Pan Meng Liy, Ahmad Puzi Nur Nabilah, Ooi Yin Yin, Ramasamy Rajesh, Vidyadaran Sharmili
Neuroinflammation Group, Immunology Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400, Malaysia.
Department of Craniofacial Diagnostics & Biosciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Jalan Raja Muda Abdul Aziz, Kuala Lumpur 50300, Malaysia.
Biomedicines. 2023 Sep 27;11(10):2648. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11102648.
(1) Background: The latest research illustrates that microglia phenotype is not the binary 'resting' and 'activated' profiles. Instead, there is wide diversity in microglia states. Similarly, when testing different stimulation protocols for BV2 microglia, we discovered differences in the response of the cells in terms of the production of intracellular ROS (iROS), nitric oxide (NO), CD40 expression, and migratory capacity. (2) Methods: BV2 microglia were treated with single interferon gamma (IFN-γ) stimulation, LPS/IFN-γ co-stimulation, and priming with IFN-γ followed by stimulation with LPS for 24 h. The responses of BV2 microglia were then assessed using the HDCFDA test for iROS, the Griess assay for NO, immunophenotyping for CD40/CD11b/MHC II, and migration using a transwell apparatus. (3) Results: Single stimulation with IFN-γ induced NO but not ROS in BV2 microglia. Co-stimulation with LPSIFN-γ induced a higher iROS production (a 9.2-fold increase) and CD40 expression (28031 ± 8810.2 MFI), compared to priming with IFN-γLPS (a 4.0-fold increase in ROS and 16764 ± 1210.8 MFI of CD40). Co-stimulation also induced cell migration. On the other hand, priming BV2 microglia (IFN-γLPS) resulted in a higher NO production (64 ± 1.4 µM) compared to LPSIFN-γ co-stimulation (44 ± 1.7 µM). Unexpectedly, priming inhibited BV2 migration. (4) Conclusions: Taken together, the findings from this project reveal the ability of co-stimulation and priming in stimulating microglia into an inflammatory phenotype, and the heterogeneity of microglia responses towards different stimulating approaches.
(1) 背景:最新研究表明,小胶质细胞表型并非简单的“静止”和“激活”两种状态。相反,小胶质细胞状态具有广泛的多样性。同样,在测试针对BV2小胶质细胞的不同刺激方案时,我们发现细胞在细胞内活性氧(iROS)产生、一氧化氮(NO)、CD40表达和迁移能力方面的反应存在差异。(2) 方法:用单一干扰素γ(IFN-γ)刺激、LPS/IFN-γ共刺激以及先用IFN-γ预处理再用LPS刺激BV2小胶质细胞24小时。然后使用HDCFDA试验检测iROS、Griess法检测NO、对CD40/CD11b/MHC II进行免疫表型分析以及使用Transwell小室检测迁移情况,以此评估BV2小胶质细胞的反应。(3) 结果:IFN-γ单一刺激可诱导BV2小胶质细胞产生NO,但不产生ROS。与先用IFN-γ/LPS预处理相比(ROS增加4.0倍,CD40为16764±1210.8平均荧光强度),LPS/IFN-γ共刺激诱导产生更高的iROS(增加9.2倍)和CD40表达(28031±8810.2平均荧光强度)。共刺激还诱导细胞迁移。另一方面,与LPS/IFN-γ共刺激(44±1.7μM)相比,先用IFN-γ/LPS预处理BV2小胶质细胞可产生更高的NO(64±1.4μM)。出乎意料的是,预处理抑制了BV2的迁移。(4) 结论:综上所述,本项目的研究结果揭示了共刺激和预处理将小胶质细胞刺激成炎症表型的能力,以及小胶质细胞对不同刺激方法反应的异质性。