Changes in Function and Dynamics in Hepatic and Splenic Macrophages in Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

Heterogeneity in intrahepatic macrophage populations and druggable target expression in patients with steatotic liver disease-related fibrosis

Background & Aims

Clinical trials for reducing fibrosis in steatotic liver disease (SLD) have targeted macrophages with variable results. We evaluated intrahepatic macrophages in patients with SLD to determine if activity scores or fibrosis stages influenced phenotypes and expression of druggable targets, such as CCR2 and galectin-3.

Methods

Liver biopsies from controls or patients with minimal or advanced fibrosis were subject to gene expression analysis using nCounter to determine differences in macrophage-related genes (n = 30). To investigate variability among individual patients, we compared additional biopsies by staining them with multiplex antibody panels (CD68/CD14/CD16/CD163/Mac387 or CD163/CCR2/galectin-3/Mac387) followed by spectral imaging and spatial analysis. Algorithms that utilize deep learning/artificial intelligence were applied to create cell cluster plots, phenotype profile maps, and to determine levels of protein expression (n = 34).

Results

Several genes known to be pro-fibrotic (e.g. CD206, TREM2, CD163, and ARG1) showed either no significant differences or significantly decreased with advanced fibrosis. Although marked variability in gene expression was observed in individual patients with cirrhosis, several druggable targets and their ligands (e.g. CCR2, CCR5, CCL2, CCL5, and LGALS3) were significantly increased when compared to patients with minimal fibrosis. Antibody panels identified populations that were significantly increased (e.g. Mac387+), decreased (e.g. CD14+), or enriched (e.g. interactions of Mac387) in patients that had progression of disease or advanced fibrosis. Despite heterogeneity in patients with SLD, several macrophage phenotypes and druggable targets showed a positive correlation with increasing NAFLD activity scores and fibrosis stages.

Conclusions

Patients with SLD have markedly varied macrophage- and druggable target-related gene and protein expression in their livers. Several patients had relatively high expression, while others were like controls. Overall, patients with more advanced disease had significantly higher expression of CCR2 and galectin-3 at both the gene and protein levels.

Impact and implications

Appreciating individual differences within the hepatic microenvironment of patients with SLD may be paramount to developing effective treatments. These results may explain why such a small percentage of patients have responded to macrophage-targeting therapies and provide additional support for precision medicine-guided treatment of chronic liver diseases.

Remodeling the hepatic fibrotic microenvironment with emerging nanotherapeutics: a comprehensive review

Liver fibrosis could be the last hope for treating liver cancer and remodeling of the hepatic microenvironment has emerged as a strategy to promote the ablation of liver fibrosis. In recent years, especially with the rapid development of nanomedicine, hepatic microenvironment therapy has been widely researched in studies concerning liver cancer and fibrosis. In this comprehensive review, we summarized recent advances in nano therapy-based remodeling of the hepatic microenvironment. Firstly, we discussed novel strategies for regulatory immune suppression caused by capillarization of liver sinusoidal endothelial cells (LSECs) and macrophage polarization. Furthermore, metabolic reprogramming and extracellular matrix (ECM) deposition are caused by the activation of hepatic stellate cells (HSCs). In addition, recent advances in ROS, hypoxia, and impaired vascular remodeling in the hepatic fibrotic microenvironment due to ECM deposition have also been summarized. Finally, emerging nanotherapeutic approaches based on correlated signals were discussed in this review. We have proposed novel strategies such as engineered nanotherapeutics targeting antigen-presenting cells (APCs) or direct targeting T cells in liver fibrotic immunotherapy to be used in preventing liver fibrosis. In summary, this comprehensive review illustrated the opportunities in drug targeting and nanomedicine, and the current challenges to be addressed.

Patients with fibrosis from non-alcoholic steatohepatitis have heterogeneous intrahepatic macrophages and therapeutic targets

Background and Aims

In clinical trials for reducing fibrosis in NASH patients, therapeutics that target macrophages have had variable results. We evaluated intrahepatic macrophages in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis to determine if fibrosis influenced phenotypes and expression of CCR2 and Galectin-3.

Approach & Results

We used nCounter to analyze liver biopsies from well-matched patients with minimal (n=12) or advanced (n=12) fibrosis to determine which macrophage-related genes would be significantly different. Known therapy targets (e.g., CCR2 and Galectin-3) were significantly increased in patients with cirrhosis.However, several genes (e.g., CD68, CD16, and CD14) did not show significant differences, and CD163, a marker of pro-fibrotic macrophages was significantly decreased with cirrhosis. Next, we analyzed patients with minimal (n=6) or advanced fibrosis (n=5) using approaches that preserved hepatic architecture by multiplex-staining with anti-CD68, Mac387, CD163, CD14, and CD16. Spectral data were analyzed using deep learning/artificial intelligence to determine percentages and spatial relationships. This approach showed patients with advanced fibrosis had increased CD68+, CD16+, Mac387+, CD163+, and CD16+CD163+ populations. Interaction of CD68+ and Mac387+ populations was significantly increased in patients with cirrhosis and enrichment of these same phenotypes in individuals with minimal fibrosis correlated with poor outcomes. Evaluation of a final set of patients (n=4) also showed heterogenous expression of CD163, CCR2, Galectin-3, and Mac387, and significant differences were not dependent on fibrosis stage or NAFLD activity.

Conclusions

Approaches that leave hepatic architecture intact, like multispectral imaging, may be paramount to developing effective treatments for NASH. In addition, understanding individual differences in patients may be required for optimal responses to macrophage-targeting therapies.

Extrahepatic factors in hepatic immune regulation

The liver is a site of complex immune activity. The hepatic immune system tolerates harmless immunogenic loads in homeostasis status, shelters liver function, while maintaining vigilance against possible infectious agents or tissue damage and providing immune surveillance at the same time. Activation of the hepatic immunity is initiated by a diverse repertoire of hepatic resident immune cells as well as non-hematopoietic cells, which can sense "danger signals" and trigger robust immune response. Factors that mediate the regulation of hepatic immunity are elicited not only in liver, but also in other organs, given the dual blood supply of the liver via both portal vein blood and arterial blood. Emerging evidence indicates that inter-organ crosstalk between the liver and other organs such as spleen, gut, lung, adipose tissue, and brain is involved in the pathogenesis of liver diseases. In this review, we present the features of hepatic immune regulation, with particular attention to the correlation with factors from extrahepatic organ. We describe the mechanisms by which other organs establish an immune association with the liver and then modulate the hepatic immune response. We discuss their roles and distinct mechanisms in liver homeostasis and pathological conditions from the cellular and molecular perspective, highlighting their potential for liver disease intervention. Moreover, we review the available animal models and methods for revealing the regulatory mechanisms of these extrahepatic factors. With the increasing understanding of the mechanisms by which extrahepatic factors regulate liver immunity, we believe that this will provide promising targets for liver disease therapy.

Functions of two distinct Kupffer cells in the liver

Tissue-resident macrophages play critically important roles in host homeostasis and pathogenesis of diseases, with the functions of phagocytosis, metabolism, and immune modulation. Recently, two research studies accomplished by a collaborated group of researchers showed that there are two populations of liver resident Kupffer cells (KCs), including a major cluster of differentiation 206 low expression (CD206low)endothelial cell-selective adhesion molecule negative (ESAM-) population (KC1) and a minor CD206highESAM+ population (KC2). Both KC1 and KC2 express KC markers, such as C-type lectin domain family 4 member F (CLEC4F) and T-cell membrane protein 4 (Tim4). In fatty liver, the frequency of KC2 was increased, and those KC2 expressed some markers like liver sinusoidal endothelial cells (LSECs), such as CD31 and ESAM. In addition, KC2 population had a relatively higher expression of CD36, as fatty acid transporter, which was implicated in the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and lipid peroxidation. Furthermore, this collaborated group also showed that KC2 can cross-present hepatocellular antigens to prime antiviral function of CD8+ T cells by sensing interleukin-2 (IL-2) in hepatitis B virus (HBV) replication-competent transgenic mice. Increasing evidence shows that targeting hepatic macrophages can prevent and reverse non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), with a new suggested name metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) to include metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver diseases, such as viruses and alcohol. In summary, differentiating specific populations of hepatic macrophages is critically important for the treatment of MAFLD or NAFLD, and their overlaps. Markers specifically expressed on sub-types of hepatic macrophages may be applied for liver disease diagnosis.