Reprogrammed in vitro on m3 phenotype macrophages stop the growth of solid carcinoma in vivo
Abstract
Purpose of the study. The proof of the hypothesis that reprogrammed in vitro on M3 phenotype macrophages when injected into the body will substantially limit the development of solid carcinoma in vivo. Methods. The growth of a solid tumor was initiated in mice in vivo by subcutaneous injection of Ehrlich carcinoma (EC) cells. Injection of macrophages with a native M0 phenotype and with a reprogrammed M3 phenotype was performed in the region of solid EC formation. Reprogramming was performed with low serum doses, STAT3/6 and SMAD3 transcription factor blockers and lipopolysaccharide. Two schemes of macrophage administration were used: early and late. With early administration, macrophages were injected on days 1, 5, 10 and 15 after injection of EC cells by macrophage pricking all round on the four sides of the site of tumor development. With late administration, macrophages were administered on days 10, 15, 20 and 25. After 15 and 30 days after the introduction of EC cells, the solid tumor was excised and its volume was measured. The effect of macrophage administration was assessed qualitatively according to the visual and palpation characteristics of a solid tumor and quantitatively by the change in its volume compared with the group without the introduction of macrophages. Results. It has been established that M3-STAT3/6-SMAD3 macrophages with early administration from the onset of tumor development exert a pronounced antitumor effect in vivo, which was significantly greater than the antitumor effect of M3-STAT3/6-SMAD3 macrophages in late administration. Conclusion. The facts found in the work that M3 macrophages significantly inhibit the growth of solid carcinoma in vivo make it promising to develop a clinical version of the biotechnology of limiting tumor growth by pre-programming an antitumoral innate immune response in vitro.
Downloads
References
2. Sica A., Schioppa T., Mantovani A., Allavena P. Tumor-associated macrophages are a distinct M2 polarized population promoting tumor progression: potential targets of anti-cancer therapy. European Journal of Cancer. 2006; 42(6): 717-27.
3. Mills C.D., Thomas A.C., Lenz L.L., Munder M. Macrophage: SHIP of Immunity. Frontiers in Immunology. 2014; 5: 620.
4. Mills C.D., Kincaid K., Alt J.M., Heilman M.J., Hill A.M. M-1/M-2 macrophages and the Th1/Th2 paradigm. The Journal of Immunology. 2000; 164(12): 6166-73.
5. Rey-Giraud F., Hafner M., Ries C.H. In vitro generation of monocyte-derived macrophages under serum-free conditions improves their tumor promoting functions. PLoS One. 2012; 7(8): e42656.
6. 6. Gordon S., Taylor P.R. Monocyte and macrophage heterogeneity. Nature Reviews Immunology. 2000; 5: 953-64.
7. 7. Mantovani A., Sozzani S., Locati M., Allavena P., Sica A. Macrophage polarization: tumor-associated macrophages as a paradigm for polarized M2 mononuclear phagocytes. Trends in Immunology. 2002; 23(11): 549-55.
8. Zeini M., Través P.G., López-Fontal R., Pantoja C., Matheu A., Serrano M. et al. Specific contribution of p19 (ARF) to nitric oxide-dependent apoptosis. The Journal of Immunology. 2006; 177(5): 3327-36.
9. Tsung K., Dolan J.P., Tsung Y.L., Norton J.A. Macrophages as effector cells in interleukin 12-induced T cell-dependent tumor rejection. Cancer Research. 2002; 62(17): 5069-75.
10. Ibe S., Qin Z., Schuler T., Preiss S., Blankenstein T. Tumor rejection by disturbing tumor stroma cell interactions. The Journal of Experimental Medicine. 2001; 194(11): 1549-59.
11. Sharma M. Chemokines and their receptors: orchestrating a fine balance between health and disease. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology. 2009; 30(1): 1-22.
12. Dunn G.P., Old L.J., Schreiber R.D. The immunobiology of cancer immunosurveillance and immunoediting. Immunity. 2004; 21(2): 137-48.
13. Khong H.T., Restifo N.P. Natural selection of tumor variants in the generation of "tumor escape" phenotypes. Nature Immunology. 2002; 3(11): 999-1005.
14. Zou W. Regulatory T cells, tumor immunity and immunotherapy. Nature Reviews Immunology. 2006; 6(4): 295-307.
15. Stout R.D., Watkins S.K., Suttles J. Functional plasticity of macrophages: in situ reprogramming of tumor-associated macrophages. Journal of Leukocyte Biology. 2009; 86(5): 1105-9.
16. Malyshev I., Malyshev Yu. Current concept and update of the macrophage plasticity concept: intracellular mechanisms of reprogramming and M3 macrophage “switch” phenotype. BioMed Research International. 2015; 2015: 341308.
17. Gabrilovich D. Mechanisms and functional significance of tumor-induced dendritic-cell defects. Nature Reviews Immunology. 2004; 4 (12): 941-52.
18. Kono Y., Kawakami S., Higuchi Y., Maruyama K., Yamashita F., Hashida M. Antitumor effect of nuclear factor-κB decoy transfer by mannose-modified bubble lipoplex into macrophages in mouse malignant ascites. Cancer Science. 2014; 105(8): 1049-55.
19. Kalish S.V., Lyamina S.V., Usanova E.A., Manukhina E.B., Larionov N.P., Malyshev I.Yu. Macrophages reprogrammed in vitro towards the M1 phenotype and activated with LPS extend lifespan of mice with ehrlich ascites carcinoma. Medical Science Monitor Basic Research. 2015; 21: 226-34.
20. Kalish S., Lyamina S., Manukhina E., Malyshev Y., Raetskaya A., Malyshev I. M3 Macrophages Stop Division of Tumor Cells In Vitro and Extend Survival of Mice with Ehrlich Ascites Carcinoma. Medical science monitor basic research. 2017; 23: 8-19.
21. Cavazzoni E., Bugiantella W., Graziosi L., Franceschini M.S., Donini A. Malignant ascites: pathophysiology and treatment. International Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2013; 18(1): 1-9.
22. Becker G., Galandi D., Blum H.E. Malignant ascites: systematic review and guideline for treatment. European Journal of Cancer. 2006; 42(5): 589-97.
23. Ahmed N., Stenvers K.L. Getting to know ovarian cancer ascites: opportunities for targeted therapy-based translational research. Frontiers in Oncology. 2013; 3: 256.
24. Saif M.W., Siddiqui I.A., Sohail M.A. Management of ascites due to gastrointestinal malignancy. Annals of Saudi Medicine. 2009; 29(5): 369-77.
25. Kono Y., Kawakami S., Higuchi Y., Maruyama K., Yamashita F., Hashida M. Antitumor effect of nuclear factor-κB decoy transfer by mannose-modified bubble lipoplex into macrophages in mouse malignant ascites. Cancer Science. 2014; 105(8): 1049-55.
26. Ray T., Chakrabarti M.K., Pal A. Hemagglutinin protease secreted by V. cholerae induced apoptosis in breast cancer cells by ROS mediated intrinsic pathway and regresses tumor growth in mice model. Apoptosis. 2016; 21(2): 143-54.
27. Zhang X., Goncalves R., Mosser D.M. The Isolation and Characterization of Murine Macrophages. Current Protocols in Immunology. 2008; Chapter 14: Unit 14.1.
28. Martinez F.O., Sica A., Mantovani A., Locati M. Macrophage activation and polarization. Frontiers in Bioscience. 2008; 1(13): 453-61.
29. Peng J., Tsang J.Y., Li D., Niu N., Ho D.H., Lau K.F. et al. Inhibition of TGF-β signaling in combination with TLR7 ligation re-programs a tumoricidal phenotype in tumor-associated macrophages. Cancer Letters. 2013; 331(2): 239-49.
30. Satoh T., Saika T., Ebara S., Kusaka N., Timme T.L., Yang G. et al. Macrophages transduced with an adenoviral vector expressing IL-12 suppress tumor growth and metastasis in a preclinical metastatic prostate cancer model. Cancer Research. 2003; 63(22): 7853-7860.
31. Baay M., Brouwer A., Pauwels P., Peeters M. and Lardon F. Tumor cells and tumor-associated macrophages: secreted proteins as potential targets for therapy. Clinical and Developmental Immunology. 2011; 2011: 565187.
32. Aharinejad S., Abraham D., Paulus P., Abri H., Hofmann M., Grossschmidt K. Colony-stimulating factor-1 antisense treatment suppresses growth of human tumor xenografts in mice. Cancer Research. 2002; 62(18): 5317-24.
33. Malyshev I.Yu. Phenomena and signaling mechanisms reprogramming of macrophages. Patologicheskaya fiziologiya i eksperimental'naya terapiya. 2015; 59(2): 99-111. (in Russian)
