Clinical-Grade Multipotent Adult Progenitor Cells Durably Control Pathogenic T Cell Responses in Human Models of Transplantation and Autoimmunity

Department of Immunobiology, King's College London, Guy's Hospital, London SE1 9RT, United Kingdom
The Journal of Immunology (Impact Factor: 4.92). 04/2013; 190(9). DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1202710
Source: PubMed


A major goal of immunotherapy remains the control of pathogenic T cell responses that drive autoimmunity and allograft rejection. Adherent progenitor cells, including mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) and multipotent adult progenitor cells (MAPCs), represent attractive immunomodulatory cell therapy candidates currently active in clinical trials. MAPCs can be distinguished from MSCs on the basis of cellular phenotype, size, transcriptional profile, and expansion capacity. However, despite their ongoing evaluation in autoimmune and allogeneic solid organ transplantation settings, data supporting the immune regulatory potential of clinical-grade MAPCs are limited. In this study, we used allogeneic islet transplantation as a model indication to assess the ability of clinical-grade MAPCs to control T cell responses that drive immunopathology in human autoimmune disease and allograft rejection. MAPCs suppressed T cell proliferation and Th1 and Th17 cytokine production while increasing secretion of IL-10 and were able to suppress effector functions of bona fide autoreactive T cells from individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus, including killing of human islets. Furthermore, MAPCs favored the proliferation of regulatory T cells during homeostatic expansion driven by γ-chain cytokines and exerted a durable, yet reversible, control of T cell function. MAPC suppression required licensing and proceeded via IDO-mediated tryptophan catabolism. Therefore, the common immune modulatory characteristics of clinical-grade MAPCs shown in this study suggest that they can be regarded as an alternative source of adult progenitor cells with similar clinical usefulness to MSCs. Taken collectively, these findings may guide the successful deployment of both MSCs and MAPCs for the amelioration of human autoimmunity and allograft rejection.

Download full-text


Available from: Ania Skowera, Feb 17, 2015
1 Follower
28 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose of review: Cell therapy with mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) has emerged as a promising tolerance-inducing strategy, as MSC are potent modifiers of immune cells within adaptive as well as innate arm of the immune system. Here, we review recent evidence on both the beneficial and deleterious effect of MSC in experimental models of solid organ transplantation as well as first clinical experiences of MSC therapy in kidney transplant recipients. Recent findings: MSC are able to reprogram macrophages toward an anti-inflammatory phenotype capable to regulate antigraft immune response. This interaction is mediated mainly by TNF-α-induced-protein-6. Conversely, MSC also take on a proinflammatory phenotype and actually could worsen graft outcome. MSC in clinical transplantation is in its infancy and nobody so far has attempted to or provided evidence that this cell-based therapy is capable to promote operational tolerance. There are, however, supporting data of the ex-vivo immunoregulatory activity of MSC in treated patients. Summary: MSC have a great potential as a tolerance-promoting cell therapy. Extensive investigations are still needed to dissect the mechanism(s) of action of MSC, particularly in the setting of a proinflammatory environment, and to establish specific assays for monitoring MSC-treated patients to define the protolerogenic potential of MSC-based therapy in kidney transplantation.
    Current opinion in organ transplantation 12/2012; 19(1). DOI:10.1097/MOT.0b013e32835c5016 · 2.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Multipotent adult progenitor cells (MAPCs) are adult adherent stromal stem cells currently being assessed in acute graft versus host disease clinical trials with demonstrated immunomodulatory capabilities and the potential to ameliorate detrimental autoimmune and inflammation-related processes. Our previous studies documented that MAPCs secrete factors that play a role in regulating T-cell activity. Here we expand our studies using a proteomics approach to characterize and quantify MAPC secretome components secreted over 72 hours in vitro under steady-state conditions and in the presence of the inflammatory triggers interferon-γ and lipopolysaccharide, or a tolerogenic CD74 ligand, RTL1000. MAPCs differentially responded to each of the tested stimuli, secreting molecules that regulate the biological activity of the extracellular matrix (ECM), including proteins that make up the ECM itself, proteins that regulate its construction/deconstruction, and proteins that serve to attach and detach growth factors from ECM components for redistribution upon appropriate stimulation. MAPCs secreted a wide array of proteases, some detectable in their zymogen forms. MAPCs also secreted protease inhibitors that would regulate protease activity. MAPCs secreted chemokines and cytokines that could provide molecular guidance cues to various cell types, including neutrophils, macrophages, and T cells. In addition, MAPCs secreted factors involved in maintenance of a homeostatic environment, regulating such diverse programs as innate immunity, angiogenesis/angiostasis, targeted delivery of growth factors, and the matrix-metalloprotease cascade.
    STEM CELLS TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 08/2013; 19(2). DOI:10.5966/sctm.2013-0031 · 5.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC) field continues to rapidly progress with a number of clinical trials initiated and completed, with some reported successes in multiple clinical indications, and a growing number of companies established. The field nevertheless faces several challenges. Persistent issues include the definition of a MSC and comparability between MSC cell preparations. This is because of inherent cell heterogeneity, absence of markers unique to MSCs, and the difficulty in precisely defining them by developmental origin. Differences in the properties of MSCs also depend on the site of tissue harvest, phenotypic and genotypic characteristics of the donor and the isolation, storage and expansion methods used. These differences may be sufficient to ensure that attributes of the final MSC product could differ in potentially significant ways. As there are currently no gold standards, we propose using a reference material to establish methods of comparability amongst MSC preparations. We suggest four possible "ruler scenarios" and a method for global distribution. We further suggest that critical to establishing a reference material is the need to define protocols for comparing cells. The main purpose of this manuscript is to solicit input in establishing a consensus-based comparison. A comparative approach will be critical to all stages of translation to better clarify mechanisms of MSC actions, define optimal cell manufacturing process, ensure best practice clinical investigations, extend the use of a MSC product for new indications, protect a MSC product from imitators, and develop uniform reimbursement policies. Importantly, a reference material may enable a consensus on a practical definition of MSCs.
    Stem cells and development 01/2014; 23(11). DOI:10.1089/scd.2013.0591 · 3.73 Impact Factor
Show more