Background
Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) is an inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous system (CNS) that can be induced in animals to model immunological processes involved in human diseases such as multiple sclerosis, neuromyelitis optica, and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis. EAE is initiated by CD4
+ T helper lymphocytes of the Th
1 or Th
17 subset that recognize myelin peptides through their T cell receptors [
1]. These cells do not act alone, but in concert with different myeloid cells, including monocyte-derived CD11c
+ dendritic cells [
2‐
5], which activate them by presenting the myelin peptides together with costimulatory signals [
6‐
12], and monocyte-derived macrophages [
2,
4,
13,
14], which execute effector functions leading to demyelination [
15]. In addition, recent studies have established that neutrophils importantly contribute to EAE [
16‐
19], although their precise role is still unclear.
To coordinate their actions, immune cells must communicate with each other through chemical messengers such as interleukins, chemokines, and growth factors. Many of these molecules have been studied in the context of EAE in the hope of identifying potential therapeutic targets. For example: GM-CSF derives from T cells and promotes dendritic cell recruitment [
20,
21], IL-12 and IL-23 are secreted by dendritic cells to sustain T cell activation [
22], and IL-1β is released from different myeloid cells to induce inflammatory responses [
23]. However, no neutrophil-specific cytokine has been identified to date.
Following a study conducted to clarify the mechanism underlying the adjuvant effect of pertussis toxin (PTX) in EAE [
24], we compared the transcriptional profiles of peritoneal leukocytes isolated from mice injected or not with PTX using DNA microarrays (unpublished data). Among the most upregulated genes was IL-36γ (also called IL1F9), a newly characterized cytokine of the IL-1 family [
25]. The IL-36–IL-36R signaling pathway comprises three agonists (IL-36α, IL-36β, IL-36γ), two antagonists (IL-36RA, IL-38), one specific receptor subunit (IL-36R), and one accessory receptor subunit (IL-1RAcP) that is shared with the classical interleukin-1 receptor (IL-1R). The IL-36 proteins exhibit a typical β-trefoil structure [
26] whose activity is enhanced by N-terminal truncation [
27].
In the CNS, the expression of IL-36γ has never been studied, but that of IL-36R has been reported under normal conditions in non-neuronal elements such as the meninges, choroid plexus, and perivascular cells [
28]. In the periphery, IL-36γ expression is constitutive in epithelial cell lines and inducible in myeloid cells (monocytes, macrophages, dendritic cells) by inflammatory mediators (e.g., IL-1β, TNF, IL-17, IL-23, TLR ligands) [
29‐
37]. IL-36R is found on keratinocytes, splenic CD4
+ T cells, and different myeloid cells [
38‐
40].
IL-36γ promotes not only inflammation but also dendritic cell maturation and ability to generate a Th
1 response. Indeed, recombinant IL-36γ induces cytokines and chemokines (e.g., IL-6, IL-8, Csf2, Csf3, Cxcl1, Ccl20) when injected into epithelial tissues, resulting in neutrophil and T cell infiltration [
31,
40‐
42]. Furthermore, IL-36γ stimulates dendritic cells to produce inflammatory mediators (e.g., IL-6, IL-1β, IL-12p40, IL-12p35, IL-23p19, Cox-2, Cxcl1, Csf2) and cell surface receptors involved in antigen presentation (e.g., MHCII, CD80, CD83, CD86) [
38‐
40]. IL-36γ can also induce CD4
+ T cells to adopt an inflammatory IFNγ
+ Th
1 profile even in the absence of antigen-presenting cells, indicating that it can directly signal through IL-36R on T cells [
38]. Consistently, the IL-36–IL-36R axis was found to be involved in psoriasis [
29,
32,
34,
43‐
50], but the possibility that it also contributes to other T cell-driven autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis remains to be determined.
The goal of the present study was to test the hypothesis that myeloid cells produces IL-36γ during EAE to promote inflammatory Th1/Th17 responses towards myelin. The findings presented below demonstrate that IL-36γ is specifically and strongly expressed by neutrophils in both CNS and hematopoietic compartments during certain forms of EAE and that microglia can react to IL-36γ by releasing neutrophil-related cytokines; however, IL-36γ does not influence the clinical and histopathological signs of EAE.
Methods
Animals
C57BL/6 mice were obtained from The Jackson Laboratory. Colonies of IL-36γ
–/–, IL-36R
–/–, and 2D2 mice (C57BL/6 background) were generated from breeders provided by the Mutant Mouse Regional Resource Center, Amgen or The Jackson Laboratory, respectively. The genotypes were confirmed by PCR using the primers listed in Additional file
1: Table S1. The experiments were performed on male mice aged 8–10 weeks under specific pathogen-free conditions with the approval of the Laval University Animal Protection Committee.
EAE induction by active immunization
Mice were subcutaneously injected into both flanks with a total of 200 μl of emulsion containing 300 μg of MOG35-55 peptide (Feldan) dissolved in saline and mixed with an equal volume of complete Freund’s adjuvant containing 500 μg of killed Mycobacterium tuberculosis H37 RA (Difco Laboratories). They were also injected intraperitoneally with 20 μg/kg of PTX (List Biological Laboratories) immediately and 2 days after immunization.
EAE induction by adoptive transfer
Mice were intraperitoneally injected with 20 × 106 encephalitogenic cells. These were isolated from abdominal lymph nodes and spleens of mice killed 8 days after active EAE induction and then cultured for 2 days in DMEM with MOG35-55 peptide (15 μg/ml), murine IL-12 (5 ng/ml, R&D Systems), murine IL-23 (20 ng/ml, R&D Systems), heat-inactivated HyClone bovine growth serum (10 %, Thermo Scientific), modified Eagle’s medium non-essential amino acids (1 %, Wisent), penicillin (100 U/ml), streptomycin (100 μg/ml), and amphotericin B (250 ng/ml).
EAE induction in 2D2 mice
2D2 mice received two intraperitoneal injections of PTX (20 μg/kg) at a 2-day interval.
Evaluation of EAE symptoms
Mice were weighed and scored daily as follows: 0, no visual sign of disease; 0.5, partial tail paralysis; 1, complete tail paralysis; 1.5, weakness in one hindlimb; 2, weakness in both hindlimbs; 2.5, partial hindlimb paralysis; 3, complete hindlimb paralysis; 3.5, partial forelimb paralysis; 4, complete forelimb paralysis; and 5, dead or killed for humane reasons.
Cell suspension and flow cytometry
Mice were anesthetized and exsanguinated by cardiac perfusion with saline. Spinal cords were harvested, minced with razor blades in Dulbecco’s phosphate-buffered saline (DPBS, with Ca2+ and Mg2+), digested for 45 min at 37 °C in DPBS containing 0.13 U/ml Liberase TM (Roche Diagnostics) and 50 U/ml DNase I (Sigma-Aldrich), filtered through 40-μm cell strainers, and then separated from myelin debris by centrifugation in 35 % Percoll (GE Healthcare). The spleens were mashed through 40-μm cell strainers and treated with ammonium chloride solution (Stemcell Technologies) to remove residual erythrocytes. For immunostaining, the cells were incubated sequentially with rat anti-CD16/CD32 antibody (5 μg/ml, BD Biosciences, clone 2.4G2) and Fixable viability dye eFluor 506 (1:1000, eBioscience) for 5 min, with anti-IL-36R antibody (Abcam #ab171844 or R&D Systems #AF2354) for 30 min, and with combinations of the following antibodies for 30 min: rat anti-CD45-FITC (BD Biosciences, clone 30-F11), rat anti-CD11b-V450 (BD Biosciences, clone M1/70), rat anti-Ly6G-APC-Cy7 (Biolegend, clone 1A8), rat anti-CD3ε-PE (BD Biosciences, clone 145-2C11), rat anti-CD19-PerCP-Cy5.5, (BD Biosciences, clone 1D3), rat anti-CD11c-Alexa 647 (Biolegend, clone N418), and goat anti-rabbit IgG-Alexa 594 (Invitrogen, Cat No A11072). The latter antibodies were diluted at 1:200, except anti-CD45-FITC, which was diluted at 1:100. Isotype control antibodies and fluorescence-minus-one controls were used for gating. Cells were washed and resuspended in PBS before being analyzed with a FACSAria II flow cytometer (BD Biosciences). All the analyses were performed by excluding dead cells and doublets using FlowJo software (Tree Star, version 10.0.7r2).
Western blotting
Ly6G+ neutrophils, isolated by flow cytometry, were homogenized in extraction buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl at pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 1 % Triton X-100, 1 mM ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, 1 mM ethylene glycol tetraacetic acid, 2 mM Na pyrophosphate, 10 mM Na β-glycerophosphate, 1 mM Na orthovanadate, 1 mM phenylmethanesulfonylfluoride, 1× protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail [Sigma]). The protein samples (50 μg) were resolved in a 12 % SDS-PAGE Mini-Protean Precast gel (Bio-Rad) and transferred to a polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (PerkinElmer). The membrane was blocked in PBS containing 0.1 % Tween 20 and 7 % non-fat milk, and then incubated at 4 °C overnight with an antibody against IL-36γ (1:200, Santa Cruz, sc-168163) or β-actin (1:50000, Abcam, mab150), followed by 1 h at room temperature in the appropriate secondary horseradish peroxidase-conjugated antibody (Cell Signaling Technology). The antibodies were detected using the Western Lightning Plus-ECL chemiluminescence substrate (Perkin Elmer).
Immunostaining
Immunostaining was performed as described previously [
51] using the following primary antibodies: rat anti-CD3 (1:500, BD Biosciences, clone 17A2) and rat anti-Ly6G (1:5000, BD Biosciences, clone 1A8).
In situ hybridization
Spinal cord sections were analyzed for IL-36γ and IL-36R mRNAs by radioisotopic in situ hybridization as described previously [
52].
Microscopy
Micrographs were taken using a Retiga EX camera on a Nikon E800 microscope. Images were adjusted for contrast, brightness, and sharpness using Photoshop 12 (Adobe Systems).
Microglial cell isolation and culture
Primary microglia were isolated from newborn mice (1 day old or less). The brains were minced with razor blades in DPBS and passed four times through a 20-G needle. After centrifugation (1500 rpm), the pellets were resuspended and incubated at 37 °C for 15 min in DPBS containing 0.25 % trypsin-EDTA (Wisent) and 50 U/ml DNase I. The cells were plated in T-25 flasks (~3 brains/flask) and grown in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (Wisent) supplemented with 10 % heat-inactivated HyClone bovine growth serum, with medium changed every 2 days. After 2 weeks, the microglia were separated from other glial cells as described previously [
53]. Briefly, they were incubated with 0.05 % trypsin in DMEM at 37 °C for 30–45 min, rinsed with PBS to remove contaminating non-adherent cells, then grown in a 1:1 mixture of fresh media and conditioned media from mixed glial cultures (2–3 days). Microglial purity was >99 %, as determined by flow cytometry using the myeloid cell marker CD11b.
For experimentation, primary microglia were seeded in 12-well plates and used at ~70 % confluence (after 5–7 days). BV2 microglia were seeded in 12-well plates at a density of 500,000 cells and used on the next day. Cells were stimulated with 100 ng/ml recombinant mouse IL-36γ (amino acids 13-164, R&D Systems) or PBS as control. After 6 h, the cells were rinsed with PBS, resuspended in lysis buffer and stored at −80 °C until RNA extraction.
RNA extraction and qRT-PCR
Total RNA from tissues and cells was isolated by homogenization in TRI-reagent or lysis buffer (Sigma-Aldrich), respectively. GenElute Mammalian Total RNA Miniprep Kit (Sigma-Aldrich) was used for RNA purification. First strand cDNA was generated from 5 (tissues) or 1 (cells) μg of total RNA using Superscript III (Invitrogen) with random hexamers and 20-mer oligo-dT primers, then purified using the GenElute PCR Clean-Up Kit (Sigma-Aldrich). The product (20 ng) was analyzed using the LightCycler 480 system with the SYBR Green I Master mix and primers listed in Additional file
2: Table S2 according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Applied Biosystems). The PCR conditions consisted of 45 cycles of denaturation (10 s at 95 °C), annealing (10 s at 60 °C), elongation (14 s at 72 °C), and reading (5 s at 74 °C). The number of mRNA copies was determined using the second derivative method [
54].
Statistical analyses
Data are expressed as mean ± standard error. Means were compared using the Wilcoxon or Kruskal-Wallis test, except for the microarray data, which were compared using Student’s t test. EAE incidence curves were constructed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the Wilcoxon test. All these analyses were performed using JMP 10 (SAS Institute) with a significance level of 5 %.
Discussion
As observed in other immunological diseases such as psoriasis [
29,
32,
34,
57,
58], the present study shows that IL-36γ and IL-36R are upregulated in the three models of EAE. It also shows that IL-36γ derives from neutrophils and can stimulate microglia to produce neutrophil-stimulating cytokines, which is consistent with previous studies showing that IL-36γ induces both the production of such cytokines in other myeloid cells residing outside the CNS [
31,
38,
40‐
42] and the recruitment of neutrophils [
42]. Despite these observations, we demonstrate that neither IL-36γ nor IL-36R plays a significant role in EAE, similarly to what was reported in murine models of arthritis [
59,
60] and mycobacterial infection [
61].
The main question that arises is why IL-36γ is expressed, but does not play a role in certain conditions. One hypothesis is that IL-36γ, like other members of the IL-1 family, requires a second signal to be processed, activated, and secreted. This signal would be present in psoriasis, but not in EAE and arthritis models. In support of this, it has been shown that IL-36γ requires N-terminal truncation to be fully active [
27]. However, it is unknown whether this truncation occurs in vivo and what would be the protease involved. Our work shows, for the first time to our knowledge, that the full-length IL-36γ protein (193 amino acids, 22 kDa) is detectable in vivo (i.e., in neutrophils from EAE mice). As the truncated form is not detectable in the same conditions, it is likely that IL-36γ remains stored under a pro-form in the cytoplasm of neutrophils during EAE. A second (non-exclusive) hypothesis is that neutrophils release IL-36γ during a cell death process such as NETosis, which occurs in psoriasis [
62], but not likely in EAE. This possibility that IL-36γ acts as an alarmin (i.e., an endogenous molecule that signals tissue and cell damage) is so far only supported by the observation that the TLR3 agonist polyinosinic-polycytidylic acid concomitantly induces cell death and IL-36γ release in keratinocyte cultures [
35]. Finally, a third hypothesis is that the CNS, an immunoprivileged site, has a higher activation threshold to IL-36γ due to a combination of mechanisms (e.g., via the secretion of IL-36 antagonists and the generation of intracellular signaling inhibitors such as SIGIRR [
63]).
A positive aspect of this study is that we have identified microglia as a potential target of IL-36γ. This suggests that IL-36γ could contribute to neuroinflammation, perhaps by promoting neutrophil recruitment, in certain conditions that remain to be determined. Another positive aspect is that we have identified neutrophils as a major and exclusive source of IL-36γ in nervous and hematopoietic tissues (i.e., brain, spinal cord, spleen, blood). According to previous studies, keratinocytes and other epithelial cells can also produce IL-36γ in culture [
30‐
34,
64], but, to our knowledge, this remains to be confirmed in vivo. Therefore, it will be important in the future to determine whether neutrophils are a predominant source of IL-36γ in epithelial inflammatory diseases (e.g., psoriasis, asthma) as they are in EAE.
In conclusion, this study demonstrates that components of the IL-36 signaling pathway are strongly expressed in EAE, but that they do not contribute to this pathology. Furthermore, by revealing that IL-36γ is a neutrophil-specific marker in different tissues and that microglia have the potential to response to this cytokine, this study opens up new research avenues for elucidating the biological function of IL-36γ and its clinical significance.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
LV designed the experiments and supervised the project. LB carried out most of the experiments with the assistance of AD and AP. LV and LB wrote the manuscript, which was read and approved by the other authors.