Astrocyte-specific hypoxia-inducible factor 1 (HIF-1) does not disrupt the endothelial barrier during hypoxia in vitro.


Journal

Fluids and barriers of the CNS
ISSN: 2045-8118
Titre abrégé: Fluids Barriers CNS
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101553157

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
18 Mar 2021
Historique:
received: 21 12 2020
accepted: 03 03 2021
entrez: 19 3 2021
pubmed: 20 3 2021
medline: 10 11 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Astrocytes (AC) are essential for brain homeostasis. Much data suggests that AC support and protect the vascular endothelium, but increasing evidence indicates that during injury conditions they may lose their supportive role resulting in endothelial cell activation and BBB disturbance. Understanding the triggers that flip this switch would provide invaluable information for designing new targets to modulate the brain vascular compartment. Hypoxia-inducible factor-1 (HIF-1) has long been assumed to be a culprit for barrier dysfunction as a number of its target genes are potent angiogenic factors. Indeed AC themselves, reservoirs of an array of different growth factors and molecules, are frequently assumed to be the source of such molecules although direct supporting evidence is yet to be published. Being well known reservoirs of HIF-1 dependent angiogenic molecules, we asked if AC HIF-1 dependent paracrine signaling drives brain EC disturbance during hypoxia. First we collected conditioned media from control and siRNA-mediated HIF-1 knockdown primary rat AC that had been exposed to normoxic or hypoxic conditions. The conditioned media was then used to culture normoxic and hypoxic (1% O AC conditioned media maintained both normoxic and hypoxic EC in a quiescent state by suppressing EC metabolic activity and proliferation. By FACs we observed reduced cell cycling with an increased number of cells in G0 phase and reduced cell numbers in M phase compared to controls. EC migration was also blocked by AC conditioned media and in correlation hypoxic tight junction organization and barrier functionality was improved. Surprisingly however, AC HIF-1 deletion did not impact EC responses or barrier stability during hypoxia. This study demonstrates that AC HIF-1 dependent paracrine signaling does not contribute to AC modulation of EC barrier function under normoxic or hypoxic conditions. Thus other cell types likely mediate EC permeability in stress scenarios. Our data does however highlight the continuous protective effect of AC on the barrier endothelium. Exploring these protective mechanisms in more detail will provide essential insight into ways to prevent barrier disturbance during injury and disease.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Astrocytes (AC) are essential for brain homeostasis. Much data suggests that AC support and protect the vascular endothelium, but increasing evidence indicates that during injury conditions they may lose their supportive role resulting in endothelial cell activation and BBB disturbance. Understanding the triggers that flip this switch would provide invaluable information for designing new targets to modulate the brain vascular compartment. Hypoxia-inducible factor-1 (HIF-1) has long been assumed to be a culprit for barrier dysfunction as a number of its target genes are potent angiogenic factors. Indeed AC themselves, reservoirs of an array of different growth factors and molecules, are frequently assumed to be the source of such molecules although direct supporting evidence is yet to be published. Being well known reservoirs of HIF-1 dependent angiogenic molecules, we asked if AC HIF-1 dependent paracrine signaling drives brain EC disturbance during hypoxia.
METHODS METHODS
First we collected conditioned media from control and siRNA-mediated HIF-1 knockdown primary rat AC that had been exposed to normoxic or hypoxic conditions. The conditioned media was then used to culture normoxic and hypoxic (1% O
RESULTS RESULTS
AC conditioned media maintained both normoxic and hypoxic EC in a quiescent state by suppressing EC metabolic activity and proliferation. By FACs we observed reduced cell cycling with an increased number of cells in G0 phase and reduced cell numbers in M phase compared to controls. EC migration was also blocked by AC conditioned media and in correlation hypoxic tight junction organization and barrier functionality was improved. Surprisingly however, AC HIF-1 deletion did not impact EC responses or barrier stability during hypoxia.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrates that AC HIF-1 dependent paracrine signaling does not contribute to AC modulation of EC barrier function under normoxic or hypoxic conditions. Thus other cell types likely mediate EC permeability in stress scenarios. Our data does however highlight the continuous protective effect of AC on the barrier endothelium. Exploring these protective mechanisms in more detail will provide essential insight into ways to prevent barrier disturbance during injury and disease.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33736658
doi: 10.1186/s12987-021-00247-2
pii: 10.1186/s12987-021-00247-2
pmc: PMC7977259
doi:

Substances chimiques

Hif1a protein, rat 0
Hypoxia-Inducible Factor 1, alpha Subunit 0
RNA, Small Interfering 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

13

Subventions

Organisme : Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
ID : 31003A_150062
Organisme : Candoc Forschungskredit
ID : K-51401-08-01

Références

Acta Neuropathol. 2010 Jan;119(1):7-35
pubmed: 20012068
J Cell Physiol. 2014 Aug;229(8):1096-105
pubmed: 24375098
Nat Med. 2003 Jun;9(6):677-84
pubmed: 12778166
Cell Tissue Res. 2009 Jan;335(1):75-96
pubmed: 18633647
Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2008 Sep;295(3):R864-73
pubmed: 18614764
Glia. 2010 May;58(7):857-69
pubmed: 20155822
J Clin Invest. 2012 Jul;122(7):2454-68
pubmed: 22653056
Cancer Res. 2004 Nov 1;64(21):7822-35
pubmed: 15520188
Annu Rev Physiol. 2014;76:39-56
pubmed: 23988176
J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2011 Feb;31(2):693-705
pubmed: 20827262
J Cell Physiol. 2009 Jul;220(1):163-73
pubmed: 19241444
J Neurochem. 2017 Aug;142(3):464-477
pubmed: 28488764
J Neurochem. 2007 Dec;103(6):2540-55
pubmed: 17931362
Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 1997 Sep-Oct;24(9-10):710-3
pubmed: 9315374
Neurobiol Dis. 2009 Mar;33(3):509-17
pubmed: 19166937
EMBO J. 2017 Aug 1;36(15):2187-2203
pubmed: 28637793
Mol Pharmacol. 2007 Aug;72(2):440-9
pubmed: 17513385
Mol Brain. 2015 Apr 10;8:23
pubmed: 25879213
Neuromolecular Med. 2019 Dec;21(4):414-431
pubmed: 30911877
Biostat Bioinforma Biomath. 2013 Aug;3(3):71-85
pubmed: 25558171
Nature. 1987 Jan 15-21;325(6101):253-7
pubmed: 3543687
Glia. 2016 Mar;64(3):440-56
pubmed: 26539695
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2000 Oct;279(4):C935-44
pubmed: 11003573
Redox Biol. 2020 Jul;34:101576
pubmed: 32502899
Stroke. 2016 Apr;47(4):1094-100
pubmed: 26965847
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016 Dec;71:484-505
pubmed: 27693230
Sci Transl Med. 2018 Jul 4;10(448):
pubmed: 29973407
Br J Pharmacol. 2014 Mar;171(5):1210-30
pubmed: 24641185
Acta Neuropathol. 2014 Nov;128(5):691-703
pubmed: 25149081
Sci Rep. 2020 May 8;10(1):7760
pubmed: 32385409
Curr Drug Metab. 2012 Jan;13(1):50-60
pubmed: 22292807
Neuroscience. 2008 Aug 13;155(2):423-38
pubmed: 18619525
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006 Jan;7(1):41-53
pubmed: 16371949
Exp Neurol. 2003 Jun;181(2):241-57
pubmed: 12781997
Glia. 2006 Dec;54(8):826-39
pubmed: 16977604
Neurobiol Dis. 2008 Sep;31(3):433-41
pubmed: 18602008
Brain. 2015 Jun;138(Pt 6):1548-67
pubmed: 25805644
Brain Pathol. 2009 Oct;19(4):630-41
pubmed: 18947334
J Cell Physiol. 2009 Mar;218(3):612-22
pubmed: 19016245
Brain Res Dev Brain Res. 2001 Sep 23;130(1):123-32
pubmed: 11557101
Nat Neurosci. 2019 Nov;22(11):1892-1902
pubmed: 31611708
J Biol Chem. 2013 Sep 27;288(39):28058-67
pubmed: 23926109
Transl Psychiatry. 2020 Jun 8;10(1):181
pubmed: 32513932
Front Immunol. 2017 Dec 11;8:1750
pubmed: 29321777
Glia. 2021 Feb;69(2):436-472
pubmed: 32955153
Cell. 2019 May 30;177(6):1522-1535.e14
pubmed: 31130380
Brain Res. 2005 Mar 21;1038(2):208-15
pubmed: 15757636
Exp Neurobiol. 2014 Mar;23(1):93-103
pubmed: 24737944
Neurochem Res. 2012 Feb;37(2):401-9
pubmed: 22002662
Curr Protoc Immunol. 2017 Nov 1;119:5.7.1-5.7.20
pubmed: 29091264
PLoS One. 2009;4(4):e5149
pubmed: 19340291
Int J Mol Sci. 2018 Jan 17;19(1):
pubmed: 29342116
J Neurochem. 2014 Oct;131(2):177-89
pubmed: 24974727
Neurosci Res. 1999 Nov;35(2):155-64
pubmed: 10616919

Auteurs

Julia Baumann (J)

Institute of Veterinary Physiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 260, Zurich, Switzerland.
Center for Clinical Studies, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, 8057, Zurich, Switzerland.

Chih-Chieh Tsao (CC)

Institute of Veterinary Physiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 260, Zurich, Switzerland.

Sheng-Fu Huang (SF)

Institute of Veterinary Physiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 260, Zurich, Switzerland.

Max Gassmann (M)

Institute of Veterinary Physiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 260, Zurich, Switzerland.

Omolara O Ogunshola (OO)

Institute of Veterinary Physiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 260, Zurich, Switzerland. larao@access.uzh.ch.

Articles similaires

Robotic Surgical Procedures Animals Humans Telemedicine Models, Animal

Odour generalisation and detection dog training.

Lyn Caldicott, Thomas W Pike, Helen E Zulch et al.
1.00
Animals Odorants Dogs Generalization, Psychological Smell
Animals TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases Colorectal Neoplasms Colitis Mice
Animals Tail Swine Behavior, Animal Animal Husbandry

Classifications MeSH