Background
Peripheral nerve injury (PNI) is a common clinical disease that is usually caused by sudden crushing, strong external force, ischemic injuries, transection, or other iatrogenic injuries. Patients with PNI are somewhat prohibited by sensory and motor disorders and endure neuropathic pain and its secondary lesions [
1‐
3]. Various experimental and clinical strategies, such as nerve grafts, nerve transfers, nerve conduits, cell-based therapies, and gene therapy, have been implemented to improve neuron survival, improve axon regeneration and target reinnervation [
1,
2]. The use of appropriate cytokines to protect damaged neurons and promote axonal regeneration has always been an important strategy in the study of nerve regeneration. Among cytokines, nerve growth factor (NGF) is well known to play key roles in neuronal survival, growth and maintenance in response to injury [
4]. However, researchers studying the effects of NGF on PNI have not paid much attention to its side effect of inducing neuropathic pain [
5]. For the last two decades, an increasing number of studies have focused on anti-NGF therapy [
6]. Since NGF plays two roles in the treatment of PNI, improving nerve regeneration but accelerating neuropathic pain, the discovery of novel cytokine(s) or drug molecular(s) that can protect injured neurons, promote axonal regeneration, and inhibit neuropathic pain in the treatment of PNI is a very urgent and important task.
Maresin 1 (MaR1), an anti-inflammatory and proresolving mediator, is a dioxygenation product produced by human macrophages that was discovered and named by Serhan et al. [
7]. It has shown promising value in the treatment of airway inflammation, pneumonia, colitis, delayed wound healing and diabetes complications and has been shown to ameliorate pain hypersensitivity and provide neuronal protection [
8‐
12]. In planaria, MaR1 promoted the speed of head reappearance and increased the rate of surgical regeneration [
13]; in rats and mice, MaR1 promoted bone regeneration [
14,
15]. These results prompted us to investigate whether MaR1 can simultaneously exert anti-inflammatory and analgesic effects and accelerate nerve regeneration after nervous system injury.
In this report, we examined whether MaR1 could promote nerve regeneration and neurological functional recovery and alleviate neuropathic pain after nerve injury and compared its effects with those of NGF.
Methods
Mice and surgery
Mouse experiments were performed according to guidelines established by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Nantong University and were conducted following the ARRIVE guidelines [
16,
17]. A prior sample size calculation was executed using degree of freedom (
E value) [
18] and sample sizes were estimated based on our previous studies for similar types of behavioral, biochemical, and electrophysiological analyses [
19,
20]. The ICR mice used for the experiments were obtained from the Laboratory Animal Center of Nantong University. Eight-week-old adult male ICR mice (25–30 g) were used to construct the PNI models, including a sciatic nerve crush model and a sciatic nerve chronic constriction injury model (CCI). Primary dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons were isolated from newborn ICR mice (postnatal day 0–1) or adult male ICR mice. Total 235 mice were killed in the current study, including 163 adult male mice (8–10 weeks old) and 72 newborn ICR mice (postnatal day 0–1). The sciatic nerve crush injury model was established according to our previous report [
21] and the schematic overview of the experimental timeline is shown in Additional file
1: Figure S1. Briefly, after anaesthetization with isoflurane, the left sciatic nerve of the mouse was squeezed with no. 5 jeweler’s forceps for 20 s. In some cases, a diluted fluorescent dye (0.5 μl of Vybrant CM-Dil in 20 μl of PBS) was injected into the hind paw on the injured side at 7 days after nerve crushing, and L5 DRG sections were examined 7 days later. The CCI model was produced by placing three ligatures (7-0 Prolene, 1-mm intervals) around the left sciatic nerve proximal to the trifurcation. The ligatures were softly tied until a short flick of the ipsilateral hind limb occurred [
22]. The mice in the sham group were subjected to the surgery described above but not to nerve injury. The mice were separated into groups (5 mice per cage) and housed under standard conditions (25 ± 1 °C, 12-h light/dark cycle, ad libitum access to food and water).
Reagents and administration
Capsaicin (catalog: 404-86-4) and NGF-7S (catalog: N0513, 130 kDa) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich. Maresin 1 (7R, 14S-dihydroxy-docosa-4Z, 8E, 10E, 12Z, 16Z, 19Z-hexaenoic acid) was purchased from Cayman Chemical Company (catalog: 1268720-28-0). Vybrant CM-Dil Cell-Labeling Solution was purchased from Invitrogen (catalog: V22885). A sterilized hemostatic gelatin sponge containing 500 ng of MaR1 or saline (control) was immediately applied locally to the injured nerve after crushing, and the wound was then closed. Drugs in 20 μl of PBS were intraplantarly injected using a Hamilton microsyringe with a 30-G needle. The spinal cord was punctured with a 30-gauge needle between the L5 and L6 levels for intrathecal drug delivery.
Cell culture
DRG neurons were harvested from newborn ICR mice and then subjected to explant culture or dissociated culture as previously described [
23]. A widely applied neuronal ND cell line (ND7/23) that is a hybrid between dorsal root neurons and neuroblastoma N18 Tg2, exhibiting sensory neuron-like properties was used in this work [
24‐
26]. In brief, ND7/23 rat DRG/mouse neuroblastoma hybrid cells were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich and maintained in DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS, 2 mM
l-glutamate and 10% penicillin/streptomycin.
Whole-cell patch-clamp recordings in dissociated mouse DRG neurons
As we described previously [
20], whole-cell patch-clamp recordings in dissociated DRG neurons (small size, < 25 mm) harvested from 4- to 6-week-old mice were performed at room temperature using an Axopatch-200B amplifier (Axon Instruments, USA). The patch pipettes were pulled from borosilicate capillaries (Chase Scientific Glass Inc., Rockwood, TN, USA), and their resistance when filled with the pipette solution (in mM: 126K-gluconate, 10 NaCl, 1 MgCl
2, 10 EGTA, 2 NaATP, and 0.1 MgGTP, adjusted to pH 7.3 with KOH) was 4–5 MΩ. Whole-cell recordings were performed in an extracellular solution (in mM): 140 NaCl, 5 KCl, 2 CaCl
2, 1 MgCl
2, 10 HEPES, 10 glucose, adjusted to pH 7.4 NaOH. A voltage clamp was applied at a holding membrane potential of − 70 mV to record the inward currents, and the recording chamber (300 µl) was superfused continuously (3–4 ml/min). We compensated for series resistance (> 80%) and performed leak subtraction. The data were low-pass filtered at 2 kHz and sampled at 10 kHz, and pClamp10 (Axon Instruments) software was used for the experiments and data analysis.
Behavioral analysis
A total of four double-blind behavioral tests were used. The double-blind behavioral tests were performed like this: the anonymous reagents (saline, NGF or Maresin 1) were administered to the mice by one researcher, and the behavior analysis were performed and recorded by another observer who has no information about the experimental design. (1) Walking track (footprint) analysis was used to analyze basic motor functions, and the sciatic function index (SFI) was calculated as previously reported [
21]. In brief, the plantar surface of each mouse’s hind paw was smeared with ink, and the mouse was allowed to walk in a straight path on white paper. (2) The rotarod test (LE8200, RWD Life Science Co., Ltd) was used to test complex motor functions as previously reported [
27]. Briefly, mice were tested three times at 10-min intervals, and the time spent on the rod was recorded and averaged. During the test, the speed was increased from 2 to 20 rpm over a 3-min period. (3) The von Frey test was used to test mechanical sensitivity as previously reported [
20]. Briefly, the mice were placed in a box on an elevated metal mesh floor and stimulated with a series of von Frey filaments of logarithmically increasing stiffness (0.02–2.56 gf; Stoelting Company) on their hind paws. The 50% paw withdrawal threshold was determined by Dixon’s up–down method. (4) Using a Hargreaves radiant heat apparatus (IITC Life Science) as previously reported [
27], we tested the thermal sensitivity. The basal paw withdrawal latency was adjusted to 9 to 12 s with a cutoff of 20 s to avoid tissue damage.
Immunofluorescence assay
As we described previously [
28], the mice were deeply anesthetized with isoflurane, and their ascending aortas were perfused first with PBS and then with 4% paraformaldehyde. After perfusion, the L4–L6 spinal cord segments were collected and then postfixed overnight. The spinal cord sections were sliced at a thickness of 30 µm (free-floating) on a cryostat and processed for immunohistochemistry analysis. The sections were first blocked with 2% goat serum at room temperature for 1 h and then incubated at 4 °C overnight with the following primary antibodies: anti-ATF-3 (rabbit, 1:1000, Santa Cruz Biotechnology Inc.), anti-GFAP (mouse, 1:1000, EMD Millipore), anti-IBA1 (rabbit, 1:1000; Wako Chemicals Inc., USA) and anti-NF200 (mouse, 1:1000, Sigma, catalog: N0142). After washing, the sections were incubated at room temperature for 2 h with the following secondary antibodies (1:400, Jackson ImmunoResearch): Cy3-donkey anti-rabbit (catalog: 711-165-152) and FITC-donkey anti-mouse (catalog: 715-095-150). The stained sections were observed and photographed with a Leica fluorescence microscope.
Muscle atrophy test
After the administration of MaR1 for 9 days after CCI, the gastrocnemius muscles from both hind legs were separated for imaging and weight measurements. The muscle size and weight were used to assess muscle atrophy.
Quantitative real-time RT-PCR
Total RNA was collected from ipsilateral and contralateral spinal dorsal horn tissues using TRIzol reagent (Life Technologies, USA), and 1 µg of RNA was reverse-transcribed using the PrimeScript RT reagent kit (Takara, Dalian, China). Gene-specific mRNA analyses were performed using the MiniOpticon Real-Time PCR system (BioRad), and the mRNA expression levels were calculated using the 2−ΔΔCt method. The specific primers, including those for the GAPDH control, were synthesized by Thermo Fisher Scientific, and the sequences were as follows: IL1β (forward TACATCAGCACCTCACAAGC, reverse AGAAACAGTCCAGCCCATACT), IL-6 (forward TCCATCCAGTTGCCTTCTTGG, reverse CCACGATTTCCCAGAGAACATG), TNF-α (forward CCCCAAAGGGATGAGAAGTT, reverse CACTTGGTGGTTTGCTACGA) and GAPDH (forward TTGATGGCAACAATCTCCAC, reverse CGTCCCGTAGACAAAATGGT).
Western blot analysis
Total proteins were extracted from ND7/23 cells or DRG neurons isolated from mice with RIPA lysis buffer (Beyotime, Shanghai, China) containing a protease inhibitor cocktail and phosphate inhibitors (Roche Molecular Biochemicals, Inc. Mannheim, Germany). The proteins were separated on 8% or 10% SDS-PAGE gels and electrophoretically transferred onto PVDF membranes. The membranes were blocked with 5% nonfat milk for 1–2 h and then incubated with antibodies against phosphorylated AKT (p-AKT) (1:1000, rabbit, Cell Signaling, catalog: 9271), AKT (1:1000, rabbit, Cell Signaling, catalog: 9272), phosphorylated ERK (p-ERK) (1:1000, rabbit, Cell Signaling, catalog: 9101), total ERK (1:1000, rabbit, Cell Signaling, catalog: 9102), phosphorylated mTOR (p-mTOR) (1:1000, rabbit, Cell Signaling, catalog: 2971), mTOR (1:1000, rabbit, Cell Signaling, catalog: 2972), phosphorylated PI3K (p-PI3K) (1:1000, rabbit, catalog: 4228), PI3K (1:1000, rabbit, Cell Signaling, catalog: 4292), and GAPDH (1:10,000, mouse, Proteintech, catalog: 60004-1-lg) overnight at 4 °C. The next day, the membranes were incubated with the corresponding secondary antibody at room temperature for 2 h. Bands were detected using PierceTM ECL western blotting substrate (Thermo, USA), and the results were analyzed by ImageJ software.
Statistical analyses
All data are expressed as the mean ± SD, as indicated in the figure captions. Student’s
t-test (two groups) or ANOVA (one-way and two-way) test or Bonferroni post hoc test was used to compare the differences between groups, followed by Bonferroni’s test. The criterion for statistical significance was
p < 0.05. Statistical report and
t-test comparison are shown in Additional file
3,
4; Supplementary Table 1 and Table 2, respectively.
Discussion
PNI is a common occurrence that causes motor, sensory and autonomic nervous system dysfunction as well as neuropathic pain. While surgical intervention is the main treatment for PNI, conservative and pharmacological treatments as well as cell-based therapies, gene therapies and growth factors are also popular for patients. Several growth factors have already been identified and preclinical applied for the treatment of PNI, and NGF is one of the best studied. NGF plays vital roles in promoting the growth and survival of neurons. In recent decades, an increasing number of studies have suggested that NGF antagonism can ameliorate pain and pain-related behavior [
4,
36‐
40]. Preclinical and clinical trials have demonstrated that the direct intradermal injection of NGF into rodents and humans clearly activates and sensitizes nociceptors [
41‐
43]. Therefore, a variety of strategies have been designed to target the NGF pathway and thereby reduce neuropathic pain. MaR1, a newly identified anti-inflammatory and proresolving mediator, could be an important reagent for conservative treatment. Here, we showed that MaR1 stimulated the DRG growth much more strongly than NGF at the same dosage (Fig.
3G, H). We also demonstrated that MaR1 protected damaged DRG neurons and promoted functional neurological recovery. In mice with sciatic nerve crush injury, MaR1 at a low dose accelerated the recovery of both motor function and sensory function, promoted neural regeneration, and reduced DRG neuronal damage (Fig.
4I, J), which suggests that the use of MaR1 for PNI treatment will ease the economic burdens on patients.
In addition, the paw withdrawal threshold and paw withdrawal latency were decreased after the injection of NGF into the plantar tissues of normal mice, while there were no changes in these parameters in the mice receiving the MaR1 injection (Fig.
6A, B). This result suggests that even though NGF plays a neuroprotective role, its side effect of inducing mechanical and thermal pain represents a significant limitation. In contrast, MaR1 was not shown to induce pain but rather inhibited CCI-induced neuropathic pain development in our study (Fig.
4I, J). Both sciatic nerve chronic constriction injury (CCI) model and crush injury model are typical models for PNI. Sciatic crush injury causes severe anatomical damage with a large number of axons fractured and is one of the most widely applied models for the study of nerve repair and regeneration [
44]. Motor and sensory impairment is the primary injury after sciatic nerve crush, and neuropathic pain is the secondary pain that occurs during nerve regeneration. CCI with extrusion leads to mild injury with little axon damage, and the inflammatory response triggers pathological pain, hence provides an opportunity to mimic neuropathic injury and much more popular be used for studying neuropathic pain [
45,
46]. Therefore, the effects of MaR1 on nerve regeneration were studied by local sciatic nerve administration in sciatic crush model while the effects of MaR1 on pain relieve and the expression patterns of inflammatory factors in spinal cord dorsal horn were examined in CCI model. The intrathecal injection of MaR1 into CCI model mice reduced allodynia to some extent in a dose-dependent manner (Fig.
5A. B). All of the above results strongly indicate that MaR1 should be considered a novel target for preclinical PNI treatment.
While the mechanisms of MaR1 are not well understood, those underlying NGF-induced pain have been studied extensively and might provide some clues about how MaR1 exerts its effects. Previous studies have demonstrated that NGF binds to TrkA–TrkA or TrkA–p75NTR to phosphorylate the TrkA cytoplasmic receptor and then triggers numerous second-messenger cascades (e.g., PI3K, AKT, ERK, mTOR) to affect the growth, differentiation and survival of neuronal cells [
6,
47,
48]. AKT and ERK have been indicated to significantly contribute to the pathogenesis of various neurodegenerative diseases and to PNI [
49,
50]. The PI3K/AKT pathway is activated by the NGF/TrkA complex and then participates in the cognitive dysfunctional pathological process [
51], regulates neurotrophin retrograde axonal transportation in the nervous system [
52] and determines neuronal polarity and axon growth [
53,
54]. In neuronal cell lines, PI3K promotes the outgrowth and retraction of neurites [
55,
56]. Since NGF is known to bind TrkA to initiate downstream signaling pathways, such as PI3K–AKT and Ras–MEK, followed by activation of the ERK or mTOR signal transduction pathway and, finally, the regulation of cytokine secretion, we aimed to examine whether MaR1 functions via a similar pathway in ND7/23 cells and DRG neurons collected from mice by western blot. Interestingly, in ND7/23 cells, the protein expression of p-AKT was improved to similar levels in the MaR1 and NGF treatment groups, while the AKT expression was not noticeably altered in either group (Fig.
6C, D); compared with the vehicle group, p-AKT/AKT level was upregulated in MaR1 treated mice but no significant change was found in NGF treated group (Fig.
6G, H). However, no matter in ND7/23 cells or DRG neurons isolated from mice, neither the p-ERK level nor the ERK level was changed by the administration of MaR1, unlike in the NGF treatment group (Fig.
6E–H). In ND7/23cells, the expression levels of AKT downstream of p-mTOR and AKT upstream of PI3K were elevated in both the MaR1 and NGF treatment groups, which indicated that like NGF, MaR1 promotes the neuronal growth process via the PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway in vitro, while NGF also functions via the PI3K–ERK pathway. In vivo, MaR1 also participates in PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway while NGF seems like only gets involved in ERK signaling pathway (Fig.
6G, H).
Thus far, little is known about the MaR1 receptors. Colas et al. discovered that MaR1 is a partial agonist of recombinant human leukotriene B4 receptor (BLT1), suggesting that BLT1 is a potential receptor for MaR1 [
57]. Recently, human leucine-rich repeat containing G protein-coupled receptor 6 (LGR6), a plasma membrane GPCR, was screened out as a receptor for MaR1 [
58]. MaR1 and LGR6 interactions in phagocytes were clearly demonstrated to play a role in resolving inflammation. Another confirmed receptor for MaR1 is retinoic acid-related orphan receptor α (RORα), which induces nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) protection through the MaR1/RORα/12-lipoxygenase (12-LOX) autoregulatory circuit [
59]. RORα and LGR6 are the molecular targets for MaR1 in chronic NASH and acute sepsis, respectively. However, whether RORα or LGR6, or even both, functions as a MaR1 receptor and thereby triggers intracellular cascades to promote PNI recovery requires further study. A deeper and updated understanding of this phenomenon will likely significantly advance the chances of MaR1 being investigated in clinical trials.
Besides, in our sciatic crush injury mice the basic motor function tested by Footprint could easily revered about 1 month while complicated motor action potentials examined by Rotarod test were slightly recovered even after 3 months (Fig.
1A, B), which is consistent with our previous results that the compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) not completely restored even after 56 days [
60]. It might due to the different strategies to construct sciatic nerve crush models, such as the distinct tools, time and force for extrusion lead to different injury degrees and recovery period. Also, the different animal models cause inconsistency since we used mice instead of the widely used rats [
61].
In conclusion, we provided clear evidence that MaR1 should be considered a novel analgesic agent for the treatment of neuropathic pain and as a new activator for nerve regeneration to improve functional neurological recovery after nerve crush injury. MaR1 should be considered as the mainstay treatment for PNI rather than NGF, which is expensive and has some uncertain adverse effects.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.