Published December 4, 2017 | Version v1
Journal article Open

Selective proliferative response of microglia to alternative polarization signals

  • 1. Center of Excellence on Neurodegenerative Diseases and Department Pharmacological and Biomolecular Sciences, University of Milan, Via Balzaretti, 9, 20133, Milan, Italy
  • 2. Mouse and Animal Pathology Laboratory (MAPLab), Fondazione Filarete, Viale Ortles, 22/4, 20139, Milan, Italy

Description

Background: Microglia are resident myeloid cells of the central nervous system (CNS) that are maintained by self-renewal and actively participate in tissue homeostasis and immune defense. Under the influence of endogenous or pathological signals, microglia undertake biochemical transformations that are schematically classified as the pro-inflammatory M1 phenotype and the alternatively activated M2 state. Dysregulated proliferation of M1-activated microglia has detrimental effects, while an increased number of microglia with the alternative, pro-resolving phenotype might be beneficial in brain pathologies; however, the proliferative response of microglia to M2 signals is not yet known. We thus evaluated the ability of interleukin-4 (IL-4), a typical M2 and proliferative signal for peripheral macrophages, to induce microglia proliferation and compared it with other proliferative and M2 polarizing stimuli for macrophages, namely colony-stimulating factor-1 (CSF-1) and the estrogen hormone, 17β-estradiol (E2).

Methods: Recombinant IL-4 was delivered to the brain of adult mice by intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.) injection; whole brain areas or ex vivo-sorted microglia were analyzed by real-time PCR for assessing the mRNA levels of genes related with cell proliferation (Ki67, CDK-1, and CcnB2) and M2 polarization (Arg1, Fizz1, Ym-1) or by FACS analyses of in vivo BrdU incorporation in microglia. Primary cultures of microglia and astrocytes were also tested for proliferative effects.

Results: Our results show that IL-4 only slightly modified the expression of cell cycle-related genes in some brain areas but not in microglia, where it strongly enhanced M2 gene expression; on the contrary, brain delivery of CSF-1 triggered proliferation as well as M2 polarization of microglia both in vivo and in vitro. Similar to IL-4, the systemic E2 administration failed to induce microglia proliferation while it increased M2 gene expression.

Conclusions: Our data show that, in contrast to the wider responsiveness of peripheral macrophages, microglia proliferation is stimulated by selected M2 polarizing stimuli suggesting a role for the local microenvironment and developmental origin of tissue macrophages in regulating self-renewal following alternative activating stimuli.

Files

12974_2017_1011_MOESM1_ESM.pdf

Files (2.2 MB)

Name Size Download all
md5:68cd9584b067683a23d4363c41421414
186.5 kB Preview Download
md5:3b5b0102ad8a47d6a70b597cd711bc57
171.3 kB Preview Download
md5:aac4fefa88584cb4f7fe7187c28c3485
347.7 kB Preview Download
md5:44c6edfcb12c854d2376af7b98b690ba
108.3 kB Preview Download
md5:d63c8ce8d50074198a38d86914fda966
1.4 MB Preview Download
md5:f9aeec9a23b77bf881cbfd65999a8e57
20.0 kB Download

Additional details

Funding

INMIND – Imaging of Neuroinflammation in Neurodegenerative Diseases 278850
European Commission