively from epithelial cells (as in hCRP
grafts in B6 mice; Fig. 5
a) or from the circulation (as in B6
grafts in male hCRPtransgenic mice; Fig. 5
a), arguing for
efficient antigen presentation on cortical cells in both instances. In the latter case, hCRP may gain access to the
cortex via blood vessels or the capsule (64). Indeed, cortical
epithelial cells have been shown to be accessible to blood-borne proteins (9) and to mediate deletion of immature
thymocytes in vitro and in fetal thymus organ cultures (25,
27). In support of this notion, hCRP protein can be directly visualized within the cortical parenchyma by immunohistology in hCRPtransgenic mice after experimental
induction (data not shown).The proposed intrathymic “antigen spread” may explain
why deletion of hCRP-specific thymocytes is remarkably
efficient when compared with other experimental models
in which ectopic expression of heterologous transgene-constructs was observed. Ectopic expression in the thymus
of various model-antigens under control of the ratinsulin
promoter (RIP), for instance, yielded divergent results. No
central deletion of TCRtransgenicCD4 cells specific for
the large T antigen (Tag) of SV 40 was observed in RIP-Tag × TCRmice (22), yet tolerance of CD4 and CD8 T
cells could be demonstrated at the polyclonal level in RIP-Tag single transgenic mice (58). Ectopic expression of the
nuclear protein of LCMV or the allo-MHC antigen Kb
driven by the RIP lead to partial tolerance among CD8 T
cells (42, 65). In the latter study, deletion of only those Kb-specific T cells that express a transgenicTCR at high density
was described. Deletion of CD8 T cells was also incomplete when ectopic Kb expression was directed by the promoters of guinea pig α-lactalbumin or human beta globin
(45). Intrathymic expression of Tag under the rat elastase I
promoter or MHC class I-Kb under the keratin IV promoter resulted in anergy induction of specific CD8 T cells
rather than deletion (43, 46). Several reasons may account
for these different outcomes, namely antigen availability
(secreted versus intracellular antigens), the type of APC
(bone marrow–derived versus epithelial cell), and the affinity/avidity of the TCR–MHC interaction (66, 67). Given
this variability, it will be important to test the contribution
of the thymic activity of each of these promoters to tolerance induction in their native genetic context.Tolerance to a major murine APP has recently been
documented (68). Is ectopic expression of APPs necessary
for tolerance induction? Serum levels of hCRP in female
transgenic animals closely mimic hCRP levels in humans.
These basal levels of circulating hCRP are insufficient to
induce intragraft deletion and tolerance in transgenic female mice grafted with a B6 thymus. Upon induction of an
acute phase, hCRP levels in females rise 500-fold, and are
now sufficient to activate peripheral T cells (naive Dep and
Sep T cells, when transferred into hCRPtransgenic animals
expand vigorously in male, but not in female recipients;
our unpublished results). Tolerance induction in the absence of a thymic antigen source would thus be confined to
irregular intervals of acute phases and likely to be insufficient to impose tolerance on a continuously developing T
cell repertoire. In contrast, expression of APPs in the pre-
and postnatal thymus results in presentation of both dominant and subdominant epitopes at levels sufficient to confer
functional tolerance irrespective of an acute phase. Ectopic
expression by thymic medullary epithelial cells thus seems
to be a physiological device to safeguard tolerance to APPs.Sensitive detection methods reveal the expression of a
growing number of “peripheral” antigens in the thymus,
yet based on the available number of MHC molecules on
thymic APCs, the number of self-peptides presented at
tolerogenic levels has to be limited. It will be important to
identify common biological and possibly genetic features
that have led to ectopic expression of certain “peripheral”
proteins during evolution.
Authors: A Pugliese; M Zeller; A Fernandez; L J Zalcberg; R J Bartlett; C Ricordi; M Pietropaolo; G S Eisenbarth; S T Bennett; D D Patel Journal: Nat Genet Date: 1997-03 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: P Vafiadis; S T Bennett; J A Todd; J Nadeau; R Grabs; C G Goodyer; S Wickramasinghe; E Colle; C Polychronakos Journal: Nat Genet Date: 1997-03 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: L Wu; D Vremec; C Ardavin; K Winkel; G Süss; H Georgiou; E Maraskovsky; W Cook; K Shortman Journal: Eur J Immunol Date: 1995-02 Impact factor: 5.532