Long-Acting IL-33 Mobilizes High-Quality Hematopoietic Stem and Progenitor Cells More Efficiently Than Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor or AMD3100

IL-33-activated ILC2s induce tertiary lymphoid structures in pancreatic cancer

Tertiary lymphoid structures (TLSs) are de novo ectopic lymphoid aggregates that regulate immunity in chronically inflamed tissues, including tumours. Although TLSs form due to inflammation-triggered activation of the lymphotoxin (LT)-LTβ receptor (LTβR) pathway1, the inflammatory signals and cells that induce TLSs remain incompletely identified. Here we show that interleukin-33 (IL-33), the alarmin released by inflamed tissues2, induces TLSs. In mice, Il33 deficiency severely attenuates inflammation- and LTβR-activation-induced TLSs in models of colitis and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In PDAC, the alarmin domain of IL-33 activates group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) expressing LT that engage putative LTβR+ myeloid organizer cells to initiate tertiary lymphoneogenesis. Notably, lymphoneogenic ILC2s migrate to PDACs from the gut, can be mobilized to PDACs in different tissues and are modulated by gut microbiota. Furthermore, we detect putative lymphoneogenic ILC2s and IL-33-expressing cells within TLSs in human PDAC that correlate with improved prognosis. To harness this lymphoneogenic pathway for immunotherapy, we engineer a recombinant human IL-33 protein that expands intratumoural lymphoneogenic ILC2s and TLSs and demonstrates enhanced anti-tumour activity in PDAC mice. In summary, we identify the molecules and cells of a druggable pathway that induces inflammation-triggered TLSs. More broadly, we reveal a lymphoneogenic function for alarmins and ILC2s.

Danger-associated molecular pattern molecules take unexpectedly a central stage in Nlrp3 inflammasome-caspase-1-mediated trafficking of hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells

Like their homing after transplantation to bone marrow (BM), the mobilization of hematopoietic stem/progenitor cells (HSPCs) is still not fully understood, and several overlapping pathways are involved. Several years ago our group proposed that sterile inflammation in the BM microenvironment induced by pro-mobilizing agents is a driving force in this process. In favor of our proposal, both complement cascade (ComC)-deficient and Nlrp3 inflammasome-deficient mice are poor G-CSF and AMD3100 mobilizers. It is also known that the Nlrp3 inflammasome mediates its effects by activating caspase-1, which is responsible for proteolytic activation of interleukin-1β (IL-1β) and interleukin-18 (IL-18) and their release from cells along with several danger-associated molecular pattern molecules (DAMPs). We observed in the past that IL-1β and IL-18 independently promote mobilization of HSPCs. In the current work we demonstrated that caspase-1-KO mice are poor mobilizers, and, to our surprise, administration of IL-1β or IL-18, as in the case of Nlrp3-KO animals, does not correct this defect. Moreover, neither Caspase-1-KO nor Nlrp3-KO mice properly activated the ComC to execute the mobilization process. Interestingly, mobilization in these animals and activation of the ComC were both restored after injection of the DAMP cocktail eATP+HGMB1+S100A9, the components of which are normally released from cells in an Nlrp3 inflammasome-caspase-1-dependent manner. In addition, we report that caspase-1-deficient HSPCs show a decrease in migration in response to BM homing factors and engraft more poorly after transplantation. These results for the first time identify caspase-1 as an orchestrator of HSPC trafficking.

Comparison of the efficacy of hematopoietic stem cell mobilization regimens: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of preclinical studies

BACKGROUND

Mobilization failure may occur when the conventional hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) mobilization agent granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is used alone, new regimens were developed to improve mobilization efficacy. Multiple studies have been performed to investigate the efficacy of these regimens via animal models, but the results are inconsistent. We aim to compare the efficacy of different HSC mobilization regimens and identify new promising regimens with a network meta-analysis of preclinical studies.

METHODS

We searched Medline and Embase databases for the eligible animal studies that compared the efficacy of different HSC mobilization regimens. Primary outcome is the number of total colony-forming cells (CFCs) in per milliliter of peripheral blood (/ml PB), and the secondary outcome is the number of Lin^- Sca1⁺ Kit⁺ (LSK) cells/ml PB. Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed following the guidelines of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit (NICE DSU) with WinBUGS version 1.4.3. G-CSF-based regimens were classified into the SD (standard dose, 200-250 μg/kg/day) group and the LD (low dose, 100-150 μg/kg/day) group based on doses, and were classified into the short-term (2-3 days) group and the long-term (4-5 days) group based on administration duration. Long-term SD G-CSF was chosen as the reference treatment. Results are presented as the mean differences (MD) with the associated 95% credibility interval (95% CrI) for each regimen.

RESULTS

We included 95 eligible studies and reviewed the efficacy of 94 mobilization agents. Then 21 studies using the poor mobilizer mice model (C57BL/6 mice) to investigate the efficacy of different mobilization regimens were included for network meta-analysis. Network meta-analyses indicated that compared with long-term SD G-CSF alone, 14 regimens including long-term SD G-CSF + Me6, long-term SD G-CSF + AMD3100 + EP80031, long-term SD G-CSF + AMD3100 + FG-4497, long-term SD G-CSF + ML141, long-term SD G-CSF + desipramine, AMD3100 + meloxicam, long-term SD G-CSF + reboxetine, AMD3100 + VPC01091, long-term SD G-CSF + FG-4497, Me6, long-term SD G-CSF + EP80031, POL5551, long-term SD G-CSF + AMD3100, AMD1300 + EP80031 and long-term LD G-CSF + meloxicam significantly increased the collections of total CFCs. G-CSF + Me6 ranked first among these regimens in consideration of the number of harvested CFCs/ml PB (MD 2168.0, 95% CrI 2062.0-2272.0). In addition, 7 regimens including long-term SD G-CSF + AMD3100, AMD3100 + EP80031, long-term SD G-CSF + EP80031, short-term SD G-CSF + AMD3100 + IL-33, long-term SD G-CSF + ML141, short-term LD G-CSF + ARL67156, and long-term LD G-CSF + meloxicam significantly increased the collections of LSK cells compared with G-CSF alone. Long-term SD G-CSF + AMD3100 ranked first among these regimens in consideration of the number of harvested LSK cells/ml PB (MD 2577.0, 95% CrI 2422.0-2733.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the number of CFC and LSK cells in PB as outcomes, G-CSF plus AMD3100, Me6, EP80031, ML141, FG-4497, IL-33, ARL67156, meloxicam, desipramine, and reboxetine are all promising mobilizing regimens for future investigation.

The IL-33 Receptor/ST2 acts as a positive regulator of functional mouse bone marrow hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells

There is a paucity of information on a potential role for the IL-33 receptor/ST2 in the regulation of mouse bone marrow (BM) hematopoietic stem (HSC) and progenitor (HPC) cells. Comparing the BM of st2^−/− and wild type (WT) control mice using functional assays, it was found that st2^−/− BM cells had poorer engrafting capacity than WT BM in a competitive repopulating assay using congenic mice, with no changes in reconstitution of B-, T- and myeloid cells following transplantation. The BM of st2^−/− mice also had fewer granulocyte-macrophage, erythroid, and multipotential progenitors than that of WT BM and these st2^−/− HPC were in a slow cycling state compared to that of the rapidly cycling HPC of the WT mice. While functional assessment of HSC and HPC demonstrated that ST2 has a positive influence on regulation of HSC, we could not pick up differences in st2^−/− compared to WT BM using only phenotypic analysis of HSC and HPC populations prior to transplantation, again demonstrating that phenotypic analysis of HSC and HPC do not always recapitulate the functional assessments of these immature hematopoietic cells.

•

ST2 is a positive modulator of hematopoiesis.

•

ST2^-/- is a positive modulator of hematopoiesis

•

Immunophenotyping of st2^-/- hematopoietic stem cell numbers does not recapitulate functional capability of these cells.

A Review of Advances in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization and the Potential Role of Notch2 Blockade

Hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation can be a potential cure for hematological malignancies and some nonhematologic diseases. Hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) collected from peripheral blood after mobilization are the primary source to provide HSC transplantation. In most of the cases, mobilization by the cytokine granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with chemotherapy, and in some settings, with the CXC chemokine receptor type 4 antagonist plerixafor, can achieve high yield of hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs). However, adequate mobilization is not always successful in a significant portion of donors. Research is going on to find new agents or strategies to increase HSC mobilization. Here, we briefly review the history of HSC transplantation, current mobilization regimens, some of the novel agents that are under investigation for clinical practice, and our recent findings from animal studies regarding Notch and ligand interaction as potential targets for HSPC mobilization.

Mobilized peripheral blood: an updated perspective

Enforced egress of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) out of the bone marrow (BM) into the peripheral circulation, termed mobilization, has come a long way since its discovery over four decades ago. Mobilization research continues to be driven by the need to optimize the regimen currently available in the clinic with regard to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile, costs, and donor convenience. In this review, we describe the most recent findings in the field and how we anticipate them to affect the development of mobilization strategies in the future. Furthermore, the significance of mobilization beyond HSC collection, i.e. for chemosensitization, conditioning, and gene therapy as well as a means to study the interactions between HSCs and their BM microenvironment, is reviewed. Open questions, controversies, and the potential impact of recent technical progress on mobilization research are also highlighted.