Crypt Base Columnar Stem Cells in Small Intestines of Mice Are Radioresistant

Laboratory of Signal Transduction, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Gastroenterology (Impact Factor: 12.82). 07/2012; 143(5):1266-76. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.07.106
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Adult stem cells have been proposed to be quiescent and radiation resistant, repairing DNA double-strand breaks by nonhomologous end joining. However, the population of putative small intestinal stem cells (ISCs) at position +4 from the crypt base contradicts this model, in that they are highly radiosensitive. Cycling crypt base columnar cells (CBCs) at crypt positions +1-3 recently were defined as an alternative population of ISCs. Little is known about the sensitivity of this stem cell population to radiation.
Radiation-induced lethality of CBCs was quantified kinetically in Lgr5-lacZ transgenic mice. γ-H2AX, BRCA1, RAD51, and DNA-PKcs foci were used as DNA repair surrogates to investigate the inherent ability of CBCs to recognize and repair double-strand breaks. 5-ethynyl-2'-deoxyuridine and 5-bromo-2'-deoxyuridine incorporation assays were used to study patterns of CBC growth arrest and re-initiation of cell cycling. Apoptosis was evaluated by caspase-3 staining.
CBCs are relatively radioresistant, repairing DNA by homologous recombination significantly more efficiently than transit amplifying progenitors or villus cells. CBCs undergo apoptosis less than 24 hours after irradiation (32% ± 2% of total lethality) or mitotic death at 24-48 hours. Survival of CBCs at 2 days predicts crypt regeneration at 3.5 days and lethality from gastrointestinal syndrome. Crypt repopulation originates from CBCs that survive irradiation.
Adult ISCs in mice can cycle rapidly yet still be radioresistant. Importantly, homologous recombination can protect adult stem cell populations from genotoxic stress. These findings broaden and refine concepts of the phenotype of adult stem cells.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abundant populations of epithelial progenitor cells maintain the epithelium along the proximal-to-distal axis of the airway. Exposure of lung tissue to ionizing radiation leads to tissue remodeling and potential cancer initiation or progression. However, little is known about the effects of ionizing radiation on airway epithelial progenitor cells. We hypothesized that ionizing radiation exposure will alter the behavior of airway epithelial progenitor cells in a radiation dose- and quality-dependent manner. To address this hypothesis, we cultured primary airway epithelial cells isolated from mice exposed to various doses of 320 kVp X ray or 600 MeV/nucleon (56)Fe ions in a 3D epithelial-fibroblast co-culture system. Colony-forming efficiency of the airway epithelial progenitor cells was assessed at culture day 14. In vivo clonogenic and proliferative potentials of airway epithelial progenitor cells were measured after exposure to ionizing radiation by lineage tracing and IdU incorporation. Exposure to both X rays and (56)Fe resulted in a dose-dependent decrease in the ability of epithelial progenitors to form colonies in vitro. In vivo evidence for increased clonogenic expansion of epithelial progenitors was observed after exposure to both X rays and (56)Fe. Interestingly, we found no significant increase in the epithelial proliferative index, indicating that ionizing radiation does not promote increased turnover of the airway epithelium. Therefore, we propose a model in which radiation induces a dose-dependent decrease in the pool of available progenitor cells, leaving fewer progenitors able to maintain the airway long-term. This work provides novel insights into the effects of ionizing radiation exposure on airway epithelial progenitor cell behavior.
    Radiation Research 01/2015; DOI:10.1667/RR13878.1 · 2.45 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Adult stem cells (SCs) retain the capacity of self-renewal and differentiation to generate multiple differentiated cell types (Barker et al., 2007). Thus, these adult SCs are utilized to functionally regenerate damaged tissues or reverse organ failure (Yui et al., 2012). However, SCs that are deregulated during inflammation, infection, or tissue regeneration may turn into invasive cancer SCs (CSCs) (Beachy et al., 2004). Accordingly, tight spatial-temporal regulation of adult SC behaviors may confer injury resistance, tissue regeneration, or tumor suppression, whereas SC deregulation may cause tumor initiation and/or recurrence (Merlos-Suárez et al., 2011). However, the lack of molecular markers that reflect the fine modulation of SC homeostatic response to injury or regeneration significantly hinders the development of regenerative medicine and cancer therapy.
    01/2015; 449(2). DOI:10.1016/j.stemcr.2014.12.004
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The mammalian organism is comprised of tissue types with varying degrees of self-renewal and regenerative capacity. In most organs self-renewing tissue-specific stem and progenitor cells contribute to organ maintenance, and it is vital to maintain a functional stem cell pool to preserve organ homeostasis. Various conditions like tissue injury, stress responses, and regeneration challenge the stem cell pool to re-establish homeostasis (Figure 1). However, with increasing age the functionality of adult stem cells declines and genomic mutations accumulate. These defects affect different cellular response pathways and lead to impairments in regeneration, stress tolerance, and organ function as well as to an increased risk for the development of ageing associated diseases and cancer. Maintenance of the genome appears to be of utmost importance to preserve stem cell function and to reduce the risk of ageing associated dysfunctions and pathologies. In this review, we discuss the causal link between stem cell dysfunction and DNA damage accrual, different strategies how stem cells maintain genome integrity, and how these processes are affected during ageing.
    Ageing Research Reviews 02/2015; 102. DOI:10.1016/j.arr.2015.01.004 · 7.63 Impact Factor