Frontiers Copyright Statement

© Copyright 2007-2016 Frontiers Media SA. All rights reserved.

All content included on this site, such as text, graphics, logos, button icons, images, video/audio clips, downloads, data compilations and software, is the property of or is licensed to Frontiers Media SA (“Frontiers”) or its licensees and/or subcontractors. The copyright in the text of individual articles is the property of their respective authors, subject to a license granted to Frontiers.

The compilation of articles constituting this e-book, wherever published, as well as the compilation of all other content on this site, is the exclusive property of Frontiers. For the conditions for downloading and copying of e-books from Frontiers’ website, please see the Terms for Website Use. If purchasing Frontiers e-books from other websites or sources, the conditions of the website concerned apply.

Images and graphics not forming part of user-contributed materials may not be downloaded or copied without permission.

Individual articles may be downloaded and reproduced in accordance with the principles of the CC-BY licence subject to any copyright or other notices. They may not be re-sold as an e-book.

As author or other contributor you grant a CC-BY licence to others to reproduce your articles, including any graphics and third-party materials supplied by you, in accordance with the Conditions for Website Use and subject to any copyright notices which you include in connection with your articles and materials.

All copyright, and all rights therein, are protected by national and international copyright laws.

The above represents a summary only. For the full conditions see the Conditions for Authors and the Conditions for Website Use.

ISSN 1664-8714
ISBN 978-2-88919-770-5
DOI 10.3389/978-2-88919-770-5

About Frontiers

Frontiers is more than just an open-access publisher of scholarly articles: it is a pioneering approach to the world of academia, radically improving the way scholarly research is managed. The grand vision of Frontiers is a world where all people have an equal opportunity to seek, share and generate knowledge. Frontiers provides immediate and permanent online open access to all its publications, but this alone is not enough to realize our grand goals.

Frontiers Journal Series

The Frontiers Journal Series is a multi-tier and interdisciplinary set of open-access, online journals, promising a paradigm shift from the current review, selection and dissemination processes in academic publishing. All Frontiers journals are driven by researchers for researchers; therefore, they constitute a service to the scholarly community. At the same time, the Frontiers Journal Series operates on a revolutionary invention, the tiered publishing system, initially addressing specific communities of scholars, and gradually climbing up to broader public understanding, thus serving the interests of the lay society, too.

Dedication to quality

Each Frontiers article is a landmark of the highest quality, thanks to genuinely collaborative interactions between authors and review editors, who include some of the world’s best academicians. Research must be certified by peers before entering a stream of knowledge that may eventually reach the public - and shape society; therefore, Frontiers only applies the most rigorous and unbiased reviews.

Frontiers revolutionizes research publishing by freely delivering the most outstanding research, evaluated with no bias from both the academic and social point of view.

By applying the most advanced information technologies, Frontiers is catapulting scholarly publishing into a new generation.

What are Frontiers Research Topics?

Frontiers Research Topics are very popular trademarks of the Frontiers Journals Series: they are collections of at least ten articles, all centered on a particular subject. With their unique mix of varied contributions from Original Research to Review Articles, Frontiers Research Topics unify the most influential researchers, the latest key findings and historical advances in a hot research area! Find out more on how to host your own Frontiers Research Topic or contribute to one as an author by contacting the Frontiers Editorial Office: researchtopics@frontiersin.org

The Role of Aire, micro-RNAs and Cell-Cell Interactions on Thymic Architecture and Induction of Tolerance

Topic Editors:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Daniella Areas Mendes-da-Cruz, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Brazil

Ernna Hérida Oliveira, University of São Paulo, Brazil

A medullary thymic epithelial cell (mTEC) (here depicted in green) interacts with developing thymocytes (here depicted with blue nucleus and pink cytoplasm), which through MHC-II presents the self peripheral tissue antigens (PTAs). In the nucleus of mTECs, the autoimmune regulator (Aire) protein plays its role as an very important transcriptional regulator of PTAs and microRNAs. Once within the cytoplasm, microRNAs act as posttranscriptional regulators of Aire and PTA mRNAs.

Image taken from: Passos GA, Mendes-da-Cruz DA and Oliveira EH (2015) The thymic orchestration involving Aire, miRNAs, and cell–cell interactions during the induction of central tolerance. Front. Immunol. 6:352. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00352

The focus of this eBook is to bring new insights into central immune tolerance. To fulfill that, much has been discussed about the master in the regulation of tolerance, the autoimmune regulator (Aire) gene the main thymus cell type that expresses this gene, the medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs).

It includes one Editorial and 12 other excellent contributions in the format of mini reviews or original research papers covering one or more of these aspects: promiscuous gene expression (PGE), epigenetics, miRNAs, association of the Aire gene and miRNAs, thymocyte–TEC interaction, coxsackievirus and type 1 diabetes, exosomes in the thymus, thymic crosstalk, thymic B cells, T cell development, chemokines and migration of T cells, miRNAs and the thymic atrophy, cell–cell interactions, and thymus ontogeny.

Authors raised hypothesis, discuss concepts, and show open questions. The remaining important issues to resolve questions within the central tolerance research are briefly discussed below.

The first mini review is authored by Olga Ucar and Kristin Rattay. They focused on the posttranscriptional control of PGE by miRNAs as well as epigenetic control involving DNA methylation, histone modifications, and topology of chromosomes. These processes represent additional factors to be explored and that might regulate the expression of Aire-independent tissue restricted antigens (TRAs), which are implicated in the central tolerance.

Are the Eph/ephrins important for thymocyte–TEC interaction? This issue was reviewed by Javier Garcia-Ceca and cols. The maturation of thymocytes is depending on their interaction with TECs within the thymus. Authors argue the importance of Ephs and ephrins on the intrathymic maturation of both thymic epithelial microenvironment and thymocyte maturation and on the recruitment of lymphoid progenitors into the thymus.

Another stimulating mini review is authored by Hélène Michaux and cols in which they discuss the hypothesis that infection by coxsackievirus B4 (CV-B4) could be associated with etiopathogenesis of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D). Authors consider that besides their tropism to the pancreatic beta cells, CV-B4 could also involve the thymus. Once within this organ the virus might somehow perturbs central tolerance to the insulin family triggering thus autoimmune T1D.

Our group contributed with a mini review focusing on cell–cell interactions within the thymus involving TECs and thymocytes and the role of the Aire gene on the induction of central tolerance throughout the modulation of TRA expression in mTECs. In addition, we discuss the recent evidence that Aire also regulate the expression of miRNAs in these cells. On its turn, the Aire-dependent miRNAs might exert control over TRAs. We raise issues that besides the transcriptional control exerted by Aire, PGE could also be being controlled through posttranscriptional mechanism involving miRNAs.

A very pertinent question raised by Gabriel Skogberg and cols is on the role of exosomes on TRA presentation by TECs to thymocytes and its implication in the thymocyte selection. Exosomes may be liberated by TECs to the extracellular milieu and transport TRAs as well as MHC molecules, establishing intercellular communication to enhance antigen presentation to developing thymocytes. Authors discuss how intercellular communication via exosomes within the thymus could have consequences on TRA presentation and finally on central tolerance.

The thymic crosstalk, i.e., the reciprocal control by the close contact between TECs and thymocytes, which influences the differentiation of both types of cells was elegantly reviewed by Noëlla Lopes and cols. Authors discuss the role of dendritic cells (DCs) subsets in the process of deletion of autoreactive T cells and the generation of natural Tregs and raise questions how hematopoietic cells may control the organization of the thymic medulla.

Thymus is an organ composed of different cell types including TECs, DCs, macrophages among other cell types, and of course thymocytes. Recently, researchers have identified an unexpected cell type formed by B cells, which may be originated from intrathymic B lymphopoiesis or immigration from the periphery. Tomoyoshi Yamano and cols contributed with a mini review discussing the role of thymic B cells expressing MHC-II, CD80, and Aire, in the crosstalk with CD4 single positive cells. Authors raise questions how these cells might play a role as antigen presenting cells in an unpredicted way within the thymus.

The regulation of T cell development is apparently well resolved; however, several unsolved questions remain. This important aspect is represented in this Research Topic through the mini review by Iris Caramalho and cols. Authors show new questions on the beginning of Treg lineage commitment, their spatial localization within the human thymus and their molecular components.

Cell migration within the thymus is crucial for the central tolerance. Developing thymocytes migrate throughout the thymus being exposed initially to the cortex and then to the thymic medulla were they respectively undergo positive and negative selection. Chemokines represent key regulators for thymocyte migration. Zicheng Hu and cols argue the role of chemokines in the thymic cell migration and induction of central tolerance.

Thymic atrophy during senescence is widely recognized; however, poorly understood. In addition to the atrophy due to senescence, thymus involutes in response to a variety of stimuli including microbial infections. The mouse model of Trypanosoma cruzi infection corresponds to an adequate mouse model to access this question. Leandra Linhares-Lacerda and cols show results on the role of miRNAs on regulation of chemotaxis, which contribute to a better understanding, while incites new issues, of thymic involution.

Cellularity of mTECs is pivotal for cell–cell interactions within the thymus, which is required for central tolerance. Taishin Akiyama and cols argue the role of cytokines on cellularity of mTECs focusing into the molecular basis of cell–cell interactions opening perspective on the use of mathematical models for understanding these processes.

Thymus morphogenesis is a central point with many open questions. The mini review authored by Arnon Dias Jurberg and cols addresses the role of the large superfamily of TGF-beta/bone morphogenetic protein ligands in the thymus morphogenesis and in T cell differentiation.

This eBook provides an international and updated insight into the latest developments and open questions on the cellular and molecular bases of central tolerance induction.

Citation: Passos, G. A., Mendes-da-Cruz, D. A., Oliveira, E. H., eds. (2016). The Role of Aire, micro-RNAs and Cell-Cell Interactions on Thymic Architecture and Induction of Tolerance. Lausanne: Frontiers Media. doi: 10.3389/978-2-88919-770-5

Table of Contents

Editorial: The Role of Aire, microRNAs and Cell–Cell Interactions on Thymic Architecture and Induction of Tolerance

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, Daniella Arêas Mendes-da-Cruz and Ernna Hérida Oliveira

Promiscuous gene expression in the thymus: a matter of epigenetics, miRNA, and more?

Olga Ucar and Kristin Rattay

Eph/ephrins-mediated thymocyte–thymic epithelial cell interactions control numerous processes of thymus biology

Javier García-Ceca, David Alfaro, Sara Montero-Herradón, Esther Tobajas, Juan José Muñoz and Agustín G. Zapata

How does thymus infection by coxsackievirus contribute to the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes?

Hélène Michaux, Henri Martens, Hela Jaïdane, Aymen Halouani, Didier Hober and Vincent Geenen

The thymic orchestration involving Aire, miRNAs, and cell–cell interactions during the induction of central tolerance

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, Daniella Arêas Mendes-da-Cruz and Ernna Hérida Oliveira

Exosomes in the thymus: antigen transfer and vesicles

Gabriel Skogberg, Esbjörn Telemo and Olov Ekwall

Thymic crosstalk coordinates medulla organization and T-cell tolerance induction

Noëlla Lopes, Arnauld Sergé, Pierre Ferrier and Magali Irla

Thymic B cells and central T cell tolerance

Tomoyoshi Yamano, Madlen Steinert and Ludger Klein

Regulatory T-cell development in the human thymus

Íris Caramalho, Helena Nunes-Cabaço, Russell B. Foxall and Ana E. Sousa

The contribution of chemokines and migration to the induction of central tolerance in the thymus

Zicheng Hu, Jessica Naomi Lancaster and Lauren I. R. Ehrlich

Differential expression of microRNAs in thymic epithelial cells from Trypanosoma cruzi acutely infected mice: putative role in thymic atrophy

Leandra Linhares-Lacerda, Cintia Cristina Palu, Marcelo Ribeiro-Alves, Bruno Diaz Paredes, Alexandre Morrot, Maria Rosa Garcia-Silva, Alfonso Cayota and Wilson Savino

Positive and negative regulatory mechanisms for fine-tuning cellularity and functions of medullary thymic epithelial cells

Taishin Akiyama, Ryosuke Tateishi, Nobuko Akiyama, Riko Yoshinaga and Tetsuya J. Kobayashi

A tale from TGF-β superfamily for thymus ontogeny and function

Arnon Dias Jurberg, Larissa Vasconcelos-Fontes and Vinícius Cotta-de-Almeida

EDITORIAL
published: 14 December 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00615

Editorial: The Role of Aire, microRNAs and Cell–Cell Interactions on Thymic Architecture and Induction of Tolerance

Geraldo Aleixo Passos1,2*, Daniella Arêas Mendes-da-Cruz[3] and Ernna Hérida Oliveira[1]

1 Molecular Immunogenetics Group, Department of Genetics, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil

2 Disciplines of Genetics and Molecular Biology, Department of Morphology, Physiology and Basic Pathology, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil

3 Laboratory on Thymus Research, Oswaldo Cruz Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

OPEN ACCESS

Edited and reviewed by:

Herman Waldmann, University of Oxford, UK

*Correspondence:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos
passos@usp.br

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 05 October 2015
Accepted: 23 November 2015
Published: 14 December 2015

Citation:

Passos GA, Mendes-da-Cruz DA and Oliveira EH (2015) Editorial: The Role of Aire, microRNAs and Cell–Cell Interactions on Thymic Architecture and Induction of Tolerance. Front. Immunol. 6:615. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00615

Keywords: Thymus gland, central tolerance, Aire gene, miRNAs, cell-cell interactions, Coxsackievirus, exosomes, chemokines

The focus of this Research Topic is to bring new insights into central immune tolerance. To fulfill that, much has been discussed about the master in the regulation of tolerance, the autoimmune regulator (Aire) gene (1–3), the main thymus cell type that expresses this gene, and the medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs) (4, 5).

It includes 12 excellent contributions in the format of mini reviews or original research papers covering one or more of these aspects: promiscuous gene expression (PGE), epigenetics, miRNAs, association of the Aire gene and miRNAs, thymocyte–TEC interaction, coxsackievirus and type 1 diabetes, exosomes in the thymus, thymic crosstalk, thymic B cells, T cell development, chemokines and migration of T cells, miRNAs and the thymic atrophy, cell–cell interactions, and thymus ontogeny.

Authors raised hypothesis, discuss concepts, and show open questions. The remaining important issues to resolve questions within the central tolerance research are briefly discussed below.

The first mini review is authored by Olga Ucar and Kristin Rattay (6). They focused on the posttranscriptional control of PGE by miRNAs as well as epigenetic control involving DNA methylation, histone modifications, and topology of chromosomes. These processes represent additional factors to be explored and that might regulate the expression of Aire-independent tissue restricted antigens (TRAs), which are implicated in the central tolerance.

Are the Eph/ephrins important for thymocyte–TEC interaction? This issue was reviewed by Javier Garcia-Ceca and cols (7). The maturation of thymocytes is depending on their interaction with TECs within the thymus. Authors argue the importance of Ephs and ephrins on the intrathymic maturation of both thymic epithelial microenvironment and thymocyte maturation and on the recruitment of lymphoid progenitors into the thymus.

Another stimulating mini review is authored by Hélène Michaux and cols (8) in which they discuss the hypothesis that infection by coxsackievirus B4 (CV-B4) could be associated with etiopathogenesis of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D). Authors consider that besides their tropism to the pancreatic beta cells, CV-B4 could also involve the thymus. Once within this organ the virus might somehow perturbs central tolerance to the insulin family triggering thus autoimmune T1D.

Our group contributed with a mini review (9) focusing on cell–cell interactions within the thymus involving TECs and thymocytes and the role of the Aire gene on the induction of central tolerance throughout the modulation of TRA expression in mTECs. In addition, we discuss the recent evidence that Aire also regulate the expression of miRNAs in these cells. On its turn, the Aire-dependent miRNAs might exert control over TRAs. We raise issues that besides the transcriptional control exerted by Aire, PGE could also be being controlled through posttranscriptional mechanism involving miRNAs.

A very pertinent question raised by Gabriel Skogberg and cols (10) is on the role of exosomes on TRA presentation by TECs to thymocytes and its implication in the thymocyte selection. Exosomes may be liberated by TECs to the extracellular milieu and transport TRAs as well as MHC molecules, establishing intercellular communication to enhance antigen presentation to developing thymocytes. Authors discuss how intercellular communication via exosomes within the thymus could have consequences on TRA presentation and finally on central tolerance.

The thymic crosstalk, i.e., the reciprocal control by the close contact between TECs and thymocytes, which influences the differentiation of both types of cells was elegantly reviewed by Noëlla Lopes and cols (11). Authors discuss the role of dendritic cells (DCs) subsets in the process of deletion of autoreactive T cells and the generation of natural Tregs and raise questions how hematopoietic cells may control the organization of the thymic medulla.

Thymus is an organ composed of different cell types including TECs, DCs, macrophages among other cell types, and of course thymocytes. Recently, researchers have identified an unexpected cell type formed by B cells, which may be originated from intrathymic B lymphopoiesis or immigration from the periphery. Tomoyoshi Yamano and cols (12) contributed with a mini review discussing the role of thymic B cells expressing MHC-II, CD80, and Aire, in the crosstalk with CD4 single positive cells. Authors raise questions how these cells might play a role as antigen presenting cells in an unpredicted way within the thymus.

The regulation of T cell development is apparently well resolved; however, several unsolved questions remain. This important aspect is represented in this Research Topic through the mini review by Iris Caramalho and cols (13). Authors show new questions on the beginning of Treg lineage commitment, their spatial localization within the human thymus and their molecular components.

Cell migration within the thymus is crucial for the central tolerance. Developing thymocytes migrate throughout the thymus being exposed initially to the cortex and then to the thymic medulla were they respectively undergo positive and negative selection. Chemokines represent key regulators for thymocyte migration. Zicheng Hu and cols (14) argue the role of chemokines in the thymic cell migration and induction of central tolerance.

Thymic atrophy during senescence is widely recognized; however, poorly understood. In addition to the atrophy due to senescence, thymus involutes in response to a variety of stimuli including microbial infections. The mouse model of Trypanosoma cruzi infection corresponds to an adequate mouse model to access this question. Leandra Linhares-Lacerda and cols (15) show results on the role of miRNAs on regulation of chemotaxis, which contribute to a better understanding, while incites new issues, of thymic involution.

Cellularity of mTECs is pivotal for cell–cell interactions within the thymus, which is required for central tolerance. Taishin Akiyama and cols (16) argue the role of cytokines on cellularity of mTECs focusing into the molecular basis of cell–cell interactions opening perspective on the use of mathematical models for understanding these processes.

Thymus morphogenesis is a central point with many open questions. The mini review authored by Arnon Dias Jurberg and cols (17) addresses the role of the large superfamily of TGF-beta/bone morphogenetic protein ligands in the thymus morphogenesis and in T cell differentiation.

This Research Topic provides an international and updated insight into the latest developments and open questions on the cellular and molecular bases of central tolerance induction.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

DM, EO and GP wrote the Editorial.

FUNDING

This article is funded by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (13/17481-1), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (306315/2013-0), and Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (88881.088105/2014-01).

REFERENCES

1. Mathis D, Benoist C. Aire. Annu Rev Immunol (2009) 27:287–312. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.25.0022106.141532

2. Laan M, Peterson P. The many faces of aire in central tolerance. Front Immunol (2013) 4:326. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2013.00326

3. Gallo V, Giardino G, Capalbo D, Palamaro L, Romano R, Santamaria F. Alterations of the autoimune regulator transcription fator and failure of central tolerance: APECED as a model. Expert Rev Clin Immunol (2013) 9(1):43–51. doi:10.1586/eci.12.88

4. Klein L, Kyewski B, Allen PM, Hoqquist KA. Positive and negative selection of T cell repertoire: what thymocytes see (and don’t see). Nat Rev Immunol (2014) 14(6):377–91. doi:10.1038/nri3667

5. Anderson G, Baik S, Cowan JE, Holland AM, McCarthy NI, Nakamura K, et al. Mechanisms of thymus medulla development and function. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol (2014) 373:19–47. doi:10.1007/82.2013.320

6. Ucar O, Rattay K. Promiscuous gene expression in the thymus: a matter of epigenetics, miRNA, and more? Front Immunol (2015) 6:93. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00093

7. García-Ceca J, Alfaro D, Montero-Herradón S, Tobajas E, Muñoz JJ, Zapata AG. Eph/ephrins-mediated thymocyte-thymic epithelial cell interactions control numerous processes of thymus biology. Front Immunol (2015) 6:333. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00333

8. Michaux H, Martens H, Jaïdane H, Halouani A, Hober D, Geenen V. How does thymus infection by Coxsackievirus contribute to the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes? Front Immunol (2015) 6:338. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00338

9. Passos GA, Mendes-da-Cruz DA, Oliveira EH. The thymic orchestration involving aire, miRNAs, and cell-cell interactions during the induction of central tolerance. Front Immunol (2015) 6:352. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00352

10. Skogberg G, Telemo E, Ekwall O. Exosomes in the thymus: antigen transfer and vesicles. Front Immunol (2015) 6:366. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00366

11. Lopes N, Sergé A, Ferrier P, Irla M. Thymic crosstalk coordinates medulla organization and T-cell tolerance induction. Front Immunol (2015) 6:365. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00365

12. Yamano T, Steinert M, Klein L. Thymic B cells and central T cell tolerance. Front Immunol (2015) 6:376. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00376

13. Caramalho ĺ, Nunes-Cabaço H, Foxall RB, Sousa AE. Regulatory T-cell development in the human thymus. Front Immunol (2015) 6:395. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00395

14. Hu Z, Lancaster JN, Ehrlich LIR. The contribution of chemokines and migration to the induction of central tolerance in the thymus. Front Immunol (2015) 6:398. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00398

15. Linhares-Lacerda L, Palu CC, Ribeiro-Alves M, Paredes BD, Morrot A, Garcia-Silva MR, et al. Differential expression of microRNAs in thymic epithelial cells from Trypanosoma cruzi acutely infected mice: putative role in thymic atrophy. Front Immunol (2015) 6:428. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00428

16. Akiyama T, Tateishi R, Akiyama N, Yoshinaga R, Kobayashi TJ. Positive and negative regulatory mechanisms for fine-tuning cellularity and functions of medullary thymic epithelial cells. Front Immunol (2015) 6:461. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00461

17. Jurberg AD, Vasconcelos-Fontes L, Cotta-de-Almeida V. A tale from TGF-β superfamily for thymus ontogeny and function. Front Immunol (2015) 6:442. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00442

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Passos, Mendes-da-Cruz and Oliveira. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

MINI REVIEW ARTICLE
published: 03 March 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00093

Promiscuous gene expression in the thymus: a matter of epigenetics, miRNA, and more?

Olga Ucar* and Kristin Rattay

Division of Developmental Immunology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany

Edited by:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Mitsuru Matsumoto, University of Tokushima, Japan
Mireia Guerau-de-Arellano, The Ohio State University, USA

*Correspondence:

Olga Ucar, Division of Developmental Immunology, German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, Heidelberg 69126, Germany
e-mail: o.ucar@dkfz.de

The induction of central tolerance in the course of T cell development crucially depends on promiscuous gene expression (pGE) in medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs). mTECs express a genome-wide variety of tissue-restricted antigens (TRAs), preventing the escape of autoreactive T cells to the periphery, and the development of severe autoimmunity. Most of our knowledge of how pGE is controlled comes from studies on the autoimmune regulator (Aire). Aire activates the expression of a large subset of TRAs by interacting with the general transcriptional machinery and promoting transcript elongation. However, further factors regulating Aire-independent TRAs must be at play. Recent studies demonstrated that pGE in general and the function of Aire in particular are controlled by epigenetic and post-transcriptional mechanisms. This mini-review summarizes current knowledge of the regulation of pGE by miRNA and epigenetic regulatory mechanisms such as DNA methylation, histone modifications, and chromosomal topology.

Keywords: mTEC, promiscuous gene expression, Aire, epigenetic, miRNA, tolerance, tissue-restricted antigen

INTRODUCTION

The establishment of central tolerance to all organs of the body is to a large extent mediated by the unique ability of medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs) to express a vast variety of self-antigens. This so-called promiscuous gene expression (pGE) encompasses a genome-wide selection of tissue-restricted antigens (TRAs), and so far no involvement of tissue-specific transcription factors in their regulation has been observed in the thymus (1, 2). pGE sets the scope of self tolerance, i.e., clonal deletion and Treg induction, and faulty thymic expression of even a single TRA can precipitate organ-specific autoimmunity (3–5); however, we still lack a coherent model incorporating and explaining all the intricacies of pGE.

Most of our knowledge of the molecular control of pGE comes from studies on autoimmune regulator (Aire) (6, 7). Mutations in the AIRE gene cause a rare monogenic autoimmune disorder autoimmune polyendocrinopathy–candidiasis–ectodermal dystrophy (APECED), affecting multiple organs with a preference for endocrine glands (8, 9). The Aire-deficient mouse model recapitulates the autoimmune phenotype observed in human patients (10).

Autoimmune regulator controls the expression of a subset of TRAs by interacting with the general transcriptional machinery and promoting transcript elongation. Aire does not have a dedicated DNA recognition motif, and it is unclear how it is targeted to an exclusive set of TRA-encoding genes, which is largely conserved across species (11). Depending on the cellular context, Aire can induce the expression of different sets of genes (12), suggesting that the epigenetic landscape of mTECs plays a role in defining Aire targets. Moreover, many TRAs are expressed in TECs in an Aire-independent manner implying that additional factors also regulate pGE. Noteworthy, a set of cell-lineage-specific TFs has proven dispensable for promiscuous transcription of the corresponding target genes in the thymus (13–16). Thus, the likelihood of tissue-specific TFs responsible for the Aire-independent gene regulation in mTECs or TFs acting in concert with Aire remains an open question.

Recent studies documented a role for epigenetic and post-transcriptional mechanisms in regulating pGE in general and the function of Aire in particular (14, 17–19). Indeed, both APECED patients (8) and mouse mutants (20) display variability in the disease severity and the organs affected depending on different genetic backgrounds, indicating that other genetic or epigenetic components define the exact course of the individual disease. Here, we briefly review our current knowledge of how DNA methylation, histone modification, and miRNA may influence pGE and mTEC maintenance.

EPIGENETIC REGULATION OF pGE

Transcription factor-triggered gene expression is cross-regulated by a number of enzymes, which modify the DNA itself (DNA methylation) or the histones (histone post-translational modifications). Recent studies showed that DNA and histone modifications can alter the promoter structure and accessibility to the extent of adding new TF binding sites, thus shaping the level and pattern of gene expression and, consequently, developmental decisions (21). Accumulating evidence suggests that all these modifications might also be involved in regulating pGE.

DNA METHYLATION

Methylation of cytosines in CpG dinucleotides is essential for the regulation of embryonic development, cell lineage progression, gene expression, and chromatin structure (22) and is implicated in several human diseases (23). The majority of CpGs in the human genome are methylated, whereas CpG islands at the transcription start sites of housekeeping genes are hypomethylated (24). As a rule, DNA methylation inversely correlates with gene expression level: a high degree of DNA methylation at promoter regions prevents the binding of transcription factors to their DNA-binding motives and results in transcriptional silencing (21, 22). DNA methylation pattern reflects the developmental status of cells with respect to lineage commitment/progression. Thus, the gene loci of myeloid-specific TFs and their binding sites are hypermethylated in the cells of the lymphoid lineage (25). Consistently, demethylation of promoter regions facilitates lineage-specific gene expression, e.g., CD8+ T cell markers are specifically unmethylated and highly expressed in T cells committed to the CD8 lineage (25). Comparison of the methylation patterns of stem/progenitor cells and lineage-committed cells of various tissues demonstrated that the changes in methylation occur at certain lineage-specific gene promoters rather than in extended chromosomal clusters; moreover, this specific methylation pattern is maintained in cells and defines their identity (25–27).

Several recent reports on DNA methylation profiles in mTECs suggest that this epigenetic modification might also pertain to the control of mTEC lineage commitment and pGE; however, the exact specificity and significance of DNA methylation remains unclear (Figure 1A). A number of TEC-specific genes are hypomethylated in mTECs in contrast to other thymic cell types and peripheral tissues (28), suggesting that this pattern arises during lineage commitment and defines mTEC cellular identity. In vitro and ex vivo studies demonstrated that the AIRE gene promoter is hypomethylated in mTECs (29, 30), which indicates its transcription-permissive state. In contrast, the Fgg (fibrinogen gamma chain) gene, which encodes a liver-specific protein promiscuously expressed in an Aire-dependent manner, is hypermethylated in both Aire-expressing and Aire-deficient mTECs (28). Further intriguing results were obtained from the comparison of the DNA methylation state of the casein locus and the Gad1 (Gad67) promoter between immature and mature adult mTECs (14). The DNA methylation pattern of both regions exists in a permissive state already in immature mTECs, presumably allowing rapid promoter activation after mTEC maturation (Figure 1B). Interestingly, the Csn2 promoter showed progressive demethylation in mature mTECs during embryonic development, which preceded the onset of gene expression (14). Together with the reported hypermethylation of Fgg locus (28), these observations suggest that DNA methylation pattern of TRA loci in mTECs does not reflect the promoter activity in the same way as in other peripheral tissues. In summary, although mTECs seem to adapt the “peripheral” DNA methylation pattern for their lineage-specific genes, they might employ a different strategy for genes expressed promiscuously.

FIGURE 1 | Epigenetic marks in mTECs vary between TRA pools and with mTEC maturation. (A) In mTECs, the loci of TEC lineage-specific genes and various TRA pools bear different epigenetic marks. Thus, lineage genes and AIRE (top) are characterized by low DNA methylation content (permissive), Aire-dependent genes (middle) favor repressive marks, whereas Aire-independent genes (bottom) are maintained in a permissive state. Aire specifically binds H3K4me0, facilitating polII recruitment and transcript elongation. (B) Aire-independent TRA loci undergo epigenetic changes with mTEC maturation, indicating that permissive marks are acquired in a stepwise fashion and maintained before the onset of gene expression. For example, in immature mTECs, Csn2 genomic locus exists in an epigenetically neutral state, and the appearance of permissive H3K4me3 modification coincides with mTEC maturation and the onset of transcription. TRAs, tissue-restricted antigens; mTEC, medullary thymic epithelial cell.

HISTONE MODIFICATION

Post-translational modifications of histone N-terminal tails are known to be essential in the regulation of transcription, chromatin structure, DNA repair and replication, and alternative splicing. They control gene expression by both recruiting effector proteins, the so-called readers of histone marks, and through changing the compaction state of the chromatin (21, 31). Histone modifications fall into active (promoting transcription) and repressive marks and are associated with different chromatin compaction states (32). Active histone marks at promoter and enhancer regions influence polII assembly and elongation through interaction with the basic transcriptional machinery: H4 acetylation and H3 trimethylation at K4 are recognized by TFIID and mediate polII assembly at promoters (33, 34).

In some instances, active and repressive marks can co-exist within the same region. Thus, embryonic stem cells display overlapping repressive and permissive histone modifications at developmental genes, maintaining their inactivity in steady state, but allowing for rapid activation when differentiation starts (35). Other examples of a poised, bivalent histone code at lineage-specific gene promoters have been observed in CD4+ T cell lineages (36). The coexistence of active (H3K4me3) and repressive (H27K4me3) marks at promoters of lineage-defining transcription factors GATA3, Tbet, Rorc, and Foxp3 endows different CD4+ T cell subtypes with the plasticity to rapidly cross-differentiate into another subtype in response to environmental stimuli (37).

Studies of histone modifications in mTECs indicate that the histone code plays a role in the regulation of pGE, although the exact mechanisms employed might differ for different sets of TRAs (Figure 1A). Aire-dependent genes in mTECs are characterized by a lack of H3K4 trimethylation and enrichment in repressive H3K27me3 (17, 38). Aire has been shown to specifically bind to unmethylated H3K4, targeting genes in a state of low H3K4me3 or H3 acetylation (17). Aire binding was correlated with an increase in H3K4me3 and polII recruitment to Aire-dependent gene promoters, implying that Aire facilitates the establishment of active histone marks (17). After polII assembly, Aire assists in the transcriptional elongation through facilitating p-TEFIIb recruitment (39, 40). Since p-TEFIIb recruitment requires active histone marks at the enhancer regions (41), involvement of Aire in reading enhancer histone code remains an intriguing possibility.

In contrast to Aire-dependent genes, Aire-independent TRAs seem to favor permissive histone modifications (38). In a recent study, Kyewski and colleagues assessed the chromatin state in mature and immature mTECs at two specific loci encoding Aire-independent TRAs, namely Csn2 and Gad1 (14). Both gene promoters were characterized by permissive histone marks; furthermore, in the case of the Csn2 promoter, H4 acetylation and H3K4me3 marks increased with mTEC maturation (Figure 1B). Interestingly, repressive H3K27me3 marks were absent from Csn2 promoter in both immature and mature mTECs, suggesting that at least some TRA promoters maintain a neutral rather than repressed steady state in immature mTECs (14). Whether a similar poising of chromatin occurs in Aire-dependent gene loci early in mTEC lineage progression remains to be determined.

In summary, the histone code of TRA promoters in mTECs can exist in either permissive (Aire-independent genes) or bivalent (Aire-dependent genes) states. One of many functions of Aire seems to be reading and modifying the histone marks, but it is still unclear how their initial deposition is regulated. To this end, functional studies of chromatin modifiers in TECs should shed new light on the mechanisms mTECs employ to achieve and maintain a transcriptionally poised state of TRA-coding genes. It is also pertinent to understand the epigenetic differences between Aire-dependent and -independent genes, which might lead to the identification of factors controlling Aire-independent pGE.

EPIGENETIC LANDSCAPE FLEXIBILITY IN mTECs

Recent studies revealed that DNA methylation and histone modifications function in a cooperative manner to re-shape chromatin (21, 42), and promoter activity can be predicted by the combination of both (43). The stability of transcriptionally active sites largely depends on the cellular and developmental context; more changes in the epigenetic landscape occur during development and lineage progression than in terminally differentiated cells (41). Is this also the case for pGE? On the population level, mTECs express thousands of genes promiscuously, but their global DNA methylation profile is not significantly different from that of peripheral tissues (28). One should, however, consider that individual TRAs are expressed by only a minor fraction of mTECs [1–3% on average; (38, 44)]. This might result in an under-representation of TRA-specific epigenetic marks in a population analysis. In this respect, studies of single TRA loci within the mTEC subpopulations expressing that specific TRA will be more informative than global epigenomic approaches. Given that pGE increases in its complexity during mTEC maturation and that even in mature mTECs the expression of individual TRAs seems to be transient (45), the epigenetic landscape in the thymus might turn out to be more flexible and dynamic than in other tissues.

Thus, in the case of the casein locus DNA methylation pattern is established before the histone code and both exist in a permissive state even before Csn2 mRNA can be detected [Ref. (14); Figure 1B]. Since Csn2 seems to be somewhat special with regard to its expression frequency in mTECs (44), the sequential establishment and cooperation of CpG context and histone marks should be examined in other, less frequent TRA loci at different stages of mTEC development. The interplay between histone marks and DNA methylation pattern can result in the organization of actively transcribed loci in transcriptional factories (46), demonstrating the influence of epigenetic marks on genome topology. Recently, emerging evidence suggests that higher order interactions between chromosomal regions in cis and trans might impose further influence on gene expression (47, 48). Importantly, stochastic interchromosomal interactions can account for gene expression heterogeneity in a population: for example, co-localization of β-globin gene and its enhancer was observed in 5–10% of cells in a population and correlated with a ~100-fold increase of β-globin expression in these “jackpot” cells (49). The fact that only a small proportion of mTECs expresses a given TRA at a given time together with a recent observation of TRA loci co-localization (45) suggests that such higher order organization might regulate patterns of gene co-expression in single mTECs in the context of pGE.

POST-TRANSCRIPTIONAL REGULATION OF pGE

miRNA represents a class of small (≈22 nt) RNA molecules involved in the post-transcriptional control of gene expression, acting as switches and fine-tuners of translation (50). Primary miRNA transcripts are polII-dependent and undergo two steps of post-transcriptional processing: by Drosha and DGCR8 in the nucleus and by Dicer and TRBP in the cytoplasm [Ref. (51); Figure 2A]. The mature miRNA are incorporated into the RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC), binding of which to the target mRNA causes a translational block and subsequent mRNA decay (52, 53). Target recognition depends on a sequence-specific interaction between the target mRNA 3′UTR and the seed sequence of miRNA (54). More than half of all protein-coding genes in mammals are regulated by miRNA, and many of them have binding sites for several unrelated miRNA in their 3′UTR. Additional complexity arises from the fact that a single miRNA can affect the expression of multiple targets. Studies of miRNA function in various tissues revealed complex balanced miRNA–mRNA interaction networks, regulating tissue homeostasis, cell fate decisions, and disease progression (55).

FIGURE 2 | miRNAs regulate pGE and mTEC maturation. (A) The majority of miRNA primary transcripts (pri-miRNA) are generated by polII and further processed by Drosha/DGCR8 in the nucleus to the stage of pre-miRNA. Pre-miRNA are exported into the cytoplasm by Exportin 5, and further cleaved by the Dicer complex, resulting in mature miRNA. These can be incorporated into the RNA-induced silencing complex (RISC), which binds the target mRNA and usually mediates translational block and/or mRNA degradation. In mTECs, miRNA are indispensable for the expression of Aire and Aire-dependent and -independent TRAs. The mechanism of miRNA action in pGE is not known, and it might involve activation of transcription or translation of TRAs. Aire might be involved in regulating the expression of miRNA-encoding genes and in the generation of miRNA precursors from the so-called miRtrons. (B) mTEC maturation and pGE rely on an intact miRNA pathway, as Dicer deletion in TECs blocks different stages of mTEC lineage progression. Several miRNA are specifically upregulated upon mTEC maturation; however, their exact function and the influence they exert on TRA and Aire expression remains to be determined. The fact that mTEC-specific miRNA are found in human thymic exosomes suggest the possibility of mTECs sharing these small regulators with other antigen-presenting cells in the course of central tolerance induction. RISC, RNA-induced silencing complex; mTEC, medullary thymic epithelial cell; pGE, promiscuous gene expression.

Several recent studies suggest that miRNA may be involved in the regulation of pGE. We showed that a number of miRNA exhibit subset-specific expression in TECs isolated from murine or human thymus; a substantial overlap between miRNA signatures of both species suggests that miRNA expression profiles in TECs are evolutionarily conserved (18). We also demonstrated that maturation-dependent expression of certain miRNA in mTECs correlates with Aire expression (18). Furthermore, changes in miRNA signature have been reported upon Aire knockdown in cell culture (56) and in Aire null mutant thymi (18). Whether Aire directly regulates transcription of miRNA-encoding genes in mTECs and whether such a regulation is a part of stochastic pGE remains to be determined. Since miRNA-encoding genes can use alternative promoters and many miRNA are located in introns (57, 58), Aire might be involved in the direct control of miRNA transcription as well as in the miRNA biogenesis coupled to host mRNA processing. Interestingly, Aire has been implicated in Lin-28-dependent regulation of let-7 miRNA in ES cells (59). As for Aire being regulated by miRNA, a recent report showed that Aire expression could be controlled by miRNA-220b in an artificial cell culture system (60). It is unclear whether this regulation occurs in human or mouse mTECs in vivo, and no conserved miRNA target sites in Aire mRNA have been predicted in silico by the currently available target prediction tools.

miRNA expression in the thymic epithelium is indispensable for the establishment of central tolerance. Thus, TEC-specific ablation of Dicer or DGCR8 (and therefore all mature miRNA) leads to premature thymic involution, diminished T cell output and increased susceptibility to autoimmune disease (18, 61–63). The lack of Dicer in TECs leads to a dramatic decline in pGE – a possible underlying cause of the breach in central tolerance. Interestingly, pGE decline affects both Aire-dependent and -independent TRAs in mTECs and cTECs (18), and precedes the loss of TEC cellularity (18, 62). The premature involution phenotype of Dicer and DGCR8 mutants is recapitulated in the mouse model lacking miR-29a (61). However, these latter mutants do not exhibit the defects in epithelial organization that result from the loss of all canonical miRNA (61, 63) and show only mild delayed impairment of Aire-dependent pGE (18), suggesting that miRNA other than miR-29a play a role in TEC maintenance and function. Further investigation of the mTEC-specific miRNA and their targets will be needed to comprehend the miRNA-dependent regulation of pGE.

How do post-transcriptional inhibitors facilitate pGE? First, in rare cases, miRNA were shown to activate rather than repress gene expression, e.g., through binding to the 5′-UTR [Ref. (64); Figure 2A]. Gene expression activation can also happen indirectly after the miRNA-mediated downregulation of proteins involved in transcriptional repression or RNA decay (53, 65). Finally, miRNA could affect pGE indirectly by promoting the maturation of mTECs. Indeed, FoxN1–Cre-mediated loss of Dicer causes alterations in mature mTEC surface antigen profiles (18) and might impair the early stages of mTEC lineage progression (Figure 2B). The fact that mTEC lineage progression and terminal differentiation seem to be unaffected in miR-29a mutants (18) suggests that other miRNA play a role in these processes. Of note, stemness, differentiation, and senescence of keratinocytes seem to be controlled by a complex network of p63 and several miRNA (66). Given the close parallels between keratinocyte and mTEC differentiation (67) further studies on miRNA function in the thymus should reveal whether a similar network determines turnover, maintenance, and function of mTECs.

Apart from being required for mTEC development and pGE, TEC-specific miRNA might play a role in other mechanisms of central tolerance establishment. One of these mechanisms involves a transfer of TRAs from mTECs to dendritic cells (68). Though it is unclear by which precise means the antigens are shared, exosome transfer is a possible route (69). Intriguingly, a recent study showed that human thymic exosomes contain TRAs and TEC-specific miRNA (70). miRNA transfer via exosomes was shown to be functionally relevant in various settings. Thus, T cells share their miRNA by this pathway with antigen-presenting cells and other T cells (71, 72). Whether transfer of miRNA from mTECs to dendritic cells indeed takes place via exosomes and the functional significance of this exchange will be clarified in future studies.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Promiscuous expression of peripheral antigens in the thymus keeps autoimmunity at bay; grasping its exact molecular mechanism will lead to a better understanding of how central tolerance is established and maintained. Transcription factor-mediated gene expression has been shown to go hand in hand with epigenetic and post-transcriptional regulation in many peripheral tissues. Recent studies of these modes of regulation in mTECs suggest that epigenetic marks are deposited and interpreted in an unconventional way in the course of pGE, and that miRNA play an important role in maintaining TRA expression. The future challenge lies in finding out how exactly mTECs utilize ubiquitous epigenetic and post-transcriptional mechanisms to achieve and maintain their extraordinarily broad expression profiles. Will pGE eventually turn out to employ a unique scenario of gene regulatory modes for the sake of preserving tolerance?

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank Prof. Bruno Kyewski for critical reading of the manuscript and helpful suggestions. OU was supported by the German Cancer Research Center intramural funding, and KR by the European Research Council (ERC-2012-AdG to Bruno Kyewski).

REFERENCES

1. Derbinski J, Schulte A, Kyewski B, Klein L. Promiscuous gene expression in medullary thymic epithelial cells mirrors the peripheral self. Nat Immunol (2001) 2(11):1032–9. doi:10.1038/ni723

2. Kyewski B, Derbinski J. Self-representation in the thymus: an extended view. Nat Rev Immunol (2004) 4(9):688–98. doi:10.1038/nri1436

3. DeVoss J, Hou Y, Johannes K, Lu W, Liou GI, Rinn J, et al. Spontaneous autoimmunity prevented by thymic expression of a single self-antigen. J Exp Med (2006) 203(12):2727–35. doi:10.1084/jem.20061864

4. Chentoufi AA, Polychronakos C. Insulin expression levels in the thymus modulate insulin-specific autoreactive T-cell tolerance: the mechanism by which the IDDM2 locus may predispose to diabetes. Diabetes (2002) 51(5):1383–90. doi:10.2337/diabetes.51.5.1383

5. Fan Y, Rudert WA, Grupillo M, He J, Sisino G, Trucco M. Thymus-specific deletion of insulin induces autoimmune diabetes. EMBO J (2009) 28(18):2812–24. doi:10.1038/emboj.2009.212

6. Mathis D, Benoist C. Aire. Annu Rev Immunol (2009) 27:287–312. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.25.022106.141532

7. Gray D, Abramson J, Benoist C, Mathis D. Proliferative arrest and rapid turnover of thymic epithelial cells expressing Aire. J Exp Med (2007) 204(11):2521–8. doi:10.1084/jem.20070795

8. Peterson P, Nagamine K, Scott H, Heino M, Kudoh J, Shimizu N, et al. APECED: a monogenic autoimmune disease providing new clues to self-tolerance. Immunol Today (1998) 19(9):384–6. doi:10.1016/S0167-5699(98)01293-6

9. Bjorses P, Aaltonen J, Horelli-Kuitunen N, Yaspo ML, Peltonen L. Gene defect behind APECED: a new clue to autoimmunity. Hum Mol Genet (1998) 7(10):1547–53. doi:10.1093/hmg/7.10.1547

10. Anderson MS, Venanzi ES, Klein L, Chen Z, Berzins SP, Turley SJ, et al. Projection of an immunological self shadow within the thymus by the Aire protein. Science (2002) 298(5597):1395–401. doi:10.1126/science.1075958

11. Danso-Abeam D, Humblet-Baron S, Dooley J, Liston A. Models of Aire-dependent gene regulation for thymic negative selection. Front Immunol (2011) 2:14. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2011.00014

12. Guerau-de-Arellano M, Mathis D, Benoist C. Transcriptional impact of Aire varies with cell type. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105(37):14011–6. doi:10.1073/pnas.0806616105

13. Villasenor J, Besse W, Benoist C, Mathis D. Ectopic expression of peripheral-tissue antigens in the thymic epithelium: probabilistic, monoallelic, misinitiated. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105(41):15854–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.0808069105

14. Tykocinski LO, Sinemus A, Rezavandy E, Weiland Y, Baddeley D, Cremer C, et al. Epigenetic regulation of promiscuous gene expression in thymic medullary epithelial cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2010) 107(45):19426–31. doi:10.1073/pnas.1009265107

15. Liu Z, Farley A, Chen L, Kirby BJ, Kovacs CS, Blackburn CC, et al. Thymus-associated parathyroid hormone has two cellular origins with distinct endocrine and immunological functions. PLoS Genet (2010) 6(12):e1001251. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001251

16. Danso-Abeam D, Staats KA, Franckaert D, Van Den Bosch L, Liston A, Gray DH, et al. Aire mediates thymic expression and tolerance of pancreatic antigens via an unconventional transcriptional mechanism. Eur J Immunol (2013) 43(1):75–84. doi:10.1002/eji.201242761

17. Org T, Rebane A, Kisand K, Laan M, Haljasorg U, Andreson R, et al. AIRE activated tissue specific genes have histone modifications associated with inactive chromatin. Hum Mol Genet (2009) 18(24):4699–710. doi:10.1093/hmg/ddp433

18. Ucar O, Tykocinski LO, Dooley J, Liston A, Kyewski B. An evolutionarily conserved mutual interdependence between Aire and microRNAs in promiscuous gene expression. Eur J Immunol (2013) 43(7):1769–78. doi:10.1002/eji.201343343

19. Rattay K, Claude J, Rezavandy E, Matt S, Hofmann TG, Kyewski B, et al. Homeodomain-interacting protein kinase 2, a novel autoimmune regulator interaction partner, modulates promiscuous gene expression in medullary thymic epithelial cells. J Immunol (2015) 194(3):921–8. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1402694

20. Jiang W, Anderson MS, Bronson R, Mathis D, Benoist C. Modifier loci condition autoimmunity provoked by Aire deficiency. J Exp Med (2005) 202(6):805–15. doi:10.1084/jem.20050693

21. Rothbart SB, Strahl BD. Interpreting the language of histone and DNA modifications. Biochim Biophys Acta (2014) 1839(8):627–43. doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2014.03.001

22. Smith ZD, Meissner A. DNA methylation: roles in mammalian development. Nat Rev Genet (2013) 14(3):204–20. doi:10.1038/nrg3354

23. Robertson KD. DNA methylation and human disease. Nat Rev Genet (2005) 6(8):597–610. doi:10.1038/nrg1655

24. Deaton AM, Bird A. CpG islands and the regulation of transcription. Genes Dev (2011) 25(10):1010–22. doi:10.1101/gad.2037511

25. Bock C, Beerman I, Lien WH, Smith ZD, Gu H, Boyle P, et al. DNA methylation dynamics during in vivo differentiation of blood and skin stem cells. Mol Cell (2012) 47(4):633–47. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2012.06.019

26. Hemberger M, Dean W, Reik W. Epigenetic dynamics of stem cells and cell lineage commitment: digging Waddington’s canal. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol (2009) 10(8):526–37. doi:10.1038/nrm2727

27. Kaaij LT, van de Wetering M, Fang F, Decato B, Molaro A, van de Werken HJ, et al. DNA methylation dynamics during intestinal stem cell differentiation reveals enhancers driving gene expression in the villus. Genome Biol (2013) 14(5):R50. doi:10.1186/gb-2013-14-5-r50

28. Wu G, Hirabayashi K, Sato S, Akiyama N, Akiyama T, Shiota K, et al. DNA methylation profile of Aire-deficient mouse medullary thymic epithelial cells. BMC Immunol (2012) 13:58. doi:10.1186/1471-2172-13-58

29. Murumagi A, Vahamurto P, Peterson P. Characterization of regulatory elements and methylation pattern of the autoimmune regulator (AIRE) promoter. J Biol Chem (2003) 278(22):19784–90. doi:10.1074/jbc.M210437200

30. Kont V, Murumagi A, Tykocinski LO, Kinkel SA, Webster KE, Kisand K, et al. DNA methylation signatures of the AIRE promoter in thymic epithelial cells, thymomas and normal tissues. Mol Immunol (2011) 49(3):518–26. doi:10.1016/j.molimm.2011.09.022

31. Musselman CA, Lalonde ME, Cote J, Kutateladze TG. Perceiving the epigenetic landscape through histone readers. Nat Struct Mol Biol (2012) 19(12):1218–27. doi:10.1038/nsmb.2436

32. Li G, Reinberg D. Chromatin higher-order structures and gene regulation. Curr Opin Genet Dev (2011) 21(2):175–86. doi:10.1016/j.gde.2011.01.022

33. Vermeulen M, Mulder KW, Denissov S, Pijnappel WWMP, van Schaik FMA, Varier RA, et al. Selective anchoring of TFIID to nucleosomes by trimethylation of histone H3 lysine 4. Cell (2007) 131(1):58–69. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2007.08.016

34. Moriniere J, Rousseaux S, Steuerwald U, Soler-Lopez M, Curtet S, Vitte AL, et al. Cooperative binding of two acetylation marks on a histone tail by a single bromodomain. Nature (2009) 461(7264):664–8. doi:10.1038/nature08397

35. Voigt P, Tee WW, Reinberg D. A double take on bivalent promoters. Genes Dev (2013) 27(12):1318–38. doi:10.1101/gad.219626.113

36. Krawczyk CM, Shen H, Pearce EJ. Functional plasticity in memory T helper cell responses. J Immunol (2007) 178(7):4080–8. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.178.7.4080

37. Zhou L, Chong MM, Littman DR. Plasticity of CD4+ T cell lineage differentiation. Immunity (2009) 30(5):646–55. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2009.05.001

38. Sansom SN, Shikama-Dorn N, Zhanybekova S, Nusspaumer G, Macaulay IC, Deadman ME, et al. Population and single-cell genomics reveal the Aire dependency, relief from Polycomb silencing, and distribution of self-antigen expression in thymic epithelia. Genome Res (2014) 24:1918–31. doi:10.1101/gr.171645.113

39. Oven I, Brdickova N, Kohoutek J, Vaupotic T, Narat M, Peterlin BM. AIRE recruits P-TEFb for transcriptional elongation of target genes in medullary thymic epithelial cells. Mol Cell Biol (2007) 27(24):8815–23. doi:10.1128/MCB.01085-07

40. Giraud M, Yoshida H, Abramson J, Rahl PB, Young RA, Mathis D, et al. Aire unleashes stalled RNA polymerase to induce ectopic gene expression in thymic epithelial cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2012) 109(2):535–40. doi:10.1073/pnas.1119351109

41. Dambacher S, de Almeida GP, Schotta G. Dynamic changes of the epigenetic landscape during cellular differentiation. Epigenomics (2013) 5(6):701–13. doi:10.2217/epi.13.67

42. Bartke T, Vermeulen M, Xhemalce B, Robson SC, Mann M, Kouzarides T. Nucleosome-interacting proteins regulated by DNA and histone methylation. Cell (2010) 143(3):470–84. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2010.10.012

43. Karlic R, Chung HR, Lasserre J, Vlahovicek K, Vingron M. Histone modification levels are predictive for gene expression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2010) 107(7):2926–31. doi:10.1073/pnas.0909344107

44. Derbinski J, Pinto S, Rosch S, Hexel K, Kyewski B. Promiscuous gene expression patterns in single medullary thymic epithelial cells argue for a stochastic mechanism. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105(2):657–62. doi:10.1073/pnas.0707486105

45. Pinto S, Michel C, Schmidt-Glenewinkel H, Harder N, Rohr K, Wild S, et al. Overlapping gene coexpression patterns in human medullary thymic epithelial cells generate self-antigen diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110(37):E3497–505. doi:10.1073/pnas.1308311110

46. Schoenfelder S, Sexton T, Chakalova L, Cope NF, Horton A, Andrews S, et al. Preferential associations between co-regulated genes reveal a transcriptional interactome in erythroid cells. Nat Genet (2010) 42(1):53–61. doi:10.1038/ng.496

47. Fanucchi S, Shibayama Y, Burd S, Weinberg MS, Mhlanga MM. Chromosomal contact permits transcription between coregulated genes. Cell (2013) 155(3):606–20. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2013.09.051

48. Fanucchi S, Shibayama Y, Mhlanga MM. Are genes switched on when they kiss? Nucleus (2014) 5(2):103–12. doi:10.4161/nucl.28352

49. Noordermeer D, de Wit E, Klous P, van de Werken H, Simonis M, Lopez-Jones M, et al. Variegated gene expression caused by cell-specific long-range DNA interactions. Nat Cell Biol (2011) 13(8):944–51. doi:10.1038/ncb2278

50. Mukherji S, Ebert MS, Zheng GX, Tsang JS, Sharp PA, van Oudenaarden A. MicroRNAs can generate thresholds in target gene expression. Nat Genet (2011) 43(9):854–9. doi:10.1038/ng.905

51. Ha M, Kim VN. Regulation of microRNA biogenesis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol (2014) 15(8):509–24. doi:10.1038/nrm3838

52. Guo H, Ingolia NT, Weissman JS, Bartel DP. Mammalian microRNAs predominantly act to decrease target mRNA levels. Nature (2010) 466(7308):835–40. doi:10.1038/nature09267

53. Ameres SL, Zamore PD. Diversifying microRNA sequence and function. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol (2013) 14(8):475–88. doi:10.1038/nrm3611

54. Bartel DP. MicroRNAs: target recognition and regulatory functions. Cell (2009) 136(2):215–33. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2009.01.002

55. Gurtan AM, Sharp PA. The role of miRNAs in regulating gene expression networks. J Mol Biol (2013) 425(19):3582–600. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2013.03.007

56. Macedo C, Evangelista AF, Marques MM, Octacilio-Silva S, Donadi EA, Sakamoto-Hojo ET, et al. Autoimmune regulator (Aire) controls the expression of microRNAs in medullary thymic epithelial cells. Immunobiology (2013) 218(4):554–60. doi:10.1016/j.imbio.2012.06.013

57. Ozsolak F, Poling LL, Wang Z, Liu H, Liu XS, Roeder RG, et al. Chromatin structure analyses identify miRNA promoters. Genes Dev (2008) 22(22):3172–83. doi:10.1101/gad.1706508

58. Monteys AM, Spengler RM, Wan J, Tecedor L, Lennox KA, Xing Y, et al. Structure and activity of putative intronic miRNA promoters. RNA (2010) 16(3):495–505. doi:10.1261/rna.1731910

59. Bin G, Jiarong Z, Shihao W, Xiuli S, Cheng X, Liangbiao C, et al. Aire promotes the self-renewal of embryonic stem cells through Lin28. Stem Cells Dev (2012) 21(15):2878–90. doi:10.1089/scd.2012.0097

60. Matsuo T, Noguchi Y, Shindo M, Morita Y, Oda Y, Yoshida E, et al. Regulation of human autoimmune regulator (AIRE) gene translation by miR-220b. Gene (2013) 530(1):19–25. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2013.08.015

61. Papadopoulou AS, Dooley J, Linterman MA, Pierson W, Ucar O, Kyewski B, et al. The thymic epithelial microRNA network elevates the threshold for infection-associated thymic involution via miR-29a mediated suppression of the IFN-alpha receptor. Nat Immunol (2012) 13(2):181–7. doi:10.1038/ni.2193

62. Zuklys S, Mayer CE, Zhanybekova S, Stefanski HE, Nusspaumer G, Gill J, et al. MicroRNAs control the maintenance of thymic epithelia and their competence for T lineage commitment and thymocyte selection. J Immunol (2012) 189(8):3894–904. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1200783

63. Khan IS, Taniguchi RT, Fasano KJ, Anderson MS, Jeker LT. Canonical microRNAs in thymic epithelial cells promote central tolerance. Eur J Immunol (2014) 44(5):1313–9. doi:10.1002/eji.201344079

64. Orom UA, Nielsen FC, Lund AH. MicroRNA-10a binds the 5’UTR of ribosomal protein mRNAs and enhances their translation. Mol Cell (2008) 30(4):460–71. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2008.05.001

65. Bruno IG, Karam R, Huang L, Bhardwaj A, Lou CH, Shum EY, et al. Identification of a microRNA that activates gene expression by repressing nonsense-mediated RNA decay. Mol Cell (2011) 42(4):500–10. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2011.04.018

66. Candi E, Amelio I, Agostini M, Melino G. MicroRNAs and p63 in epithelial stemness. Cell Death Differ (2015) 22:12–21. doi:10.1038/cdd.2014.113

67. Roberts N, Horsley V. Developing stratified epithelia: lessons from the epidermis and thymus. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Dev Biol (2014) 3(6):389–402. doi:10.1002/wdev.146

68. Perry JS, Lio CW, Kau AL, Nutsch K, Yang Z, Gordon JI, et al. Distinct contributions of Aire and antigen-presenting-cell subsets to the generation of self-tolerance in the thymus. Immunity (2014) 41(3):414–26. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2014.08.007

69. Kyewski B, Feuerer M. Love is in the Aire: mTECs share their assets. Immunity (2014) 41(3):343–5. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2014.08.013

70. Skogberg G, Gudmundsdottir J, van der Post S, Sandstrom K, Bruhn S, Benson M, et al. Characterization of human thymic exosomes. PLoS One (2013) 8(7):e67554. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0067554

71. Mittelbrunn M, Gutierrez-Vazquez C, Villarroya-Beltri C, Gonzalez S, Sanchez-Cabo F, Gonzalez MA, et al. Unidirectional transfer of microRNA-loaded exosomes from T cells to antigen-presenting cells. Nat Commun (2011) 2:282. doi:10.1038/ncomms1285

72. Okoye IS, Coomes SM, Pelly VS, Czieso S, Papayannopoulos V, Tolmachova T, et al. MicroRNA-containing T-regulatory-cell-derived exosomes suppress pathogenic T helper 1 cells. Immunity (2014) 41(1):89–103. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2014.05.019

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Received: 18 December 2014; accepted: 17 February 2015; published online: 03 March 2015.

Citation: Ucar O and Rattay K (2015) Promiscuous gene expression in the thymus: a matter of epigenetics, miRNA, and more? Front. Immunol. 6:93. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00093

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology.

Copyright © 2015 Ucar and Rattay. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

MINI REVIEW
published: 26 June 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00333

Eph/ephrins-mediated thymocyte–thymic epithelial cell interactions control numerous processes of thymus biology

Javier García-Ceca[1], David Alfaro[1], Sara Montero-Herradón[1], Esther Tobajas[1], Juan José Muñoz2† and Agustín G. Zapata1,2*[†]

1 Department of Cell Biology, Faculty of Biology, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain

2 Cytometry and Fluorescence Microscopy Center, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Daniella Areas Mendes-da-Cruz, Fiocruz – Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Yousuke Takahama, University of Tokushima, Japan
Andrew Freywald, University of Saskatchewan, Canada

*Correspondence:

Agustín G. Zapata, Department of Cell Biology, Faculty of Biology, Complutense University, José Antonio Novais 12, Madrid 28040, Spain
zapata@bio.ucm.es

†Juan José Muñoz and Agustín G. Zapata have contributed equally to this work.

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 29 April 2015
Accepted: 15 June 2015
Published: 26 June 2015

Citation:

García-Ceca J, Alfaro D, Montero-Herradón S, Tobajas E, Muñoz JJ and Zapata AG (2015) Eph/ephrins-mediated thymocyte–thymic epithelial cell interactions control numerous processes of thymus biology. Front. Immunol. 6:333. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00333

Numerous studies emphasize the relevance of thymocyte–thymic epithelial cell (TECs) interactions for the functional maturation of intrathymic T lymphocytes. The tyrosine kinase receptors, Ephs (erythropoietin-producing hepatocyte kinases) and their ligands, ephrins (Eph receptor interaction proteins), are molecules known to be involved in the regulation of numerous biological systems in which cell-to-cell interactions are particularly relevant. In the last years, we and other authors have demonstrated the importance of these molecules in the thymic functions and the T-cell development. In the present report, we review data on the effects of Ephs and ephrins in the functional maturation of both thymic epithelial microenvironment and thymocyte maturation as well as on their role in the lymphoid progenitor recruitment into the thymus.

Keywords: thymocytes, thymic epithelium, Eph, ephrin, thymic cell seeding

Introduction

The thymus is a lymphoid organ engaged in the production and homeostatic maintenance of functionally mature T cells, in which developing thymocytes interact sequentially with an epithelial network whose three-dimensional architecture is essential for the process. Thymocyte–thymic epithelial cell (TEC) interactions are, therefore, key for thymus functioning (1), and Eph and ephrins, two groups of molecules involved in these cell-to-cell contacts, have emerged as novel elements governing numerous thymic processes (2). Eph represent the largest group of receptor tyrosine kinases; they bind to surface ligands, ephrins and, according to their sequence homology and affinity for ephrins, are divided into EphA (10 members), which preferentially binds ephrins-A (6 members), ligands bound to the membrane through glycosylphosphatidylinositol, and EphB (6 members) that bind ephrins-B (3 members) that contains a transmembrane domain and a short cytoplasmic tail (3).

Eph/ephrins constitute an ubiquitous system due to the high number of members and their promiscuity, such that a single receptor can bind different ligands and vice versa, albeit with distinct affinities (4). Eph/ephrin-mediated interactions result in bidirectional signaling in the expressing cells, forward signals transmitted by Eph, and reverse in the ephrin-expressing cell (5), providing different cell responses depending on the multiple combinations and the direction of signaling (4). Eph/ephrins activate numerous signaling pathways that regulate cytoskeleton and cell adhesion but also gene transcription (6).

Eph and/or Ephrin are Expressed in the Thymus and Their Absence Results in Profound Thymic Hypocellularity

Eph and ephrins, particularly those of the B group, are expressed widely in both thymocytes and TECs, frequently the same cell co-expressing the two types of molecules. They appear early in the thymic primordium (7–9) and a lack of these results in decreased numbers of both thymocytes (9–11) and TECs (12). The thymic hypocellularity of Eph/ephrin-deficient mice correlates with concomitant increased apoptosis affecting distinct thymocyte subsets (9–11). However, in all these Eph/ephrin-defective mice, it is difficult to establish conclusive correlations between thymic cellularity and thymocyte proliferation. Even in thymocyte-conditioned ephrin-B1/B2 thymuses, despite the evident reduced cellularity, there are increased proportions of proliferating DP thymocytes (11), suggesting some attempt to recover the thymic cell content (13).

Thymic epithelial cells (TECs) have been proposed to have a limited expanding capacity and the number of endodermal progenitors that organize the early thymic primordium could determine the final size of embryonic and adult thymus (14). Indeed, there is little information on the control of TEC survival and proliferation in general, and by the EphB group in particular. Developing thymuses of EphB2- and/or EphB3-deficient mice show increased TEC apoptosis largely affecting immature EpCAM+MTS20+ cells and EpCAM+Ly51+ cTECs, and in vitro activation of either EphB or ephrin-B signaling decreases the proportions of apoptotic WT TECs, whereas its disruption in RTOCs resulted in increased TEC death. Importantly, RTOCs established only with EphB-defective TECs yielded higher proportions of apoptotic cells than those observed when RTOCs were established with TECs and total thymocytes, suggesting that TEC survival is governed to a greater extent by Eph–ephrin-mediated thymocyte–TEC interactions (12).

On the other hand, decreased seeding of lymphoid progenitors, which periodically colonize the thymus, could also contribute to organ size and cellularity. Reduced lymphoid seeding into the thymus can be achieved by a reduction in the colonizing progenitor numbers and/or altered mechanisms of migration. Although, EphB2-deficient mice show decreased proportions of early BM hematopoietic progenitors compared to WT mice (15) their contribution to thymic seeding is a matter of discussion (16). On the contrary, BM cells expressing molecules known to be involved in thymus seeding (i.e., CCR7, CCR9, CXCR4, PSGL1) (17, 18) neither exhibit significant changes in EphB-deficient mice (15) nor in the numbers of fetal liver CD45+PIRA/B+ precursors (unpublished data). Therefore, the lack of EphB affects the migratory capacity of progenitor cells rather than the proportions of colonizing cells.

In vivo and in vitro assays have demonstrated that the lack of EphB in either lymphoid progenitors or thymic stroma reduces thymic seeding in both fetal (19, 20) and adult mice (15). In vitro colonization of WT FTOCs by EphB2−/− or EphB3−/−, but not EphB2-LacZ, Lin− BM cells was significantly reduced compared to that shown by WT cells (19) and adult WT mice showed lower seeding into the thymus after in vivo injection of EphB-deficient Lin− BM cells than WT ones (15). This inability of progenitors to enter both fetal and adult thymus seems to be dependent, at least partially, on a direct role of Ephs in regulating cell migration, as previously reported for the cell migration of peripheral lymphocytes (21–23). In vitro migration of mutant progenitor BM cells was significantly reduced through fibronectin, laminin, or chemokine gradients, with a more severe reduction in EphB2-deficient cells than in EphB2-LacZ counterparts. Moreover, EphB2 stimulation by coated ephrin-B1Fc proteins inhibited laminin- and fibronectin-governing migration as well as CXCL12, CCL21, and CCL25-induced chemotaxis, but EphB2-LacZ cells did not exhibit reduced migration (19). This indicates that the extracellular domain of EphB promotes migration ligand independently while forward signaling promotes cell arrest.

In both experimental approaches, all tested BM progenitors, included WT ones, showed decreased migration into the EphB-deficient thymus, particularly the EphB2−/− one, which indicates the relevance of the thymic microenvironment in the process (15, 19). In fact, in both adult and fetal thymuses, decreased migration correlated with reduced production of ECM components, such as fibronectin and laminin, and chemokines (i.e., CXCL12, CCL21, CCL25) (15, 19). Furthermore, P-selectin involved in progenitor cell migration into the adult thymus (17), showed reduced expression on endothelial cells of both EphB2- and EphB3-deficient thymuses, but not of those of EphB2-LacZ cells, and decreased migration in EphB2−/− thymuses also correlated with reduced endothelial expression of ephrin-B1 and ephrin-B2, whereas in EphB3−/− thymuses, the reduction only affected ephrin-B1, reinforcing the idea that forward signals mediated by the pair EphB2/ephrin-B1 are particularly important for intrathymic lymphoid recruitment (15).

All these results, therefore, support a role for reduced thymic seeding in the thymic hypocellularity found in Eph/ephrin mutants. However, increased apoptosis of both thymocytes and TECs seems to be more relevant because, whereas thymuses deficient in both CCR7 and CCR9 with profoundly altered lymphoid colonization later recover normal thymocyte numbers (24), EphB2- and EphB3-deficient thymuses do not show that compensatory property; on the contrary, they increase their hypocellularity by increasing the death of DN and DP cells (9).

Thymic Alterations Observed in Eph/Ephrin-deficient Mice Reflect the Relevance of Thymocyte–TEC Interactions

Eph/ephrin deletion results in specific phenotypic alterations in both thymocytes and TECs. The lack of EphA4 results in a blockade of T cell maturation that results in a drop in DP cell proportions (10) and blockade of Eph/ephrin-A interactions in FTOCs treated with fusion proteins affects the maturation of immature CD4−CD8+ thymocytes (2). In correlation, these thymuses show a profound collapse of the cortical epithelial network that significantly reduces the number of cell layers and their organization whereas immature K5+K8+ TECs and areas devoid of epithelial cell marker expression increase. Apparently, the epithelial defects determine the lymphoid phenotype because mutant FTOCs grafted under the WT kidney capsule produce decreased proportions of DP thymocytes (10) while mutant thymocytes in a WT stroma do not reproduce these changes. On the contrary, in Eph/ephrin-B-deficient mice, alterations are very important in the epithelial component but less severe in the developing thymocytes (9, 11, 25). EphB2- and EphB3-deficient thymuses exhibit minimal changes in the T-cell subset proportions, with an increased percentage of total DN cells and reduction of DN3 (CD44−CD25+) cells (9). However, in this case, EphB acts cell-autonomously on T-cell differentiation as grafted EphB-deficient alymphoid fetal thymus lobes colonized by WT lymphoid progenitors exhibit normal T-cell differentiation (26), while chimeric thymuses generated with EphB2−/− and EphB2/B3−/− Lin− BM cell progenitors injected into SCID mice showed a blockade of T-cell maturation at DN stage and chimeras established with EphB3−/− progenitor cells showed a partial blockade at this same point that resulted in low numbers of DP cells (27). Therefore, both EphB2 and EphB3 autonomously control thymocyte development at DN to DP transition. Both molecules are also necessary for the maturation of DP cells to SP thymocytes as demonstrated in reaggregates (RTOCs) formed with EphB2- or EphB3-deficient DP thymocytes and WT TECs (28). Eph expression on thymocytes is also important for thymocyte survival as in all these chimeric SCID mice there were increased proportions of apoptotic thymocytes, principally DP and SP CD4+ cells. Both thymocyte differentiation and survival seem to be dependent on Eph/ephrin-mediated thymocyte–TECs interaction and regulated by both forward and reverse signals, as SCID mice receiving EphB2-LacZ cells showed DP cells but did not produce SP thymocytes and did not show increased apoptosis. Therefore, although Eph forward signaling on thymocytes is necessary for thymocyte development, reverse signaling on interacting cells, presumably thymic epithelium, partially rescues DN cell progression to the DP cell compartment, and is important for cell survival (27). Accordingly, conditional deletion of ephrin-B1 and/or ephrin-B2 in TECs also affects the T-cell development and the lack of ephrin-B2 is presumably the most important, although ephrin-B1 also contributes, as double mutants show a more severe affectation (11). In addition, specific deletion of these ephrins in thymocytes results in a partial blockade of T-cell maturation at the DN3 stage (11, 29, 30) and increased thymocyte apoptosis (11). The phenotype is similar in single and double mutants suggesting that both molecules have a cooperative rather than redundant role in thymocyte maturation (11). A similar phenotype, however, has not been found when EphB2- or EphB3-deficient thymocytes are developed in a WT stroma in a bone marrow transplantation experiment into SCID mice (26).

Eph and ephrin signaling also affect thymic epithelium development and organization as in both EphB- and ephrin-B-mutant mice there is a profound transformation of thymic epithelium that exhibits altered TEC phenotypes (i.e., immature K5+K8+MTS10+ medullary epithelial cells (mTECs), cortical K5−K8−MTS20+ cells and K5+K8+ cells) and altered 3D organization. This change provokes a 2D structure that results in increased epithelial cysts, collapsed epithelium, and large areas devoid of epithelial cell markers (11, 25, 31). These latter areas, of unknown significance, also exist in WT thymuses and in other mice with defects in molecules, such as Foxn1, Kremen 1, or Stat3, involved in TEC maturation (32–34), but are specially developed in EphB-deficient thymuses. They contain thymocytes and blood vessels, frequently surrounded by enlarged sheaths of connective tissue, and are different in cortex and medulla: the former ones contain thymocytes and some sheathed blood vessels, whereas in the medulla mTECs delimit areas with enlarged blood vessels, increased numbers of ER-TR7+ fibroblasts, components of the ECM (collagen IV, fibronectin, and laminin) (35), dendritic cells (36), and thymocytes in some areas (37–39).

Cortical areas devoid of epithelium have been described by others (37–39), receiving the name of epithelial-free areas (EFAs). EFAs are MHC class-II negative, little vascularized areas that contain abundant thymocytes frequently in division (39) reported as accumulations of DP thymocytes that do not undergo positive selection and will die subsequently by apoptosis (40). On the contrary, medullary epithelium-free areas that express several connective tissue markers could have a mesenchymal condition (35) and represent areas in which Eph-deficient TECs have undergone an epithelial–mesenchymal transition, losing their epithelial cell markers and acquiring a mesenchymal nature. In Eph mutant mice, EFAs could arise as a consequence of impeded intermingling and mutual exclusion of thymocytes and TECs caused by the lack of Eph–ephrin signaling as known in other systems (41).

Presumably, TEC maturation is autonomously governed by EphB2 and EphB3 expressed on TECs, as some of the phenotypical alterations found in EphB2- or EphB3-deficient mice can be reproduced in grafted mutant lobes colonized by WT host thymocytes. However, EphB expressed on thymocytes can also play a non-autonomous role since the epithelial phenotype of these grafted mutant lobes was not exactly the same as that found in EphB-deficient thymuses (26), and chimeric SCID thymuses receiving EphB-deficient thymocytes showed altered histological organization (27).

Selective deletion of ephrin-B1 and/or ephrin-B2 genes in thymocytes or TECs permits to determine the relevance of Eph/ephrin signaling in distinct thymic components (11). In all ephrin-B-deficient mice, but particularly in the double mutants with ephrin-B1 and ephrin-B2 deleted in TECs, the thymuses are small, with scarcely developed cortex and medulla, high numbers of K5+K8+ cells, and numerous epithelial cysts. Ephrin-B2 deletion in TECs causes altered distribution of Ly51+ cortical (c) TEC subsets defined as Ly51hi cells that express DLL4, and would constitute the cortical niche of DN thymocytes and Ly51lo cTECs that would represent that of DP cells. Thus, ephrin-B1 deletion in TECs but, also, the lack of ephrin-B1 and B2 in thymocytes induce a cortex in which rounded groups of cTECs express Ly51 homogeneously, suggesting that ephrin-B1 and B2 expressed in both thymocytes and TECs cooperate in regulating the differentiation and distribution of cortical niches (11). Furthermore, ephrin-B deletion from both thymocytes and TECs affects medulla organization. The medulla of thymuses bearing a deletion of ephrin-B1 or B2 in thymocytes, or those without ephrin-B1 or ephrin-B1/B2 in TECs, shows increased numbers of large monolayered epithelial cysts formed largely by immature K5+K8+, sometimes MTS20+, TECs, but rarely containing mature UEA1+ or MTS10+ cells that would represent an arrest of medulla development at an immature stage. They also contain numerous UEA1hi cells that form small cysts surrounded by a thin rim of UEA1lo/−MTS10+ cells that would represent a certain blockade of medulla organization at a late stage of development, in which medullary TEC subsets UEA1hiMTS10− and UEA1loMTS10+ develop but MTS20+ cell expansion and 3D organization are affected (31).

Interestingly, these studies support that ephrin-B1 and ephrin-B2 deletion in TECs result in different TEC phenotypes similar to those generated by ephrin-B1 or ephrin-B2 deletion in thymocytes. This, once again, indicates that Eph/ephrin-mediated thymocyte–TEC interactions are also important for TEC development and arrangement. Although, these molecules also mediate homotypic interactions (thymocyte–thymocyte; TEC–TEC), presumably their involvement in thymocyte–TEC interactions is more important to explain their role in the thymus. However, there are no complementary phenotypes when the effects of ephrin deletion in TECs are compared with those observed in thymuses with EphB-deficient epithelium, or when Eph mutant or ephrin mutant phenotypes are compared. This indicates that in the thymus, as in other systems (4), the final balance of forward and reverse signals in thymocytes and/or TECs would be more relevant than the mere presence/absence of certain Eph or ephrins. Besides, other factors must contribute to the complexity of the system as phenotypes in different mutant models are more severe in mice with C57/Bl6–CD1 mixed background than in the non-inbreed strain C57/Bl6 (10, 11).

In vitro experiments also clearly support the relevance of Eph/ephrin-mediated thymocyte–TEC interactions in thymus biology: ephrin-B1Fc proteins added to RTOCs, formed by fetal TECs and DP thymocytes, disorganize the 3D thymic epithelial network, prevent thymocyte–TEC association, and alter TCRαβ signaling (28). Numbers and timing of the establishment of cell conjugates also change when they are established with EphB-deficient DP thymocytes (27).

On the other hand, proper T-cell maturation occurs thanks to the movement of developing thymocytes throughout the thymic parenchyma, facilitating their interactions with distinct niches favoring the necessary thymocyte–TEC crosstalk (42). Analysis by confocal microscopy of the positioning of EphB2-deficient or WT Lin− BM progenitors in reconstituted FTOCs demonstrated that higher numbers of WT cells reached the central area of WT lobes than of EphB2-deficient cells (19). Furthermore, EphB2−/− total thymocytes migrate less efficiently through laminin or fibronectin or in response to CXCL12, CCL21, or CCL25, than WT cells. More importantly, when forward EphB2 signals were activated by ephrin-B1Fc protein treatment, there was a significant reduction in the migration of all EphB2−/−, but not EphB2-LacZ, thymocyte subsets. Therefore, together with chemokines and ECM molecules, the migration of developing thymocytes throughout the thymic stroma could be promoted by inactivated EphB2 receptors, and negatively modulated by EphB2/ephrin-B interactions (19).

Remarkably, these profound phenotypic alterations observed in mice deficient in distinct Eph or ephrins do not correlate with immune deficiencies and/or pathological processes. EphA4−/− thymuses (10) and those with deleted ephrin-B1 and/or ephrin-B2 in TECs (11) show decreased proportions of both DP TCRαβhi cells and CD69+ cells that could reflect an inefficient TCRαβ selection. However, peripheral lymphoid organs of both EphA4−/− mice (10) and EphB-deficient mice (9) show decreased numbers of total T cells, but not significant changes in the proportions of distinct T-cell subsets. In addition, there are no changes in the central and peripheral TCRαβ repertoire expressed on CD4+ T cells of EphB2- and/or EphB3-mutant mice, except for an increased proportion of Vβ3+CD4+ cells in both thymus and lymph nodes of the three mutants (43).

In summary, Eph and ephrins are molecules that through mediating thymocyte–TEC interactions are involved in numerous processes occurring into the thymus, including cell migration into and through thymus, T-cell differentiation, and TEC maturation.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by grants RD06/0010/0003 and RD12/0019/0007, from the Spanish Health Ministry; BFU2010-18250 and BFU2013-41112-R, from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness.

References

1. Boyd RL, Tucek CL, Godfrey DI, Izon DJ, Wilson TJ, Davidson NJ, et al. The thymic microenvironment. Immunol Today (1993) 14(9):445–59. doi:10.1016/0167-5699(93)90248-J

2. Munoz JJ, Cejalvo T, Alonso-Colmenar LM, Alfaro D, Garcia-Ceca J, Zapata A. Eph/ephrin-mediated interactions in the thymus. Neuroimmunomodulation (2011) 18(5):271–80. doi:10.1159/000329490

3. Gale NW, Holland SJ, Valenzuela DM, Flenniken A, Pan L, Ryan TE, et al. Eph receptors and ligands comprise two major specificity subclasses and are reciprocally compartmentalized during embryogenesis. Neuron (1996) 17(1):9–19. doi:10.1016/S0896-6273(00)80276-7

4. Pasquale EB. Eph-ephrin bidirectional signaling in physiology and disease. Cell (2008) 133(1):38–52. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2008.03.011

5. Knoll B, Drescher U. Ephrin-as as receptors in topographic projections. Trends Neurosci (2002) 25(3):145–9. doi:10.1016/S0166-2236(00)02093-2

6. Poliakov A, Cotrina M, Wilkinson DG. Diverse roles of eph receptors and ephrins in the regulation of cell migration and tissue assembly. Dev Cell (2004) 7(4):465–80. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2004.09.006

7. Munoz JJ, Alonso CL, Sacedon R, Crompton T, Vicente A, Jimenez E, et al. Expression and function of the Eph A receptors and their ligands ephrins A in the rat thymus. J Immunol (2002) 169(1):177–84. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.169.1.177

8. Vergara-Silva A, Schaefer KL, Berg LJ. Compartmentalized Eph receptor and ephrin expression in the thymus. Mech Dev (2002) 119(Suppl 1):S225–9. doi:10.1016/S0925-4773(03)00121-7

9. Alfaro D, Munoz JJ, Garcia-Ceca J, Cejalvo T, Jimenez E, Zapata A. Alterations in the thymocyte phenotype of EphB-deficient mice largely affect the double negative cell compartment. Immunology (2008) 125(1):131–43. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2567.2008.02828.x

10. Munoz JJ, Alfaro D, Garcia-Ceca J, Alonso CL, Jimenez E, Zapata A. Thymic alterations in EphA4-deficient mice. J Immunol (2006) 177(2):804–13. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.177.2.804

11. Cejalvo T, Munoz JJ, Tobajas E, Fanlo L, Alfaro D, Garcia-Ceca J, et al. Ephrin-B-dependent thymic epithelial cell-thymocyte interactions are necessary for correct T cell differentiation and thymus histology organization: relevance for thymic cortex development. J Immunol (2013) 190(6):2670–81. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1201931

12. Garcia-Ceca J, Alfaro D, Montero-Herradon S, Zapata AG. Eph/ephrinB signalling is involved in the survival of thymic epithelial cells. Immunol Cell Biol (2013) 91(2):130–8. doi:10.1038/icb.2012.59

13. Yu G, Mao J, Wu Y, Luo H, Wu J. Ephrin-B1 is critical in T-cell development. J Biol Chem (2006) 281(15):10222–9. doi:10.1074/jbc.M510320200

14. Jenkinson WE, Bacon A, White AJ, Anderson G, Jenkinson EJ. An epithelial progenitor pool regulates thymus growth. J Immunol (2008) 181(9):6101–8. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.181.9.6101

15. Alfaro D, Garcia-Ceca J, Farias-de-Oliveira DA, Terra-Granado E, Montero-Herradon S, Cotta-de-Almeida V, et al. EphB2 and EphB3 play an important role in the lymphoid seeding of murine adult thymus. J Leukoc Biol (2015). doi:10.1189/jlb.1HI1114-568R

16. Zhang SL, Bhandoola A. Trafficking to the thymus. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol (2014) 373:87–111. doi:10.1007/82_2013_324

17. Gossens K, Naus S, Corbel SY, Lin S, Rossi FM, Kast J, et al. Thymic progenitor homing and lymphocyte homeostasis are linked via S1P-controlled expression of thymic P-selectin/CCL25. J Exp Med (2009) 206(4):761–78. doi:10.1084/jem.20082502

18. Zlotoff DA, Sambandam A, Logan TD, Bell JJ, Schwarz BA, Bhandoola A. CCR7 and CCR9 together recruit hematopoietic progenitors to the adult thymus. Blood (2010) 115(10):1897–905. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-08-237784

19. Stimamiglio MA, Jimenez E, Silva-Barbosa SD, Alfaro D, Garcia-Ceca JJ, Munoz JJ, et al. EphB2-mediated interactions are essential for proper migration of T cell progenitors during fetal thymus colonization. J Leukoc Biol (2010) 88(3):483–94. doi:10.1189/jlb.0210079

20. Mendes-da-Cruz DA, Stimamiglio MA, Munoz JJ, Alfaro D, Terra-Granado E, Garcia-Ceca J, et al. Developing T-cell migration: role of semaphorins and ephrins. FASEB J (2012) 26(11):4390–9. doi:10.1096/fj.11-202952

21. Sharfe N, Freywald A, Toro A, Dadi H, Roifman C. Ephrin stimulation modulates T cell chemotaxis. Eur J Immunol (2002) 32(12):3745–55. doi:10.1002/1521-4141(200212)32:12<3745:AID-IMMU3745>3.0.CO;2-M

22. Aasheim HC, Delabie J, Finne EF. Ephrin-A1 binding to CD4+ T lymphocytes stimulates migration and induces tyrosine phosphorylation of PYK2. Blood (2005) 105(7):2869–76. doi:10.1182/blood-2004-08-2981

23. Trinidad EM, Ballesteros M, Zuloaga J, Zapata A, Alonso-Colmenar LM. An impaired transendothelial migration potential of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) cells can be linked to ephrin-A4 expression. Blood (2009) 114(24):5081–90. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-03-210617

24. Liu C, Saito F, Liu Z, Lei Y, Uehara S, Love P, et al. Coordination between CCR7- and CCR9-mediated chemokine signals in prevascular fetal thymus colonization. Blood (2006) 108(8):2531–9. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-05-024190

25. Garcia-Ceca J, Jimenez E, Alfaro D, Cejalvo T, Chumley MJ, Henkemeyer M, et al. On the role of Eph signalling in thymus histogenesis; EphB2/B3 and the organizing of the thymic epithelial network. Int J Dev Biol (2009) 53(7):971–82. doi:10.1387/ijdb.082702jg

26. Garcia-Ceca J, Jimenez E, Alfaro D, Cejalvo T, Munoz JJ, Zapata AG. Cell-autonomous role of EphB2 and EphB3 receptors in the thymic epithelial cell organization. Eur J Immunol (2009) 39(10):2916–24. doi:10.1002/eji.200939437

27. Alfaro D, Munoz JJ, Garcia-Ceca J, Cejalvo T, Jimenez E, Zapata AG. The Eph/ephrinB signal balance determines the pattern of T-cell maturation in the thymus. Immunol Cell Biol (2011) 89(8):844–52. doi:10.1038/icb.2010.172

28. Alfaro D, Garcia-Ceca JJ, Cejalvo T, Jimenez E, Jenkinson EJ, Anderson G, et al. EphrinB1-EphB signaling regulates thymocyte-epithelium interactions involved in functional T cell development. Eur J Immunol (2007) 37(9):2596–605. doi:10.1002/eji.200737097

29. Jin W, Qi S, Luo H. The effect of conditional EFNB1 deletion in the T cell compartment on T cell development and function. BMC Immunol (2011) 12:68. doi:10.1186/1471-2172-12-68

30. Luo H, Charpentier T, Wang X, Qi S, Han B, Wu T, et al. Efnb1 and Efnb2 proteins regulate thymocyte development, peripheral T cell differentiation, and antiviral immune responses and are essential for interleukin-6 (IL-6) signaling. J Biol Chem (2011) 286(48):41135–52. doi:10.1074/jbc.M111.302596

31. Cejalvo T, Munoz JJ, Tobajas E, Alfaro D, Garcia-Ceca J, Zapata A. Conditioned deletion of ephrinB1 and/or ephrinB2 in either thymocytes or thymic epithelial cells alters the organization of thymic medulla and favors the appearance of thymic epithelial cysts. Histochem Cell Biol (2015) 143(5):517–29. doi:10.1007/s00418-014-1296-9

32. Sano S, Takahama Y, Sugawara T, Kosaka H, Itami S, Yoshikawa K, et al. Stat3 in thymic epithelial cells is essential for postnatal maintenance of thymic architecture and thymocyte survival. Immunity (2001) 15(2):261–73. doi:10.1016/S1074-7613(01)00180-7

33. Su DM, Navarre S, Oh WJ, Condie BG, Manley NR. A domain of Foxn1 required for crosstalk-dependent thymic epithelial cell differentiation. Nat Immunol (2003) 4(11):1128–35. doi:10.1038/ni983

34. Osada M, Ito E, Fermin HA, Vazquez-Cintron E, Venkatesh T, Friedel RH, et al. The Wnt signaling antagonist Kremen1 is required for development of thymic architecture. Clin Dev Immunol (2006) 13(2–4):299–319. doi:10.1080/17402520600935097

35. Clarke AG, Gil AL, Kendall MD. The effects of pregnancy on the mouse thymic epithelium. Cell Tissue Res (1994) 275(2):309–18. doi:10.1007/BF00319429

36. Sawanobori Y, Ueta H, Dijkstra CD, Park CG, Satou M, Kitazawa Y, et al. Three distinct subsets of thymic epithelial cells in rats and mice defined by novel antibodies. PLoS One (2014) 9(10):e109995. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0109995

37. von Gaudecker B. The development of the human thymus microenvironment. Curr Top Pathol (1986) 75:1–41.

38. Godfrey DI, Izon DJ, Tucek CL, Wilson TJ, Boyd RL. The phenotypic heterogeneity of mouse thymic stromal cells. Immunology (1990) 70(1):66–74.

39. Bruijntjes JP, Kuper CF, Robinson JE, Schuurman HJ. Epithelium-free area in the thymic cortex of rats. Dev Immunol (1993) 3(2):113–22. doi:10.1155/1993/90759

40. Boyd RL, Hugo P. Towards an integrated view of thymopoiesis. Immunol Today (1991) 12(2):71–9. doi:10.1016/0167-5699(91)90161-L

41. Wilkinson DG. Regulation of cell differentiation by Eph receptor and ephrin signaling. Cell Adh Migr (2014) 8(4):339–48. doi:10.4161/19336918.2014.970007

42. Anderson G, Takahama Y. Thymic epithelial cells: working class heroes for T cell development and repertoire selection. Trends Immunol (2012) 33(6):256–63. doi:10.1016/j.it.2012.03.005

43. Munoz JJ, Alfaro D, Garcia-Ceca J, Cejalvo T, Stimamiglio MA, Jimenez E, et al. Eph and ephrin: key molecules for the organization and function of the thymus gland. Immunología (2009) 28(1):19–31. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2008.03965.x

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 García-Ceca, Alfaro, Montero-Herradón, Tobajas, Muñoz and Zapata. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

MINI REVIEW
published: 30 June 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00338

How does thymus infection by coxsackievirus contribute to the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes?

Hélène Michaux[1], Henri Martens[1], Hela Jaïdane2,3, Aymen Halouani2,3, Didier Hober[4] and Vincent Geenen[1]*

1 Department of Biomedical and Preclinical Sciences, GIGA-I 3 Center of Immunoendocrinology, GIGA Research Institute, University of Liege, Liege, Belgium

2 Laboratory of Virology LR99ES27, School of Pharmacy, University of Monastir, Monastir, Tunisia

3 Faculty of Sciences of Tunis, University of Tunis El Manar, Tunis, Tunisia

4 Laboratory of Virology EA3610, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Lille, University of Lille 2, Lille, France

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Sylvie Lesage, University of Montreal, Canada
Zhibin Chen, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, USA

*Correspondence:

Vincent Geenen, GIGA-I^3 Center of Immunoendocrinology, CHU-B34, Liege-SartTilman, Liege B-4000, Belgium
vgeenen@ulg.ac.be

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 13 May 2015
Accepted: 17 June 2015
Published: 30 June 2015

Citation:

Michaux H, Martens H, Jaïdane H, Halouani A, Hober D and Geenen V (2015) How does thymus infection by coxsackievirus contribute to the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes? Front. Immunol. 6:338. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00338

Through synthesis and presentation of neuroendocrine self-antigens by major histocompatibility complex proteins, thymic epithelial cells (TECs) play a crucial role in programing central immune self-tolerance to neuroendocrine functions. Insulin-like growth factor-2 (IGF-2) is the dominant gene/polypeptide of the insulin family that is expressed in TECs from different animal species and humans. Igf2 transcription is defective in the thymus of diabetes-prone bio-breeding rats, and tolerance to insulin is severely decreased in Igf2−/− mice. For more than 15 years now, our group is investigating the hypothesis that, besides a pancreotropic action, infection by coxsackievirus B4 (CV-B4) could implicate the thymus as well, and interfere with the intrathymic programing of central tolerance to the insulin family and secondarily to insulin-secreting islet β cells. In this perspective, we have demonstrated that a productive infection of the thymus occurs after oral CV-B4 inoculation of mice. Moreover, our most recent data have demonstrated that CV-B4 infection of a murine medullary (m) TEC line induces a significant decrease in Igf2 expression and IGF-2 production. In these conditions, Igf1 expression was much less affected by CV-B4 infection, while Ins2 transcription was not detected in this cell line. Through the inhibition of Igf2 expression in TECs, CV-B4 infection could lead to a breakdown of central immune tolerance to the insulin family and promote an autoimmune response against insulin-secreting islet β cells. Our major research objective now is to understand the molecular mechanisms by which CV-B4 infection of TECs leads to a major decrease in Igf2 expression in these cells.

Keywords: enterovirus, coxsackievirus, thymus, self-tolerance, type 1 diabetes, insulin family, insulin-like growth factor 2

Introduction

The major genetic determinants of type 1 diabetes (T1D) are the class II major histocompatibility complex (MHC) on chromosome 6 – which accounts for almost 50% of the genetic susceptibility – as well as a number of non-MHC genes, including the variable number of tandem repeat (VNTR) alleles upstream of the INS/IGF2 (IDDM2) locus, PTPN22, CCR5, IL2RA, IL10, and CTLA4. However, only 10% of the individuals bearing a genetic predisposition will develop T1D, and more than 50% of monozygotic twins are discordant for the disease, which illustrates the implication of environmental influences in T1D pathogenesis (1) as for all autoimmune diseases.

Type 1 diabetes occurrence has been related to a number of viruses but epidemiological studies have provided the strongest evidence that enteroviral infections, in particular, by coxsackievirus B (CV-B), are frequent events preceding T1D onset (2–7). Human enteroviruses include human pathogens, such as poliovirus, CV-B, rhinovirus, and echovirus. Using RT-PCR detection, CV-B genome was detected in 5 out of 12 (42%) newly diagnosed T1D patients and in 1 of 12 (8%) patients during the course of T1D. None of T2D patients and none of 15 healthy controls had enterovirus sequences in their blood (8). CV-B4 E2 can persistently infect human β cells (9) and a CV-B4 variant infects β cells leading to a disturbance of proinsulin synthesis and insulin secretion (10). The mechanism most accredited to explain the link between CV-B infection and T1D is a specific tropism of the virus for insulin-secreting islet β cells (11) – that is, mediated by their expression of the specific virus receptor – and a bystander activation of autoreactive T cells by antigens released by β cells after their damage caused by CV-B infection (12). Another crucial study has shown that CV-B4 is able to infect β cells in patients with T1D and that such infection is associated with both inflammation and severe β-cell functional disturbance (13). The persistent aspect of enterovirus infection is also an important factor to take into account [for a complete review, see Ref. (14)]. Very recently, this scenario received a strong support through the Diabetes Virus Detection (DiViD) study that detected a low-grade enteroviral infection in the islets of Langerhans collected from living patients newly diagnosed with T1D (15). This study does not prove a causal relationship between enterovirus infection and T1D, but is the first to detect enterovirus in pancreatic islets from patients close to the time of their diagnosis of T1D. The association between T1D and viral infections has also been previously reinforced by a genetic linkage between T1D susceptibility and host determinants of the antiviral response, such as the antiviral oligoadenylate synthase (OAS1) and the interferon-induced helicase (IFIH1), which intervene in innate immunity by recognition of RNA genome of picornaviruses, such as enteroviruses (16, 17). Besides this pancreotropism of CV-B, we have been exploring for a long time another mechanism that could play an essential and complimentary role in the development of the diabetogenic autoimmune response, namely, thymus infection.

Thymus-Dependent Central Self-Tolerance to Islet β Cells

As previously demonstrated that the thymus epithelium plays a unique role in programing central self-tolerance to neuroendocrine functions [complete reviews in Ref. (18–20)], as well as to many tissue-related antigens (21). Following gene transcription in the thymus, neuroendocrine precursors are processed not according to the classical model of neurosecretion but for presentation by, or in association with, the thymic MHC machinery. In the thymus, MHC presentation of neuroendocrine self-peptides promotes two intimately associated but paradoxical events: (1) negative selection and deletion of self-reactive T cell clones and (2) Generation of self-specific regulatory T (tTreg) cells that are able to inhibit in the periphery those “forbidden” self-reactive T cells that escaped thymic clonal deletion. The AutoImmune REgulator (AIRE) protein controls intrathymic transcription of neuroendocrine genes, including all the members of the insulin gene family (22) that are transcribed in the murine thymus according to the following hierarchy: Igf2 > Igf1 > Ins2 > Ins1. Thymic self-antigen expression and AIRE function are also regulated by epigenetic and post-translational mechanisms (23).

There is now mounting evidence that a defect in intrathymic negative selection is implicated in the development of autoimmune endocrine diseases, such as T1D (24–27), although this is still discussed for the non-obese diabetic (NOD) thymus (28, 29). Contrary to Igf1 and Ins2, Igf2 transcription is defective in the thymus of diabetes-prone of bio-breeding (BB) rats (30), one of the two animal models of T1D with the NOD mouse. In humans, INS transcripts are measured at a lower level in the thymus from fetuses with short class I VNTR alleles, the second genetic trait (IDDM2) of T1D susceptibility (31, 32). Both VNTR alleles and AIRE determine the concentration of INS transcripts in the human thymus (33). In the mouse, Ins2 is predominantly transcribed in the thymus, while Ins1 expression is dominant in islet β cells, which leads to a higher immunological tolerance to Ins2. This explains why the breeding of Ins2−/− mice onto the NOD background accelerates insulitis and diabetes onset (34), whereas insulitis and diabetes are markedly inhibited in Ins1−/− congenic NOD mice (35). There is now firm evidence that Ins1 codes for the primary insulin-derived autoantigenic epitopes tackled by the autoimmune diabetogenic process (36, 37). In addition, there is a very rapid onset of autoimmune diabetes after a thymus-specific Ins1 and Ins2 deletion resulting from the crossing of Ins1−/− mice with mice presenting a specific Ins2 deletion in Aire-expressing medullary thymic epithelial cells (TECs) (38). The insulin transactivator Mafa also regulates Ins2 transcription in the thymus and targeted Mafa disruption induces appearance of anti-islet antibodies (39).

Tolerogenic Properties of IGF-2: Multiple Facets

Given the direct relationship between the expression level of a protein/peptide in the thymus and the immunological tolerance to this protein/peptide (40), the hierarchical profile of the intrathymic expression of insulin-related peptides (IGF-2 > IGF-1 > insulin) suggests that tolerance to insulin-like growth factor-2 (IGF-2) is high and that tolerance to insulin is low. This is indirectly supported by the fact that insulin is the primary autoantigen of T1D (36, 37) while no autoimmune response against IGF-2 has ever been reported. Conversely, the highly immunogenic properties of insulin might actually be related to its very low expression in rare medullary (m) TEC subsets. Recently, the alternate variant INS–IGF-2 has been identified as a novel autoantigen in T1D (41), but there is still no data about the expression of this hybrid protein in thymic epithelium. Spontaneous autoimmune diabetes does not develop in Igf2−/− mice although these mice display a marked lower tolerance to insulin, which evidences that Igf2 expression mediates cross-tolerance to insulin and is required for the programing of a complete immunological tolerance to this protein (42). The homologous sequences Ins B9-23 and IGF-2 B11-25 compete for binding to the MHC-II DQ8 allele, and their presentation to PBMCs isolated from DQ8+ T1D adolescents induce distinct cytokine profiles with a regulatory profile for IGF-2 B11-25 that is not observed for Ins B9-23 (43). Two recent studies have further evidenced the tolerogenic properties of IGF-2 by enhancement of Treg cell functions in an experimental model of food allergy (44), as well as promotion of antigen-specific Breg cell properties (45).

Our studies have also shown that the blockage of IGF-mediated signaling in the thymus severely interferes with T-cell growth and differentiation blocks T-cell differentiation (46), which was further confirmed by the demonstration that an antibody to CD222 (the IGF-2 receptor, an endosomal transporter that regulates protein trafficking) plays a central function in the initiation of T-cell signal transduction (47).

Therefore, the predominant expression of IGF-2 in the thymus is not only associated with a higher immunological tolerance to this protein but also seems to confer significant tolerogenic properties to IGF-2- and IGF-2-derived antigen sequences. On these experimental bases, we have proposed the novel concept of “negative self-vaccination” that is under current development through DNA vaccine methodology (48).

Thymus Infection by Enteroviruses

Given the programing of self-tolerance to islet β cells in the thymus and its defect in the development of the autoimmune diabetogenic response, we investigated the question of a putative role played by an enteroviral infection in an acquired dysfunction of the three major properties of this primary lymphoid organ: thymopoiesis, establishment of central self-tolerance, and generation of self-antigen-specific tTreg cells. A persistent replication of CV-B4 E2 (a “diabetogenic” CV-B strain) and JBV (a prototype CV-B strain) in primary cultures of human TECs was demonstrated by detection of positive- and negative-strand viral RNA in extracts from cell cultures, by immunofluorescence staining of the VP1 capsid protein, and by release of infectious particles up to 30 days after culture inoculation without any apparent cytolytic effect. The persistence of CV-B4 infection was associated with an increased rate of TEC proliferation and with an increase in the secretion of the cytokines IL-6, LIF, and GM-CSF in the supernatants. CV-B4 replication was not restricted to the CV-B4 E2 strain and did not depend on the genetic background of the host. However, cytokine secretion in human TEC cultures infected with CV-B4 E2 was higher than in cultures infected with CV-B4 JBV (49). Therefore, although they are considered as cytolytic viruses, enteroviruses can infect persistently some tissues, such as thymus and pancreas.

Coxsackievirus B4 E2 is also able to infect human fetal thymic organ cultures (FTOC). Viral RNA was detected by quantitative RT-PCR in CV-B4 E2-infected human FTOC, which supported high yields of virus production, as well as in flow-sorted thymic T cell populations for 7 days after infection. In FTOC, double positive CD4+CD8+ thymocytes were the principal target cells of infection and were progressively and severely depleted with no sign of apoptosis. Of note, massive thymic depletion of developing T cells and the subsequent CD4+CD25+ tTreg cells was shown previously to result in systemic autoimmunity (50). CV-B4 E2 replication caused a major up-regulation of MHC class I expression on thymic T cells and TECs. This MHC class I up-regulation was correlated with markers of CV-B4 infection (viral RNA quantification, release of infectious particles), and this was the result of a direct infection rather than caused by production of soluble factors, such as interferon-α (51). Interestingly, Krogvold et al. also reported an overexpression of MHC class I in the islets of all the patients included in their recent study (15). CV-B4 E2 was similarly shown to disturb T-cell differentiation in infected murine FTOC (52). In concordance with previous observations (53), CV-B4 oral inoculation of outbred mice results in a systemic spreading of viral RNA and a detection of viral RNA in thymus, spleen and blood up to 70 days after inoculation (54). Finally, CV-B4 infection of a murine mTEC line induces a dramatic decrease in Igf2 transcription and IGF-2 production in long-term cultures of this cell line, while Igf1 transcripts were much less affected and Ins2 transcripts were not detected in these experimental conditions (55). Inoculation of the mTEC line with CV-B3, CV-B4 JVB, or echovirus 1 also induced a decrease in IGF-2 production, while herpes simplex virus 1 stimulated IGF-2 production. As already cited, a defect of Igf2 expression in the thymus was suggested to play a role in the development of autoimmune diabetes in the diabetes-prone BB rat (30). Although these effects need to be reproduced in vivo, they strongly support our hypothesis that CV-B4 infection of the thymus could disrupt central self-tolerance to the insulin family, and could also enhance CV-B4 virulence through induction of central immunological tolerance to this virus. We are currently investigating the molecular mechanisms responsible for the CV-B-induced decrease of thymic IGF-2 expression in this mTEC line and in vivo after oral inoculation of CD1 mice. Since the CV-B-mediated effects in mTEC line are more pronounced on IGF-2 protein than on Igf2 transcription, we concluded that post-transcriptional and/or post-translational mechanisms could be both involved.

As previously discussed by Zinkernagel (56), fetal exposure to maternal enterovirus infections should also be taken into account. One study has shown that enterovirus infection during the first trimester of pregnancy is not associated with a higher risk for T1D in the childhood (57), but another one has evidenced that such maternal enterovirus infection was a risk factor in offspring diagnosed with T1D between 15 and 30 years of age (58). More recently, a study has investigated that the effects of CV-B4 E2 oral inoculation of CD1 mice at days 4, 10, or 17 of gestation. Severe inflammation of the pancreas and higher glucose blood levels were observed only when dams were previously infected and, in particular, at day 17, thus, in the late phase of pregnancy (59). CV-B4 E2 oral inoculation of pregnant mice is also associated with fetal thymus infection and disturbance of T-cell differentiation (Jaïdane, personal communication). Obviously, the question of materno-fetal transmission of enterovirus infection highly deserves to be further investigated.

Conclusion: A Model Associating CV-B-Induced Dysfunction of Central Tolerance and Peripheral Bystander Activation

In addition to the necessity of standardization for the serological and RT-PCR detection of CV-B infection as recommended by Gale and Atkinson (60), there is also an urgent need for a thorough investigation of the relationships between CV-B and the host immune system (Figure 1). What is our current knowledge about this point? CV-B4 is able to persistently infect α and β cells in human pancreatic islets, and to cause functional impairment and β-cell death characterized by nuclear pyknosis. The CV-B4-induced damage to the islet cells causes release and presentation of sequestered islet antigens. Through bystander activation, autoreactive T cells initiate the diabetogenic autoimmune process. Now, with regard to the origin of these autoreactive T cells, more and more experimental evidence points to the generation in the thymus of “forbidden” T cell clones due to a failure of the central tolerogenic mechanisms. This thymus defect results in a progressive enrichment of the peripheral T cell repertoire with self-reactive T cells and a decreased generation of self-antigen tTreg cells. From our collaborative work, it appears that CV-B4 is also able to persistently infect the epithelial and lymphoid compartments of the thymus. CV-B4 infection of the thymus leads to increased secretion of diverse cytokines synthesized in TECs, to a severe depletion of double positive CD4+CD8+ thymocytes, and to marked up-regulation of MHC class I molecules expressed by TECs and double positive thymic T cells. Moreover, CV-B4 infection of a murine mTEC line induces a marked decrease in Igf2 transcription and IGF-2 production. Therefore, a CV-B4 persistent infection of the thymus may lead to significant thymus and immune dysregulation that associates:

• A significant impairment of thymus-dependent self-tolerance issued from the decrease in the presentation of insulin family related self-antigens, and putatively a direct viral interference with self-antigen presentation (61).

• An induction of central tolerance to CV-B4 and a secondary decrease of anti-CV-B4 CD8+ T-cell mediated response, so that further exposure to the virus could promote more severe damage to the peripheral target tissues.

FIGURE 1 | Coxsackievirus B4 persistent infection of thymus and pancreatic islets are closely associated and implicated in T1D pathogenesis.

If further research confirmed such rational assumption based on our new knowledge of thymus functions, then an anti-CV-B4 vaccination could be considered as a strategy for T1D prevention in regions with a high incidence of this disease such as in Scandinavian countries (62).

Acknowledgments

HM is a Ph.D. Fellow supported by FRIA of Belgium. VG is Research Director of F.S.R.-NFSR of Belgium. This work has been supported in part by Eurothymaide FP6 Integrated Project, by F.S.R.-NFSR of Belgium, by Wallonia, and by the Fund Leon Fredericq for biomedical research at the University Hospital of Liege.

References

1. Steck AK, Rewers MJ. Genetics of type 1 diabetes. Clin Chem (2011) 57:176–85. doi:10.1373/clinchem.2010.148221

2. Hyöti H, Hiltunen M, Knip M, Laakonen M, Vähäsalo P, Karjalainen J, et al. A prospective role of coxsackie B and enterovirus infections in the pathogenesis of IDDM. Childhood Diabetes in Finland (DiMe) Study Group. Diabetes (1995) 44:652–67. doi:10.2337/diabetes.44.6.652

3. Yeung WC, Rawlinson WD, Craig ME. Enterovirus infection and type 1 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational molecular studies. BMJ (2011) 342:d35. doi:10.1136/bmj.d35

4. Oikarinen S, Tauriainen S, Hober D, Lucas B, Vazeou A, Sioofy-Khojine A, et al. VirDiab Study Group. Virus antibody survey in different European populations indicates risk association between coxsackievirus B1 and type 1 diabetes. Diabetes (2014) 63:655–62. doi:10.2337/db13-0620

5. Jaïdane H, Hober D. Role of coxsackievirus B4 in the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Metab (2008) 34:537–48. doi:10.1016/j.diabet.2008.05.008

6. Hober D, Sauter P. Pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes mellitus: interplay between enterovirus and host. Nat Rev Endocrinol (2010) 6:279–89. doi:10.1038/nrendo.2010.27

7. Jaïdane H, Sauter P, Sane F, Goffard A, Gharbi J, Hober D. Enteroviruses and type 1 diabetes: towards a better understanding of the relationship. Rev Med Virol (2010) 20:265–80. doi:10.1002/rmv.647

8. Chehadeh W, Weill J, Vantyghem MC, Alm G, Lefebvre J, Wattré P, et al. Increased level of interferon-alpha in blood of patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: relationship with coxsackie B virus infection. J Infect Dis (2000) 181:1929–39. doi:10.1086/315516

9. Chehadeh W, Kerr-Conte J, Patou F, Alm G, Lefebvre J, Wattré P, et al. Persistent infection of human pancreatic islets by coxsackievirus B is associated with alpha-interferon synthesis in beta cells. J Virol (2000) 74:10153–64. doi:10.1128/JVI.74.21.10153-10164.2000

10. Yin H, Berg AK, Westman J, Hellerström C, Frisk G. Complete nucleotide sequence of a coxsackievirus B4 strain capable of establishing persistent infection in human pancreatic islets: effects on insulin release, proinsulin synthesis, and cell morphology. J Med Virol (2002) 68:544–7. doi:10.1002/jmv.10236

11. Roivanen M, Rasilainen S, Ylipaasto P, Nissinen R, Ustinov J, Bouwens L, et al. Mechanisms of coxsackievirus-induced damage to human pancreatic beta-cells. J Clin Endocrinol Metab (2000) 85:432–40. doi:10.1210/jc.85.1.432

12. Horwitz MS, Ilic A, Fine C, Rodriguez E, Sarvetnick N. Presented antigen from damaged pancreatic beta cells activates autoreactive T cells in virus-mediated autoimmune diabetes. J Clin Invest (2002) 109:79–87. doi:10.1172/JCI0211198

13. Dotta F, Censini S, van Halteren AGS, Marselli L, Masini M, Dionisi S, et al. Coxsackie B4 virus infection of β cells and natural killer cell insulitis in recent-onset type 1 diabetic patients. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2007) 104:5115–20. doi:10.1073/pnas.0700442104

14. Alidjinou EK, Sané F, Engelmann I, Geenen V, Hober D. Enterovrus persistence as a mechanism in the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes. Discov Med (2014) 18:273–82.

15. Krogvold L, Bjorn E, Buanes T, Frisk G, Skog O, Anagandula M, et al. Detection of a low-grade enteroviral infection in the islets of Langerhans of living patients newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes (2015) 64:1682–7. doi:10.2337/db14-1370

16. Field LL, Bonnevie-Nielsen V, Pociot F, Lu S, Nielsen TB, Beck-Nielsen H. OAS1 splice site polymorphism controlling antiviral enzyme activity influences susceptibility to type 1 diabetes. Diabetes (2005) 54:1588–91. doi:10.2337/diabetes.54.5.1588

17. Smyth DJ, Cooper JD, Bailey R, Field S, Burren O, Smink LJ, et al. A genome-vide association study of nonsynonymous SNPs identifies a type 1 diabetes locus in the interferon-induced helicase (IFIH1) region. Nat Genet (2006) 38:617–9. doi:10.1038/ng1800

18. Bonomo A, Matzinger P. Thymus epithelium induces tissue-specific tolerance. J Exp Med (1993) 177:1153–64. doi:10.1084/jem.177.4.1153

19. Martens H, Goxe B, Geenen V. The thymic repertoire of neuroendocrine self-antigens: physiological implications in T-cell life and death. Immunol Today (1996) 17:312–7. doi:10.1016/0167-5699(96)10023-2

20. Geenen V, Bodart G, Henry S, Michaux H, Dardenne O, Charlet-Renard C, et al. Programming of neuroendocrine self in the thymus and its defect in the development of neuroendocrine autoimmunity. Front Neurosci (2013) 7:187. doi:10.3389/fnins.2013.00187

21. Kyewski B, Klein L. The central role of central tolerance. Annu Rev Immunol (2006) 24:571–605. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.23.021704.115601

22. Anderson MS, Venanzi ES, Klein L, Chen Z, Berzin SP, Turley SJ, et al. Projection of an immunological self shadow in the thymus by the Aire protein. Science (2002) 298:1395–401. doi:10.1126/science.1075958

23. Ucar O, Rattay K. Promiscuous gene expression in the thymus: a matter of epigenetics, miRNA and more? Front Immunol (2015) 6:93. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00093

24. Like AA, Kislaukis E, Williams RM, Rossini AA. Neonatal thymectomy prevents spontaneous diabetes in the BB:W rat. Science (1982) 216:644–6. doi:10.1126/science.7041259

25. Georgiou HM, Bellgrau D. Induction of insulitis in athymic (nude) mice. The effect of NOD thymus and pancreas transplantation. Diabetes (1995) 44:49–59. doi:10.2337/diabetes.44.1.49

26. Thomas-Vaslin V, Damotte D, Coltey M, Le Douarin NM, Coutinho A, Salaün J. Abnormal T cell selection on nod thymic epithelium is sufficient to induce autoimmune manifestations in C57BL/6 athymic nude mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1997) 94:4598–603. doi:10.1073/pnas.94.9.4598

27. Kishimoto H, Sprent J. A defect in central tolerance in NOD mice. Nat Immunol (2001) 2:1025–31. doi:10.1038/ni726

28. Zucchelli S, Holler P, Yamagata T, Roy M, Benoist C, Mathis D. Defective central tolerance induction in NOD mice: genomics and genetics. Immunity (2005) 22:385–96. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2005.01.015

29. Mingueneau M, Jiand W, Feuerer M, Mathis D, Benoist C. Thymic negative selection is functional in NOD mice. J Exp Med (2012) 209:623–37. doi:10.1084/jem.20112593

30. Kecha-Kamoun O, Achour I, Martens H, Collette J, Lefebvre PJ, Greiner DL, et al. Thymic expression of insulin-related genes in an animal of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev (2001) 17:146–52. doi:10.1002/dmmr.182

31. Vafiadis P, Bennett ST, Todd JA, Nadeau J, Grabs R, Goodyer CG, et al. Insulin expression in human thymus is modulated by INS VNTR alleles at the IDDM2 locus. Nat Genet (1997) 15:289–92. doi:10.1038/ng0397-289

32. Pugliese A, Zeller M, Fernandez A Jr, Zalcberg LJ, Bartlett RJ, Ricordi C, et al. The insulin gene is transcribed in the human thymus and transcription levels correlate with allelic variation at the INS VNTR-IDDM2 susceptibility locus for type 1 diabetes. Nat Genet (1997) 15:293–7. doi:10.1038/ng0397-293

33. Sabater L, Ferrer-Francesch X, Sospedra M, Caro P, Juan M, Pujol-Borrell R. Insulin alleles and autoimmune regulator (AIRE) gene both influence insulin expression in the thymus. J Autoimmun (2005) 25:312–8. doi:10.1016/j.aut.2005.08.006

34. Thebault-Baumont K, Dubois-Laforgue D, Krief P, Briand JP, Halbout P, Vallon-Geoffroy K, et al. Acceleration of type 1 diabetes mellitus in proinsulin 2-deficient mice. J Clin Invest (2003) 111:851–7. doi:10.1172/JCI16584

35. Moriyama H, Abiru N, Paronen J, Sikora K, Liu E, Miao D, et al. Evidence for a primary islet autoantigen (proinsulin 1) for insulitis and diabetes in the nonobese diabetic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2003) 100:10376–81. doi:10.1073/pnas.1834450100

36. Nakayama M, Abiru N, Moriyama H, Babaya N, Liu E, Miao D, et al. Prime role for an insulin epitope in the development of type 1 diabetes in NOD mice. Nature (2005) 435:220–3. doi:10.1038/nature03523

37. Kent SC, Chen Y, Bregoli L, Clemmings SM, Kenyon NS, Ricordi C, et al. Expanded T cells from pancreatic lymph nodes of type 1 diabetic subjects recognize an insulin epitope. Nature (2005) 435:224–8. doi:10.1038/nature03625

38. Fan Y, Rudert WA, Grupillo M, He J, Sisino G, Trucco M. Thymus-specific deletion of insulin induces autoimmune diabetes. EMBO J (2009) 28:2812–24. doi:10.1038/emboj.2009.212

39. Noso S, Kataoka K, Kawabata Y, Babaya N, Hiromine Y, Yamaji K, et al. Insulin transactivator MafA regulates intrathymic transcription of insulin and affects susceptibility to type 1 diabetes. Diabetes (2010) 59:2579–87. doi:10.2337/db10-0476

40. Ashton-Rickardt P, Bandeira A, Delaney JR, Van Kaer L, Pircher HP, Zinkernagel RM, et al. Evidence for a differential avidity model of T cell selection in the thymus. Cell (1994) 76:651–63. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(94)90505-3

41. Kanatsuma N, Taneera J, Vaziri-Sani F, Wierup N, Larsson HE, Delli A, et al. Autoimmunity against INS-IGF2 protein expressed in human pancreatic islets. J Biol Chem (2013) 288:29013–23. doi:10.1074/jbc.M113.478222

42. Hansenne I, Charlet-Renard C, Greimers R, Geenen V. Dendritic cell differentiation and tolerance to insulin-related peptides in Igf2-deficient mice. J Immunol (2006) 176:4651–7. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.176.8.4651

43. Geenen V, Louis C, Martens H. The Belgian diabetes registry. An insulin-like growth factor 2-derived self-antigen inducing a regulatory cytokine profile to peripheral blood mononuclear cells from DQ8+ type 1 diabetic adolescents: preliminary design of a thymus-based tolerogenic self-vaccination. Ann N Y Acad Sci (2004) 1037:59–64. doi:10.1196/annals.1337.008

44. Yang G, Geng XR, Song JP, Wu Y, Yan H, Zhan Z, et al. Insulin-like growth factor 2 enhances regulatory T-cell functions and suppresses food allergy in an experimental model. J Allergy ClinImmunol (2014) 133:1702–8. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2014.02.019

45. Geng XR, Yang G, Li M, Song JP, Liu ZQ, Qiu S, et al. Insulin-like growth factor 2 enhances functions of antigen (Ag)-specific regulatory B cells. J Biol Chem (2014) 289:17941–50. doi:10.1074/jbc.M113.515262

46. Kecha O, Brilot F, Martens H, Franchimont N, Renard C, Greimers R, et al. Involvement of insulin-like growth factors in early T cell development: a study using fetal thymic organ cultures. Endocrinology (2000) 141:1209–17. doi:10.210/en.141.3.1209

47. Pfister K, Forster F, Paster W, Supper V, Ohradanova-Repic A, Eckerstorfer P, et al. The late endosomal transporter CD222 directs the spatial distribution and activity of Lck. J Immunol (2014) 193:2718–32. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1303349

48. Geenen V, Mottet M, Dardenne O, Kermani H, Martens H, Francois JM, et al. Thymic self-antigens for the design of a negative/tolerogenic self-vaccination against type 1 diabetes. Curr Opin Pharmacol (2010) 10:461–72. doi:10.1016/j.coph.2010.04.005

49. Brilot F, Chehadeh W, Charlet-Renard C, Martens H, Geenen V, Hober D. Persistent infection of human thymic epithelial cells by coxsackievirus B4. J Virol (2002) 76:5260–5. doi:10.1128/JVI.76.10.5260-5265.2002

50. Shih FF, Mandik-Nayak L, Wipke BT, Allen PM. Massive thymic deletion results in systemic autoimmunity through elimination of CD4+CD25+ T regulatory cells. J Exp Med (2004) 199:323–35. doi:10.1084/jem.20031137

51. Brilot F, Geenen V, Hober D, Stoddart C. Coxsackievirus B4 infection of human fetal thymus cells. J Virol (2004) 78:9854–61. doi:10.1128/JVI.78.18.9854-9861.2004

52. Brilot F, Jaïdane H, Geenen V, Hober D. Coxsackievirus B4 infection of murine fetal thymus organ cultures. J Med Virol (2008) 80:659–66. doi:10.1002/jmv.21016

53. Chatterjee NK, Hou J, Dockstader P, Charbonneau T. Coxsackievirus B4 infection alters thymic, splenic, and peripheral lymphocyte repertoire preceding onset of hyperglycemia in mice. J Med Virol (1992) 38:124–31. doi:10.1002/jmv.1890380210

54. Jaïdane H, Gharbi J, Lobert PE, Lucas B, Hiar R, M’Hadheb MB, et al. Prolonged viral RNA detection in blood and lymphoid tissues from coxsackievirus B4-E2 orally-inoculated mice. Microbiol Immunol (2006) 50:971–4. doi:10.1111/j.1348-0421.2006.tb03874.x

55. Jaïdane H, Caloone D, Lobert PE, Sané F, Dardenne O, Naquet P, et al. Persistent infection of thymic epithelial cells with coxsackievirus B4 results in decreased expression of type 2 insulin-like growth factor. J Virol (2012) 86:11151–62. doi:10.1128/JVI.00726-12

56. Zinkernagel RM. Maternal antibodies, childhood infections, and autoimmune diseases. N Engl J Med (2001) 345:1331–5. doi:10.1056/NEJMra012493

57. Viskari HR, Roivainen M, Reunanen A, Pitkäniemi J, Sadeharju K, Koskela P, et al. Maternal first-trimester enterovirus infection and future risk of type 1 diabetes in the exposed fetus. Diabetes (2002) 51:2568–71. doi:10.2337/diabetes.51.8.2568

58. Elfving M, Svensson J, Oikarinen S, Jonsson B, Olofsson P, Sundkvist G, et al. Maternal enterovirus infection during pregnancy as a risk factor in offspring diagnosed with type 1 diabetes between 15 and 30 years of age. Exp Diabetes Res (2008) 2008:271958. doi:10.1155/2008/271958

59. Bopegamage S, Precechtelova J, Marosova L, Stipalova D, Sojka M, Borsanyiova M, et al. Outcome of challenge with coxsackievirus B4 in young mice after maternal infection with the same virus during gestation. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol (2012) 64:184–90. doi:10.1111/j.1574-695X.2011.00886.x

60. Gale EAM, Atkinson M. A piece of nucleic acid surrounded by controversy: coxsackievirus and the cause of type 1 diabetes. Diabet Med (2004) 21:503–6. doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2004.01181.x

61. Yewdell JY, Hill AB. Viral interference with antigen presentation. Nat Immunol (2002) 3:1019–25. doi:10.1038/ni1102-1019

62. Karvonen M, Viik-Kajander M, Moltchanova E, Libman I, LaPorte R, Tuomilehto J. Incidence of childhood type 1 diabetes worldwide. Diabetes Mondiale (DiaMond) Project Group. Diabetes Care (2000) 23:1516–26. doi:10.2337/diacare.23.10.1516

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Michaux, Martens, Jaïdane, Halouani, Hober and Geenen. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

MINI REVIEW
published: 14 July 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00352

The thymic orchestration involving Aire, miRNAs, and cell–cell interactions during the induction of central tolerance

Geraldo Aleixo Passos1,2*, Daniella Arêas Mendes-da-Cruz[3] and Ernna Hérida Oliveira[1]

1 Molecular Immunogenetics Group, Department of Genetics, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil

2 Disciplines of Genetics and Molecular Biology, Department of Morphology, Physiology and Basic Pathology, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil

3 Laboratory on Thymus Research, Oswaldo Cruz Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Stephen Paul Cobbold, University of Oxford, UK

Reviewed by:

Hans Acha-Orbea, Université de Lausanne, Switzerland
Vincent Geenen, University of Liege, Belgium

*Correspondence:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, Department of Genetics, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Via Bandeirantes 3900, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo 14049-900, Brazil
passos@usp.br

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 15 May 2015
Accepted: 29 June 2015
Published: 14 July 2015

Citation:

Passos GA, Mendes-da-Cruz DA and Oliveira EH (2015) The thymic orchestration involving Aire, miRNAs, and cell–cell interactions during the induction of central tolerance. Front. Immunol. 6:352. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00352

Developing thymocytes interact sequentially with two distinct structures within the thymus: the cortex and medulla. Surviving single-positive and double-positive thymocytes from the cortex migrate into the medulla, where they interact with medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs). These cells ectopically express a vast set of peripheral tissue antigens (PTAs), a property termed promiscuous gene expression that is associated with the presentation of PTAs by mTECs to thymocytes. Thymocyte clones that have a high affinity for PTAs are eliminated by apoptosis in a process termed negative selection, which is essential for tolerance induction. The Aire gene is an important factor that controls the expression of a large set of PTAs. In addition to PTAs, Aire also controls the expression of miRNAs in mTECs. These miRNAs are important in the organization of the thymic architecture and act as posttranscriptional controllers of PTAs. Herein, we discuss recent discoveries and highlight open questions regarding the migration and interaction of developing thymocytes with thymic stroma, the ectopic expression of PTAs by mTECs, the association between Aire and miRNAs and its effects on central tolerance.

Keywords: AIRE, miRNA, MTEC, thymus gland, thymocytes, cell adhesion, promiscuous gene expression, central tolerance

Introduction

The induction of central immune tolerance is an increasingly complex and intricate process that occurs within the thymus (1, 2). Inside this organ, immature thymocytes interact sequentially and in a three-dimensional architecture with two distinct structures: the cortex and the medulla. In the cortex, the double-negative (DN) and double-positive (DP) thymocytes interact with cortical thymic epithelial cells (cTECs), allowing MHC-mediated self-peptide presentation to DP thymocytes expressing the α/β T cell receptor (α/β TCR), featuring intermediate affinity/avidity. Positive selection is a result of this interaction, which causes DP thymocytes to differentiate into mature single-positive (SP) thymocytes (3, 4).

The DP thymocytes that do not undergo positive selection are eliminated through death by neglect. Thereafter, the surviving SP and DP thymocytes migrate to the thymic medulla, where they interact with medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs). These cells are very peculiar because they ectopically express a large set of peripheral tissue antigens (PTAs) (5–8). Therefore, it is possible to find insulin, a PTA that represents pancreatic beta cells, and a myriad of other autoantigens in the thymus.

The immunological significance of this property, which was termed promiscuous gene expression (PGE) (9–12), is associated with the presentation of PTAs by mTECs to SP and DP thymocytes. Thymocyte clones that express α/β TCR with a high affinity for PTAs are eliminated by apoptosis in a process termed negative selection or clonal deletion, which is essential for central tolerance induction (13–16). This process prevents the passage of autoreactive T cell clones to the periphery, which could provoke aggressive autoimmunity.

Therefore, the migration of thymocytes within the thymus enables the physical association of these cells with different thymic microenvironments (15, 17). Immunologists are interested in elucidating which chemotactic factors and/or adhesion molecules are involved in this process (18, 19).

Another very important factor in central tolerance is the autoimmune regulator (Aire) gene that controls the expression of a large set (but not all) of PTAs in mTECs (20, 21). Mutations in these gene that lead to a loss of Aire function can result in autoimmune polyendocrinopathycandidiasis-ectodermal dystrophy (APECED), an autoimmune disease characterized by hypoparathyroidism, candidiasis (yeast infection), and adrenal insufficiency (22–24). The mechanism of the Aire gene as a transcriptional regulator of Aire-dependent PTAs and the effect of point mutations found in the Aire gene sequence on clinical phenotypes (APECED or other autoimmune diseases) have received attention in recent years (25–27).

In addition, researchers have observed that in addition to PTAs, Aire controls the expression of microRNAs (miRNAs) in mTECs (28). In turn, miRNAs are important for the organization of thymic architecture and act as posttranscriptional controllers of PTAs (29, 30).

In this mini-review, we briefly discuss (1) the main aspects of three-dimensional thymus architecture, focusing on the migration and interaction of developing thymocytes with the thymic stroma and positive and negative selection; (2) the ectopic expression of PTAs by mTECs and role of the Aire gene; and (3) the current evidence for the link between Aire and miRNAs in thymic architecture and the induction of central tolerance.

Thymus Architecture, Migration of Thymocytes and the Induction of Central Tolerance

Developing thymocytes interact with the thymic microenvironment while they migrate and differentiate within the organ. This microenvironment is subdivided into two main regions, and each region is composed of different cell types that produce soluble and non-soluble molecules that can modulate thymocyte migration and maturation (31, 32). Thymic lobules are divided into cortical and medullary regions that are connected by a cortico-medullary junction. The cortex microenvironment is filled with cTECs, thymic nurse cells (TECs-thymocyte-forming lymphoepithelial complexes), macrophages, migratory dendritic cells (DCs), and fibroblasts. The medullary region contains mTECs, macrophages, resident and migratory conventional DCs, plasmacytoid DCs, fibroblasts, and B cells (16) (Figure 1A). Both regions are filled with a network of extracellular matrix (ECM) molecules, such as type I and IV collagens, fibronectin, and laminin. Soluble molecules, such as hormones, cytokines, growth factors, chemokines, and sphingolipids, are also found in the thymus and are produced by the lymphoid and non-lymphoid compartments. These soluble moieties can be present in the ECM and mediate cell–ECM and cell–cell interactions (33–35).

FIGURE 1 | (A) Thymocyte development and interactions with microenvironmental cells. T cell development occurs while cells migrate and interact with thymic microenvironmental components, including thymic epithelial cells, dendritic cells, and macrophages. These interactions are responsible for the selective processes, which lead to the formation of a self-restricted T-cell repertoire. In this context, medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs) play an essential role by expressing AIRE, which control the expression of a set of peripheral tissue antigens (PTAs) that are presented to developing thymocytes. High avidity of MHC-PTAs presented by mTECs with TCRs lead to thymocyte death by apoptosis and consequently avoid self-reactive T cell maturation. DN, double-negative CD4−CD8− thymocytes; DP, doublepositive CD4+CD8+; CD4, single-positive CD4+CD8−; CD8, single-positive CD8+CD4− thymocytes; cTEC, cortical thymic epithelial cell; mTEC, medullary thymic epithelial cell. CMJ, cortico-medullary junction. (B) The transcriptional and posttranscriptional control pathway of promiscuous gene expression. The peripheral tissue antigens (PTAs) expressed in medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs) are transcriptionally controlled by Aire within the nuclear compartment, which also controls the expression of miRNAs. Within the cytoplasm, the miRNAs control Aire and PTAs.

Thymocyte differentiation and migration occur simultaneously in the thymic microenvironment. T cell progenitors enter the cortico-medullary region via post-capillary venules (36) and rapidly migrate through the cortex toward the subcapsular zone, where DN thymocytes are primarily located. Subsequently, thymocytes migrate to the middle cortex and begin expressing both CD4 and CD8 co-receptors, becoming DP cells. During this stage, cells are selected based on the rearrangement of TCR genes, which leads to the membrane expression of productive TCRs. Cells that do not express productive TCRs undergo apoptosis, whereas cells expressing productive TCRs continue the differentiation process. Then, cells with TCRs that interact with high avidity with MHC-presented self-antigens expressed by mTECs and DCs undergo apoptosis in a process termed negative selection (37). The presentation of self-antigens by mTECs is controlled by Aire and guarantees the deletion of autoreactive T-cell clones, supporting central tolerance (38). In this context, cells with TCRs that interact with low/median avidity with MHC-presented self-antigens survive and continue the maturation process. Survival signals mediated by TCRs and CD4/CD8 co-receptors lead to the down-regulation of a co-receptor, and thymocytes become mature CD4+CD8− or CD8+CD4− SP cells (Figure 1A).

Thymocyte localization and guidance are controlled by ECM molecules and chemokines, among others molecules, and their respective receptors. For example, the entrance of T-cell progenitors in the thymus is controlled by CCL21/CCR7 and CCL25/CCR9 (chemokine/chemokine receptor) interactions (39). Migration of immature cells within the thymus is controlled by CXCL12/CXCR4 and CCL20/CCR6 interactions (40, 41), and CCR7 signaling is essential for the migration of DP thymocytes to the medulla (42). Moreover, CCR7 is involved in thymocyte egress, which is also controlled by sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor 1 signaling (43). The absence of such molecules in the thymus not only abrogates thymocyte development but also induces changes in the histological organization of the organ (44).

Thymic architecture and organization are essential for proper T-cell development and depend on both the lymphoid and non-lymphoid compartments. Alterations in one compartment can affect the other and consequently modify T-cell development and the repertoire of exported mature T cells to peripheral lymphoid organs. For example, Rag mutations substantially impair thymocyte development and consequently affect the distribution and maturation of TECs, diminishing the proportion of mTECs and inducing a lack of AIRE protein expression (45, 46). Lack of AIRE expression can in turn directly affect negative selection and break central tolerance. Interestingly, Aire deficiency can modulate the intrathymic expression of chemokines as a control mechanism of thymocyte development (47). In this context, one can argue that chemokines and other molecules controlling thymocyte migration (such as ECM molecules) could also modulate Aire expression.

The Role of Aire in the Ectopic Expression of PTAs in the Thymus

During the induction of central tolerance in the thymus, self-reactive regulatory T cells (Treg) are negatively selected, even if these cells play a role in the periphery. In fact, all sets of antigen-presenting cells, including cTECs, mTECs, and thymic DCs, act as self-antigen peptide presenting cells (6–9, 48–53). Thymic DCs present only the PTA peptides that were expressed and processed by mTECs (38).

The expression of PTAs by mTECs is a key process of (auto)immune representation. Due to the wide-ranging diversity of PTAs expressed by these cells, this phenomenon has been termed PGE (5, 9, 12, 48, 54–62).

The primary implication of this type of gene expression, which is heterogeneous and ectopic, is associated with the maintenance of immune homeostasis and controlling the reactivity and self-aggressive autoimmune diseases.

Notably, cTECs and mTECs are essential but not sufficient for these selection events (55). The cTEC-derived signals may regulate the positive selection of thymocytes that recognize the MHC-peptide complexes themselves; however, mTECs that express AIRE help ensure tolerance to self-antigens (63).

A subset of mTECs express the Aire gene (chromosome 10C1 in mice and 21q22.3 in humans) (64) and the claudin proteins (Cld3 or Cld4) on their surface. In these cells, AIRE and the claudin proteins act as adhesion molecules and represent the major proteins that contribute to the molecular architecture of cell junctions. All Cld3+, Cld4+, and Aire+ adult TEC cells strongly express MHC class II and CD80 molecules on their surface (51).

“Immature” CD80−/MHC-II− mTECs express a limited set of PTAs, whereas “mature” CD80+/MHC-II+ mTECs exhibit greater PTA diversity, including PTAs whose expression is Aire dependent (11). These findings have led some researchers to propose “the terminal differentiation model”; i.e., mTECs undergo a continuous process of differentiation similar to the skin or intestinal epithelium, and the full complement of PGE is contingent upon this process (55). mTEC cells are very peculiar due to their unique gene expression pattern. They are capable of expressing more than 19,000 protein-coding genes, including “ectopic” genes that correspond to PTAs. Currently, no other known cell type expresses such a large set of genes (65).

We next sought to determine whether these cells also have unique machinery for gene expression control.

Although the transcriptional control of PGE is partially exerted by Aire, mutations in this gene cause severe autoimmunity that involves various organs and tissues in both mice and humans. In humans, this disease is a syndrome termed APECED, and patients have mutations along the Aire sequence, suggesting that mutations in Aire trigger aggressive autoimmunity (22, 66).

However, the existence of APECED patients who lack Aire mutations (67–69) suggests that other factor(s) may be involved in controlling aggressive autoimmunity. These observations led us to wonder if temporal changes and a slight deregulation of wild-type Aire expression during development could contribute to autoimmunity.

Variation of Aire expression might disturb Aire-dependent PTAs in the thymus and consequently trigger aggressive autoimmunity, a hypothesis that was previously tested by our group (58). This hypothesis is a promising subject for further research and is currently being studied in humans with thymic cells isolated from Down syndrome patients, which feature trisomy of chromosome 21, providing a unique opportunity to evaluate the effect of natural Aire gene dosage in humans (70–72).

The functional role of Aire has been demonstrated using knockout (KO) mice. Aire in mice and humans encodes a protein with affinity for DNA that functions as a positive transcription factor regulating the expression of PTAs mTECs, but AIRE can also act as a negative regulator of other genes (8, 10, 73–76).

The link between Aire expression and the induction of thymocyte apoptosis, a biological process crucial for negative selection, has been demonstrated (37, 77). However, according to our best knowledge, no investigation has assessed this link considering the possible effect of variations in Aire expression in mTECs on adhesion with thymocytes and the induction of apoptosis. Alternatively, Aire-deficient mTEC cells may lose their adhesion ability. This question is still open for further research.

Interestingly, the AIRE targets low-transcribed genes. It interacts with hypomethylated promoter regions in the chromatin through its PHD1 domain (62, 78–82).

However, recent evidence has demonstrated that the AIRE acts indirectly in regulating PTA transcription. According to Giraud et al. (83), AIRE can be considered an unusual transcription factor because it does not appear to function as a typical transactivator. These authors demonstrated that AIRE activates PTA transcription by releasing stalled RNA Pol II from blockage at the promoter region of its target genes. This model suggests that AIRE acts during the elongation stage of transcription rather than at transcription initiation (83). The “promiscuity” of Aire on a large set of downstream PTA genes might be due the unspecific mode of action of RNA Pol II on different promoter regions, but this remains to be determined.

A new exciting possibility for the Aire mechanism is its influence in controlling alternative splicing of PTA genes in mTECs. Aire has been shown to increase the amount of measurable exons per gene and enables the production of PTAs from these exons (84); these properties might significantly increase the diversity of PTA isoforms in mTECs and consequently increase the range of self-representation.

It is possible that aggressive autoimmunity is associated with an imbalance of PTAs isoforms in mTECs.

The Link Between Aire and miRNAs

In our view, not only Aire but also miRNAs may play a role in central tolerance. This hypothesis is plausible considering the vast range of action of miRNAs, which affect more than half of all mRNAs originating from protein-coding genes in human or murine cells (85).

This range of action is expected to reach mRNAs encoding proteins involved in the central tolerance mechanism, including PTA mRNAs and Aire mRNA itself.

First, researchers evaluated the role of the endoribonuclease Dicer, a key enzyme implicated in miRNA maturation, on thymic function. They found that Dicer-KO mice exhibit progressive degeneration in thymic architecture and function, provoking alterations in T cell differentiation and peripheral tolerance, pinpointing miRNA-29a as a specific miRNA participating in this process (29).

Then, mice lacking Dicer expression in the thymic epithelia were found to exhibit a set of abnormalities, including alterations in the expression profiling of cTEC and mTEC mRNAs. T cells obtained from a Dicer-deficient thymus were pathogenic and produced aggressive autoimmunity (86). These finding were instrumental for further research on the role of miRNAs in central tolerance induction.

Moreover, thymic epithelial cells isolated from murine or human thymuses feature overlapping of miRNA signatures, suggesting evolutionary conservation of miRNA expression profiles (87). These authors also demonstrated that Aire expression is associated with maturation-dependent expression of miRNAs.

However, a direct demonstration that Dicer and consequently miRNAs play a role in TEC-thymocyte adhesion, which is crucial for positive and negative selection, is still lacking. This question is open for further investigation.

As discussed above, the AIRE acts in close association with RNA Pol II (83). Because this polymerase transcribes miRNAs in addition to mRNAs (88–92), Aire may affect miRNA expression.

Our group was the first to directly demonstrate this possibility (28). We showed that in murine mTECs, Aire controls the transcription of miRNAs located within a genomic region that encompasses an open-reading frame (ORF of Gm2922 mRNA).

This finding enabled further evaluation of the role played by Aire-dependent miRNAs in the posttranscriptional control of PTAs. Thus, we reconstructed miRNA–mRNA interaction networks from mTECs isolated from BALB/c (non-autoimmune) or non-obese diabetic (NOD) (autoimmune) mice. As expected, dozens of PTA mRNAs interacted with miRNAs. Interestingly, none of the classical Aire-dependent PTAs (e.g., Ins2) interacted with miRNAs, strongly suggesting that they are somewhat resistant to posttranscriptional control (30).

What would be the consequences of a lack of miRNA action on these PTAs? Could this lack of action aid autoantigen synthesis by mTECs, consequently inducing tolerance? What causes these Aire-dependent PTAs to be “resistant” to miRNA action? Could changes in their 3′UTRs (length or mutations) or imbalance in miRNAs expression levels (or both) cause this resistance? We have suggested that there may be changes in length of the 3′UTR sequence of Aire-dependent PTAs expressed in mTECs (30). Researchers including our group and the group of Mathieu Giraud in Paris are now challenged to evaluate the structure of mRNAs in general and/or the 3′UTR of mRNAs of PTAs expressed in mTECs compared with other cell types.

Based on these recent results, is possible to drawn a pathway for the transcriptional and posttranscriptional control of PGE in mTECs (Figure 1B). Within the nuclear compartment, the AIRE controls PTA and miRNA transcription (Aire-dependent PTAs and miRNAs). Once in the cytoplasm, miRNAs play a role in the posttranscriptional control of Aire and PTA mRNAs. Would PTA mRNAs with altered 3′UTRs be refractory to the action of miRNAs?

Although these aspects have only recently begun to be explored, they represent new, exciting questions for present and future research on the molecular genetic basis of immune tolerance.

Concluding Remarks

The molecular genetic control of central tolerance remains an open question in immunology. The identification and cloning of the Aire gene was instrumental in studying the molecular genetics of this process. As the primary controller of PTA expression in mTECs, Aire is the master pillar of central tolerance. Aire expression is common in the thymus; and this observation led to the idea of PGE. However, Aire did not fit well as a classic transcription factor. The AIRE operates in conjunction with various other partner proteins in the release of RNA Pol II shortly after the initiation of PTA gene transcription. This property enabled better understanding of the vast range of AIRE activity. Recently, miRNAs have been found to be the modulators of post-transcriptional controllers in the thymus. Researchers are now challenged with deciphering the transcriptional and post-transcriptional control pathway of PGE involving Aire and miRNAs.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the following funding agencies: the São Paulo State Research Foundation (Fapesp) through grant Nos. 13/17481-1 (to GP) and 13/08216-2 (Cepid-Fapesp to Fernando Q. Cunha), the National Council for Research and Technology (CNPq, Brasília) through grant No. 306315/2013-0 (to GP), the CAPES Foundation (Brasília) through grant No. 88881.06105/2014-01 (to GP), the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation and Rio de Janeiro State Research Foundation (Faperj, Rio de Janeiro to DM). EHO was supported by CNPq through post-doctoral fellowship No. 150103/2014-0.

References

1. Gallegos AM, Bevan MJ. Central tolerance to tissue-specific antigens mediated by direct and indirect antigen presentation. J Exp Med (2004) 200(8):1039–49. doi:10.1084/jem.20041457

2. Mouchess ML, Anderson M. Central tolerance induction. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol (2014) 373:69–86. doi:10.1007/82.2013.321

3. Klein L, Hinterberger M, Wirnsberger G, Kyewski B. Antigen presentation in the thymus for positive selection and central tolerance induction. Nat Rev Immunol (2009) 9:833–44. doi:10.1038/nri2669

4. Groettrup M, Kirk CJ, Basler M. Proteasomes in immune cells: more than peptide producers? Nat Rev Immunol (2010) 10:73–7. doi:10.1038/nri2687

5. Gotter J, Brors B, Hergenhahn M, Kyewski B. Medullary epithelial cells of the human thymus express a highly diverse selection of tissue-specific genes co-localized in chromosomal clusters. J Exp Med (2004) 199(2):155–66. doi:10.1084/jem.20031677

6. Klein L, Kyewski B. Self-antigen presentation by thymic stromal cells: a subtle division of labor. Curr Opin Immunol (2000) 12(2):179–86. doi:10.1016/S0952-7915(99)00069-2

7. Mizuochi T, Kasai M, Kokuho T, Kakiuchi T, Hirokawa K. Medullary but not cortical thymic epithelial cells present soluble antigens to helper T cells. J Exp Med (1992) 175(6):1601–5. doi:10.1084/jem.175.6.1601

8. Tikocinski LO, Sinemus A, Kyewski B. The thymus medulla slowly yields its secrets. Ann N Y Acad Sci (2008) 1143:105–22. doi:10.1196/annals.1443.018

9. Derbinski J, Schulte A, Kyewski B, Klein L. Promiscuous gene expressionin medullary thymic epithelial cells mirrors the peripheral self. Nat Immunol (2001) 2(11):1032–9. doi:10.1038/ni723

10. Kyewski B, Derbinski J, Gotter J, Klein L. Promiscuous gene expression and central T-cell tolerance: more than meets the eye. Trends Immunol (2002) 23(7):364–71. doi:10.1016/S1471-4906(02)02248-2

11. Derbinski J, Gäbler J, Brors B, Tierling S, Jonnakuty S, Hergenhan M, et al. Promiscuous gene expression in thymic epithelialcells is regulated at multiple levels. J Exp Med (2005) 202(1):33–45. doi:10.1084/jem.20050471

12. Magalhães DA, Silveira EL, Junta CM, Sandrin-Garcia P, Fachin AL, Donadi EA, et al. Promiscuous gene expression in the thymus: the root of central tolerance. Clin Dev Immunol (2006) 13(2–4):81–99. doi:10.1080/17402520600877091

13. Ma D, Wei Y, Liu F. Regulatory mechanisms of thymus and T cell development. Dev Comp Immunol (2013) 39(1–2):91–102. doi:10.1016/j.dci.2011.12.013

14. Lo WL, Allen PM. Self-peptides in TCR repertoire selection and peripheral T cell function. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol (2014) 373:49–67. doi:10.1007/82.2013.319

15. Anderson G, Baik S, Cowan JE, Holland AM, McCarthy NI, Nakamura K, et al. Mechanisms of thymus medulla development and function. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol (2014) 373:19–47. doi:10.1007/82.2013.320

16. Klein L, Kyewski B, Allen PM, Hoqquist KA. Positive and negative selection of the T cell repertoire: what thymocytes see (and don’t see). Nat Rev Immunol (2014) 14(6):377–91. doi:10.1038/nri3667

17. Takada K, Ohigashi I, Kasai M, Nakase H, Takahama Y. Development and function of cortical thymic epithelial cells. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol (2014) 373:1–17. doi:10.1007/82.2013.322

18. Scimone ML, Aifantis I, Apostolou I, Von Boehmer H, Von Andrian UH. A multistep adhesion cascade for lymphoid progenitor cell homing to the thymus. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2006) 103(18):7006–11. doi:10.1073/pnas.0602024103

19. Zhang SL, Bhandoola A. Trafficking to the thymus. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol (2014) 373:87–111. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40252-4

20. Mathis D, Benoist C. Aire. Annu Rev Immunol (2009) 27:287–312. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.25.022106.141532

21. Laan M, Peterson P. The many faces of aire in central tolerance. Front Immunol (2013) 4:326. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2013.00326

22. Nagamine K, Peterson P, Scott HS, Kudoh J, Minoshima S, Heino M, et al. Positional cloning of the APECED gene. Nat Genet (1997) 17(4):393–8. doi:10.1038/ng1297-393

23. Consortium FG-A. An autoimmune disease, APECED, caused by mutations in a novel gene featuring two PHD-type zinc-finger domains. Nat Genet (1997) 17(4):399–403. doi:10.1038/ng1297-399

24. Perheentupa J. Autoimmune polyendocrinopathy-candidiasis-ectodermal dystrophy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab (2006) 91(8):2843–50. doi:10.1210/jc.2005-2611

25. Jin P, Zhang Q, Dong CS, Zhao SL, Mo ZH. A novel mutation in autoimmune regulator gene causes autoimmune polyendocrinopathy-candidiasis-ectodermal dystrophy. J Endocrinol Invest (2014) 37(10):941–8. doi:10.1007/s40618-014-0120-7

26. Huibregtse KE, Wolfgram P, Winer KK, Connor EL. Polyglandular autoimmune syndrome type I – a novel AIRE mutation in a North American patient. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab (2014) 27(11–12):1257–60. doi:10.1515/jpem-2013-0328

27. Gallo V, Giardino G, Capalbo D, Palamaro L, Romano R, Santamaria F. Alterations of the autoimmune regulator transcription factor and failure of central tolerance: APECED as a model. Expert Rev Clin Immunol (2013) 9(1):43–51. doi:10.1586/eci.12.88

28. Macedo C, Evangelista AF, Marques MM, Octacílio-Silva S, Donadi EA, Sakamoto-Hojo ET, et al. Autoimmune regulator (Aire) controls the expression of microRNAs in medullary thymic epithelial cells. Immunobiology (2013) 218(4):554–60. doi:10.1016/j.imbio.2012.06.013

29. Papadopoulou AS, Dooley J, Linterman MA, Pierson W, Ucar O, Kyewski B, et al. The thymic epithelial microRNA network elevates the threshold for infection-associated thymic involution via miR-29a mediated suppression of the IFN-α receptor. Nat Immunol (2011) 13(2):181–7. doi:10.1038/ni.2193

30. Macedo C, Oliveira EH, Almeida RS, Donate PB, Fornari TA, Pezzi N, et al. Aire-dependent peripheral tissue antigen mRNAs in mTEC cells feature networking refractoriness to microRNA interaction. Immunobiology (2015) 220(1):93–102. doi:10.1016/j.imbio.2014.08.015

31. Savino W, Mendes-da-Cruz DA, Silva JS, Dardenne M, Cotta-de-Almeida V. Intrathymic Tcell migration: a combinatorial interplay of extracellular matrix and chemokines? Trends Immunol (2002) 23(6):305–13. doi:10.1016/S1471-4906(02)02224-X

32. Savino W, Mendes-Da-Cruz DA, Smaniotto S, Silva-Monteiro E, Villa-Verde DM. Molecular mechanisms governing thymocyte migration: combined role of chemokines and extracellular matrix. J Leukoc Biol (2004) 75(6):951–61. doi:10.1189/jlb.1003455

33. Segerer S, Djafarzadeh R, Gröne HJ, Weingart C, Kerjaschki D, Weber C, et al. Selective binding and presentation of CCL5 by discrete tissue microenvironments during renal inflammation. J Am Soc Nephrol (2007) 18(6):1835–44. doi:10.1681/ASN.2006080837

34. Netelenbos T, Zuijderduijn S, Van Den Born J, Kessler FL, Zweegman S, Huijgens PC. Proteoglycans guide SDF-1-induced migration of hematopoietic progenitor cells. J Leukoc Biol (2002) 72(2):353–62.

35. Yanagawa Y, Iwabuchi K, Onoé K. Enhancement of stromal cell-derived factor-1alphainduced chemotaxis for CD4/8 double-positive thymocytes by fibronectin and laminin in mice. Immunology (2001) 104(1):43–9. doi:10.1681/ASN.2006080837

36. Lind EF, Prockop SE, Porritt HE, Petrie HT. Mapping precursor movement through the postnatal thymus reveals specific microenvironments supporting defined stages of early lymphoid development. J Exp Med (2001) 194(2):127–34. doi:10.1084/jem.194.2.127

37. Yamaguchi Y, Kudoh J, Yoshida T, Shimizu N. In vitro co-culture systems for studying molecular basis of cellular interaction between Aire-expressing medullary thymic epithelial cells and fresh thymocytes. Biol Open (2014) 3(11):1071–82. doi:10.1242/bio.201410173

38. Hubert FX, Kinkel SA, Davey GM, Phipson B, Mueller SN, Liston A, et al. Aire regulates the transfer of antigen from mTECs to dendritic cells for induction of thymic tolerance. Blood (2011) 118(9):2462–72. doi:10.1182/blood-2010-06-286393

39. Liu C, Ueno T, Kuse S, Saito F, Nitta T, Piali L, et al. The role of CCL21 in recruitment of T-precursor cells to fetal thymi. Blood (2005) 105(1):31–9. doi:10.1182/blood-2004-04-1369

40. Kim CH, Pelus LM, White JR, Broxmeyer HE. Differential chemotactic behavior of developing T cells in response to thymic chemokines. Blood (1998) 91(12):4434–43.

41. Bunting MD, Comerford I, Kara EE, Korner H, McColl SR. CCR6 supports migration and differentiation of a subset of DN1 early thymocyte progenitors but is not required for thymic nTreg development. Immunol Cell Biol (2014) 92(6):489–98. doi:10.1038/icb.2014.14

42. Kwan J, Killeen N. CCR7 directs the migration of thymocytes into the thymic medulla. J Immunol (2004) 172(7):3999–4007. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.172.7.3999

43. Matloubian M, Lo CG, Cinamon G, Lesneski MJ, Xu Y, Brinkmann V. Lymphocyte egress from thymus and peripheral lymphoid organs is dependent on S1P receptor 1. Nature (2004) 427(6972):355–60. doi:10.1038/nature02284

44. Misslitz A, Pabst O, Hintzen G, Ohl L, Kremmer E, Petrie HT, et al. Thymic T cell development and progenitor localization depend on CCR7. J Exp Med (2004) 200(4):481–91. doi:10.1084/jem.20040383

45. Poliani PL, Facchetti F, Ravanini M, Gennery AR, Villa A, Roifman CM, et al. Early defects in human T-cell development severely affect distribution and maturation of thymic stromal cells: possible implications for the pathophysiology of Omenn syndrome. Blood (2009) 114(1):105–8. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-03-211029

46. Marrella V, Poliani PL, Notarangelo LD, Grassi F, Villa A. Rag defects and thymic stroma: lessons from animal models. Front Immunol (2014) 5:259. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2014.00259

47. Laan M, Kisand K, Kont V, Möll K, Tserel L, Scott HS, et al. Autoimmune regulator deficiency results in decreased expression of CCR4 and CCR7 ligands and in delayed migration of CD4+ thymocytes. J Immunol (2009) 183(12):7682–91. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0804133

48. Kyewski B, Derbinski J. Self-representation in the thymus: an extended view. Nat Rev Immunol (2004) 4(9):688–98. doi:10.1038/nri1436

49. Kyewski B, Klein L. A central role for central tolerance. Annu Rev Immunol (2006) 24:571606. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.23.021704.115601

50. Takahama Y. Journey through the thymus: stromal guides for T-cell development and selection. Nat Rev Immunol (2006) 6(2):127–35. doi:10.1038/nri1781

51. Holländer GA. Claudins provide a breath of fresh Aire. Nat Immunol (2007) 8(3):234–6. doi:10.1038/ni0307-234

52. Irla M, Hugues S, Gill J, Nitta T, Hikosaka Y, Williams IR, et al. Autoantigen-specific interactions with CD4+ thymocytes control mature medullary thymic epithelial cell cellularity. Immunity (2008) 29(3):451–63. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.08.007

53. Villasenor J, Besse W, Benoist C, Mathis D. Ectopic expression of peripheral-tissue antigens in the thymic epithelium: probabilistic, monoallelic, misinitiated. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2008) 105(41):15854–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.0808069105

54. Sousa Cardoso R, Magalhães DA, Baião AM, Junta CM, Macedo C, Marques MM, et al. Onset of promiscuous gene expression in murine fetal thymus organ culture. Immunology (2006) 119(3):369–75. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2567.2006.02441.x

55. Gäbler J, Arnold J, Kyewski B. Promiscuous gene expression and the developmental dynamics of medullary thymic epithelial cells. Eur J Immunol (2007) 37(12):3363–72. doi:10.1002/eji.200737131

56. Tykocinski LO, Sinemus A, Kyewski B. The thymus medulla slowly yields its secrets. Ann N Y Acad Sci (2008) 1143:105–22. doi:10.1196/annals.1443.018

57. Irla M, Hollander G, Reith W. Control of central self-tolerance induction by autoreactive CD4+ thymocytes. Trends Immunol (2010) 31(2):71–9. doi:10.1016/j.it.2009.11.002

58. Fornari TA, Donate PB, Macedo C, Marques MM, Magalhães DA, Passos GA. Age-related deregulation of Aire and peripheral tissue antigen genes in the thymic stroma of non-obese diabetic (NOD) mice is associated with autoimmune type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM-1). Mol Cell Biochem (2010) 342(1–2):21–8. doi:10.1007/s11010-010-0464-z

59. Derbinski J, Kyewski B. How thymic antigen presenting cells sample the body’s self-antigens. Curr Opin Immunol (2010) 22(5):592–600. doi:10.1016/j.coi.2010.08.003

60. Donate PB, Fornari TA, Junta CM, Magalhães DA, Macedo C, Cunha TM, et al. Collagen induced arthritis (CIA) in mice features regulatory transcriptional network connecting major histocompatibility complex (MHC H2) with autoantigen genes in the thymus. Immunobiology (2011) 216(5):591–603. doi:10.1016/j.imbio.2010.09.007

61. Pinto S, Michel C, Schmidt-Glenewinkel H, Harder N, Rohr K, Wild S, et al. Overlapping gene coexpression patterns in human medullary thymic epithelial cells generate self-antigen diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110(37):E3497–505. doi:10.1073/pnas.1308311110

62. Ucar O, Rattay K. Promiscuous gene expression in the thymus: a matter of epigenetics, miRNA, and more? Front Immunol (2015) 6:93. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00093

63. Anderson G, Lane PJ, Jenkinson EJ. Generating intrathymic microenvironments to establish T-cell tolerance. Nat Rev Immunol (2007) 7(12):954–63. doi:10.1038/nri2187

64. SOURCE Database. Available from: http://source-search.princeton.edu/

65. Sansom SN, Shikama-Dorn N, Zhanybekova S, Nusspaumer G, Macaulay IC, Deadman ME, et al. Population and single-cell genomics reveal the Aire dependency, relief from polycomb silencing, and distribution of self-antigen expression in thymic epithelia. Genome Res (2014) 24(12):1918–31. doi:10.1101/gr.171645.113

66. Capalbo D, De Martino L, Giardino G, Di Mase R, Di Donato I, Parenti G, et al. Autoimmune polyendocrinopathy candidiasis ectodermal dystrophy: insights into genotype-phenotype correlation. Int J Endocrinol (2012) 2012:353250. doi:10.1155/2012/353250

67. Wang CY, Davoodi-Semiromi A, Huang W, Connor E, Shi JD, She JX. Characterization of mutations in patients with autoimmune polyglandular syndrome type 1 (APS1). Hum Genet (1998) 103(6):681–5. doi:10.1007/s004390050891

68. Heino M, Scott HS, Chen Q, Peterson P, Mäebpää U, Papasavvas MP, et al. Mutation analyses of North American APS-1 patients. Hum Mutat (1999) 13(1):69–74. doi:10.1002/(SICI)10981004

69. Björses P, Halonen M, Palvimo JJ, Kolmer M, Aaltonen J, Ellonen P, et al. Mutations in the AIRE gene: effects on subcellular location and transactivation function of the autoimmune polyendocrinopathy-candidiasis-ectodermal dystrophy protein. Am J Hum Genet (2000) 66(2):378–92. doi:10.1086/302765

70. Lima FA, Moreira-Filho CA, Ramos PL, Brentani H, Lima Lde A, Arrais M, et al. Decreased AIRE expression and global thymic hypofunction in Down syndrome. J Immunol (2011) 187(6):3422–30. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1003053

71. Skogberg G, Lundberg V, Lindgren S, Gudmundsdottir J, Sandström K, Kämpe O, et al. Altered expression of autoimmune regulator in infant down syndrome thymus, a possible contributor to an autoimmune phenotype. J Immunol (2014) 193(5):2187–95. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1400742

72. Giménez-Barcons M, Casteràs A, Armengol Mdel P, Porta E, Correa PA, Marín A, et al. Autoimmune predisposition in Down syndrome may result from a partial central tolerance failure due to insufficient intrathymic expression of AIRE and peripheral antigens. J Immunol (2014) 193(8):3872–9. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1400223

73. Taniguchi RT, Anderson MS. The role of Aire in clonal selection. Immunol Cell Biol (2011) 89(1):40–4. doi:10.1038/icb.2010.132

74. Gallegos AM, Bevan MJ. Central tolerance: good but imperfect. Immunol Rev (2006) 209:290–6. doi:10.1111/j.0105-2896.2006.00348.x

75. Mathis D, Benoist C. A decade of AIRE. Nat Rev Immunol (2007) 7(8):645–50. doi:10.1038/nri2136

76. Mathis D, Benoist C. Levees of immunological tolerance. Nat Immunol (2010) 11(1):3–6. doi:10.1038/ni.1833

77. Yamaguchi Y, Takayanagi A, Chen J, Sakai K, Kudoh J, Shimizu N. Mouse thymic epithelial cell lines expressing “Aire” and peripheral tissue-specific antigens reproduce in vitro negative selection of T cells. Exp Cell Res (2011) 317(14):2019–30. doi:10.1016/j.yexcr.2011.05.00

78. Org T, Chignola F, Hetényi C, Gaetani M, Rebane A, Liiv I, et al. The autoimmune regulator PHD finger binds to non-methylated histone H3K4 to activate gene expression. EMBO Rep (2008) 9(4):370–6. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.2008.11

79. Koh AS, Kuo AJ, Park SY, Cheung P, Abramson J, Bua D, et al. Aire employs a histonebinding module to mediate immunological tolerance, linking chromatin regulation with organspecific autoimmunity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105(41):15878–83. doi:10.1073/pnas.080847010

80. Koh AS, Kingston RE, Benoist C, Mathis D. Global relevance of Aire binding to hypomethylated lysine-4 of histone-3. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2010) 107(29):13016–21. doi:10.1073/pnas.1004436107

81. Chignola F, Gaetani M, Rebane A, Org T, Mollica L, Zucchelli C, et al. The solution structure of the first PHD finger of autoimmune regulator in complex with non-modified histone H3 tail reveals the antagonistic role of H3R2 methylation. Nucleic Acids Res (2009) 37(9):2951–61. doi:10.1093/nar/gkp166

82. Kont V, Murumagi A, Tykocinski LO, Kinkel SA, Webster KE, Kisand K, et al. DNA methylation signatures of the AIRE promoter in thymic epithelial cells, thymomas and normal tissues. Mol Immunol (2011) 49(3):518–26. doi:10.1016/j.molimm.2011.09.022

83. Giraud M, Yoshida H, Abramson J, Rahl PB, Young RA, Mathis D, et al. Aire unleashes stalled RNA polymerase to induce ectopic gene expression in thymic epithelial cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2012) 109(2):535–40. doi:10.1073/pnas.1119351109

84. Keane P, Ceredig R, Seoighe C. Promiscuous mRNA splicing under the control of AIRE in medullary thymic epithelial cells. Bioinformatics (2015) 31(7):986–90. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu785

85. Fabian MR, Sonenberg N, Filipowicz W. Regulation of mRNA translation and stability by microRNAs. Annu Rev Biochem (2010) 79:351–79. doi:10.1146/annurev-biochem-060308103103

86. Zuklys S, Mayer CE, Zhanybekova S, Stefanski HE, Nusspaumer G, Gill J, et al. MicroRNAs control the maintenance of thymic epithelia and their compe-tence for T lineage commitment and thymocyte selection. J Immunol (2012) 189(8):3894–904. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1200783

87. Ucar O, Tykocinski LO, Dooley J, Liston A, Kyewski B. An evolutionarily conserved mutual interdependence between Aire and microRNAs in promiscuous gene expression. Eur J Immunol (2013) 43(7):1769–78. doi:10.1002/eji.201343343

88. Bartel DP. MicroRNAs: genomics, biogenesis, mechanism, and function. Cell (2004) 116(2):281–97. doi:10.1016/S0092-8674(04)00045-5

89. Bui TV, Mendell JT. Myc: maestro of microRNAs. Genes Cancer (2010) 1(6):568–75. doi:10.1177/1947601910377491

90. Fujita S, Iba H. Putative promoter regions of miRNAs genes involved in evolutionarily conserved regulatory systems among vertebrates. Bioinformatics (2008) 24(3):303–8. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm589

91. Lee Y, Jeon K, Lee JT, Kim S, Kim VN. MicroRNA maturation: stepwise processing and subcellular localization. EMBO J (2002) 21(17):4663–70. doi:10.1093/emboj/cdf476

92. Saini HK, Enright AJ, Griffiths-Jones S. Annotation of mammalian primary microRNAs. BMC Genomics (2008) 9:564. doi:10.1186/1471-2164-9-564

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Passos, Mendes-da-Cruz and Oliveira. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

MINI REVIEW
published: 20 July 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00366

Exosomes in the thymus: antigen transfer and vesicles

Gabriel Skogberg[1]*, Esbjörn Telemo[1] and Olov Ekwall1,2

1 Department of Rheumatology and Inflammation Research, Institute of Medicine, The Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden

2 Department of Pediatrics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Bin Li, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China
Nuno L. Alves, University of Porto, Portugal

*Correspondence:

Gabriel Skogberg, Department of Rheumatology and Inflammation Research, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Guldhedsgatan 10A, Gothenburg Västra Götaland, Gothenburg SE 405 30, Sweden
xskoga@gu.se

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 14 May 2015
Accepted: 06 July 2015
Published: 20 July 2015

Citation:

Skogberg G, Telemo E and Ekwall O (2015) Exosomes in the thymus: antigen transfer and vesicles. Front. Immunol. 6:366. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00366

Thymocytes go through several steps of maturation and selection in the thymus in order to form a functional pool of effector T-cells and regulatory T-cells in the periphery. Close interactions between thymocytes, thymic epithelial cells, and dendritic cells are of vital importance for the maturation, selection, and lineage decision of the thymocytes. One important question that is still unanswered is how a relatively small epithelial cell population can present a vast array of self-antigens to the manifold larger population of developing thymocytes in this selection process. Here, we review and discuss the literature concerning antigen transfer from epithelial cells with a focus on exosomes. Exosomes are nano-sized vesicles released from a cell into the extracellular space. These vesicles can carry proteins, microRNAs, and mRNAs between cells and are thus able to participate in intercellular communication. Exosomes have been shown to be produced by thymic epithelial cells and to carry tissue-restricted antigens and MHC molecules, which may enable them to participate in the thymocyte selection process.

Keywords: exosome, thymic epithelial cell, tolerance, tissue-restricted antigen, miRNA

Introduction

Exosomes are small (30–100 nm) vesicles released by cells into the extracellular space. They are a subgroup of extracellular vesicles (EVs) formed by inward budding of membranes in the late endosomes, thus creating a multi-vesicular body (MVB), which may dock to the outer membrane of the cell and release its content of exosomes (1, 2). In hindsight, the recycling of the transferrin receptor back to the cell membrane from an endocytic route in developing erythrocytes was the original description of exosomes in 1983 (3). One particularly striking finding, which in recent years has heavily influenced exosome research, was the identification of microRNA (miRNA) and mRNA in exosomes (4). Exosomal transfer of functional miRNA and mRNA has been demonstrated to result in regulation of gene expression through miRNA as well as translation of proteins through mRNA in recipient cells (5, 6). Exosomes are abundant in, and fairly easy to purify from, bodily fluids such as saliva (7), peripheral blood (8), bronco alveolar lavage fluid (9), and urine (10, 11), and one area of extensive research is the use of exosomes as diagnostic biomarkers for various pathologic conditions (12).

Exosomes have also shown therapeutic promise, e.g., in a study by Zitvogel and co-workers it was demonstrated that tumor peptide-pulsed dendritic cells (DCs) released exosomes that carried MHC I and II as well as co-stimulatory molecules and that these exosomes primed cytotoxic T-cells and suppressed the growth of established tumors (13). Native antigens on tumor-derived exosomes can be taken up by DCs and cross-presented to tumor-specific cytotoxic T-cells (14).

Other studies have revealed that exosomes are capable of presenting antigens to T-cells. In 1996, Raposo et al. (15) reported that both human and murine B-cell derived exosomes could induce an antigen-specific MHC II-restricted T-cell response. Exosome-like structures, named tolerosomes, are released from epithelial cells of the small intestine and have been shown to induce specific tolerance to fed antigens (16). As with the B-cell derived exosomes, tolerosomes seem to deliver antigens in a MHC dependent manner (17).

The thymus is the organ responsible for the establishment of an immune competent but yet self-tolerant T-cell population. While the extreme diversity of the mature effector T-cell specificities is a prerequisite for an effective defense against invading pathogens/infectious agents, the negative selection of self-reactive effector T-cells and the positive selection of T regulatory cells ensure tolerance to self-structures in order to avoid autoimmunity. To ensure a self-tolerant peripheral population, thymocytes are selected against a comprehensive set of self-antigens (18) of which many are produced and presented by medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs) (19) under control of the autoimmune regulator (AIRE) (20). The importance of a functional thymic antigen expression has been validated in models where even a defect expression of a single antigen may lead to development of peripheral organ-specific autoimmunity (21). Of equal importance is the selection of regulatory T-cells (Tregs) within the thymus, foremost from clones with a somewhat elevated TCR avidity for self-antigens (22). Proper thymic Treg development is also dependent on AIRE, and in particular for the functionally important Tregs that are induced during the perinatal period (23).

Since thymocytes outnumber TECs by several orders of magnitude, and the fact that each individual TEC only expresses a small subgroup of self-antigens (18, 24), a possible dissemination of antigen from TECs has been discussed in order to aid individual TECs to cover an extended volume of the thymic microenvironment (25). This would increase the number of possible antigen–thymocyte interactions and allow additional impact of the thymic DC populations. Antigen transfer could potentially occur by different means such as apoptotic bodies, nanotubes, and/or exosomes. Here, we review the current literature and argue that thymic exosomes have a potential role in T-cell maturation and selection.

Antigen Transfer and Indirect Antigen Presentation in the Thymus

Clearly, direct cell–cell contacts in the thymus are pivotal for the development of a functional T-cell population (26). The addition of antigen transfer between thymic cell populations could, however, optimize thymic cell communication by making antigens more available to the pool of developing thymocytes. Through the last two decades, a number of studies performed under different experimental conditions have demonstrated the transfer of antigens from TECs to DCs. Already in 1994, Kyewski and co-workers observed intercellular transfer of Eα52–68 (a-chain of the MHC class II allele I-Ed, amino acids 52–68) from TECs to thymic DCs in a unidirectional fashion (27). They proposed that this mechanism “may enhance the efficacy of tolerance induction by spreading self-antigens” (27). Subsequent experiments with OVA-specific TCR-transgenic mice (RIP-mOVA model) revealed that transfer of antigen to and presentation by hematopoietic cells also applies to MHC class I-restricted epitopes, since it resulted in deletion of both MHC class I- and MHC class II-restricted OVA-specific thymocytes when OVA was expressed only by mTECs (28). The identity of the hematopoietic cells in the RIP-mOVA study was unclear but further studies have revealed that deletion of CD11c+ cells using CD11c-Cre mice crossed with mice expressing diphtheria toxin under the control Rosa Locus containing a loxP-flanked STOP cassette results in increased frequencies of CD4+ thymocytes and increased CD4 T-cell infiltration into peripheral tissues (29). Likewise, Aschenbrenner and colleagues have observed that DCs capture mTEC-derived antigens and take part in deletional tolerance (30). This observation was strengthened by a study by Koble and Kyewski who demonstrated a presentation of TEC antigens by DCs. In their study, thymic but not peripheral DCs presented TEC-derived OVA to OVA-specific T-cells and were constitutively provided with mTEC-derived proteins (31). Further, unidirectional antigen transfer from mTEC to DCs was shown to also apply for native endogenous self-antigens in vivo (31). Non-redundant contribution of DCs and mTECs is further suggested based on simultaneous hematopoietic MHC class II deficiency and reduced MHC II expression on mTECs; this combination has an additive worsening effect on negative selection compared to either of the single deficiencies alone (32).

Also, the Treg formation seem to be dependent of DC-TEC cross-talk, which was elegantly demonstrated in a study on bone marrow chimeras in which CD28/B7 signaling was disrupted on either hematopoietic-derived antigen-presenting cells (APCs) or on TECs. The results showed that when B7 was restored in the hematopoietic-derived APCs this was enough to restore Treg numbers, hence hematopoietic-derived APCs and TECs can independently contribute to Treg development (33). The transfer of material in this study was unidirectional toward DCs, and the discussed mechanisms were primarily exosomes and apoptotic bodies. Transfer of material from TECs to DCs has also been demonstrated in the work by Hubert and co-workers in which OT-II restricted thymocytes were deleted by a soluble form of OVA that required presentation by bone marrow-derived cells (34). Using tetramer staining and transfer of bone marrow with ablated expression of MHC II, Taniguchi and co-workers found an abolished negative selection of T-cells specific for the AIRE-controlled self-antigen retinoid-binding protein (35). They concluded that intercellular transfer of the interphotoreceptor retinoid-binding protein peptide epitope of amino acids 277–290 from AIRE-expressing mTECs to bone marrow-derived APCs is important for negative selection of the investigated peptide. In re-aggregated thymic organ cultures, both the thymic epithelium and conventional DCs (as opposed to plasmacytoid DCs) have been shown capable of eliminating autoreactive CD4 thymocytes and to support natural Treg (nTreg) development on their own (36). In addition, Perry and co-workers recently reported that CD8 α+ DCs preferentially acquire and present AIRE-dependent antigens to developing Treg cells (37). They also showed that bone marrow-derived APCs and mTECs play non-overlapping roles in shaping of the T-cell receptor repertoire in terms of deletion and Treg selection (37).

T-Cell Stimulation by Exosomes, With or Without DCs

The capacity of exosomes to directly stimulate target cells has been debated. Some studies have suggested that there is an absolute need for DC presence for efficient exosomal stimulation of T-cells (38–40), while others have shown that exosomes are able to directly stimulate T-cells without any aid from DCs (15, 41–44). Models in which the efficiency of exosomal T-cell stimulation increases by DC presence have also been put forward (45). Interestingly, thymic exosomes carry ICAM-1 (46), which is both required for efficient T-cell responses (40) and involved in exosome binding to DCs (47). In addition to ICAM-1, thymus exosomes carry the opsonin MFGE8, which indicates that thymic exosomes would readily be engulfed by APCs such as DCs (46). TEC exosomes are also strongly positive for HLA-DR, which suggest a possibility that they contribute with antigens not only indirectly via, e.g., DCs but also directly to developing thymocytes (48). The presence of co-stimulatory molecules on exosomes may be important for their potential to affect the maturation of nTreg precursors (49). However, whether TEC exosomes that carry antigen presentation molecules and antigens need APCs or not to participate in thymocyte selection in vivo is not known. Possibly, thymic exosomes could take part in negative selection both directly by interacting with the thymocytes or indirectly by delivering antigens to APCs such as thymic DCs (Figures 1A,B).

FIGURE 1 | Models for transfer of exosomal material from TECs to other thymic cell populations. Transcription and translation of AIRE-dependent TRAs followed by TRA loading of exosomes, MVB fusion with the mTEC plasma membrane leading to exosome release from mTECs. The exosomes could then take an intercellular route from mTECs directly (A) to CD4+, CD8+, and developing nTregs and/or indirectly (B) via thymic DC or other APCs. (C) The proteome of thymic exosomes typically include exosomal markers, e.g., tetraspanins, TEC associated proteins, TRAs, and autoantigens (46, 48).

Characteristics of Thymic Exosomes

The first observation of exosome-like structures in thymic tissue was made by Wang and co-workers (50). These mouse thymic exosomes were characterized by high content of TGF-beta, CD9, and MHC II. In human beings, thymic exosomes were originally characterized with the use of explant cultures (46). The thymic exosomes shared features with exosomes from other sources, such as a size distribution of 30–100 nm for a majority of the vesicles, density peaking at 1.18–1.19 g/ml, which is less than the typical density of histone dense apoptotic bodies (51), and presence of typical exosomal proteins such as TSG101, CD9, CD81, and HLA-DR. Since these thymic exosomes were isolated from whole thymic tissue, the cellular source could not be determined, and the vesicles were most probably a mix of exosomes from different sources, e.g., thymocytes, TECs, and DCs. Even so, tissue-restricted antigens (TRAs), defined by protein-expression allowed in a maximum of five tissues in the human protein atlas (HPA) (52) were identified in the exosomes (2′,3′-cyclic-nucleotide 3′phosphodiesterase, reticulon 3, tropomyosin 3, and the GNAS protein), which suggest that a portion of the exosomes originates from the thymic epithelium (46). These four identified TRAs are possible candidates to participate in the selection/maturation processes within the human thymus. With the exception of one study that address thymic expression of 2′,3′-cyclic-nucleotide 3′phosphodiesterase (53), the four TRAs are hitherto unaddressed in thymic research. Interestingly, 2′, 3′-cyclic-nucleotide 3′phosphodiesterase is recognized by IgG autoantibodies in multiple sclerosis patients (54). In addition, tropomyosin 3 was suggested to be a candidate antigen in endometriosis (55).

Other traits seem to be specific for thymic exosomes compared to exosomes from other sources. One is the massive yield of ~1 mg of thymic exosomes per gram of thymic tissue grown in an explant culture (46). Other characteristics typical for thymic exosomes are the low expression of CD63 and the high expression of TSG101 on their surface (46). However, low levels of CD63 could have functional implications for thymic exosomes since it has been reported that siRNA mediated knockdown of the tetraspanin CD63 in a B-lymphoblastoid cell line (LCL) resulted in an increased CD4+ T-cell recognition as evaluated by IFN-γ production. The increase in T-cell response could not be explained by changes in antigen processing or MHC II-expression (56). Instead, equal amounts of exosomes from CD63low LCL cells and control LCL cells stimulated the T-cells to comparable degrees, but the CD63low LCL cells produced more exosomes, which in the end enhanced the total T-cell-stimulatory capacity of the CD63low LCL cells.

Formal proof that TECs are able to produce exosomes was provided with the use of an approach in which primary cultures of TECs were established under selective conditions to eliminate the presence of thymocytes, DCs, fibroblasts, and peripherally produced exosomes (48, 57). The results showed that TECs produce exosomes and that these exosomes contained TRAs and a number of known autoantigens (48). Among the identified autoantigens in TEC exosomes were myelin basic protein (58), collagen type II (59), TITIN (60), heat shock protein 60 [connected with various autoimmune diseases (61)], transglutaminase 2 (62), desmoglein 1, and desmoglein 3 (63). In addition to autoantigens, previously reported mTEC-enriched TRAs were present in TEC exosomes, e.g., glutathione S-transferase M3 (GSTM3), LDL receptor, monocarboxylate transporter 4 (SLC16A3), mucins (MUC5B and MUC18), and myosin 1B (MYO1B) (48).

The observation that TEC exosomes have a higher fraction of proteins classified as TRAs (24%) compared to the fraction of TRAs in the cultured TECs (21%) could argue for a directed loading of TRAs into the exosomes (48).

Exosomes isolated directly from thymic tissue and exosomes isolated from TEC-cultures share a set of TRAs, such as 2′,3′-cyclic-nucleotide 3′ phosphodiesterase, which strengthens that thymic explant exosomes are partly of epithelial origin and that their TRA-content can be analyzed with whole thymic tissue as starting material. See Figure 1C for a schematic summary of the TEC-exosomal proteome. In addition, the presence of antigen-presenting molecules together with TRAs indicates that exosomes could transfer intact functional peptide-MHC complexes.

RNA Transfer by Exosomes

Exosomes have been increasingly recognized for their ability to transfer functional miRNAs and mRNAs between cells (4), and recently, it was shown that Tregs utilize exosomes for transfer of miRNA in order to functionally silence effector T-cells (64). The importance of miRNAs in the thymus has rendered an increased interest, and miRNAs have been shown to affect promiscuous gene expression under the influence of AIRE (65, 66), to be involved in thymic involution (67) and the maintenance of thymic epithelia (68). Thymic exosomes contain a number of miRNAs, and among them is the highly TEC enriched miRNA hsa-miR-149 (66). The role of thymic miRNAs has been thoroughly reviewed recently (69). Possible roles for miRNA sharing within the thymus by exosomes include control of TEC development and regulation of TRA expression. See Figure 2A for a schematic view of miRNA incorporation into TEC exosomes.

FIGURE 2 | (A) Thymic exosomes contain miRNAs that could be taken up by adjacent cells. (B) Suggested model describing two principally different routes for TRA loading onto exosomes. TRAs could be engulfed by phagophores, which are processed to autophagosomes that fuse with MVBs where TRA carrying exosomes are formed. Alternatively, TRAs are directly directed into MVBs.

Exosomal Biogenesis – Crossroads with Autophagy?

Autophagy may serve as a way to generate self-peptides from endogenously produced proteins that allows loading onto MHCII, and the constitutive autophagy process present in the thymus has been suggested to be involved in the negative selection and Treg formation (70). Thymic exosomes carry proteins involved in autophagy, such as autophagy related protein 7 (46). Two interesting observations are that a subgroup of TECs is rich in MVBs (71), and that at the same time, TECs have a constitutive autophagic activity (72). The simultaneous appearance of autophagic ultrastructure elements and multi-vesicular bodies in TECs support this notion (71). The intersection between autophagy and exosome formation is illustrated by the regulation of both autophagy and exosome biogenesis by GAIP interacting protein C terminus in pancreatic cancer cell lines (73). Exosomal release is also impaired in mouse embryonic fibroblasts lacking ATG12-ATG3, and immature autophagosomes are shown to fuse with MVBs in these cells (74). Whether this also occurs in TECs is so far unaddressed, but this route could potentially make antigens that are processed in the autophagic machinery available for export on exosomes and at the same time enhance the loading of endogenous antigens onto MHC class II molecules (Figure 2B).

Concluding Remarks

Tissue-restricted antigen presentation within the thymic micromileus is pivotal to establish central tolerance. Antigen transfer between thymic cell populations, e.g., from mTECs to thymocytes and DCs is an established phenomenon that is poorly investigated from a mechanistic point of view. To get a more comprehensive understanding of central tolerance, the role of antigen transfer and the responsible vectors, e.g., exosomes, need to be studied and understood in more depth.

The abundant presence of TRA-containing exosomes in thymic tissue and the many observations of antigen transfer from mTECs to DCs lead us to speculate that this antigen transfer is, at least partly, mediated by exosomes. However, such a mechanism has not yet been formally proven. Although this review has been focused on possible antigen transfer by mTEC-derived exosomes to DCs and thymocytes, it is not excluded that also cTECs produce exosomes and that exosomes are shuttling antigens between different TEC populations. Other questions also remain regarding thymic exosomes that are equally important to answer in future studies; do exosomes exist in vivo in enough quantities to be biologically functional in the context of tolerance induction? If so, which is the primary route, direct interaction with thymocytes or indirect via APCs? What is the importance of exosomes for nTreg induction? Also, does miRNA content of the exosomes affect the development and maturation of thymic cells? Examples of experimental approaches that could be used to address these questions are TEC specific inhibition of the ESCRT machinery using the FOXN1-cre system or microinjection of thymic exosomes isolated from wild type mice into AIRE−/− thymii. The outcome of this kind of experiments may give hints to whether a therapeutic use of tailor made exosomes to induce antigen-specific tolerance may be possible in the future.

Acknowledgments

OE was supported by the Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg Foundation (MMW 2012.0052).

References

1. Fevrier B, Raposo G. Exosomes: endosomal-derived vesicles shipping extracellular messages. Curr Opin Cell Biol (2004) 16:415–21. doi:10.1016/j.ceb.2004.06.003

2. Kalra H, Simpson RJ, Ji H, Aikawa E, Altevogt P, Askenase P, et al. Vesiclepedia: a compendium for extracellular vesicles with continuous community annotation. PLoS Biol (2012) 10:e1001450. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001450

3. Harding C, Heuser J, Stahl P. Receptor-mediated endocytosis of transferrin and recycling of the transferrin receptor in rat reticulocytes. J Cell Biol (1983) 97:329–39. doi:10.1083/jcb.97.2.329

4. Valadi H, Ekström K, Bossios A, Sjostrand M, Lee JJ, Lotvall JO. Exosome-mediated transfer of mRNAs and microRNAs is a novel mechanism of genetic exchange between cells. Nat Cell Biol (2007) 9:654–9. doi:10.1038/ncb1596

5. Pegtel DM, Cosmopoulos K, Thorley-Lawson DA, Van Eijndhoven MA, Hopmans ES, Lindenberg JL, et al. Functional delivery of viral miRNAs via exosomes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2010) 107:6328–33. doi:10.1073/pnas.0914843107

6. Ridder K, Keller S, Dams M, Rupp AK, Schlaudraff J, Turco DD, et al. Extracellular vesicle-mediated transfer of genetic information between the hematopoietic system and the brain in response to inflammation. PLoS Biol (2014) 12(6):e1001874. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001874

7. Michael A, Bajracharya SD, Yuen PS, Zhou H, Star RA, Illei GG, et al. Exosomes from human saliva as a source of microRNA biomarkers. Oral Dis (2010) 16:34–8. doi:10.1111/j.1601-0825.2009.01604.x

8. Caby MP, Lankar D, Vincendeau-Scherrer C, Raposo G, Bonnerot C. Exosomal-like vesicles are present in human blood plasma. Int Immunol (2005) 17:879–87. doi:10.1093/intimm/dxh267

9. Admyre C, Grunewald J, Thyberg J, Gripenback S, Tornling G, Eklund A, et al. Exosomes with major histocompatibility complex class II and co-stimulatory molecules are present in human BAL fluid. Eur Respir J (2003) 22:578–83. doi:10.1183/09031936.03.00041703

10. Kanno K, Sasaki S, Hirata Y, Ishikawa S, Fushimi K, Nakanishi S, et al. Urinary excretion of aquaporin-2 in patients with diabetes insipidus. N Engl J Med (1995) 332:1540–5. doi:10.1056/NEJM199506083322303

11. Pisitkun T, Shen RF, Knepper MA. Identification and proteomic profiling of exosomes in human urine. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2004) 101:13368–73. doi:10.1073/pnas.0403453101

12. Taylor DD, Gercel-Taylor C. MicroRNA signatures of tumor-derived exosomes as diagnostic biomarkers of ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol (2008) 110:13–21. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.04.033

13. Zitvogel L, Regnault A, Lozier A, Wolfers J, Flament C, Tenza D, et al. Eradication of established murine tumors using a novel cell-free vaccine: dendritic cell-derived exosomes. Nat Med (1998) 4:594–600. doi:10.1038/nm0598-594

14. Wolfers J, Lozier A, Raposo G, Regnault A, Thery C, Masurier C, et al. Tumor-derived exosomes are a source of shared tumor rejection antigens for CTL cross-priming. Nat Med (2001) 7:297–303. doi:10.1038/85438

15. Raposo G, Nijman HW, Stoorvogel W, Liejendekker R, Harding CV, Melief CJ, et al. B lymphocytes secrete antigen-presenting vesicles. J Exp Med (1996) 83:1161–72. doi:10.1084/jem.183.3.1161

16. Karlsson M, Lundin S, Dahlgren U, Kahu H, Pettersson I, Telemo E. “Tolerosomes” are produced by intestinal epithelial cells. Eur J Immunol (2001) 31:2892–900. doi:10.1002/1521-4141(2001010)31:10<2892::AID-IMMU2892>3.0.CO;2-I

17. Ostman S, Taube M, Telemo E. Tolerosome-induced oral tolerance is MHC dependent. Immunology (2005) 116:464–76. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2567.2005.02245.x

18. Sansom SN, Shikama-Dorn N, Zhanybekova S, Nusspaumer G, Macaulay IC, Deadman ME, et al. Population and single-cell genomics reveal the Aire dependency, relief from Polycomb silencing, and distribution of self-antigen expression in thymic epithelia. Genome Res (2014) 24:1918–31. doi:10.1101/gr.171645.113

19. Derbinski J, Schulte A, Kyewski B, Klein L. Promiscuous gene expression in medullary thymic epithelial cells mirrors the peripheral self. Nat Immunol (2001) 2:1032–9. doi:10.1038/ni723

20. Anderson MS, Venanzi ES, Klein L, Chen Z, Berzins SP, Turley SJ, et al. Projection of an immunological self shadow within the thymus by the aire protein. Science (2002) 298:1395–401. doi:10.1126/science.1075958

21. Chentoufi AA, Polychronakos C. Insulin expression levels in the thymus modulate insulin-specific autoreactive T-cell tolerance: the mechanism by which the IDDM2 locus may predispose to diabetes. Diabetes (2002) 51:1383–90. doi:10.2337/diabetes.51.5.1383

22. Lio CW, Hsieh CS. Becoming self-aware: the thymic education of regulatory T cells. Curr Opin Immunol (2011) 23(2):213–9. doi:10.1016/j.coi.2010.11.010

23. Yang S, Fujikado N, Kolodin D, Benoist C, Mathis D. Regulatory T cells generated early in life play a distinct role in maintaining self-tolerance. Science (2015) 348:589–94. doi:10.1126/science.aaa7017

24. Derbinski J, Pinto S, Rosch S, Hexel K, Kyewski B. Promiscuous gene expression patterns in single medullary thymic epithelial cells argue for a stochastic mechanism. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105:657–62. doi:10.1073/pnas.0707486105

25. Kyewski B, Feuerer M. Love is in the Aire: mTECs share their assets. Immunity (2014) 41:343–5. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2014.08.013

26. Klein L, Hinterberger M, Von Rohrscheidt J, Aichinger M. Autonomous versus dendritic cell-dependent contributions of medullary thymic epithelial cells to central tolerance. Trends Immunol (2011) 32(5):188–93. doi:10.1016/j.it.2011.03.002

27. Humblet C, Rudensky AY, Kyewski B. Presentation and intercellular transfer of self antigen within the thymic microenvironment: expression of the E alpha peptide-I-Ab complex by isolated thymic stromal cells. Int Immunol (1994) 6(12):1949–58. doi:10.1093/intimm/6.12.1949

28. Gallegos AM, Bevan MJ. Central tolerance to tissue-specific antigens mediated by direct and indirect antigen presentation. J Exp Med (2004) 200:1039–49. doi:10.1084/jem.20041457

29. Ohnmacht C, Pullner A, King SB, Drexler I, Meier S, Brocker T, et al. Constitutive ablation of dendritic cells breaks self-tolerance of CD4 T cells and results in spontaneous fatal autoimmunity. J Exp Med (2009) 206:549–59. doi:10.1084/jem.20082394

30. Aschenbrenner K, D’cruz LM, Vollmann EH, Hinterberger M, Emmerich J, Swee LK, et al. Selection of Foxp3+ regulatory T cells specific for self antigen expressed and presented by Aire+ medullary thymic epithelial cells. Nat Immunol (2007) 8:351–8. doi:10.1038/ni1444

31. Koble C, Kyewski B. The thymic medulla: a unique microenvironment for intercellular self-antigen transfer. J Exp Med (2009) 206:1505–13. doi:10.1084/jem.20082449

32. Hinterberger M, Aichinger M, Prazeres Da Costa O, Voehringer D, Hoffmann R, Klein L. Autonomous role of medullary thymic epithelial cells in central CD4(+) T cell tolerance. Nat Immunol (2010) 11:512–9. doi:10.1038/ni.1874

33. Roman E, Shinom H, Qin FX, Liu YJ. Cutting edge: hematopoietic-derived APCs select regulatory T cells in thymus. J Immunol (2010) 185:3819–23. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0900665

34. Hubert FX, Kinkel SA, Davey GM, Phipson B, Mueller SN, Liston A, et al. Aire regulates the transfer of antigen from mTECs to dendritic cells for induction of thymic tolerance. Blood (2011) 118:2462–72. doi:10.1182/blood-2010-06-286393

35. Taniguchi RT, Devoss JJ, Moon JJ, Sidney J, Sette A, Jenkins MK, et al. Detection of an autoreactive T-cell population within the polyclonal repertoire that undergoes distinct autoimmune regulator (Aire)-mediated selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2012) 109:7847–52. doi:10.1073/pnas.1120607109

36. Guerri L, Peguillet I, Geraldo Y, Nabti S, Premel V, Lantz O. Analysis of APC types involved in CD4 tolerance and regulatory T cell generation using reaggregated thymic organ cultures. J Immunol (2013) 190:2102–10. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1202883

37. Perry JS, Lio CW, Kau AL, Nutsch K, Yang Z, Gordon JI, et al. Distinct contributions of aire and antigen-presenting-cell subsets to the generation of self-tolerance in the thymus. Immunity (2014) 41:414–26. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2014.08.007

38. Thery C, Duban L, Segura E, Veron P, Lantz O, Amigorena S. Indirect activation of naive CD4+ T cells by dendritic cell-derived exosomes. Nat Immunol (2002) 3:1156–62. doi:10.1038/ni854

39. Vincent-Schneider H, Stumptner-Cuvelette P, Lankar D, Pain S, Raposo G, Benaroch P, et al. Exosomes bearing HLA-DR1 molecules need dendritic cells to efficiently stimulate specific T cells. Int Immunol (2002) 14:713–22. doi:10.1093/intimm/dxf048

40. Segura E, Nicco C, Lombard B, Veron P, Raposo G, Batteux F, et al. ICAM-1 on exosomes from mature dendritic cells is critical for efficient naive T-cell priming. Blood (2005) 106:216–23. doi:10.1182/blood-2005-01-0220

41. Sprent J. Direct stimulation of naive T cells by antigen-presenting cell vesicles. Blood Cells Mol Dis (2005) 35(1):17–20. doi:10.1016/j.bcmd.2005.04.004

42. Admyre C, Johansson SM, Paulie S, Gabrielsson S. Direct exosome stimulation of peripheral human T cells detected by ELISPOT. Eur J Immunol (2006) 36:1772–81. doi:10.1002/eji.200535615

43. Admyre C, Bohle B, Johansson SM, Focke-Tejkl M, Valenta R, Scheynius A, et al. B cell-derived exosomes can present allergen peptides and activate allergen-specific T cells to proliferate and produce TH2-like cytokines. J Allergy Clin Immunol (2007) 120:1418–24. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2007.06.040

44. Nolte-’t Hoen EN, Buschow SI, Anderton SM, Stoorvogel W, Wauben MH. Activated T cells recruit exosomes secreted by dendritic cells via LFA-1. Blood (2009) 113:1977–81. doi:10.1182/blood-2008-08-174094

45. Utsugi-Kobukai S, Fujimaki H, Hotta C, Nakazawa M, Minami M. MHC class I-mediated exogenous antigen presentation by exosomes secreted from immature and mature bone marrow derived dendritic cells. Immunol Lett (2003) 89:125–31. doi:10.1016/S0165-2478(03)00128-7

46. Skogberg G, Gudmundsdottir J, Van Der Post S, Sandstrom K, Bruhn S, Benson M, et al. Characterization of human thymic exosomes. PLoS One (2013) 8:e67554. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0067554

47. Segura E, Guerin C, Hogg N, Amigorena S, Thery C. CD8+ dendritic cells use LFA-1 to capture MHC-peptide complexes from exosomes in vivo. J Immunol (2007) 179:1489–96. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.179.3.1489

48. Skogberg G, Lundberg V, Berglund M, Gudmundsdottir J, Telemo E, Lindgren S, et al. Human thymic epithelial primary cells produce exosomes carrying tissue-restricted antigens. Immunol Cell Biol (2015). doi:10.1038/icb.2015.33

49. Hinterberger M, Wirnsberger G, Klein L. B7/CD28 in central tolerance: costimulation promotes maturation of regulatory T cell precursors and prevents their clonal deletion. Front Immunol (2011) 2:30. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2011.00030

50. Wang GJ, Liu Y, Qin A, Shah SV, Deng ZB, Xiang X, et al. Thymus exosomes-like particles induce regulatory T cells. J Immunol (2008) 181:5242–8. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.181.8.5242

51. Thery C, Boussac M, Veron P, Ricciardi-Castagnoli P, Raposo G, Garin J, et al. Proteomic analysis of dendritic cell-derived exosomes: a secreted subcellular compartment distinct from apoptotic vesicles. J Immunol (2001) 166:7309–18. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.166.12.7309

52. Uhlen M, Oksvold P, Fagerberg L, Lundberg E, Jonasson K, Forsberg M, et al. Towards a knowledge-based Human Protein Atlas. Nat Biotechnol (2010) 28:1248–50. doi:10.1038/nbt1210-1248

53. Bernier L, Alvarez F, Norgard EM, Raible DW, Mentaberry A, Schembri JG, et al. Molecular cloning of a 2’,3’-cyclic nucleotide 3’-phosphodiesterase: mRNAs with different 5’ ends encode the same set of proteins in nervous and lymphoid tissues. J Neurosci (1987) 7:2703–10.

54. Lovato L, Cianti R, Gini B, Marconi S, Bianchi L, Armini A, et al. Transketolase and 2’,3’-cyclic-nucleotide 3’-phosphodiesterase type I isoforms are specifically recognized by IgG autoantibodies in multiple sclerosis patients. Mol Cell Proteomics (2008) 7:2337–49. doi:10.1074/mcp.M700277-MCP200

55. Gajbhiye R, Sonawani A, Khan S, Suryawanshi A, Kadam S, Warty N, et al. Identification and validation of novel serum markers for early diagnosis of endometriosis. Hum Reprod (2012) 27:408–17. doi:10.1093/humrep/der410

56. Petersen SH, Odintsova E, Haigh TA, Rickinson AB, Taylor GS, Berditchevski F. The role of tetraspanin CD63 in antigen presentation via MHC II. Eur J Immunol (2011) 41:2556–61. doi:10.1002/eji.201141438

57. Ropke C. Thymic epithelial cell culture. Microsc Res Tech (1997) 38: 276–86. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0029(19970801)38:3<276::AID-JEMT8>3.3.CO;2-6

58. Allegretta M, Nicklas JA, Sriram S, Albertini RJ. T cells responsive to myelin basic protein in patients with multiple sclerosis. Science (1990) 247:718–21. doi:10.1126/science.1689076

59. Terato K, Shimozuru Y, Katayama K, Takemitsu Y, Yamashita I, Miyatsu M, et al. Specificity of antibodies to type II collagen in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum (1990) 33:1493–500. doi:10.1002/art.1780331006

60. Chen XJ, Qiao J, Xiao BG, Lu CZ. The significance of titin antibodies in myasthenia gravis – correlation with thymoma and severity of myasthenia gravis. J Neurol (2004) 251:1006–11. doi:10.1007/s00415-004-0479-z

61. Mallard K, Jones DB, Richmond J, Mcgill M, Foulis AK. Expression of the human heat shock protein 60 in thyroid, pancreatic, hepatic and adrenal autoimmunity. J Autoimmun (1996) 9:89–96. doi:10.1006/jaut.1996.0011

62. Dieterich W, Ehnis T, Bauer M, Donner P, Volta U, Riecken EO, et al. Identification of tissue transglutaminase as the autoantigen of celiac disease. Nat Med (1997) 3:797–801. doi:10.1038/nm0797-797

63. Amagai M, Klaus-Kovtun V, Stanley JR. Autoantibodies against a novel epithelial cadherin in pemphigus vulgaris, a disease of cell adhesion. Cell (1991) 67:869–77. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(91)90360-B

64. Okoye IS, Coomes SM, Pelly VS, Czieso S, Papayannopoulos V, Tolmachova T, et al. MicroRNA-containing T-regulatory-cell-derived exosomes suppress pathogenic T helper 1 cells. Immunity (2014) 41:89–103. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2014.05.019

65. Macedo C, Evangelista AF, Marques MM, Octacilio-Silva S, Donadi EA, Sakamoto-Hojo ET, et al. Autoimmune regulator (Aire) controls the expression of microRNAs in medullary thymic epithelial cells. Immunobiology (2013) 218:554–60. doi:10.1016/j.imbio.2012.06.013

66. Ucar O, Tykocinski LO, Dooley J, Liston A, Kyewski B. An evolutionarily conserved mutual interdependence between Aire and microRNAs in promiscuous gene expression. Eur J Immunol (2013) 43(7):1769–78. doi:10.1002/eji.201343343

67. Papadopoulou AS, Dooley J, Linterman MA, Pierson W, Ucar O, Kyewski B, et al. The thymic epithelial microRNA network elevates the threshold for infection-associated thymic involution via miR-29a mediated suppression of the IFN-alpha receptor. Nat Immunol (2011) 13:181–7. doi:10.1038/ni.2193

68. Zuklys S, Mayer CE, Zhanybekova S, Stefanski HE, Nusspaumer G, Gill J, et al. MicroRNAs control the maintenance of thymic epithelia and their competence for T lineage commitment and thymocyte selection. J Immunol (2012) 189:3894–904. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1200783

69. Ucar O, Rattay K. Promiscuous gene expression in the thymus: a matter of epigenetics, miRNA, and more? Front Immunol (2015) 6:93. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00093

70. Nedjic J, Aichinger M, Emmerich J, Mizushima N, Klein L. Autophagy in thymic epithelium shapes the T-cell repertoire and is essential for tolerance. Nature (2008) 455:396–400. doi:10.1038/nature07208

71. Milicevic Z, Milicevic NM, Laan M, Peterson P, Kisand K, Scott HS, et al. Ultrastructure of medullary thymic epithelial cells of autoimmune regulator (Aire)-deficient mice. Immunol Cell Biol (2010) 88:50–6. doi:10.1038/icb.2009.55

72. Mizushima N, Yamamoto A, Matsui M, Yoshimori T, Ohsumi Y. In vivo analysis of autophagy in response to nutrient starvation using transgenic mice expressing a fluorescent autophagosome marker. Mol Biol Cell (2004) 15:1101–11. doi:10.1091/mbc.E03-09-0704

73. Bhattacharya S, Pal K, Sharma AK, Dutta SK, Lau JS, Yan IK, et al. GAIP interacting protein C-terminus regulates autophagy and exosome biogenesis of pancreatic cancer through metabolic pathways. PLoS One (2014) 9:e114409. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0114409

74. Murrow L, Malhotra R, Debnath J. ATG12-ATG3 interacts with Alix to promote basal autophagic flux and late endosome function. Nat Cell Biol (2015) 17(3):300–10. doi:10.1038/ncb3112

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Skogberg, Telemo and Ekwall. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

REVIEW
published: 20 July 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00365

Thymic crosstalk coordinates medulla organization and T-cell tolerance induction

Noëlla Lopes[1], Arnauld Sergé[2], Pierre Ferrier[1] and Magali Irla[1]*

1 Centre d’Immunologie de Marseille-Luminy, INSERM, U1104, CNRS UMR7280, Aix-Marseille Université UM2, Marseille, France

2 Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie de Marseille, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, INSERM U1068, CNRS UMR7258, Aix-Marseille Université UM105, Marseille, France

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Daniel Gray, The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, Australia
Thorsten Buch, University of Zurich, Switzerland

*Correspondence:

Magali Irla, Centre d’Immunologie de Marseille-Luminy (CIML), Campus de Luminy Case 906, Marseille Cedex 09 F-13288, France
magali.irla@inserm.fr

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 14 May 2015
Accepted: 06 July 2015
Published: 20 July 2015

Citation:

Lopes N, Sergé A, Ferrier P and Irla M (2015) Thymic crosstalk coordinates medulla organization and T-cell tolerance induction. Front. Immunol. 6:365. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00365

The thymus ensures the generation of a functional and highly diverse T-cell repertoire. The thymic medulla, which is mainly composed of medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs) and dendritic cells (DCs), provides a specialized microenvironment dedicated to the establishment of T-cell tolerance. mTECs play a privileged role in this pivotal process by their unique capacity to express a broad range of peripheral self-antigens that are presented to developing T cells. Reciprocally, developing T cells control mTEC differentiation and organization. These bidirectional interactions are commonly referred to as thymic crosstalk. This review focuses on the relative contributions of mTEC and DC subsets to the deletion of autoreactive T cells and the generation of natural regulatory T cells. We also summarize current knowledge regarding how hematopoietic cells conversely control the composition and complex three-dimensional organization of the thymic medulla.

Keywords: autoimmune regulator, dendritic cells, medulla, medullary thymic epithelial cells, natural regulatory T cells, negative selection, T-cell tolerance, thymic crosstalk

Introduction

Healthy individuals mount effective T-cell immune responses directed against pathogens while avoiding autoimmune attacks directed toward self-antigens. The random generation of the T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire results in the production of autoreactive TCRs, which necessitates their selection in the thymus (1). Anatomically, the thymus is compartmentalized into an outer region called the cortex and an inner region called the medulla. The cortex supports early stages of T-cell differentiation, including the positive selection of CD4+ and CD8+ thymocytes. Nonetheless, the cortex also supports a substantial loss of DP thymocytes that are specific for ubiquitous self-antigens (2, 3). The medulla sustains the induction of T-cell tolerance, which is established by two distinct main mechanisms: negative selection (also known as clonal deletion) of potentially hazardous autoreactive T cells, and the production of natural regulatory T (nTreg) cells. Negative selection consists of the deletion of immature T cells bearing TCRs, which are highly reactive against self-antigens (4, 5). Although this process is remarkably efficient, it cannot completely purge the TCR repertoire of self-reactive specificities and thus allows potentially hazardous T cells to reach the periphery. To control potential deleterious effects of autoreactive T cells that have escaped the negative selection process, the thymus produces a specific subset of T cells called nTregs. This cell type belongs mainly to the CD4+ T-cell lineage and specifically expresses the transcription factor forkhead box P3 (FOXP3), which is essential for their development and function (6). The induction of T-cell tolerance is established within the medullary microenvironment, which is composed of a dense 3D network of antigen-presenting cells (APCs), namely thymic dendritic cells (DCs) and medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs) (Figure 1A). In this review, we discuss our current knowledge regarding the phenotypic features of the different subsets of thymic DCs and mTECs as well as their relative contribution to the induction of T-cell tolerance. We also summarize recent progress in our understanding of the thymic crosstalk that sustains the composition and complex three-dimensional (3D) organization of the medulla.

FIGURE 1 | The thymic medulla is composed of a dense network of distinct subsets of DCs and mTECs. (A) Confocal micrograph of a mouse thymic section stained with antibodies against the DC-specific marker CD11c (blue) and the mTEC-specific marker K14 (red). (B) Three distinct subsets of DCs are located mainly in the medulla: resident cDCs (CD11chiCD11b− CD8αhiSirpα−), migratory cDCs (CD11chiCD11b+CD8αloSirpα+), and pDCs (CD11cintB220+PDCA-1+). (C) Schematic representation of mTEC differentiation. mTECs arise from a pool of self-renewing mTEC progenitors. Distinct stages of mTEC maturation can be identified based on the differential expression of MHCII, CD80, and Aire. The end stages of maturation can lead to the emergence of post-Aire mTECs, apoptosis, or to the development of Hassall’s corpuscle.

Thymic Medullary APCs Involved in T-Cell Tolerance Induction

Features of Thymic DCs

In the thymus, DCs represent only approximately 0.5% of the total thymic cells, which is less than that in other lymphoid organs. Although peripheral DCs have been long described as heterogeneous, only recently thymic DCs have also been shown to constitute a heterogeneous cell population. It is now accepted that thymic DCs comprise three distinct subsets: two conventional DC (cDC) subsets and plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs) (Figure 1B) (7). The two subsets of cDCs, which express high levels of CD11c, have different origins and can be distinguished based on specific cell surface markers. The CD11b−CD8αhiSirpα− (signal regulatory protein α) cDCs develop intrathymically and are commonly termed intrathymic or resident cDCs. In contrast, the CD11b+CD8αloSirpα+ cDCs have a myeloid origin and continuously migrate from the periphery via the blood circulation into the thymus (8). They are referred to as extrathymic or migratory cDCs. Under steady-state conditions, resident and migratory cDCs represent two-thirds and one-third of the thymic cDCs, respectively (7). Resident cDCs arise from a common T/DC precursor and reside exclusively in the thymus throughout their long life (7, 9, 10). They express CD8α mRNA and display CD8αα homodimers at their surface. In contrast, migratory cDCs do not synthesize CD8α mRNA, and the low expression level of CD8α observed at the surface of this cell type is a consequence of the uptake of cell surface CD8αβ heterodimers from thymocytes (11). Strikingly, following their migration in the thymus, migratory cDCs upregulate CD80 and CD86 costimulatory molecules as well as CD11c and MHCII molecules (8). In addition, in contrast to resident cDCs, migratory cDCs proliferate extensively and mature in interdigitating cDCs. Consequently, migratory cDCs overall exhibit a more activated phenotype compared with their resident counterparts (12).

The third subset of thymic DCs corresponds to pDCs, which continuously migrate to the thymus via the bloodstream. They are defined as CD11cintB220+PDCA-1+ and represent approximately 30% of the total thymic DCs (Figure 1B). Like their immature counterparts in the periphery, thymic pDCs present a plasmacytoid morphology rather than a dendritic morphology. Upon migration in the thymus, pDCs enlarge and adopt a semi-mature phenotype via the upregulation of CD11c and MHCII molecules (8). Moreover, they express high levels of Toll-like receptors (TLR) 7 and 9 and low levels of TLR 2, 3, and 4 (13). Overall, migratory DCs, i.e., pDCs and cDCs, represent 50% of the total thymic DCs. Parabiosis experiments have shown that migratory DCs are localized in the medulla and at the cortico-medullary junction (CMJ) (8). Antigen-loaded peripheral pDCs were found to be localized preferentially at the CMJ upon their migration in the thymus (14). Intriguingly, both pDCs and migratory cDCs change their phenotype shortly after entering the thymus, suggesting that the medullary microenvironment provides specific factors that contribute to the functional specification of these DC subsets. The identity of these factors that drive the maturation as well as the extensive proliferation of migratory DCs remains elusive.

Features of mTECs

Similarly to DCs, mTECs also constitute a heterogeneous cell population that represent less than 1% of the total thymic cells (15). Histologically, mTECs are commonly identified by the expression of cytokeratin-5, 14, MTS10, and ERTR5 markers as well as by reactivity with the lectin Ulex Europaeus Agglutinin 1 (UEA-1) (16–19). However, it is not completely clear whether these markers stain the bulk of mTECs or whether they preferentially detect some specific subsets. However, the whole mTEC compartment can be identified by flow cytometry and is generally defined as CD45−EpCAM+ (epithelial cell adhesion molecule) Ly51−/lo. mTEC subsets can be further defined with respect to other markers, including the levels of cell surface MHCII and CD80 expression as well as of the transcription factor Aire (Figure 1C). Recent advances have established the relationship between these different cell subsets by demonstrating that mTEC differentiation proceeds along distinct maturational stages. RTOC experiments have shown that MHCII−/loCD80−/loAire−immature mTECs give rise to MHCIIhiCD80hiAire+ mature mTECs (20–22). Consistently during embryogenesis, MHCII−/loCD80−/loAire−immature mTECs appear prior to the emergence of MHCIIhiCD80hiAire+ mature mTECs (20, 22). Mature mTECs are thus believed to derive from immature mTECs via an intermediate stage that is Aire− but has acquired high levels of MHCII and CD80 expression (Figure 1C). Aire+ mature mTECs were initially described to be post-mitotic and short-lived and were thus thought to represent the last stage of mTEC differentiation (20, 21). Apoptosis of this cell type has been proposed to be induced by Aire itself and to be favorable for the diffusion of self-antigens within the medullary microenvironment (21). Recent studies of cell fate mapping, allowing the permanent labeling of Aire-expressing cells even after the termination of transcription, have challenged this concept by demonstrating the existence of a post-Aire stage (23, 24). Approximately half of Aire+ mature mTECs seems to further progress to this post-Aire stage, which does not express Aire and expresses MHCII and CD80 molecules at reduced levels, thereby generating MHCIIloCD80loAire−mTECs (Figure 1C) (24, 25). This end-stage maturation of mTECs closely resembles that of keratinocytes (25). Finally, mTECs lose their nuclei to form Hassall’s corpuscles that can be detected by the expression of markers such as involucrin, cytokeratins 6/10, desmogleins 1/3, and lympho-epithelial kazal type related inhibitor (LEKTI) (25, 26).

Interestingly, all mTEC subsets are simultaneously present in the post-natal thymus (Figure 1C). In addition, the turnover period for mature mTECs is estimated to be between 2 and 3 weeks (20, 21). These observations suggest that the mature mTEC population is continuously replenished by differentiation from an mTEC progenitor. Consistent with this notion of perpetual renewal, recent studies have demonstrated the presence in adults of thymic epithelial progenitors and/or stem cells that are capable of generating both mature cortical and medullary lineages in a stepwise fashion (27, 28). Furthermore, a novel transitional progenitor stage characterized by the expression of cTEC markers such as CD205, β5t, and high levels of IL-7 has been identified in the embryonic thymus and shown to have the potential to generate mTECs (29–31). Moreover, an mTEC-specific stem cell capable of ensuring lifelong mTEC subsets was recently found within the claudin-3,4hiSSEA-1+ (stage-specific embryonic antigen 1) population (Figure 1C) (32). Of note, adult mTEC stem cells have a lower regenerative capacity than their embryonic counterparts. At the current stage of knowledge, the relationships among the common thymic epithelial stem cells (27, 28), the transitional progenitor that harbors cTEC-properties (29–31) and claudin-3,4hi SSEA-1+ mTEC stem cells (32) remain unknown. Thus, further investigations are needed to clarify the relationship among these cells as well as their relative contributions to medulla formation and homeostasis within the embryonic and adult thymus. The identification of specific markers that allow distinct discrimination between these cell types would be helpful to evaluate their respective regenerative capacity. Such studies could aid in identifying clinical applications, notably for improving thymic function in the context of elderly or cytoablative treatments. Taken together, these findings have revealed that the medullary epithelium is not static but, in contrast, is much more dynamic than previously considered.

Tight Collaboration Between Medullary APCs for the Establishment of T-Cell Tolerance

Medullary thymic epithelial cells play a privileged role in the induction of central T-cell tolerance through their ability to express a broad range of tissue-restricted self-antigens (TRAs) (33). A recent study has shown, by using deep transcriptome sequencing, that mature mTECs express 19,293 genes, i.e., approximately 85% of the mouse genome (34). Thus, mTECs constitute the only cell type described that expresses such a large number of genes. The transcription factor Aire is the only regulator known to date that drives the expression of many TRAs (35). Aire alone regulates 3,980 genes (34). The importance of Aire in the induction of T-cell tolerance is illustrated by the fact that mutations in this gene are responsible for the development of the human autoimmune syndrome autoimmune polyendocrinopathy syndrome-1 (APS-1), which is also known as autoimmune polyendocrinopathy candidiasis ectodermal dystrophy (APECED) (36, 37). Similarly to humans, Aire-deficient mice show signs of autoimmunity characterized by inflammatory infiltrates and serum autoantibodies (38). The mechanisms by which Aire controls the transcription of TRAs have been extensively reviewed elsewhere (39–41). In contrast, although Aire-independent TRAs represent approximately 80% of the genes expressed in mTECs, the mechanisms that regulate them are largely unknown. The participation of other regulatory factors as well as epigenetic regulation thus remains to be identified.

Cross-Presentation of mTEC-Derived TRAs by Resident cDCs

Tissue-restricted self-antigens expressed by mTECs, independently of their subcellular origin, were described to be cross-presented by resident cDCs, which reside in close proximity to mTECs (42–45) (Figure 2). This unidirectional transfer of self-antigens is thought to be favored by a high mTEC turnover, which might allow the subsequent uptake of materials by cDCs. Although several potential mechanisms of intercellular material transfer have been proposed, such as the uptake of apoptotic bodies, gap junctions, exosome transfer, and membrane exchange (“nibbling”), experimental evidence is still lacking, and the precise underlying mechanisms remain unclear (46, 47). However, a recent study found that human TECs produce exosomes that carry antigen-presentation molecules and TRAs, suggesting that TEC-derived exosome could be involved in TRA cross-presentation (48). Given that a particular TRA is expressed only by a minor fraction of mTECs (1–3%), this phenomenon of intercellular antigen transfer likely ensures efficient scanning of TRAs by developing SP thymocytes (49). Furthermore, two-photon imaging experiments have shown that SP thymocytes are extremely mobile and make frequent and transient contacts with DCs, which might greatly contribute to the efficient selection of T cells during their 4- to 5-day residency in the medulla (50, 51). Proper localization of resident cDCs in the medulla is controlled by the expression of the chemokine receptor XCR1 and its Aire-dependent associated chemokine XCL1 (52). XCL1-deficient mice show fewer medullary DCs and defective generation of nTreg cells, suggesting that medullary cDCs contribute to nTreg cell development (Figure 2). Consistent with this observation, resident cDCs have been found to play an important role in the generation of nTregs via their ability to acquire and present Aire-dependent TRAs (53).

FIGURE 2 | mTECs and DCs tightly collaborate to delete autoreactive T cells and to induce the generation of nTreg cells. Relevant in vivo studies are indicated in this figure. Tissue-restricted self-antigens (TRAs) expressed and presented by mTECs can lead to the deletion of autoreactive T cells and the induction of nTregs. These self-antigens can also be transferred to and presented by resident cDCs, resulting in T-cell deletion and the induction of nTregs. Furthermore, migratory cDCs and pDCs also reinforce the establishment of central T-cell tolerance via the presentation of antigens captured in the periphery. Migratory cDCs are also involved in T-cell deletion and the induction of nTregs, whereas pDCs only contribute to the deletion of autoreactive T cells in mice. Thymic B cells have also been shown to participate in the deletion of autoreactive T cells and the generation of nTregs.

mTECs Act as Bona Fide APCs

Medullary thymic epithelial cells have thus been initially recognized to play a privileged role in T-cell tolerance because they constitute an “antigen reservoir” that mirrors the peripheral self (33). However, the use of transgenic mouse models that mimic TRA expression in the thymus have shown that mTECs can efficiently induce the clonal deletion of CD8+ T cells (42, 54). Recent studies have demonstrated that they also act as bona fide APCs to CD4+ T cells. mTECs have the ability to autonomously present endogenously expressed TRAs via MHCII molecules by using an unconventional endogenous pathway called macroautophagy, which allows the shuttling of cytoplasmic constituents into lysosomes (55, 56). Aire+ mTECs can induce both the negative selection of autoreactive T cells as well as the generation of nTreg cells (Figure 2) (53, 57–60). The induction of nTreg cells was found to be mTEC-dependent because mTECs have the ability to foster the development of Foxp3−CD25+ nTreg precursors (61). In accordance with these findings, mice showing an enhanced mTEC compartment display increased production of nTreg cells (62, 63). Conversely, mice showing a reduced mTEC compartment exhibit a reduction of nTreg cells (64, 65). Interestingly, a recent study has shown that a large proportion of thymic Tregs corresponds to peripheral recirculating Tregs (66). The participation of mTECs to this phenomenon of recirculation to the thymus remains to be examined. Interestingly, post-Aire mTECs were found to maintain intermediate TRA expression (24). Thus, it is plausible that this newly identified mTEC subset plays a role in the establishment of T-cell tolerance. Further studies, based for instance on cell-specific ablation, are needed to address this issue. Moreover, although MHCII−/loCD80−/loAire− and MHCIIhiCD80hiAire− mTECs express fewer genes compared with Aire+ mTECs (34), only a few thousands genes are differentially expressed, which suggests that these immature subsets could have a non-redundant function in the induction of T-cell tolerance. In addition, these distinct mTEC subsets express different levels of MHCII and costimulatory molecules, which may significantly impact T-cell selection. Consistent with these observations, in vivo knock-down of MHCII molecules specifically in Aire+ mTECs leads to an increased proportion of CD4+ SP and an enhanced selection of nTregs (59). These findings suggest that there is an underlying division of labor within mTEC subsets, with immature mTECs likely providing more potent induction of nTregs and mature mTECs preferentially prone to negative selection. Of note, the in vivo dynamics of the interactions of CD8+ and CD4+ T cells with mTECs remain unknown to date. It would be very informative to compare the interactions of medullary CD8+ and CD4+ T cells with Aire− and Aire+ mTECs to determine to what extent the frequency and duration of these interactions influence T-cell outcomes. Two-photon imaging experiments assessing fresh thymic slices are expected to achieve this goal in the near future and may reveal a complex choreography between SP thymocytes and mTECs.

Migratory DCs Reinforce the Presentation of Self-Antigens

Although mTECs express a diverse repertoire of TRAs that largely contribute to the induction of T-cell tolerance, they cannot encompass the spectrum of all peripheral self-antigens. Migratory DCs have been shown to reinforce the deletion of autoreactive thymocytes by sampling peripheral self-antigens that would otherwise be undetectable to developing thymocytes. Studies based on Rag2−/− OTII TCR-transgenic mice have shown that migratory cDCs induce the negative selection of autoreactive CD4+ thymocytes (12, 67). Interestingly, in co-culture assays, Sirpα+ cDCs efficiently convert CD4+CD25− thymocytes into CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ nTregs (12, 68). Migratory cDCs were also found to efficiently induce nTreg cells in vivo (12). Thus, in the steady state, migratory cDCs have the ability to transport antigens captured in the periphery and contribute to the establishment of tolerance by deleting autoreactive CD4+ thymocytes and inducing nTreg cells (Figure 2). These studies have mainly focused on MHCII-restricted TCR-transgenic models, and consequently, the role of migratory cDCs in CD8+ T-cell deletion remains unclear. Migratory cDCs home to the thymus in a CCR2-dependent manner (69). CCR2-deficient mice display a decreased number of migratory cDCs in their thymus and exhibit defective negative selection against blood-borne antigens (69). However, the deficiency in CCR2 does not completely alter the migration of these cells, suggesting the potential involvement of other chemokine receptors. Of note, activated cDCs exhibit a reduced ability to home to the thymus, thus preventing the inappropriate deletion of cells capable of recognizing pathogen-derived antigens (67).

A third subset of DCs, namely pDCs, has recently been described to participate in the induction of T-cell tolerance. Until recently, the function of pDCs in the thymus has remained largely enigmatic, although it was suggested that they could protect the thymus against viral infections via their ability to produce type I interferon (7). In the periphery, in addition to secreting large amounts of type I interferon in response to viral infections, it became evident that pDCs can also function as bona fide APCs that are capable of modulating T-cell responses (70). Recent advances have demonstrated that pDCs possess tolerogenic properties in specific contexts, primarily through the induction or the proliferation of nTreg cells (71–74). Consistent with these tolerogenic functions observed in the periphery, pDCs were shown to colocalize with Foxp3+ Tregs and to promote the generation of nTreg cells from immature thymocytes via CD40–CD40L and interleukin-3 in the human thymus (75). Similarly, thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP)-activated human pDCs induce the generation of nTregs (76). However, in mice, thymic pDCs do not efficiently induce the generation of nTregs from immature thymocytes in vitro (12, 68). In vivo, no role of thymic pDCs was observed in the conversion of thymocytes into the nTreg cell lineage (14). These studies suggest that in contrast to their human counterparts, murine thymic pDCs are intrinsically inefficient at inducing nTreg cells. Murine thymic pDCs, however, were shown to transport peripheral antigens to the thymus, inducing the deletion of autoreactive CD4+ thymocytes (14) (Figure 2). Their role in the deletion of CD8+ thymocytes remains unclear. The migration of pDCs in the thymus was found to be dependent on CCR9, a chemokine receptor that is also involved in T-cell progenitor homing (14, 77, 78). Importantly, pDCs that are activated by TLR ligands lose their ability to home to the thymus by down-regulating CCR9, thus preventing the unwanted induction of T-cell tolerance toward pathogens (14). Under normal conditions, CCR9 deficiency does not completely block the recruitment of pDCs in the thymus, suggesting that other chemokine receptors could be involved in this process. Interestingly, transgenic mice overexpressing CCL2 in the thymus under the myelin basic protein (MBP) promoter exhibit a massive thymic recruitment of pDCs, which express CCR2 (79, 80). The thymic migration of pDCs could be mediated via both CCR9 and CCR2. The generation of double knockout mice for CCR9 and CCR2 should reveal whether these two chemokine receptors are sufficient for directing the thymic recruitment of pDCs.

A New Player: Thymic B Cells

In the medulla, in addition to mTECs and DCs, a third type of APC, namely the B cell, has also been implicated in the induction of T-cell tolerance (Figure 2). The vast majority of thymic B cells develop within the thymus from Rag-expressing progenitors, whereas recirculating B cells represent a minority (81). Thymic B cells display unique phenotypic hallmarks in comparison to peripheral B cells. They express high levels of MHCII and costimulatory molecules, supporting their robust antigen-presenting capacity (81). Of note, a recent report has shown that thymic B cells express Aire and display tolerogenic properties upon migration into the thymus (82). An original study using transgenic mice on an I-E-deficient background, in which B cells specifically express I-E MHCII molecules, established the capacity of thymic B cells to mediate the negative selection of CD4+ but not CD8+ T cells (83). Similarly, transgenic B cells, which exclusively present an antigen derived from the myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG), efficiently induce the deletion of MOG-specific CD4+ T cells (84). A recent study has also suggested that thymic B cells capture self-antigens through their B-cell receptors and delete autoreactive T cells by presenting peptides derived from these self-antigens (81). Furthermore, thymic B cells also contribute to the generation of nTreg cells (85).

Therefore, mTECs, DCs and B cells participate in the induction of T-cell tolerance through the negative selection of autoreactive T cells and the generation of nTreg cells (Figure 2). Interestingly, a recent study using deep sequencing in a fixed TCRβ chain model comparing different genetically modified mice has shown that bone marrow-derived APCs and mTECs play non-redundant roles in shaping the TCR repertoire (53). Roughly half of the Aire-dependent deletion or nTreg induction processes require antigen presentation by bone marrow cells (53). Moreover, the origin of the tissue antigens captured in the periphery and transported in the thymus by migratory cDCs and pDCs remains unclear. Additional studies are needed to determine the degree of the spectrum of overlap among antigens presented in the thymus by these two cell types. In addition to peripheral tissue antigens, although migratory DCs are suspected to participate in T-cell tolerance toward inoffensive foreign antigens derived from food or the commensal gut flora, experimental evidence is still lacking (86). Thus, it is possible that specific thymic DC subsets capture distinct sets of self-antigens and, consequently, could differentially impact the TCR repertoire. Additional studies performed at the polyclonal TCR level are required to elucidate this important issue.

Involvement of Thymic Crosstalk in the Composition and Patterning of the Medulla

The thymic medulla plays a pivotal role in the selection of SP thymocytes. In turn, the expansion and organization of the medulla is governed by developing SP thymocytes. These reciprocal interactions between these two cell types is referred to as “thymic crosstalk” (87). Mice exhibiting a block in thymocyte development at the DP stage, such as TCRα−/− and ZAP70−/− mice, show prominent defects in medulla formation (88, 89). The transplantation of wild-type bone marrow cells in SCID mice lacking TCR-positive cells restores medulla formation and mTEC maturation, indicating that hematopoietic cells control the development of the medullary epithelium (90). Subsequent studies have established that TCR-bearing mature T cells control medulla formation (88, 91, 92). Thus, these pioneer studies indicated that SP thymocytes provide instructive signals that are critical for controlling the expansion and organization of the medulla. Recent advances have facilitated our understanding of the underlying molecular and cellular participants that are responsible for these crucial processes in the establishment of T-cell tolerance.

AIRE+ mTEC Differentiation in the Embryonic Thymus

In the embryonic thymus, lymphoid tissue inducer (LTi) cells identified as CD3−CD4+IL-7Rα+ were found to regulate the first cohort of Aire+ mTECs, which emerge around embryonic day 16 of gestation (Figure 3A) (20, 22, 93). LTi cells are present during embryogenesis at a time that correlates with the appearance of Aire+ mTECs, before the development of SP thymocytes (22). The emergence of Aire+ mTECs is controlled by a member of the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) superfamily: receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B (RANK), which is expressed by mTECs, and its corresponding ligand, RANKL (also known as TRANCE), which is expressed by LTi cells (Figure 3A). Strikingly, mice that are deficient for RANK or RANKL show an absence of Aire+ mTECs in the embryonic thymus, indicating that this TNF member regulates the emergence of Aire+ mTECs (22, 94). In accordance with these findings, the exposure of 2-deoxyguanosine-treated fetal thymus organ cultures (FTOCs) to recombinant RANKL or an agonistic antibody to RANK induces the appearance of mature mTECs (22, 95, 96). Conversely, the addition of osteoprotegerin, a soluble decoy receptor for RANKL, or the recombinant RANK-Fc protein, impairs Aire+ mTEC differentiation (94, 97). Importantly, LTi-deficient Rorc−/− mice do not show a complete absence of Aire+ mTECs, suggesting that other embryonic cell types play a role in the development of the medullary epithelium (98). An additional cellular contributor, the invariant Vγ5+TCR+ dendritic epidermal T-cell progenitor, which also expresses RANKL, has likewise been recently implicated in the emergence of Aire+ mTECs in the embryonic thymus (Figure 3A) (97). The addition of purified Vγ5+ thymocytes or LTi cells in reaggregate thymus organ culture (RTOC) experiments induces similar proportions of Aire+ mTEC differentiation. Interestingly, Vγ5+ thymocytes and LTi cells are both present in individual Aire-expressing medullary environments, suggesting that they act collectively to influence mTEC maturation. Mice that are deficient in both LTi and γδ T cells (Rorc−/− × Tcrd−/−mice) show a further decreased number of fetal Aire+ mTECs compared with mice that are deficient in either LTi or γδ T cells alone. However, Rorc−/− × Tcrd−/−double-deficient mice do not show a complete absence of Aire+ mTECs, which suggests that other cell type(s) that remain(s) to be identified could also be involved in this differentiation process. Therefore, the two innate immune cells, Vγ5+ thymocytes and LTi cells, both of which express RANKL, drive the emergence of Aire+ mTECs in the embryonic thymus.

FIGURE 3 | Key cell types, receptors, and ligands that contribute to Aire+ mTEC differentiation and medulla patterning. (A) RANKL, which is expressed by Vγ5+ T cells and LTi cells in the embryonic thymus and (B) by CD4+ thymocytes and iNKT cells in the post-natal thymus, induces Aire+ mTEC differentiation. In the post-natal thymus, crosstalk between mTECs and CD4+ thymocytes via CCL19/21–CCR7, LTβR/LTα1β2, and CD80/86–CD28 controls medulla patterning, whereas MHCII/self-antigen–TCR complexes and CD40–CD40L contribute to both the differentiation of Aire+ mTECs and patterning of the medulla. Receptors and ligands involved in Aire+ mTEC differentiation are represented in green, in medulla patterning in red, and in both processes in yellow. (C) Schematic representation of 3D medullary organization in the post-natal thymus. Aire+ mTECs (denoted by a green nucleus) and venules are preferentially localized at the cortico-medullary junction (CMJ).

AIRE+ mTEC Differentiation in the Post-natal Thymus

In the post-natal thymus, the RANK–RANKL axis also plays a crucial role in the differentiation of mature mTECs (Figure 3B). The absence of RANK or RANKL expression leads to a drastic reduction of Aire+ mTECs and TRA expression (22, 94, 99). Conversely, mice that are deficient for osteoprotegerin, a soluble decoy receptor for RANKL, display a large medulla with many Aire-expressing mTECs (99). In contrast to the embryonic thymus, Aire+ mTECs are partially reduced in the post-natal thymus from RANK−/− or RANKL−/− mice, which suggests that after birth, additional signal(s) are involved in the differentiation and maintenance of mature mTECs. These observations led to the identification of a second member of the TNF superfamily, namely CD40, which is involved in this process (Figure 3B). CD40−/− and CD40L−/− mice show more subtle defects in mTEC subsets compared with those observed in RANK−/− or RANKL−/− mice (94, 100). However, these defects were markedly increased in RANK−/− × CD40−/−double-deficient mice compared with RANK−/−mice, demonstrating that RANK and CD40 cooperate to promote mTEC differentiation in the post-natal thymus (94). Moreover, Aire and TRA expression are dramatically affected in these double-deficient mice, which consequently develop severe autoimmune manifestations. Taken together, these findings provide strong support for a model in which the emergence of Aire+ mTECs during embryogenesis involves RANK signaling, whereas the subsequent mTEC differentiation in the post-natal thymus involves cooperation between the RANK and CD40 signals (Figures 3A,B).

Several groups have investigated the cellular sources of RANKL and CD40L in the post-natal thymus. Although SP thymocytes were initially found to promote the organization and maturation of the medulla, it remained to be determined whether the instructive signals were provided in a different manner by CD4+ and/or CD8+ thymocytes. RANKL was found to be expressed by both CD4+ and CD8+ thymocytes, with a preferential expression by CD4+ thymocytes (101). In contrast, CD40L was found to be exclusively expressed by CD4+ thymocytes (99, 100). The simultaneous analysis of RANKL and CD40L proteins revealed a sequential acquisition of first RANKL on CD69+ semi-mature CD4+ thymocytes and then of CD40L on CD69− mature CD4+ thymocytes, suggesting that RANKL and CD40L are delivered by distinct CD4+ subsets (101). The respective role of CD4+ and CD8+ thymocytes in mTEC differentiation was explicitly addressed through the use of knockout mice lacking either CD4+ or CD8+ thymocytes (100). The numbers of CD80hiAire+ mature mTECs are essentially unaffected in mice lacking CD8+ thymocytes (β2m−/− mice), which suggests that they are dispensable for this process. In contrast, the numbers of CD80hiAire+ mature mTECs are strongly reduced in mice that lack the positive selection of CD4+ thymocytes, such as H2-Aa−/− and CIItaIV−/IV− mice (100). Thus, CD4+ thymocytes play a dominant role in promoting the development of the mature mTEC compartment (102). Nevertheless, in mice lacking CD4+ thymocytes, a minor population of CD80hiAire+ mature mTECs is still detectable, suggesting that another cell type is also involved in the acquisition of a mature phenotype. Even if a rare number of LTi cells is present in the post-natal thymus, it is unlikely that these cells contribute significantly to mTEC differentiation after birth because Id2−/− mice, which lack LTi cells, exhibit normal mature mTEC cellularity (99). Similarly, TCRγδ-deficient mice do not exhibit any obvious defect in mature mTECs (99). Thus, LTi and TCRγδ cells seem to be dispensable for mTEC differentiation during post-natal life. A recent study has suggested that invariant NKT cells that also express RANKL participate in Aire+ mTEC differentiation in adult mice (103). Thus, it is likely that CD4+ thymocytes and invariant NKT cells cooperate to drive mTEC differentiation (Figure 3B). Although CD4+ thymocytes play a dominant role in mTEC differentiation, it remained to be determined whether they influence this differentiation process via the release of soluble mediators or by directly engaging in physical interactions with mTECs. The generation of transgenic mice lacking MHCII molecules specifically in mTECs has shown that TCR–MHCII-mediated contacts between the two cell types are required for normal mature mTEC cellularity (100). Furthermore, mTEC differentiation occurs only when CD4+ thymocytes recognize their cognate antigen on mTECs (96, 100). Taken together, these findings revealed distinct molecular and cellular mechanisms that sustain the generation of mTECs that display a mature phenotype in the embryonic and post-natal thymus.

Three-Dimensional Organization of the Thymic Medulla

The 3D reconstruction of wild-type thymic lobes has revealed that the medulla is highly complex, consisting of a major central compartment surrounded by ~100 islets (Figure 3C) (104–106). Interestingly, individual medullary islets initially derive from a single progenitor (107). Thus, during thymic development, some growing mTEC islets likely fuse together, leading to the emergence of larger islets and ultimately to a major central compartment. Additional studies of the 3D organization of the thymic lobes during thymus development from fetal to adult stage would be extremely informative to further understand the formation of the medullary architecture. Similar studies performed during aging should also reveal fundamental mechanisms of thymic involution. The recent development of multicolor fate mapping systems based on Cre-lox technology are expected to unravel the dynamics of the development and remodeling of the medulla during a lifetime (108). Importantly, such transgenic systems should aid in determining whether individual medullary islets are indeed derived from a single progenitor or, alternatively, whether they are derived from several clones. The discovery of the co-existence of a major medullary compartment and a hundred distinct smaller islets with a broad volume distribution raises questions regarding the functional relevance of individual islets compared to the central medulla. We estimate that individual islets may contain from only a few to as many as several thousand cells, with an average of a few tens or a few hundreds of cells (unpublished observations). Thus, for the smallest islets, it remains to be determined whether this low number of cells expresses a TRA array large enough to induce T-cell tolerance or, in contrast, whether these few cells do not express sufficient TRA and may permit the escape of potentially hazardous autoreactive T cells. It would be interesting to determine whether the large medulla and small individual islets display similar sets of TRAs. In addition, to be functional, small medullary islets must be vascularized, which remains to be further investigated using 3D reconstruction (106). Thus, further investigation is required to improve our understanding of the functional implications of the medullary topology. Of note, the medulla is not smooth at all, but on the contrary exhibits a highly folded/convoluted shape, with a complex contour at any scale, ranging from the total structure to the cellular level. Such multi-scale complexity is described best by fractal geometry, which affords a high area of interface for a given volume (105). Such characteristics are also typically found in the lungs or intestinal microvilli, which have a large surface area to maximize the exchange of oxygen or nutrients, respectively. In the case of the thymic medulla, this fractal shape ensures a large interface area between the cortex and the medulla, which is referred to as the CMJ. This fractal geometry also ensures that the average distance from any location within the cortex to the nearest medulla remains reasonably low (105). By comparison, the distances from any location within the cortex to the nearest medullary location are significantly reduced compared with the distances that would be obtained for the simplest shape, i.e., a spherical medulla. The CMJ likely plays a critical role in the function of the thymus because it constitutes the site where T cells go through at three critical steps of their journey through the thymus: (i) T-cell progenitors enter the thymus from venules preferentially located at the CMJ, travel outward in the cortex and subsequently migrate inward from the cortex to the medulla, undergoing positive selection; (ii) they cross the CMJ and migrate through the medulla, undergoing negative selection; (iii) they ultimately leave the thymus and enter the periphery, again via venules located at the CMJ (109–111). Indeed, the CMJ exhibits a high density of large venules, representing a privileged site for thymocyte homing/export, by extra/intravasation through venule walls, respectively (Figure 3C). Remarkably, the CMJ is also particularly dense in Aire+ mTECs, which is expected to favor the encounter with SP thymocytes that are migrating from the cortex to the medulla (93, 105). This distribution is strikingly pronounced in neonates compared to adults. This observation is consistent with the finding that Aire is important during the perinatal period to prevent the emergence of autoimmune disorders (112). Therefore, the CMJ represents not only a privileged site of T-cell progenitor homing and export of mature T cells but also a privileged region that favors the encounter of SP thymocytes with Aire+ mTECs. A first wave of negative selection is thus expected to occur in this region, which could play a more important role in the induction of T-cell tolerance than previously thought.

Cellular and Molecular Crosstalk in Medulla Organization

Alterations in the cortico-medullary migration of SP thymocytes result in marked defects in the medullary organization. This is well illustrated in mice that lack CCR7 expressed by SP thymocytes or its two ligands CCL19 and CCL21 expressed by mTECs, which are responsible for the migration of SP thymocytes from the cortex to the medulla (113). CCR7- and CCR7 ligand-deficient mice show an arrest of thymocyte migration in the cortex and abnormal medulla formation characterized by small medullary regions that are sparsely distributed throughout their thymi (113, 114). The complex 3D organization of the medulla is preferentially controlled by positively selected CD4+ thymocytes (105, 115). H2-Aa−/− mice lacking CD4+ thymocytes are devoid of any large medullary compartment, leading to a reduced medullary volume. In these mice, the numbers of mTECs are severely reduced, affecting CD80hiAire− and CD80hiAire+ subsets (96). However, the formation of the medulla is less severely affected in mice lacking CD4+ thymocytes than in mice lacking SP thymocytes such as TCRα−/− and ZAP70−/− mice. These observations suggest that other cell type(s) participate in the expansion of the medulla. Although invariant NKT cells have been implicated in Aire+ mTEC differentiation, their role in the organization of the medulla remains to be defined. CD8+ thymocytes seem to play a minor role compared with CD4+ thymocytes because β2m−/− mice, which lack CD8+ thymocytes, do not exhibit defects either in the 3D organization of the medulla or in the composition of the mTEC subset (96, 105). These observations suggest that CD4+ thymocytes are prominently required for the development and 3D organization of the medulla by controlling mTEC cellularity. Furthermore, the organization of the medulla is also dependent on antigen-specific TCR–MHCII-mediated interactions between autoreactive CD4+ thymocytes and mTECs displaying autoantigen–MHCII complexes (96). Several MHCII-restricted TCR-transgenic mice lacking expression of the cognate antigen, such as OTII-Rag2−/−, B3K508-Rag1−/−, and female Marilyn-Rag2−/− mice, show severe impairment in medulla formation. In contrast, this defect is restored when the cognate antigen is expressed by mTECs, as for example in OTII-Rag2−/− mice crossed with Rip-mOVA mice (in which the Rip-mOVA transgene drives the synthesis of membrane-bound OVA specifically in mTECs), or provided exogenously, as for example in OTII-Rag2−/− mice injected with OVA323–339 peptide. Moreover, RTOC experiments in which OTII-Rag2−/− thymocytes are reaggregated in the presence or absence of OVA323–339 peptide have demonstrated that the addition of the cognate antigen restores the numbers of mTECs similarly to those induced by WT thymocytes (96). These antigen-specific interactions between mTECs and CD4+ thymocytes also require the engagement of the CD28–CD80/86 and CD40–CD40L costimulatory axes (Figure 3B). Defects in the CD28–CD80/86 or CD40–CD40L costimulatory pathway alone have a slight effect on the architecture of the medulla (105, 116). In contrast, the combined absence of CD28–CD80/86 and CD40–CD40L results in a drastic impairment in medulla formation (116). These different experimental results thus favor a model in which autoreactive CD4+ thymocytes control the formation and organization of the medulla in an antigen-dependent manner that involves the CD28–CD80/86 and CD40–CD40L costimulatory pathways. Interestingly, two-photon microscopy experiments have revealed that autoreactive thymocytes do not directly undergo cell death after encountering a negative selecting ligand but instead remain viable and motile for some time in the medullary microenvironment (51). They adopt a confined migration pattern during which they likely provide to mTECs instructive signals that would be necessary for both mTEC differentiation and organization.

A third member of the TNF superfamily, namely the lymphotoxin β receptor (LTβR) expressed by mTECs, and its ligand, the heterotrimer LTα1β2 expressed by SP thymocytes, was found to orchestrate the organization of the medulla (105, 117, 118). A deficiency in LTβR leads to a disorganized medullary architecture and alterations in mTEC subsets, notably in UEA-1+ mTECs and terminally differentiated involucrin+ mTECs (117–119). LTβR signaling also regulates the expression of Aire-independent TRAs and CCL19 in mTECs (120, 121). These defects are associated with the appearance of signs of autoimmunity, which suggests that LTβR signaling is required for the establishment of central tolerance (117, 120). Of note, mice that are deficient for LTβR ligands, such as LTα−/−, LTβ−/−, or LIGHT−/− mice, exhibit an intermediate phenotype compared with that observed in LTβR−/− mice. Consequently, the contribution of lymphotoxin signaling to mTEC development is only partially understood (117, 118). The 3D reconstruction of LTα−/− thymic lobes has revealed that LTα−/− mice are devoid of any large medullary compartment, leading to a substantial reduction of the medulla volume. Of note, the absence of LTα results in a less drastic phenotype compared with that observed in mice lacking CD4+ thymocytes, which suggests that other(s) mediator(s) contribute to the effect mediated by CD4+ T cells (105). Interestingly, the absence of Aire results in morphological changes in mTECs (26). However, it remains unclear whether Aire affects the 3D organization of the medulla in terms of the numbers and volumes of the medullary islets. Further investigations including the identification of other molecular participants in the topology of the medulla as well as the determination of the 3D distribution of specific mTEC subsets are required. Indeed, recent findings have revealed a differential distribution of mTEC subsets throughout the medulla. Aire+ mTECs were found to be preferentially positioned at the CMJ, whereas post-Aire mTECs were described to be localized toward the center of the medulla (24, 93, 105). A 3D map of distinct mTEC subsets, including mTEC stem cells, may thus reveal a subtle compartmentalization of these specific cell types within the thymic medulla.

Importantly, this cellular crosstalk between mTECs and autoreactive CD4+ thymocytes regulates a cascade of events that control the expression of TNF superfamily members that are essential for both the differentiation and organization of mTECs. In this context, autoantigen-specific interactions between mTECs and CD4+ thymocytes, involving the CD40–CD40L and CD28–CD80/86 axes, lead to the upregulation of lymphotoxin ligands in autoreactive CD4+ thymocytes (96, 116). Then, LTβR signaling induces RANK expression in mTECs (95, 96), and subsequently, RANK signaling induces the upregulation of CD40 in mTECs (101). This cellular crosstalk with autoreactive CD4+ thymocytes is likely to fine-tune the homeostasis of the medulla, allowing the thymus to adapt optimally for the establishment of T-cell tolerance.

Concluding Remarks

Thymic crosstalk is the indispensable interplay between medullary APCs and developing T cells that coordinates the induction of T-cell tolerance. DCs, B cells, and mTECs have all been shown to control the selection of SP thymocytes. DCs reinforce the induction of T-cell tolerance by cross-presenting mTEC-derived TRAs and by displaying peripheral self-antigens captured in the periphery. Furthermore, thymic B cells can also express Aire and act as APCs. Nevertheless, mTECs are the lead player in T-cell tolerance induction due to their constitutive expression of TRAs. At the molecular and cellular levels, studies conducted over the last decade have furthered our understanding of the thymic crosstalk that sustains mTEC differentiation as well as the organization of the medulla. However, the precise consequences of thymic crosstalk on mTEC differentiation, proliferation, and survival remain to be defined. Additional studies are needed to identify the downstream target genes induced in mTECs by crosstalk signals in both the embryonic and the post-natal thymus. Future work can be expected to elucidate how thymic crosstalk shapes the T cell repertoire. Such studies would be extremely informative for further delineating the mechanisms that govern the establishment of T-cell tolerance. This knowledge is expected to pave the way toward novel therapeutic strategies aimed at preventing the development of autoimmunity and controlling age-associated thymic involution.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully thank Christin Hong (Harvard University) for constructive comments and the Swiss National Science Foundation (PZ00P3-131945 to MI), the Marie Curie Actions (Career Integration Grants, CIG_SIGnEPI4Tol_618541 to MI), the ARC Foundation (PJA 20131200238 to AS), and the Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM). We acknowledge American Journal Experts for editorial assistance.

References

1. Palmer E. Negative selection – clearing out the bad apples from the T-cell repertoire. Nat Rev Immunol (2003) 3:383–91. doi:10.1038/nri1085

2. McCaughtry TM, Baldwin TA, Wilken MS, Hogquist KA. Clonal deletion of thymocytes can occur in the cortex with no involvement of the medulla. J Exp Med (2008) 205:2575–84. doi:10.1084/jem.20080866

3. Stritesky GL, Xing Y, Erickson JR, Kalekar LA, Wang X, Mueller DL, et al. Murine thymic selection quantified using a unique method to capture deleted T cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:4679–84. doi:10.1073/pnas.1217532110

4. Kappler JW, Roehm N, Marrack P. T cell tolerance by clonal elimination in the thymus. Cell (1987) 49:273–80. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(87)90568-X

5. Pircher H, Burki K, Lang R, Hengartner H, Zinkernagel RM. Tolerance induction in double specific T-cell receptor transgenic mice varies with antigen. Nature (1989) 342:559–61. doi:10.1038/342559a0

6. Josefowicz SZ, Lu LF, Rudensky AY. Regulatory T cells: mechanisms of differentiation and function. Annu Rev Immunol (2012) 30:531–64. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.25.022106.141623

7. Wu L, Shortman K. Heterogeneity of thymic dendritic cells. Semin Immunol (2005) 17:304–12. doi:10.1016/j.smim.2005.05.001

8. Li J, Park J, Foss D, Goldschneider I. Thymus-homing peripheral dendritic cells constitute two of the three major subsets of dendritic cells in the steady-state thymus. J Exp Med (2009) 206:607–22. doi:10.1084/jem.20082232

9. Ardavin C, Wu L, Li CL, Shortman K. Thymic dendritic cells and T cells develop simultaneously in the thymus from a common precursor population. Nature (1993) 362:761–3. doi:10.1038/362761a0

10. Porritt HE, Gordon K, Petrie HT. Kinetics of steady-state differentiation and mapping of intrathymic-signaling environments by stem cell transplantation in nonirradiated mice. J Exp Med (2003) 198:957–62. doi:10.1084/jem.20030837

11. Vremec D, Pooley J, Hochrein H, Wu L, Shortman K. CD4 and CD8 expression by dendritic cell subtypes in mouse thymus and spleen. J Immunol (2000) 164:2978–86. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.164.6.2978

12. Proietto AI, Van Dommelen S, Zhou P, Rizzitelli A, D’amico A, Steptoe RJ, et al. Dendritic cells in the thymus contribute to T-regulatory cell induction. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105:19869–74. doi:10.1073/pnas.0810268105

13. Okada T, Lian ZX, Naiki M, Ansari AA, Ikehara S, Gershwin ME. Murine thymic plasmacytoid dendritic cells. Eur J Immunol (2003) 33:1012–9. doi:10.1002/eji.200323616

14. Hadeiba H, Lahl K, Edalati A, Oderup C, Habtezion A, Pachynski R, et al. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells transport peripheral antigens to the thymus to promote central tolerance. Immunity (2012) 36:438–50. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2012.01.017

15. Gray DH, Fletcher AL, Hammett M, Seach N, Ueno T, Young LF, et al. Unbiased analysis, enrichment and purification of thymic stromal cells. J Immunol Methods (2008) 329:56–66. doi:10.1016/j.jim.2007.09.010

16. Van Vliet E, Melis M, Van Ewijk W. Monoclonal antibodies to stromal cell types of the mouse thymus. Eur J Immunol (1984) 14:524–9. doi:10.1002/eji.1830140608

17. Farr AG, Anderson SK. Epithelial heterogeneity in the murine thymus: fucose-specific lectins bind medullary epithelial cells. J Immunol (1985) 134:2971–7.

18. Godfrey DI, Izon DJ, Tucek CL, Wilson TJ, Boyd RL. The phenotypic heterogeneity of mouse thymic stromal cells. Immunology (1990) 70:66–74.

19. Klug DB, Carter C, Crouch E, Roop D, Conti CJ, Richie ER. Interdependence of cortical thymic epithelial cell differentiation and T-lineage commitment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1998) 95:11822–7. doi:10.1073/pnas.95.20.11822

20. Gabler J, Arnold J, Kyewski B. Promiscuous gene expression and the developmental dynamics of medullary thymic epithelial cells. Eur J Immunol (2007) 37:3363–72. doi:10.1002/eji.200737131

21. Gray D, Abramson J, Benoist C, Mathis D. Proliferative arrest and rapid turnover of thymic epithelial cells expressing Aire. J Exp Med (2007) 204:2521–8. doi:10.1084/jem.20070795

22. Rossi SW, Kim MY, Leibbrandt A, Parnell SM, Jenkinson WE, Glanville SH, et al. RANK signals from CD4(+)3(-) inducer cells regulate development of Aire-expressing epithelial cells in the thymic medulla. J Exp Med (2007) 204:1267–72. doi:10.1084/jem.20062497

23. Nishikawa Y, Hirota F, Yano M, Kitajima H, Miyazaki J, Kawamoto H, et al. Biphasic Aire expression in early embryos and in medullary thymic epithelial cells before end-stage terminal differentiation. J Exp Med (2010) 207:963–71. doi:10.1084/jem.20092144

24. Metzger TC, Khan IS, Gardner JM, Mouchess ML, Johannes KP, Krawisz AK, et al. Lineage tracing and cell ablation identify a post-Aire-expressing thymic epithelial cell population. Cell Rep (2013) 5:166–79. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2013.08.038

25. Wang X, Laan M, Bichele R, Kisand K, Scott HS, Peterson P. Post-Aire maturation of thymic medullary epithelial cells involves selective expression of keratinocyte-specific autoantigens. Front Immunol (2012) 3:19. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2012.00019

26. Yano M, Kuroda N, Han H, Meguro-Horike M, Nishikawa Y, Kiyonari H, et al. Aire controls the differentiation program of thymic epithelial cells in the medulla for the establishment of self-tolerance. J Exp Med (2008) 205:2827–38. doi:10.1084/jem.20080046

27. Ucar A, Ucar O, Klug P, Matt S, Brunk F, Hofmann TG, et al. Adult thymus contains FoxN1(-) epithelial stem cells that are bipotent for medullary and cortical thymic epithelial lineages. Immunity (2014) 41:257–69. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2014.07.005

28. Wong K, Lister NL, Barsanti M, Lim JM, Hammett MV, Khong DM, et al. Multilineage potential and self-renewal define an epithelial progenitor cell population in the adult thymus. Cell Rep (2014) 8:1198–209. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2014.07.029

29. Baik S, Jenkinson EJ, Lane PJ, Anderson G, Jenkinson WE. Generation of both cortical and Aire(+) medullary thymic epithelial compartments from CD205(+) progenitors. Eur J Immunol y (2013) 43:589–94. doi:10.1002/eji.201243209

30. Ohigashi I, Zuklys S, Sakata M, Mayer CE, Zhanybekova S, Murata S, et al. Aire-expressing thymic medullary epithelial cells originate from beta5t-expressing progenitor cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:9885–90. doi:10.1073/pnas.1301799110

31. Ribeiro AR, Rodrigues PM, Meireles C, Di Santo JP, Alves NL. Thymocyte selection regulates the homeostasis of IL-7-expressing thymic cortical epithelial cells in vivo. J Immunol (2013) 191:1200–9. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1203042

32. Sekai M, Hamazaki Y, Minato N. Medullary thymic epithelial stem cells maintain a functional thymus to ensure lifelong central T Cell tolerance. Immunity (2014) 41:753–61. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2014.10.011

33. Derbinski J, Schulte A, Kyewski B, Klein L. Promiscuous gene expression in medullary thymic epithelial cells mirrors the peripheral self. Nat Immunol (2001) 2:1032–9. doi:10.1038/ni723

34. Sansom SN, Shikama-Dorn N, Zhanybekova S, Nusspaumer G, Macaulay IC, Deadman ME, et al. Population and single-cell genomics reveal the Aire dependency, relief from polycomb silencing, and distribution of self-antigen expression in thymic epithelia. Genome Res (2014) 24(12):1918–31. doi:10.1101/gr.171645.113

35. Anderson MS, Venanzi ES, Klein L, Chen Z, Berzins SP, Turley SJ, et al. Projection of an immunological self shadow within the thymus by the Aire protein. Science (2002) 298:1395–401. doi:10.1126/science.1075958

36. Consortium F-GA. An autoimmune disease, APECED, caused by mutations in a novel gene featuring two PHD-type zinc-finger domains. Nat Genet (1997) 17:399–403. doi:10.1038/ng1297-399

37. Nagamine K, Peterson P, Scott HS, Kudoh J, Minoshima S, Heino M, et al. Positional cloning of the APECED gene. Nat Genet (1997) 17:393–8. doi:10.1038/ng1297-393

38. Jiang W, Anderson MS, Bronson R, Mathis D, Benoist C. Modifier loci condition autoimmunity provoked by Aire deficiency. J Exp Med (2005) 202:805–15. doi:10.1084/jem.20050693

39. Peterson P, Org T, Rebane A. Transcriptional regulation by AIRE: molecular mechanisms of central tolerance. Nat Rev Immunol (2008) 8:948–57. doi:10.1038/nri2450

40. Akiyama T, Shinzawa M, Qin J, Akiyama N. Regulations of gene expression in medullary thymic epithelial cells required for preventing the onset of autoimmune diseases. Front Immunol (2013) 4:249. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2013.00249

41. Zumer K, Saksela K, Peterlin BM. The mechanism of tissue-restricted antigen gene expression by AIRE. J Immunol (2013) 190:2479–82. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1203210

42. Gallegos AM, Bevan MJ. Central tolerance to tissue-specific antigens mediated by direct and indirect antigen presentation. J Exp Med (2004) 200:1039–49. doi:10.1084/jem.20041457

43. Millet V, Naquet P, Guinamard RR. Intercellular MHC transfer between thymic epithelial and dendritic cells. Eur J Immunol (2008) 38:1257–63. doi:10.1002/eji.200737982

44. Koble C, Kyewski B. The thymic medulla: a unique microenvironment for intercellular self-antigen transfer. J Exp Med (2009) 206:1505–13. doi:10.1084/jem.20082449

45. Hubert FX, Kinkel SA, Davey GM, Phipson B, Mueller SN, Liston A, et al. Aire regulates the transfer of antigen from mTECs to dendritic cells for induction of thymic tolerance. Blood (2011) 118:2462–72. doi:10.1182/blood-2010-06-286393

46. Klein L, Hinterberger M, Wirnsberger G, Kyewski B. Antigen presentation in the thymus for positive selection and central tolerance induction. Nat Rev Immunol (2009) 9:833–44. doi:10.1038/nri2669

47. Klein L, Hinterberger M, Von Rohrscheidt J, Aichinger M. Autonomous versus dendritic cell-dependent contributions of medullary thymic epithelial cells to central tolerance. Trends Immunol (2011) 32:188–93. doi:10.1016/j.it.2011.03.002

48. Skogberg G, Lundberg V, Berglund M, Gudmundsdottir J, Telemo E, Lindgren S, et al. Human thymic epithelial primary cells produce exosomes carrying tissue-restricted antigens. Immunol Cell Biol (2015). doi:10.1038/icb.2015.33

49. Klein L, Kyewski B, Allen PM, Hogquist KA. Positive and negative selection of the T cell repertoire: what thymocytes see (and don’t see). Nat Rev Immunol (2014) 14:377–91. doi:10.1038/nri3667

50. McCaughtry TM, Wilken MS, Hogquist KA. Thymic emigration revisited. J Exp Med (2007) 204:2513–20. doi:10.1084/jem.20070601

51. Le Borgne M, Ladi E, Dzhagalov I, Herzmark P, Liao YF, Chakraborty AK, et al. The impact of negative selection on thymocyte migration in the medulla. Nat Immunol (2009) 10:823–30. doi:10.1038/ni.1761

52. Lei Y, Ripen AM, Ishimaru N, Ohigashi I, Nagasawa T, Jeker LT, et al. Aire-dependent production of XCL1 mediates medullary accumulation of thymic dendritic cells and contributes to regulatory T cell development. J Exp Med (2011) 208:383–94. doi:10.1084/jem.20102327

53. Perry JS, Lio CW, Kau AL, Nutsch K, Yang Z, Gordon JI, et al. Distinct contributions of Aire and antigen-presenting-cell subsets to the generation of self-tolerance in the thymus. Immunity (2014) 41:414–26. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2014.08.007

54. Oukka M, Cohen-Tannoudji M, Tanaka Y, Babinet C, Kosmatopoulos K. Medullary thymic epithelial cells induce tolerance to intracellular proteins. J Immunol (1996) 156:968–75.

55. Nedjic J, Aichinger M, Emmerich J, Mizushima N, Klein L. Autophagy in thymic epithelium shapes the T-cell repertoire and is essential for tolerance. Nature (2008) 455:396–400. doi:10.1038/nature07208

56. Aichinger M, Wu C, Nedjic J, Klein L. Macroautophagy substrates are loaded onto MHC class II of medullary thymic epithelial cells for central tolerance. J Exp Med (2013) 210:287–300. doi:10.1084/jem.20122149

57. Oukka M, Colucci-Guyon E, Tran PL, Cohen-Tannoudji M, Babinet C, Lotteau V, et al. CD4 T cell tolerance to nuclear proteins induced by medullary thymic epithelium. Immunity (1996) 4:545–53. doi:10.1016/S1074-7613(00)80481-1

58. Aschenbrenner K, D’cruz LM, Vollmann EH, Hinterberger M, Emmerich J, Swee LK, et al. Selection of Foxp3+ regulatory T cells specific for self antigen expressed and presented by Aire+ medullary thymic epithelial cells. Nat Immunol (2007) 8:351–8. doi:10.1038/ni1444

59. Hinterberger M, Aichinger M, Da Costa OP, Voehringer D, Hoffmann R, Klein L. Autonomous role of medullary thymic epithelial cells in central CD4(+) T cell tolerance. Nat Immunol (2010) 11:512–9. doi:10.1038/ni.1874

60. Malchow S, Leventhal DS, Nishi S, Fischer BI, Shen L, Paner GP, et al. Aire-dependent thymic development of tumor-associated regulatory T cells. Science (2013) 339:1219–24. doi:10.1126/science.1233913

61. Cowan JE, Parnell SM, Nakamura K, Caamano JH, Lane PJ, Jenkinson EJ, et al. The thymic medulla is required for Foxp3+ regulatory but not conventional CD4+ thymocyte development. J Exp Med (2013) 210:675–81. doi:10.1084/jem.20122070

62. Akiyama N, Shinzawa M, Miyauchi M, Yanai H, Tateishi R, Shimo Y, et al. Limitation of immune tolerance-inducing thymic epithelial cell development by Spi-B-mediated negative feedback regulation. J Exp Med (2014) 211:2425–38. doi:10.1084/jem.20141207

63. Hauri-Hohl M, Zuklys S, Hollander GA, Ziegler SF. A regulatory role for TGF-beta signaling in the establishment and function of the thymic medulla. Nat Immunol (2014) 15:554–61. doi:10.1038/ni.2869

64. Kajiura F, Sun S, Nomura T, Izumi K, Ueno T, Bando Y, et al. NF-kappa B-inducing kinase establishes self-tolerance in a thymic stroma-dependent manner. J Immunol (2004) 172:2067–75. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.172.4.2067

65. Mouri Y, Nishijima H, Kawano H, Hirota F, Sakaguchi N, Morimoto J, et al. NF-kappaB-inducing kinase in thymic stroma establishes central tolerance by orchestrating cross-talk with not only thymocytes but also dendritic cells. J Immunol (2014) 193:4356–67. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1400389

66. Thiault N, Darrigues J, Adoue V, Gros M, Binet B, Perals C, et al. Peripheral regulatory T lymphocytes recirculating to the thymus suppress the development of their precursors. Nat Immunol (2015) 16(6):628–34. doi:10.1038/ni.3150

67. Bonasio R, Scimone ML, Schaerli P, Grabie N, Lichtman AH, Von Andrian UH. Clonal deletion of thymocytes by circulating dendritic cells homing to the thymus. Nat Immunol (2006) 7:1092–100. doi:10.1038/ni1106-1234b

68. Guerri L, Peguillet I, Geraldo Y, Nabti S, Premel V, Lantz O. Analysis of APC types involved in CD4 tolerance and regulatory T cell generation using reaggregated thymic organ cultures. J Immunol (2013) 190:2102–10. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1202883

69. Baba T, Nakamoto Y, Mukaida N. Crucial contribution of thymic Sirp alpha+ conventional dendritic cells to central tolerance against blood-borne antigens in a CCR2-dependent manner. J Immunol (2009) 183:3053–63. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0900438

70. Villadangos JA, Young L. Antigen-presentation properties of plasmacytoid dendritic cells. Immunity (2008) 29:352–61. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.09.002

71. Ito T, Yang M, Wang YH, Lande R, Gregorio J, Perng OA, et al. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells prime IL-10-producing T regulatory cells by inducible costimulator ligand. J Exp Med (2007) 204:105–15. doi:10.1084/jem.20061660

72. Sharma MD, Baban B, Chandler P, Hou DY, Singh N, Yagita H, et al. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells from mouse tumor-draining lymph nodes directly activate mature Tregs via indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase. J Clin Invest (2007) 117:2570–82. doi:10.1172/JCI31911

73. Hadeiba H, Sato T, Habtezion A, Oderup C, Pan J, Butcher EC. CCR9 expression defines tolerogenic plasmacytoid dendritic cells able to suppress acute graft-versus-host disease. Nat Immunol (2008) 9:1253–60. doi:10.1038/ni.1658

74. Irla M, Kupfer N, Suter T, Lissilaa R, Benkhoucha M, Skupsky J, et al. MHC class II-restricted antigen presentation by plasmacytoid dendritic cells inhibits T cell-mediated autoimmunity. J Exp Med (2010) 207:1891–905. doi:10.1084/jem.20092627

75. Martin-Gayo E, Sierra-Filardi E, Corbi AL, Toribio ML. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells resident in human thymus drive natural Treg cell development. Blood (2010) 115:5366–75. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-10-248260

76. Hanabuchi S, Ito T, Park WR, Watanabe N, Shaw JL, Roman E, et al. Thymic stromal lymphopoietin-activated plasmacytoid dendritic cells induce the generation of FOXP3+ regulatory T cells in human thymus. J Immunol (2010) 184:2999–3007. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0804106

77. Krueger A, Willenzon S, Lyszkiewicz M, Kremmer E, Forster R. CC chemokine receptor 7 and 9 double-deficient hematopoietic progenitors are severely impaired in seeding the adult thymus. Blood (2010) 115:1906–12. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-07-235721

78. Zlotoff DA, Sambandam A, Logan TD, Bell JJ, Schwarz BA, Bhandoola A. CCR7 and CCR9 together recruit hematopoietic progenitors to the adult thymus. Blood (2010) 115:1897–905. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-08-237784

79. Proietto AI, Van Dommelen S, Wu L. The impact of circulating dendritic cells on the development and differentiation of thymocytes. Immunol Cell Biol (2009) 87:39–45. doi:10.1038/icb.2008.86

80. Cedile O, Lobner M, Toft-Hansen H, Frank I, Wlodarczyk A, Irla M, et al. Thymic CCL2 influences induction of T-cell tolerance. J Autoimmun (2014) 55:73–85. doi:10.1016/j.jaut.2014.07.004

81. Perera J, Meng L, Meng F, Huang H. Autoreactive thymic B cells are efficient antigen-presenting cells of cognate self-antigens for T cell negative selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:17011–6. doi:10.1073/pnas.1313001110

82. Yamano T, Nedjic J, Hinterberger M, Steinert M, Koser S, Pinto S, et al. Thymic B cells are licensed to present self antigens for central T cell tolerance induction. Immunity (2015) 42(6):1048–61. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2015.05.013

83. Kleindienst P, Chretien I, Winkler T, Brocker T. Functional comparison of thymic B cells and dendritic cells in vivo. Blood (2000) 95:2610–6.

84. Frommer F, Waisman A. B cells participate in thymic negative selection of murine auto-reactive CD4+ T cells. PLoS One (2010) 5:e15372. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0015372

85. Walters SN, Webster KE, Daley S, Grey ST. A role for intrathymic B cells in the generation of natural regulatory T cells. J Immunol (2014) 193:170–6. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1302519

86. Derbinski J, Kyewski B. How thymic antigen presenting cells sample the body’s self-antigens. Curr Opin Immunol (2010) 22:592–600. doi:10.1016/j.coi.2010.08.003

87. van Ewijk W, Shores EW, Singer A. Crosstalk in the mouse thymus. Immunol Today (1994) 15:214–7. doi:10.1016/0167-5699(94)90246-1

88. Palmer DB, Viney JL, Ritter MA, Hayday AC, Owen MJ. Expression of the alpha beta T-cell receptor is necessary for the generation of the thymic medulla. Dev Immunol (1993) 3:175–9. doi:10.1155/1993/56290

89. Negishi I, Motoyama N, Nakayama K, Nakayama K, Senju S, Hatakeyama S, et al. Essential role for ZAP-70 in both positive and negative selection of thymocytes. Nature (1995) 376:435–8. doi:10.1038/376435a0

90. Shores EW, Van Ewijk W, Singer A. Disorganization and restoration of thymic medullary epithelial cells in T cell receptor-negative scid mice: evidence that receptor-bearing lymphocytes influence maturation of the thymic microenvironment. Eur J Immunol (1991) 21:1657–61. doi:10.1002/eji.1830210711

91. Surh CD, Ernst B, Sprent J. Growth of epithelial cells in the thymic medulla is under the control of mature T cells. J Exp Med (1992) 176:611–6. doi:10.1084/jem.176.2.611

92. Shores EW, Van Ewijk W, Singer A. Maturation of medullary thymic epithelium requires thymocytes expressing fully assembled CD3-TCR complexes. Int Immunol (1994) 6:1393–402. doi:10.1093/intimm/6.9.1393

93. Zuklys S, Balciunaite G, Agarwal A, Fasler-Kan E, Palmer E, Hollander GA. Normal thymic architecture and negative selection are associated with Aire expression, the gene defective in the autoimmune-polyendocrinopathy-candidiasis-ectodermal dystrophy (APECED). J Immunol (2000) 165:1976–83. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.165.4.1976

94. Akiyama T, Shimo Y, Yanai H, Qin J, Ohshima D, Maruyama Y, et al. The tumor necrosis factor family receptors RANK and CD40 cooperatively establish the thymic medullary microenvironment and self-tolerance. Immunity (2008) 29:423–37. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.06.015

95. Mouri Y, Yano M, Shinzawa M, Shimo Y, Hirota F, Nishikawa Y, et al. Lymphotoxin signal promotes thymic organogenesis by eliciting RANK expression in the embryonic thymic stroma. J Immunol (2011) 186(9):5047–57. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1003533

96. Irla M, Guerri L, Guenot J, Serge A, Lantz O, Liston A, et al. Antigen recognition by autoreactive cd4(+) thymocytes drives homeostasis of the thymic medulla. PLoS One (2012) 7:e52591. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0052591

97. Roberts NA, White AJ, Jenkinson WE, Turchinovich G, Nakamura K, Withers DR, et al. Rank signaling links the development of invariant gammadelta T cell progenitors and Aire(+) medullary epithelium. Immunity (2012) 36:427–37. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2012.01.016

98. White AJ, Withers DR, Parnell SM, Scott HS, Finke D, Lane PJ, et al. Sequential phases in the development of Aire-expressing medullary thymic epithelial cells involve distinct cellular input. Eur J Immunol (2008) 38:942–7. doi:10.1002/eji.200738052

99. Hikosaka Y, Nitta T, Ohigashi I, Yano K, Ishimaru N, Hayashi Y, et al. The cytokine RANKL produced by positively selected thymocytes fosters medullary thymic epithelial cells that express autoimmune regulator. Immunity (2008) 29:438–50. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.06.018

100. Irla M, Hugues S, Gill J, Nitta T, Hikosaka Y, Williams IR, et al. Autoantigen-specific interactions with CD4+ thymocytes control mature medullary thymic epithelial cell cellularity. Immunity (2008) 29:451–63. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.08.007

101. Desanti GE, Cowan JE, Baik S, Parnell SM, White AJ, Penninger JM, et al. Developmentally regulated availability of RANKL and CD40 ligand reveals distinct mechanisms of fetal and adult cross-talk in the thymus medulla. J Immunol (2012) 189:5519–26. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1201815

102. Irla M, Hollander G, Reith W. Control of central self-tolerance induction by autoreactive CD4+ thymocytes. Trends Immunol (2010) 31:71–9. doi:10.1016/j.it.2009.11.002

103. White AJ, Jenkinson WE, Cowan JE, Parnell SM, Bacon A, Jones ND, et al. An essential role for medullary thymic epithelial cells during the intrathymic development of invariant NKT cells. J Immunol (2014) 192:2659–66. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1303057

104. Anderson M, Anderson SK, Farr AG. Thymic vasculature: organizer of the medullary epithelial compartment? Int Immunol (2000) 12:1105–10. doi:10.1093/intimm/12.7.1105

105. Irla M, Guenot J, Sealy G, Reith W, Imhof BA, Serge A. Three-dimensional visualization of the mouse thymus organization in health and immunodeficiency. J Immunol (2013) 190:586–96. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1200119

106. Sergé A, Bailly AL, Aurrand-Lions M, Imhof BA, Irla M. For3D: full organ reconstruction in 3D, an automatized tool for deciphering the complexity of lymphoid organs. J Immunol Methods (2015). doi:10.1016/j.jim.2015.04.019

107. Rodewald HR, Paul S, Haller C, Bluethmann H, Blum C. Thymus medulla consisting of epithelial islets each derived from a single progenitor. Nature (2001) 414:763–8. doi:10.1038/414763a

108. Livet J, Weissman TA, Kang H, Draft RW, Lu J, Bennis RA, et al. Transgenic strategies for combinatorial expression of fluorescent proteins in the nervous system. Nature (2007) 450:56–62. doi:10.1038/nature06293

109. Lind EF, Prockop SE, Porritt HE, Petrie HT. Mapping precursor movement through the postnatal thymus reveals specific microenvironments supporting defined stages of early lymphoid development. J Exp Med (2001) 194:127–34. doi:10.1084/jem.194.2.127

110. Takahama Y. Journey through the thymus: stromal guides for T-cell development and selection. Nat Rev Immunol (2006) 6:127–35. doi:10.1038/nri1781

111. Petrie HT, Zuniga-Pflucker JC. Zoned out: functional mapping of stromal signaling microenvironments in the thymus. Annu Rev Immunol (2007) 25:649–79. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.23.021704.115715

112. Guerau-de-Arellano M, Martinic M, Benoist C, Mathis D. Neonatal tolerance revisited: a perinatal window for Aire control of autoimmunity. J Exp Med (2009) 206:1245–52. doi:10.1084/jem.20090300

113. Ueno T, Saito F, Gray DH, Kuse S, Hieshima K, Nakano H, et al. CCR7 signals are essential for cortex-medulla migration of developing thymocytes. J Exp Med (2004) 200:493–505. doi:10.1084/jem.20040643

114. Nitta T, Nitta S, Lei Y, Lipp M, Takahama Y. CCR7-mediated migration of developing thymocytes to the medulla is essential for negative selection to tissue-restricted antigens. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2009) 106:17129–33. doi:10.1073/pnas.0906956106

115. Nasreen M, Ueno T, Saito F, Takahama Y. In vivo treatment of class II MHC-deficient mice with anti-TCR antibody restores the generation of circulating CD4 T cells and optimal architecture of thymic medulla. J Immunol (2003) 171:3394–400. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.171.7.3394

116. Williams JA, Zhang J, Jeon H, Nitta T, Ohigashi I, Klug D, et al. Thymic medullary epithelium and thymocyte self-tolerance require cooperation between CD28-CD80/86 and CD40-CD40L costimulatory pathways. J Immunol (2014) 192:630–40. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1302550

117. Boehm T, Scheu S, Pfeffer K, Bleul CC. Thymic medullary epithelial cell differentiation, thymocyte emigration, and the control of autoimmunity require lympho-epithelial cross talk via LTbetaR. J Exp Med (2003) 198:757–69. doi:10.1084/jem.20030794

118. Venanzi ES, Gray DH, Benoist C, Mathis D. Lymphotoxin pathway and Aire influences on thymic medullary epithelial cells are unconnected. J Immunol (2007) 179:5693–700. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.179.9.5693

119. White AJ, Nakamura K, Jenkinson WE, Saini M, Sinclair C, Seddon B, et al. Lymphotoxin signals from positively selected thymocytes regulate the terminal differentiation of medullary thymic epithelial cells. J Immunol (2010) 185:4769–76. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1002151

120. Zhu M, Chin RK, Tumanov AV, Liu X, Fu YX. Lymphotoxin beta receptor is required for the migration and selection of autoreactive T cells in thymic medulla. J Immunol (2007) 179:8069–75. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.179.12.8069

121. Seach N, Ueno T, Fletcher AL, Lowen T, Mattesich M, Engwerda CR, et al. The lymphotoxin pathway regulates Aire-independent expression of ectopic genes and chemokines in thymic stromal cells. J Immunol (2008) 180:5384–92. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.180.8.5384

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Lopes, Sergé, Ferrier and Irla. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

MINI REVIEW
published: 22 July 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00376

Thymic B cells and central T cell tolerance

Tomoyoshi Yamano, Madlen Steinert and Ludger Klein*

Institute for Immunology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, Germany

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Ari Waisman, Johannes-Gutenberg University of Mainz, Germany
Olga Ucar, German Cancer Research Center, Germany

*Correspondence:

Ludger Klein, Institute for Immunology, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Goethestr. 31, Munich 80336, Germany
ludger.klein@med.uni-muenchen.de

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 08 June 2015
Accepted: 09 July 2015
Published: 22 July 2015

Citation:

Yamano T, Steinert M and Klein L (2015) Thymic B cells and central T cell tolerance. Front. Immunol. 6:376. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00376

Central T cell tolerance is believed to be mainly induced by thymic dendritic cells and medullary thymic epithelial cells. The thymus also harbors substantial numbers of B cells. These may arise though intrathymic B lymphopoiesis or immigration from the bloodstream. Importantly, and in contrast to resting “mainstream” B cells in the periphery, thymic B cells display elevated levels of MHC class II and constitutively express CD80. Arguably, their most unexpected feature is the expression of autoimmune regulator. These unique features of thymic B cells result from a licensing process that involves cross-talk with CD4 single-positive T cells and CD40 signaling. Together, these recent findings suggest that B cells play a more prominent role as thymic APCs than previously appreciated.

Keywords: central tolerance, B cells, antigen presentation, germinal center, CD40, class-switching, Aire

Introduction

B cells represent approximately 0.3% of the thymic cellularity. Although their absolute number may, in fact, exceed that of thymic dendritic cells, their role a APCs for central tolerance induction is not well understood, and thymic B cells have often been regarded as “innocent bystanders.” Recent data suggest that this view may need to be revised. Here, we will provide a short overview of novel insights into distinct features of thymic B cells and how these may predispose thymic B cells to support T cell tolerance.

The Origin of Thymic B Cells

Intrathymic B Cell Development

The early thymic progenitor (ETP), i.e., the cell type that gives rise to the T cell lineage, retains some B cell potential (1). Notch signaling is essential for T lineage specification in ETPs, so that precursors lacking Notch-1 fail to generate T lineage cells in the thymus. There are increased numbers of B cells in the thymus of conditional Notch-1 knockout mice (2), and this was interpreted to indicate that in the absence of Notch signaling, ETPs undergo B cell differentiation as a “default cell fate” (3, 4). However, subsequent experiments argued that most of the accumulation of thymic B cells under these conditions is not a cell intrinsic effect of Notch-deficiency, but may stem from immigration of peripheral B cells as a result of excessive niche availability (5). This notion is supported by the observation that perturbations in T cell differentiation downstream of the loss of B lineage potential result in effects on thymic B cell numbers that are reciprocal to their effects on T cell numbers. Specifically, TCRβ−/− mice, in which T cell development is blocked prior to pre-TCR expression, harbor a drastically diminished overall T cell compartment (arrested at the DN3 stage), yet have a 10-fold increase in thymic B cell numbers, whereas TCRα−/− mice, in which T cell differentiation is arrested at the DP stage, display slightly decreased numbers of B cells in the thymus (6, 7).

Does intrathymic B cell differentiation occur under non-perturbed steady state conditions? There were early reports on the existence of cells within the thymus whose phenotype – surface (s)IgM−B220+CD43+ – resembled that of B cell progenitors in the bone marrow (BM). When these cells were purified and injected intrathymically (i.t.), they gave rise to mature B cells within the thymus (8). Akashi et al. estimated that concomitant to the release of about 1 × 10^6 T cells, the thymus also exports around 3 × 10^4 B cells each day (6). In sum, there is good evidence that part of the thymic B cell population arises through differentiation within the thymus.

Immigration of Peripheral B Cells

Using more conclusive surface marker combinations, we recently revisited the issue whether the thymus harbors significant numbers of B cell precursors (9). Among CD19+IgM−IgD−BM cells, pre- and pro-B cells are commonly identified as CD2+c-Kit− and CD2−c-Kit+ cells, respectively. We found that around one-third of thymic CD19+ cells were surface IgM−IgD−, and thereby resembled B cell precursors in the BM. However, pro-B cells (CD19+IgM−IgD−CD2−c-Kit+) were essentially undetectable in the thymus. Moreover, most thymic CD19+IgM−IgD−CD2+c-Kit− cells expressed surface sIgG. Thus, the majority of CD19+IgM−IgD−cells in the thymus (unlike their phenotypic counterparts in the BM) are class-switched mature B cells and not B cell precursors. Based upon the paucity of B cell precursors in the thymus, we wondered whether peripheral B cells enter the thymus in the steady state. In order to address this, we intravenously injected bulk splenic B cells into syngeneic hosts. Seven days later, donor B cells were detectable in both spleen and thymus, whereby the relative abundance among host B cells in the thymus was about 5- to 10-fold lower as compared to the spleen. Although at first glance, this suggests that thymic immigration is a fairly efficient process, any comparison of its efficacy in relation to homing to the spleen is blurred by the fact that upon entering the thymus, B cells undergo several cell divisions. The capacity to enter the thymus does not seem to be restricted to any particular activation state, since purified naïve B cells (IgM+IgD+) also entered the thymus.

Taken together, it is reasonable to assume that both intrathymic B lymphopoesis and immigration of BM-derived B cells contribute to the thymic B cell pool. However, we lack a precise understanding of the relative contribution of either pathway. On the one hand, the virtual absence of pro- and pre-B cells may render intrathymic differentiation an unlikely source of the majority of thymic B cells. On the other hand, thymic B cells in parabiosed mice do not equilibrate to the same extent as is observed for splenic B cells, insinuating a substantial contribution of intrathymic B cell differentiation (10). Unraveling the lineage relation between peripheral “mainstream” B cells and thymic B cells remains experimentally challenging. Ultimately, this issue is linked to the questions whether thymic B cells display distinct features, and whether these features are manifestations of a hard-wired “thymic B lineage differentiation program” or result from extrinsic cues.

Intrathymic B Cell Licensing

The Unusual Phenotype of Thymic B Cells

Some phenotypic features (e.g., CD5 expression) had suggested that thymic B cells may be related to the fetal liver-derived B1 lineage (8). However, whereas bona fide B1 cells in the peritoneal cavity are restored only by reconstitution with fetal liver cells, but not BM cells, the thymic B cell pool is efficiently generated from both precursors (10). Thus, thymic B cells clearly are genealogically related to the B2 “mainstream” B cell lineage.

Unlike resting B cells in spleen and lymph node, thymic B cells express high levels of MHC class II and the co-stimulatory molecules CD80 and CD86 (9–11). Moreover, a substantial fraction of thymic B cells have class-switched, whereby the distribution of isotype classes is remarkably stereotypic from mouse to mouse. Perhaps the most unusual feature of thymic B cells is their expression of the autoimmune regulator (Aire) gene. Aire is known to be crucial for “promiscuous gene expression” (pGE) of peripheral self-antigens in medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs) (12). The only cell-type other than mTECs that had so far been reported to express Aire is rare cells in the lymph node which have been termed as extrathymic Aire expressing cells (eTACs) (13). eTACs are of hematopoietic origin, yet their exact lineage identity remains elusive (14). Using Aire-reporter mice, we noted a reporter-positive population of non-mTEC cells in the thymus and subsequently identified these cells as thymic B cells (9). Faithful expression of the Aire-reporter was confirmed by RT-PCR and intracellular protein staining. Aire protein was detectable in nuclear dots in around 2–3% of thymic B cells, whereby protein levels were substantially lower than in mTECs. A comparison of gene expression profiles in WT versus Aire−/− thymic B cells revealed that several hundred genes are differentially expressed. Very few of these had previously been reported to be Aire dependent in mTECs or eTACs, indicating that Aire’s function as a transcriptional regulator is cell context dependent. Of note, whereas in mTECs the expression of several thousand genes is modulated by Aire, only a few hundred genes are controlled by Aire in thymic B cells or eTACs. Furthermore, it remains to be established whether Aire-dependent expression of any tissue-restricted antigen in thymic B cells is essential for T cell tolerance.

Are these distinctive features of thymic B cells an inherent feature of B cells that arise through intrathymic B lympopoiesis? To address this question, we followed the fate of i.v. injected IgM+IgD+ B cells, which are MHCIIintermediate, CD80− and Aire−. Seven days after injection, donor cells in the spleen had retained their initial phenotype. In contrast, cells that had immigrated into the thymus recapitulated all features of steady state thymic B cells, indicating that the unique phenotype of thymic B cells is imprinted by extrinsic cues in the thymic microenvironment, and we referred to this microenvironmental programing as “thymic B cell licensing” (9).

Thymic B Cell Licensing Requires CD40

The transition from a MHCIIintCD80−Aire−stage to a MHCIIhiCD80+Aire+ phenotype during thymic B cell licensing is strikingly reminiscent of mTEC “maturation.” However, whereas mTEC maturation is orchestrated by RANK signals (15–17), thymic B cell licensing crucially requires another TNF family member, CD40. Treatment of splenic B cells with agonist anti-CD40 antibody emulated B cell licensing, including induction of Aire (9). Thymic B cells in Cd40−/− and Cd40lg−/− mice are substantially diminished, consistent with a role of CD40 signals in thymic B cell homeostasis (7). Strikingly, the phenotype of thymic B cells in the absence of CD40 signaling is that of resting peripheral B cells. Thus, distinct signaling axes control the expression of Aire and the acquisition of a MHCIIhighCD80+ phenotype in mTECs or thymic B cells.

Cross-Talk with Autoreactive CD4 T Cells Regulates Thymic B Cell Numbers and Licensing

Fujihara et al. showed that thymic B cell numbers are regulated by CD4 single-positive (SP) thymocytes (7). Similarly, we found that thymic B cells from TCRα−/− mice, which lack SP thymocytes, express low levels of MHCII, are negative for co-stimulatory molecules, do not undergo class-switching and fail to up-regulate Aire (9). Strikingly, although CD4 SP thymocytes in “monoclonal” OT2 TCR transgenic mice on TCRα−/− background express normal levels of CD40L, B cells in these mice are not licensed, indicating that a polyclonal repertoire of CD4 SP cells is necessary. The requirement for diverse TCRs seems to reflect a critical role of autoreactivity within the nascent CD4 SP compartment. Along these lines, B cell licensing can be mimicked in vitro when splenic B cells are pulsed with cognate antigen and co-cultured with specific CD4 SP cells. Moreover, MHCII-deficient B cells do not undergo licensing upon immigration into the thymus. Together, these observations suggest that cognate interactions through direct antigen presentation by B cells provide a platform for CD40 signaling and thereby initiate licensing (Figure 1). This tolerogenic feed-forward loop represents a striking parallel to the very similar cross-talk between mTECs and CD4 SP cells that is thought to bolster the tolerogenic features of mTECs (18).

FIGURE 1 | Sequential phases of thymic B cell licensing. (1) Recirculating peripheral B cells can enter the thymus. Their peptide (p)MHCII ligandome is expected to mostly contain endogenously expressed “resting B cell autoantigens.” Whereas the peripheral T cell repertoire is likely to be robustly tolerant toward these self-antigens, the nascent CD4 SP compartment is not (yet) fully purged of the respective specificities. (2) An unknown fraction of “B cell-reactive” CD4 SP cells within the diverse CD4 SP repertoire recognize “resting B cell autoantigens” and provide CD40 signals. CD40L is constitutively expressed by CD4 SP cells regardless of autoreactivity, presumably as a consequence of preceeding positively selecting interactions with cTECs. (3) Cross-talk with CD4 single-positive thymocytes induces proliferation, up-regulation of MHC class II, induction of CD80, induction of Aire, and Ig class-switching. (4) Licensed B cells delete autoreactive CD4 T cells, including TCR specificities that recognize “licensing-dependent” self-antigens; these are expected to include, but are not restricted to, self-antigens that are also up-regulated in activated B cells in the periphery (Type A) and Aire-dependent self-antigens (TRAs) (Type B).

Thymic B Cells and Central T Cell Tolerance

Evidence for a Non-Redundant Contribution of Thymic B Cells to Central Tolerance

Several studies have shown that thymic B cells can contribute to negative selection under particular experimental conditions. Forced expression of the I-E MHCII molecule exclusively on B cells led to deletion of superantigen reactive T cells (19). Myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG)-specific CD4+ thymocytes were negatively selected when an epitope of MOG was exclusively presented by B cells (20). Perera et al. used autoreactive B cell receptor (BCR) transgenic mice to show that cognate T cells of the “same specificity” were negatively selected in the thymus (10). We showed that a “licensing-dependent” neo-antigen selectively up-regulated in immigrating B cells mediated negative selection through direct presentation (9).

What is known about the overall contribution of thymic B cells to central T cell tolerance? In mice lacking B cells, the size of the CD4SP cell compartment is significantly increased (9, 21). This resembles previous observations in mice that either lacked DCs or had a diminution of MHCII on mTECs, suggesting a non-redundant contribution of thymic B cells to negative selection of CD4 T cells (22, 23). Other recent reports showed that thymic Treg cells are decreased in B cell-deficient mice, and increased Treg numbers were observed in the thymus of Baff-transgenic mice harboring elevated B cell numbers (21, 24). Although these findings support a role of thymic B cell for central tolerance induction under physiological conditions, the exact spectrum of self-antigens that may require such a contribution remains to be characterized.

Do Thymic B Cells Pre-Empt the Self-Antigen Signature of Germinal Center B Cells?

The role of CD40 and the cognate interactions between B cells and CD4 T cells during thymic B cell licensing are reminiscent of the germinal center (GC) reaction (25). Indeed, a substantial fraction of thymic B cells display a Fas+GL7+ phenotype that is otherwise characteristic for GC B cells (9). It is therefore tempting to speculate that the tolerogenic potential of licensed thymic B cells might in particular comprise “activated-B-cell” autoantigens. Consistent with that idea, CD4 SP thymoctes from B cell-deficient mice are hyper-responsive to CD40-activated B cells (9). A central assumption of the GC paradigm is that CD4 T cell help needs to be tightly focused on epitopes of the foreign antigen that has been internalized via the BCR (26). In order to control BCR–hypermutation-related neo-autoreactivity among GC B cells, self-reactive B cells need to be deprived from cognate help. This not only requires robust CD4 T cell tolerance toward exogenously derived self-determinants that have been captured via the hypermutated BCR but also that the CD4 T cell repertoire is efficiently purged of reactivity toward any endogenously derived B cell autoantigen that is concurrently presented. Because thymic B cells may emulate the peptide/MHC composition of GC B cells in a tolerogenic setting, thymic B cell licensing may pre-empt T cell recognition of “activated B cell autoantigens” in an inflammatory context in secondary lymphoid tissues.

A Role for the BCR?

B cells efficiently present antigens that have been captured via the BCR (27). So, do BCR-specificity and/or -autoreactivity play a role in thymic B cell licensing and B cell-mediated central tolerance? Using BCR knock-in and T cell receptor transgenic mice specific for the same antigen, Perera et al. elegantly demonstrated that autoreactive B cells are particularly efficient APCs to induce negative selection of T cells with identical specificity (10). However, we found no evidence that BCR autoreactivity may favor B cell entry into the thymus or is a prerequisite to subsequently undergo licensing (9). Specifically, we employed SWHEL mice to address these issues. In these mice, around two-thirds of peripheral B cells express a transgenic “anti-foreign BCR” specific for hen egg lysozyme (HEL), whereas the remainder of B cells carry endogenously rearranged BCRs, some of which may harbor autoreactivity. The relative abundance of HEL+ B cells in the thymus exactly reflected their peripheral frequency, and both HEL+ and HEL− B cells underwent intrathymic licensing. Future work is needed to more conclusively address the composition of the thymic B cell repertoire, for instance, through BCR sequencing.

Open Questions

Is BCR Class-Switching in the Thymus Physiologically Relevant?

As a consequence of licensing, thymic B cells class-switch to IgG or IgA. It is therefore conceivable that thymic B cells present B lineage-specific “neo-epitopes” generated through isotype-class-switching or possibly also somatic hypermutation. In all likelihood, and in distinction from the GC reaction, class-switching in the thymus may occur “spontaneously,” i.e., independent of cognate help downstream of BCR-mediated antigen capture. This has obvious implications for the emergence of “natural” Igs. Some thymic B cells display a memory B cell phenotype (CD38+Faslo), and it is possible that IgG- or IgA-positive thymic B cells re-enter the blood stream. In fact, we observed a minute population of class-switched donor cell in the periphery after intrathymic injection of naive B cells (Tomoyoshi Yamano and Ludger Klein unpublished). More work is needed to clarify the role of the thymus as a potential source of natural Igs.

Do Thymic B Cells Shape the Thymic Microenvironment?

It was shown that thymic B cells express Ltα and Ltβ, and thereby regulate mTEC cellularity (28). Thymic B cells also express a variety of cytokines and chemokines, e.g., IL-10, IL-12, IL-16, and CCL22 (Tomoyoshi Yamano and Ludger Klein unpublished). These data suggest additional layers of cross-talk in the thymus. However, more work is needed to better understand whether and how thymic B cells may organize the thymic microenvironment.

Do Thymic B Cells Play a Role in Human Disease?

The presence of B cells with an “activated” phenotype in the healthy human thymus has long been recognized (29), but their origin and specificity has remained elusive. Ectopic GC-like structures are present in thymi of early-onset myasthenia gravis (MG) patients, and it was hypothesized that they are the site of auto-sensitization against the acetylcholine receptor (AChR) (30). However, a recent characterization of antibody repertoires in MG thymi revealed expansion of a polyclonal repertoire unrelated to AChR specificities (31). Thus, it remains to be shown whether the accumulation of B cells in MG thymi is a cause or a consequence of disease.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (KL 1228/5-1). TY was supported by a Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) postdoctoral fellowship.

References

1. Luc S, Luis TC, Boukarabila H, Macaulay IC, Buza-Vidas N, Bouriez-Jones T, et al. The earliest thymic T cell progenitors sustain B cell and myeloid lineage potential. Nat Immunol (2012) 13:412–9. doi:10.1038/ni.2255

2. Radtke F, Wilson A, Stark G, Bauer M, van Meerwijk J, MacDonald HR, et al. Deficient T cell fate specification in mice with an induced inactivation of Notch1. Immunity (1999) 10:547–58. doi:10.1016/S1074-7613(00)80054-0

3. Koch U, Lacombe TA, Holland D, Bowman JL, Cohen BL, Egan SE, et al. Subversion of the T/B lineage decision in the thymus by lunatic fringe-mediated inhibition of Notch-1. Immunity (2001) 15:225–36. doi:10.1016/S1074-7613(01)00189-3

4. Wilson A, MacDonald HR, Radtke F. Notch 1-deficient common lymphoid precursors adopt a B cell fate in the thymus. J Exp Med (2001) 194:1003–12. doi:10.1084/jem.194.7.1003

5. Feyerabend TB, Terszowski G, Tietz A, Blum C, Luche H, Gossler A, et al. Deletion of Notch1 converts pro-T cells to dendritic cells and promotes thymic B cells by cell-extrinsic and cell-intrinsic mechanisms. Immunity (2009) 30:67–79. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.10.016

6. Akashi K, Richie LI, Miyamoto T, Carr WH, Weissman IL. B lymphopoiesis in the thymus. J Immunol (2000) 164:5221–6. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.164.10.5221

7. Fujihara C, Williams JA, Watanabe M, Jeon H, Sharrow SO, Hodes RJ. T cell-B cell thymic cross-talk: maintenance and function of thymic B cells requires cognate CD40-CD40 ligand interaction. J Immunol (2014) 193:5534–44. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1401655

8. Mori S, Inaba M, Sugihara A, Taketani S, Doi H, Fukuba Y, et al. Presence of B cell progenitors in the thymus. J Immunol (1997) 158:4193–9.

9. Yamano T, Nedjic J, Hinterberger M, Steinert M, Koser S, Pinto S, et al. Thymic B cells are licensed to present self antigens for central T cell tolerance induction. Immunity (2015) 42(6):1048–61. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2015.05.013

10. Perera J, Meng L, Meng F, Huang H. Autoreactive thymic B cells are efficient antigen-presenting cells of cognate self-antigens for T cell negative selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:17011–6. doi:10.1073/pnas.1313001110

11. Ferrero I, Anjuere F, Martin P, Martinez del Hoyo G, Fraga ML, Wright N, et al. Functional and phenotypic analysis of thymic B cells: role in the induction of T cell negative selection. Eur J Immunol (1999) 29:1598–609. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1521-4141(199905)29:05<1598::AID-IMMU1598>3.3.CO;2-F

12. Mathis D, Benoist C. Aire. Annu Rev Immunol (2009) 27:287–312. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.25.022106.141532

13. Gardner JM, Devoss JJ, Friedman RS, Wong DJ, Tan YX, Zhou X, et al. Deletional tolerance mediated by extrathymic Aire-expressing cells. Science (2008) 321:843–7. doi:10.1126/science.1159407

14. Gardner JM, Metzger TC, McMahon EJ, Au-Yeung BB, Krawisz AK, Lu W, et al. Extrathymic Aire-expressing cells are a distinct bone marrow-derived population that induce functional inactivation of CD4(+) T cells. Immunity (2013) 39:560–72. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2013.08.005

15. Rossi SW, Kim MY, Leibbrandt A, Parnell SM, Jenkinson WE, Glanville SH, et al. RANK signals from CD4(+)3(-) inducer cells regulate development of Aire-expressing epithelial cells in the thymic medulla. J Exp Med (2007) 204:1267–72. doi:10.1084/jem.20062497

16. Akiyama T, Shimo Y, Yanai H, Qin J, Ohshima D, Maruyama Y, et al. The tumor necrosis factor family receptors RANK and CD40 cooperatively establish the thymic medullary microenvironment and self-tolerance. Immunity (2008) 29:423–37. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.06.015

17. Hikosaka Y, Nitta T, Ohigashi I, Yano K, Ishimaru N, Hayashi Y, et al. The cytokine RANKL produced by positively selected thymocytes fosters medullary thymic epithelial cells that express autoimmune regulator. Immunity (2008) 29:438–50. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.06.018

18. Irla M, Hugues S, Gill J, Nitta T, Hikosaka Y, Williams IR, et al. Autoantigen-specific interactions with CD4+ thymocytes control mature medullary thymic epithelial cell cellularity. Immunity (2008) 29:451–63. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.08.007

19. Kleindienst P, Chretien I, Winkler T, Brocker T. Functional comparison of thymic B cells and dendritic cells in vivo. Blood (2000) 95:2610–6.

20. Frommer F, Waisman A. B cells participate in thymic negative selection of murine auto-reactive CD4+ T cells. PLoS One (2010) 5:e15372. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0015372

21. Xing C, Ma N, Xiao H, Wang X, Zheng M, Han G, et al. Critical role for thymic CD19+CD5+CD1dhiIL-10+ regulatory B cells in immune homeostasis. J Leukoc Biol (2015) 97:547–56. doi:10.1189/jlb.3A0414-213RR

22. Ohnmacht C, Pullner A, King SB, Drexler I, Meier S, Brocker T, et al. Constitutive ablation of dendritic cells breaks self-tolerance of CD4 T cells and results in spontaneous fatal autoimmunity. J Exp Med (2009) 206:549–59. doi:10.1084/jem.20082394

23. Hinterberger M, Aichinger M, Prazeres da Costa O, Voehringer D, Hoffmann R, Klein L. Autonomous role of medullary thymic epithelial cells in central CD4(+) T cell tolerance. Nat Immunol (2010) 11:512–9. doi:10.1038/ni.1874

24. Walters SN, Webster KE, Daley S, Grey ST. A role for intrathymic B cells in the generation of natural regulatory T cells. J Immunol (2014) 193(1):170–6. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1302519

25. Victora GD, Nussenzweig MC. Germinal centers. Annu Rev Immunol (2012) 30:429–57. doi:10.1146/annurev-immunol-020711-075032

26. Goodnow CC, Vinuesa CG, Randall KL, Mackay F, Brink R. Control systems and decision making for antibody production. Nat Immunol (2010) 11:681–8. doi:10.1038/ni.1900

27. Yuseff MI, Pierobon P, Reversat A, Lennon-Dumenil AM. How B cells capture, process and present antigens: a crucial role for cell polarity. Nat Rev Immunol (2013) 13:475–86. doi:10.1038/nri3469

28. Akirav EM, Xu Y, Ruddle NH. Resident B cells regulate thymic expression of myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein. J Neuroimmunol (2011) 235:33–9. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroim.2011.03.013

29. Isaacson PG, Norton AJ, Addis BJ. The human thymus contains a novel population of B lymphocytes. Lancet (1987) 2:1488–91. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(87)92622-5

30. Leprince C, Cohen-Kaminsky S, Berrih-Aknin S, Vernet-Der Garabedian B, Treton D, Galanaud P, et al. Thymic B cells from myasthenia gravis patients are activated B cells. Phenotypic and functional analysis. J Immunol (1990) 145:2115–22.

31. Vrolix K, Fraussen J, Losen M, Stevens J, Lazaridis K, Molenaar PC, et al. Clonal heterogeneity of thymic B cells from early-onset myasthenia gravis patients with antibodies against the acetylcholine receptor. J Autoimmun (2014) 52:101–12. doi:10.1016/j.jaut.2013.12.008

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Yamano, Steinert and Klein. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

MINI REVIEW
published: 03 August 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00395

Regulatory T-cell development in the human thymus

Íris Caramalho[†], Helena Nunes-Cabaço[†], Russell B. Foxall and Ana E. Sousa*

Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Sylvie Lesage, University of Montreal and Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, Canada
Alberto Varas, Complutense University, Spain

*Correspondence:

Ana E. Sousa, Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, Avenue Prof Egas Moniz, 1649-028 Lisbon, Portugal
asousa@medicina.ulisboa.pt

†Co-first authors.

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 22 June 2015
Accepted: 19 July 2015
Published: 03 August 2015

Citation:

Caramalho Í, Nunes-Cabaço H, Foxall RB and Sousa AE (2015) Regulatory T-cell development in the human thymus. Front. Immunol. 6:395. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00395

The thymus generates a lineage-committed subset of regulatory T-cells (Tregs), best identified by the expression of the transcription factor FOXP3. The development of thymus-derived Tregs is known to require high-avidity interaction with MHC-self peptides leading to the generation of self-reactive Tregs fundamental for the maintenance of self-tolerance. Notwithstanding their crucial role in the control of immune responses, human thymic Treg differentiation remains poorly understood. In this mini-review, we will focus on the developmental stages at which Treg lineage commitment occurs, and their spatial localization in the human thymus, reviewing the molecular requirements, including T-cell receptor and cytokine signaling, as well as the cellular interactions involved. An overview of the impact of described thymic defects on the Treg compartment will be provided, illustrating the importance of these in vivo models to investigate human Treg development.

Keywords: human thymus, regulatory T-cells, FOXP3, regulatory T-cell development, human thymic defects, primary immunodeficiency

Introduction

Regulatory T-cells (Tregs) play a major role in immune homeostasis by preventing or limiting T-cell activation, particularly in the context of auto-antigens. Expression of the transcription factor forkhead box P3 (FOXP3), considered a master regulator of Treg development and function, is essential for their role in the maintenance of dominant tolerance [reviewed in Ref. (1)]. Conditions where FOXP3 is defective or absent, such as the recessive disorder immune dysregulation, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, X-linked (IPEX) syndrome, are characterized by aggressive autoimmune manifestations that are usually fatal within the first 2 years of life, unless corrected via hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (2–4).

Regulatory T-cells develop primarily in the thymus (thymus-derived Tregs, tTregs), although they can also be differentiated in the periphery (peripherally-induced Tregs). The delineation of these two populations in the peripheral Treg compartment is difficult due to the lack of specific markers. Nevertheless, tTregs are thought to be enriched in self-reactive T-cell receptors (TCRs) and to be critical for the maintenance of self-tolerance [reviewed in Ref. (1)]. Despite extensive research on tTreg development using murine models in the past 20 years, many questions remain unanswered regarding the mechanisms involved in the establishment and maintenance of the tTreg lineage [reviewed in Ref. (5, 6)]. Additionally, human tTreg studies are constrained by the limited number of tools available. Data have been mainly generated by in vitro manipulation of human thymic tissue or in vivo models using mouse/human chimeras [reviewed in Ref. (7)].

In this regard, the information provided by genetic human diseases characterized by thymus-related disturbances, such as the DiGeorge, the Omenn, and the autoimmune polyendocrinopathy candidiasis ectodermal dystrophy (APECED) syndromes, have been instrumental [reviewed in Ref. (8, 9)]. DiGeorge syndrome features athymia in <1% of the patients, but in the majority of them the prevailing thymic hypoplasia is associated with mild to moderate T-cell lymphopenia, and increased incidence of infection and autoimmune diseases [reviewed in Ref. (10)]. Alterations in the circulating Treg compartment have been consistently reported in DiGeorge syndrome (11–13). Notably, a decreased proportion and number of FOXP3+ cells in pediatric patients older than 2 years was observed when compared to age-matched healthy controls, in direct correlation with thymic output, as estimated by the numbers of CD4+ recent thymic emigrants (RTEs, defined by the expression of CD31 and CD45RA) (12). Omenn syndrome results from hypormorphic mutations in severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID)-causing genes and is associated with the generation of a limited pool of T lymphocytes with a restricted repertoire and activated phenotype [reviewed in Ref. (8)]. Loss of corticomedullary junction and Hassall’s bodies with depletion of autoimmune regulator gene (AIRE)-expressing medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs) and thymic dendritic cells (DCs) were described in two Omenn patients, in parallel with a dramatic decrease of Tregs in the thymus (14), supporting a role of AIRE-expressing mTEC and/or thymic DCs in their differentiation. In agreement, loss-of-function mutations in the AIRE gene (APECED syndrome) have been linked to a defective circulating Treg compartment (15–17). Not only is the frequency of naïve/resting Tregs (defined as CD4+FOXP3+CD45ROnegCD31+) decreased in APECED patients but also their levels of FOXP3 expression, function, and repertoire are altered, further supporting an abnormal tTreg development in the absence of AIRE (16).

A recent study that involved a paired analysis of thymic and blood samples in young children (newborns to 1-year-old) showed a direct correlation between the size of the two Treg compartments, further supporting the importance of the thymus for the establishment of the peripheral Treg pool early in life (18). Of note, both human and murine RTEs are endowed with enhanced potential to convert into peripherally-induced Tregs, when compared to their more mature counterparts, implying an additional role of the thymus for the setting of the peripheral Treg compartment (19). Furthermore, patients with athymia due to complete DiGeorge or FOXN1 deficiency have been shown to recover the peripheral Treg compartment upon allogeneic thymus transplantation, irrespective of the degree of HLA mismatching (20–22).

It is vitally important to understand human tTreg development in order to devise strategies to manipulate their generation as well as their repertoire (23). This mini-review will provide an overview of the current knowledge regarding human tTreg development, as well as the fundamental questions that remain to be addressed.

Commitment to the Treg Lineage: When?

The human thymic primordium is colonized by T-cell progenitors during the 8th week of gestation, but mature T-cells are only observed in the thymus at the 12th to 13th gestational weeks (24–26). At this stage, human tTregs can already be found in the thymus (27–29). The frequency of fetal human tTregs, identified by their elevated expression of the high-affinity IL-2 receptor alpha chain (IL-2Rα/CD25), was found to be stable throughout gestation (representing 6–7% of total thymocytes) and similar to the proportion observed in infant thymuses (28).

Fetal human tTregs already express FOXP3, as assessed at the gene expression level, as well as other markers related to their suppressive phenotype, such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) and glucocorticoid-induced TNFR-related protein (GITR) (27, 28). Moreover, these fetal human tTregs have the ability to suppress T-cell proliferation (27, 28).

One question that has been extensively addressed in mice, but due to technical limitations only in a few human studies, is when and how a thymocyte becomes committed to the Treg lineage. The discrete populations that express Treg markers, such as CD25 and FOXP3, in the human post-natal thymus mainly comprise mature CD4 single-positive (CD4SP, CD4+CD8neg) thymocytes, but also include CD8 single-positive (CD8SP, CD4negCD8+) and double-positive (DP, CD4+CD8+) thymocytes, as well as cells in early pre-DP stages (27, 28, 30–36). In agreement, FOXP3+/CD25+ thymocytes can be found mostly in the medullary region of the human thymus, where mature thymocytes localize, with rare cells scattered in the cortex (30, 31, 35, 37, 38). The mechanisms that allow for human tTreg commitment to occur are still ill-defined.

We and others have reported pre-DP expression of FOXP3, namely, at the triple-negative and CD4 immature single-positive stages (33, 35) (Table 1). However, the contribution of this population to the human tTreg pool remains to be addressed.

Double-positive thymocytes expressing FOXP3 and/or CD25 are clearly identified in the human thymus. They additionally express other Treg function-associated markers, such as CTLA-4, CD39, and GITR (27, 28, 36), and exhibit suppressive function (32, 36) (Table 1). DP tTregs feature some degree of immaturity, as evidenced by the expression of recombination-activating gene 2 mRNA (34). Moreover, upon stripping of surface molecules using pronase, DP tTregs re-acquire both CD4 and CD8 at the surface, confirming their bona-fide DP status (36). Nevertheless, the majority of human DP tTregs express high levels of CD3 and CD27, which are associated with positive selection and maturity (27, 36) (Table 1). Importantly, DP tTregs are thought to significantly contribute to the CD4SP tTreg pool in humans, as predicted by linear regression models (36), and formally demonstrated by co-cultures of DP thymocytes with either TEC (36) or mature plasmacytoid (p)DCs (38). This observation contrasts with what has been described in murine models, where Foxp3 induction, although possible at the DP stage (45–47), mostly occurs at the CD4SP stage (48). Of note, human CD4SP CD25neg thymocytes are also permissive to FOXP3 acquisition (37, 39, 49).

CD4SP tTreg represent the major population of FOXP3+ human thymocytes. They phenotypically mirror peripheral Tregs and exhibit efficient regulatory function (27, 28, 30, 36, 41, 43) (Table 1). The contribution of recirculating peripheral Tregs to this tTreg compartment is still debatable. It has long been proposed that activated T-cells may recirculate back to the thymus (50, 51), although this issue is particularly difficult to assess in humans. Recently, it was reported that a considerable proportion of human CD4SP tTregs may consist of recirculating cells (44). This was based on the observation that approximately one-fourth of these cells had lost CD31 and acquired ICOS and Tbet expression. Although it is not possible to exclude that a fraction of human tTregs may actually represent mature recirculating cells, there are some caveats to this interpretation. For instance, ICOS is already expressed by tTreg at the DP stage (39). Also, the high FOXP3 expression levels found within CD4SP ICOS+CD31neg tTregs (44) may reflect their interaction with ICOSL expressed on mTECs, as previously described (52). Moreover, TREC levels are reportedly comparable between the CD4SP CD25+ and CD25neg thymocyte populations, and several logs higher that those found in circulating Tregs, supporting that the majority of CD4SP tTregs are at the final stage of T-cell development (53). Of note, Vbeta usage and spectratyping analyses supported that CD4SP tTregs and CD4SP FOXP3neg/CD25neg thymocytes have a similarly diverse repertoire (36, 53). To our knowledge, the direct comparison of the thymic CD4SP FOXP3+ and FOXP3neg repertoires has not been reported. Its assessment will be important to clarify this issue since in peripheral cells the Treg repertoire has only 24% overlap with conventional CD4 T-cells (54). Additional studies will be instrumental in determining the magnitude and role of mature Treg recirculation in the human thymus.

TABLE 1 | Characterization of human post-natal thymic Tregs.

Thus, tTreg lineage commitment may occur at various stages of human T-cell development.

Commitment to the Treg Lineage: How?

Studies in mice have clearly established the requirement for TCR stimulation in Treg lineage commitment [reviewed in Ref. (5, 6)]. In humans, technical limitations preclude a direct assessment of the role of TCR signaling in tTreg development. We and others have shown that human tTreg differentiation is associated with markers of positive selection, such as CD69 and CD27 (27, 28, 34, 36, 42) (Table 1). Moreover, binding sites for the TCR downstream targets NFAT and AP1 are present within the human FOXP3 promoter that are directly activated by TCR stimulation (55). Notably, both DP and CD4SP tTreg express CTLA-4 (30, 36), a molecule that in mice was shown to be downstream of Nur77, an immediate early gene upregulated by TCR stimulation (56). Indirect evidence that enhanced TCR signaling strength may dictate thymocyte commitment into the Treg lineage can be further inferred by the increase in CD4SP CD25+FOXP3+ thymocyte number in humanized mice treated with a superagonist anti-CD28 mAb (57). Moreover, human ZAP70-deficient patients present a dramatic decrease in the frequency and number of tTregs (58). Interestingly, CD4SP CD25+ tTregs were shown to frequently express two functional TCRs, in association with enhanced FOXP3 expression, suggesting that dual TCR expression may favor tTreg lineage commitment in humans (40). Overall, available evidence support that TCR signaling strength guides thymocyte commitment into the Treg lineage in humans, with a predicted impact on their self-reactivity.

Several additional signaling pathways and molecular factors have been implicated in human tTreg differentiation and/or proliferation, namely JAK3/STAT-5, Notch, CD80/CD86, ICOS/ICOSL, CD40/CD40L, thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), as well as the common-gamma chain (γC) cytokines interleukin (IL)-2 and -15 (37–39, 49, 52, 59). Watanabe et al. demonstrated that TSLP from Hassall’s bodies activate myeloid (m)DCs, enabling them to induce tTreg differentiation from CD4SP CD25neg thymocytes (37). pDCs are also capable of driving CD4SP non-regulatory thymocytes into the human Treg lineage, upon response to TSLP (49). Cognate interactions between mDCs or pDCs and CD4SP non-regulatory thymocytes are required, as differentiation was impaired by HLA-DR blockade (37, 49). Activation of pDCs with anti-CD40L and IL-3 also confers on them the capacity to differentiate post-selection DP CD69hiTCRhi thymocytes into human tTregs (38). Additionally, mTECs were shown to promote the survival and proliferation of human tTregs in an ICOSL-dependent mechanism that required the presence of conventional CD4SP cells as source of IL-2 (52). We have recently investigated the requirement of γC cytokines in human tTreg development and established a critical role for both IL-2 and IL-15 in their lineage commitment, as well as in tTreg proliferation and survival post-selection (39). This study also allowed the identification of macrophages and B lymphocytes as main IL-15 producers that likely represent two additional thymic antigen-presenting cell populations involved in human tTreg differentiation (39). In agreement, we found FOXP3+ cells in close vicinity of both macrophages and B cells in the human thymus (39). Accordingly, B lymphocytes were recently shown to be capable of selecting tTreg in mice (60, 61), and the majority of human CD4SP tTregs were shown to express CCR8 endowing them with the capacity to migrate in response to chemokines produced by macrophages (30).

As illustrated in Figure 1, the most immature thymocyte population that clearly expresses FOXP3, in addition to other Treg function-associated markers, such as CD25, CTLA-4, and CD39, and displays regulatory function is the cortical positively selected DP population (27, 28, 36). The thymic cellular populations and signals mediating their positive selection and concomitant recruitment to the Treg lineage may include cortical TECs and macrophages, as well as IL-2/IL-15, shown by immunohistochemistry to be expressed in the human thymic cortex (39). The DP FOXP3+ thymocyte compartment directly correlates with the CD4SP FOXP3+ subset, denoting a precursor–product relationship (36). Upon interaction with activated pDCs, post-selection DP FOXP3neg cells may also differentiate into Tregs, in a costimulation-dependent manner (38). Medullary CD4SP FOXP3neg thymocytes can also acquire FOXP3 expression upon cognate interaction with activated pDCs or mDCs, in a costimulation- and IL-2-dependent fashion (37, 49). In addition, CD4SP FOXP3neg thymocytes may receive appropriate TCR and costimulation signals leading to CD25 acquisition and differentiation into tTreg precursors (CD4SP CD25+FOXP3neg cells) (39). These precursors can differentiate into tTregs upon exposure to IL-2, produced mostly by cycling mature CD4SP thymocytes, or IL-15 secreted by macrophages, B lymphocytes, or mTECs (39). Whether concomitant TCR, costimulation, and γC cytokine signaling also commits medullary CD4SP FOXP3neg thymocytes into tTregs, is a possibility remaining to be addressed. Finally, CD4SP CD25negFOXP3neg thymocytes TCR-stimulated in the presence of costimulation, TGF-β and IL-2/IL-15 signaling can also acquire FOXP3 expression and differentiate into CD4SP tTreg (19, 39).

FIGURE 1 | Schematic representation of human Treg development in the human thymus. DP, double-positive (CD4+CD8+); CD4SP, CD4 single-positive (CD4+CD8neg); CD8SP, CD8 single-positive (CD8+CD4neg); cTEC, cortical thymic epithelial cell; mTEC, medullary TEC; Mac, macrophage; FOXP3, Forkhead box P3; TSLP, thymic stromal lymphopoietin.

The Unique Properties of Human CD8SP tTregs

In addition to the CD4SP human tTregs, a CD8SP population with phenotypic and functional Treg characteristics is present in the human thymus. CD8SP human tTregs express several Treg-associated markers, such as FOXP3, CD25, CTLA-4, and GITR, although at lower levels than CD4SP tTregs (31, 36) (Table 1). Similarly to CD4SP tTregs, they express very low levels of the IL-7 Rα/CD127 molecule (36), and are able to suppress CD4SP CD25neg cells in a contact-dependent manner (31) (Table 1). A microRNA “signature” of CD8 Tregs has been recently defined in cord blood CD8 Treg (62).

Importantly, CD8SP human tTregs were found to express the αE chain (CD103) of the αEβ_7 integrin (36), a marker associated with CD4 Tregs in the periphery (63). CD103 was also expressed at the DP stage but was very low within CD4SP thymocytes, supporting a precursor–product relationship between CD103+ DP and CD8SP human tTregs (36) (Table 1; Figure 1).

The role of CD103 expression on CD8SP FOXP3+ thymocytes remains to be addressed. High expression of E-cadherin, the main ligand of CD103, on mTEC (64) may promote retention of CD8 tTregs in the thymic medulla. Furthermore, in an in vitro cell adhesion assay, TEC-induced proliferation of CD8SP human thymocytes was inhibited by antibodies against E-cadherin or CD103, supporting a role for CD103 in CD8SP proliferation (64). Although the proliferation of CD8SP CD25+ thymocytes was not addressed in this setting, the higher levels of the active cell-cycle marker Ki67 found within CD8SP FOXP3+ as compared to CD8SP FOXP3neg thymocytes (36) also support this hypothesis.

Despite the low frequency of CD8+ Treg in the steady state, they may be of special relevance in pathologic conditions [reviewed in Ref. (65, 66)]. CD103 has been associated with T-cell migration to mucosal sites (67, 68). In agreement, in the setting of colorectal cancer, CD8+FOXP3+CD25+ T-cells were significantly increased in peripheral blood and in colorectal cancer tissue, indicating that these cells may contribute to tumor immune escape and disease progression (69). In addition, studies in macaques have described a rapid expansion of CD8+FOXP3+CD25+ Tregs in the blood and colorectal mucosa following pathogenic SIV infection (70). An increase in the frequency of CD8+ Tregs has also been reported in HIV-1-infected patients (70).

In conclusion, a population of CD8+ Tregs is generated in the human thymus. A subset of post-selection DP FOXP3+ thymocytes expresses the tissue homing-associated molecule CD103, likely giving rise to the CD8SP FOXP3+CD103+ cells found in the medulla (Figure 1) (36). This finding supports the possibility that CD8+ Tregs egress the thymus expressing markers associated with mucosal homing, which may explain their very low frequency in the blood.

Concluding Remarks

Cumulative evidence supports the existence of different pathways of Treg commitment in the human thymus that may occur at different stages of thymocyte differentiation. Their physiological contribution and the possible implications for the tTreg repertoire diversity remain unclear.

Thymus-derived Treg development does not seem to require a dedicated antigen-presenting cell population, as studies indicate that TECs, mDC, and pDC, as well as macrophages and B cells may be involved in tTreg selection. Finally, despite the proposed role of TCR signaling strength in human tTreg commitment, it has become increasingly clear that γC cytokines, particularly IL-2 and IL-15, are important mediators of lineage stabilization.

The thymus and specifically tTregs represent important therapeutic targets to manipulate tolerance in many clinical settings, namely autoimmune diseases, tumor immunity, and transplantation. Furthermore, their targeting is also critical to achieve full immunological reconstitution in primary and secondary immunodeficiencies and to decrease the morbidity associated with hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. It is therefore of utmost importance to further investigate human tTreg development, in order to take full-advantage of the current development of immune-based therapies.

Acknowledgments

IC, HN-C, and RBF received scholarships from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) cofinanced by Programa Operacional Ciência e Inovação 2010 (POCI2010).

References

1. Sakaguchi S, Miyara M, Constantino CM, Hafler DA. FOXP3+ regulatory T cells in the human immune system. Nat Rev Immunol (2010) 10:490–500. doi:10.1038/nri2785

2. Bennett CL, Christie J, Ramsdell F, Brunkow ME, Ferguson PJ, Whitesell L, et al. The immune dysregulation, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, X-linked syndrome (IPEX) is caused by mutations of FOXP3. Nat Genet (2001) 27:20–1. doi:10.1038/83713

3. Wildin RS, Ramsdell F, Peake J, Faravelli F, Casanova JL, Buist N, et al. X-linked neonatal diabetes mellitus, enteropathy and endocrinopathy syndrome is the human equivalent of mouse scurfy. Nat Genet (2001) 27:18–20. doi:10.1038/83707

4. Seidel MG, Fritsch G, Lion T, Jurgens B, Heitger A, Bacchetta R, et al. Selective engraftment of donor CD4+25high FOXP3-positive T cells in IPEX syndrome after nonmyeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood (2009) 113:5689–91. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-02-206359

5. Josefowicz SZ, Lu LF, Rudensky AY. Regulatory T Cells: mechanisms of differentiation and function. Annu Rev Immunol (2012) 30:531–64. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.25.022106.141623

6. Hsieh CS, Lee HM, Lio CW. Selection of regulatory T cells in the thymus. Nat Rev Immunol (2012) 12:157–67. doi:10.1038/nri3155

7. Legrand N, Weijer K, Spits H. Experimental models to study development and function of the human immune system in vivo. J Immunol (2006) 176:2053–8. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.176.4.2053

8. Notarangelo LD. Combined immunodeficiencies with nonfunctional T lymphocytes. Adv Immunol (2014) 121:121–90. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-800100-4.00004-0

9. Pignata C, D’Assante R, Sousa AE. Thymic stromal alterations and genetic disorders of immune system. Front Immunol (2015) 6:81. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00081

10. Davies EG. Immunodeficiency in DiGeorge syndrome and options for treating cases with complete athymia. Front Immunol (2013) 4:322. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2013.00322

11. Sullivan KE, McDonald-McGinn D, Zackai EH. CD4(+) CD25(+) T-cell production in healthy humans and in patients with thymic hypoplasia. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol (2002) 9:1129–31. doi:10.1128/CDLI.9.5.1129-1131.2002

12. McLean-Tooke A, Barge D, Spickett GP, Gennery AR. Immunologic defects in 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. J Allergy Clin Immunol (2008) 122:e–7. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2008.03.033

13. Klocperk A, Grecová J, Šišmová K, Kayserová J, Froňková E, Šedivá A. Helios expression in T-regulatory cells in patients with Di George syndrome. J Clin Immunol (2014) 34:864–70. doi:10.1007/s10875-014-0071-y

14. Poliani PL, Facchetti F, Ravanini M, Gennery AR, Villa A, Roifman CM, et al. Early defects in human T-cell development severely affect distribution and maturation of thymic stromal cells: possible implications for the pathophysiology of Omenn syndrome. Blood (2009) 114:105–8. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-03-211029

15. Kekalainen E, Tuovinen H, Joensuu J, Gylling M, Franssila R, Pontynen N, et al. A defect of regulatory T cells in patients with autoimmune polyendocrinopathy-candidiasis-ectodermal dystrophy. J Immunol (2007) 178:1208–15. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.178.2.1208

16. Laakso SM, Laurinolli TT, Rossi LH, Lehtoviita A, Sairanen H, Perheentupa J, et al. Regulatory T cell defect in APECED patients is associated with loss of naive FOXP3(+) precursors and impaired activated population. J Autoimmun (2010) 35:351–7. doi:10.1016/j.jaut.2010.07.008

17. Arstila TP, Jarva H. Human APECED; a sick thymus syndrome? Front Immunol (2013) 4:313. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2013.00313

18. Machnes-Maayan D, Lev A, Katz U, Mishali D, Vardi A, Simon AJ, et al. Insight into normal thymic activity by assessment of peripheral blood samples. Immunol Res (2015) 61:198–205. doi:10.1007/s12026-014-8558-4

19. Paiva RS, Lino AC, Bergman ML, Caramalho I, Sousa AE, Zelenay S, et al. Recent thymic emigrants are the preferential precursors of regulatory T cells differentiated in the periphery. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:6494–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.1221955110

20. Markert ML, Marques JG, Neven B, Devlin BH, McCarthy EA, Chinn IK, et al. First use of thymus transplantation therapy for FOXN1 deficiency (nude/SCID): a report of 2 cases. Blood (2011) 117:688–96. doi:10.1182/blood-2010-06-292490

21. Albuquerque AS, Marques JG, Silva SL, Ligeiro D, Devlin BH, Dutrieux J, et al. Human FOXN1-deficiency is associated with αβ double-negative and FoxP3+ T-cell expansions that are distinctly modulated upon thymic transplantation. PLoS One (2012) 7:e37042. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0037042.g005

22. Chinn IK, Milner JD, Scheinberg P, Douek DC, Markert ML. Thymus transplantation restores the repertoires of forkhead box protein 3 (FoxP3)+ and FoxP3− T cells in complete DiGeorge anomaly. Clin Exp Immunol (2013) 173:140–9. doi:10.1111/cei.12088

23. Nunes-Cabaço H, Sousa AE. Repairing thymic function. Curr Opin Organ Transplant (2013) 18:363–8. doi:10.1097/MOT.0b013e3283615df9

24. Haynes BF, Heinly CS. Early human T cell development: analysis of the human thymus at the time of initial entry of hematopoietic stem cells into the fetal thymic microenvironment. J Exp Med (1995) 181:1445–58. doi:10.1084/jem.181.4.1445

25. Farley AM, Morris LX, Vroegindeweij E, Depreter MLG, Vaidya H, Stenhouse FH, et al. Dynamics of thymus organogenesis and colonization in early human development. Development (2013) 140:2015–26. doi:10.1242/dev.087320

26. Haddad R, Guimiot F, Six E, Jourquin F, Setterblad N, Kahn E, et al. Dynamics of thymus-colonizing cells during human development. Immunity (2006) 24:217–30. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2006.01.008

27. Cupedo T, Nagasawa M, Weijer K, Blom B, Spits H. Development and activation of regulatory T cells in the human fetus. Eur J Immunol (2005) 35:383–90. doi:10.1002/eji.200425763

28. Darrasse-Jèze G, Marodon G, Salomon BL, Catala M, Klatzmann D. Ontogeny of CD4+CD25+ regulatory/suppressor T cells in human fetuses. Blood (2005) 105:4715–21. doi:10.1182/blood-2004-10-4051

29. Michaelsson J, Mold JE, McCune JM, Nixon DF. Regulation of T cell responses in the developing human fetus. J Immunol (2006) 176:5741–8. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.176.10.5741

30. Annunziato F, Cosmi L, Liotta F, Lazzeri E, Manetti R, Vanini V, et al. Phenotype, localization, and mechanism of suppression of CD4+CD25+ human thymocytes. J Exp Med (2002) 196:379–87. doi:10.1084/jem.20020110

31. Cosmi L, Liotta F, Lazzeri E, Francalanci M, Angeli R, Mazzinghi B, et al. Human CD8+CD25+ thymocytes share phenotypic and functional features with CD4+CD25+ regulatory thymocytes. Blood (2003) 102:4107–14. doi:10.1182/blood-2003-04-1320

32. Liotta F, Cosmi L, Romagnani P, Maggi E, Romagnani S, Annunziato F. Functional features of human CD25+ regulatory thymocytes. Microbes Infect (2005) 7:1017–22. doi:10.1016/j.micinf.2005.03.024

33. Tuovinen H, Kekäläinen E, Rossi LH, Puntila J, Arstila TP. Cutting edge: human CD4−CD8− thymocytes express FOXP3 in the absence of a TCR. J Immunol (2008) 180:3651–4. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.180.6.3651

34. Tuovinen H, Pekkarinen PT, Rossi LH, Mattila I, Arstila TP. The FOXP3+ subset of human CD4+CD8+ thymocytes is immature and subject to intrathymic selection. Immunol Cell Biol (2008) 86:523–9. doi:10.1038/icb.2008.36

35. Nunes-Cabaço H, Ribot JC, Caramalho Í, Serra-Caetano A, Silva-Santos B, Sousa AE. Foxp3 induction in human and murine thymus precedes the CD4+ CD8+ stage but requires early T-cell receptor expression. Immunol Cell Biol (2010) 88:523–8. doi:10.1038/icb.2010.4

36. Nunes-Cabaço H, Caramalho Í, Sepúlveda N, Sousa AE. Differentiation of human thymic regulatory T cells at the double positive stage. Eur J Immunol (2011) 41:3604–14. doi:10.1002/eji.201141614

37. Watanabe N, Wang YH, Lee HK, Ito T, Wang YH, Cao W, et al. Hassall’s corpuscles instruct dendritic cells to induce CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells in human thymus. Nature (2005) 436:1181–5. doi:10.1038/nature03886

38. Martin-Gayo E, Sierra-Filardi E, Corbi AL, Toribio ML. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells resident in human thymus drive natural Treg cell development. Blood (2010) 115:5366–75. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-10-248260

39. Caramalho Í, Nunes-Silva V, Pires AR, Mota C, Pinto AI, Nunes-Cabaço H, et al. Human regulatory T-cell development is dictated by interleukin-2 and -15 expressed in a non-overlapping pattern in the thymus. J Autoimmun (2015) 56:98–110. doi:10.1016/j.jaut.2014.11.002

40. Tuovinen H, Salminen JT, Arstila TP. Most human thymic and peripheral-blood CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells express 2 T-cell receptors. Blood (2006) 108:4063–70. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-04-016105

41. Stephens LA, Mottet C, Mason D, Powrie F. Human CD4+ CD25+ thymocytes and peripheral T cells have immune suppressive activity in vitro. Eur J Immunol (2001) 31:1247–54. doi:10.1002/1521-4141(200104)31:4<1247::AID-IMMU1247>3.0.CO;2-M

42. Wing K, Ekmark A, Karlsson H, Rudin A, Suri-Payer E. Characterization of human CD25+ CD4+ T cells in thymus, cord and adult blood. Immunology (2002) 106:190–9. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2567.2002.01412.x

43. Ito T, Hanabuchi S, Wang YH, Park WR, Arima K, Bover L, et al. Two functional subsets of FOXP3+ regulatory T cells in human thymus and periphery. Immunity (2008) 28:870–80. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.03.018

44. Thiault N, Darrigues J, Adoue V, Gros M, Binet B, Perals C, et al. Peripheral regulatory T lymphocytes recirculating to the thymus suppress the development of their precursors. Nat Immunol (2015) 16:628–34. doi:10.1038/ni.3150

45. Cabarrocas J, Cassan C, Magnusson F, Piaggio E, Mars L, Derbinski J, et al. Foxp3+ CD25+ regulatory T cells specific for a neo-self-antigen develop at the double-positive thymic stage. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2006) 103:8453–8. doi:10.1073/pnas.0603086103

46. Ribot J, Enault G, Pilipenko S, Huchenq A, Calise M, Hudrisier D, et al. Shaping of the autoreactive regulatory T cell repertoire by thymic cortical positive selection. J Immunol (2007) 179:6741–8. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.179.10.6741

47. Liston A, Nutsch KM, Farr AG, Lund JM, Rasmussen JP, Koni PA, et al. Differentiation of regulatory Foxp3+ T cells in the thymic cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105:11903–8. doi:10.1073/pnas.0801506105

48. Lee HM, Hsieh CS. Rare development of Foxp3+ thymocytes in the CD4+CD8+ subset. J Immunol (2009) 183:2261–6. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0901304

49. Hanabuchi S, Ito T, Park WR, Watanabe N, Shaw JL, Roman E, et al. Thymic stromal lymphopoietin-activated plasmacytoid dendritic cells induce the generation of FOXP3+ regulatory T cells in human thymus. J Immunol (2010) 184:2999–3007. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0804106

50. Michie SA, Rouse RV. Traffic of mature lymphocytes into the mouse thymus. Thymus (1989) 13:141–8.

51. Kirberg J, Bosco N, Deloulme JC, Ceredig R, Agenès F. Peripheral T lymphocytes recirculating back into the thymus can mediate thymocyte positive selection. J Immunol (2008) 181:1207–14. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.181.2.1207

52. Nazzal D, Gradolatto A, Truffault F, Bismuth J, Berrih-Aknin S. Human thymus medullary epithelial cells promote regulatory T-cell generation by stimulating interleukin-2 production via ICOS ligand. Cell Death Dis (2014) 5:e1420. doi:10.1038/cddis.2014.377

53. Kasow KA, Chen XH, Knowles J, Wichlan D, Handgretinger R, Riberdy JM. Human CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells share equally complex and comparable repertoires with CD4+CD25- counterparts. J Immunol (2004) 172:6123–8. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.172.10.6123

54. Fazilleau N, Bachelez H, Gougeon ML, Viguier M. Cutting edge: size and diversity of CD4+CD25high Foxp3+ regulatory T cell repertoire in humans: evidence for similarities and partial overlapping with CD4+CD25- T Cells. J Immunol (2007) 179:3412–6. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.179.6.3412

55. Mantel PY, Ouaked N, Ruckert B, Karagiannidis C, Welz R, Blaser K, et al. Molecular mechanisms underlying FOXP3 induction in human T cells. J Immunol (2006) 176:3593–602. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.176.6.3593

56. Rajpal A, Cho YA, Yelent B, Koza-Taylor PH, Li D, Chen E, et al. Transcriptional activation of known and novel apoptotic pathways by Nur77 orphan steroid receptor. EMBO J (2003) 22:6526–36. doi:10.1093/emboj/cdg620

57. Legrand N, Cupedo T, van Lent AU, Ebeli MJ, Weijer K, Hanke T, et al. Transient accumulation of human mature thymocytes and regulatory T cells with CD28 superagonist in “human immune system” Rag2-/-gammac-/- mice. Blood (2006) 108:238–45. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-01-0190

58. Poliani PL, Fontana E, Roifman CM, Notarangelo LD. ζ Chain-associated protein of 70 kDa (ZAP70) deficiency in human subjects is associated with abnormalities of thymic stromal cells: implications for T-cell tolerance. J Allergy Clin Immunol (2013) 131:e–600. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2012.11.002

59. Hutton JF, Gargett T, Sadlon TJ, Bresatz S, Brown CY, Zola H, et al. Development of CD4+CD25+FoxP3+ regulatory T cells from cord blood hematopoietic progenitor cells. J Leukoc Biol (2008) 85:445–51. doi:10.1189/jlb.1008620

60. Walters SN, Webster KE, Daley S, Grey ST. A role for intrathymic B cells in the generation of natural regulatory T cells. J Immunol (2014) 193:170–6. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1302519

61. Lu FT, Yang W, Wang YH, Ma HD, Tang W, Yang JB, et al. Thymic B cells promote thymus-derived regulatory T cell development and proliferation. J Autoimmun (2015) 61:62–72. doi:10.1016/j.jaut.2015.05.008

62. Jebbawi F, Fayyad-Kazan H, Merimi M, Lewalle P, Verougstraete JC, Leo O, et al. A microRNA profile of human CD8(+) regulatory T cells and characterization of the effects of microRNAs on Treg cell-associated genes. J Transl Med (2014) 12:218. doi:10.1186/s12967-014-0218-x

63. Allakhverdi Z, Fitzpatrick D, Boisvert A, Baba N, Bouguermouh S, Sarfati M, et al. Expression of CD103 identifies human regulatory T-cell subsets. J Allergy Clin Immunol (2006) 118:1342–9. doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2006.07.034

64. Kutlesa S, Wessels JT, Speiser A, Steiert I, Müller CA, Klein G. E-cadherin-mediated interactions of thymic epithelial cells with CD103+ thymocytes lead to enhanced thymocyte cell proliferation. J Cell Sci (2002) 115:4505–15. doi:10.1242/jcs.00142

65. Tang XL, Smith TR, Kumar V. Specific control of immunity by regulatory CD8 T cells. Cell Mol Immunol (2005) 2:11–19.

66. Kapp JA, Bucy RP. CD8+ suppressor T cells resurrected. Hum Immunol (2008) 69:715–20. doi:10.1016/j.humimm.2008.07.018

67. Cerf-Bensussan N, Jarry A, Brousse N, Lisowska-Grospierre B, Guy-Grand D, Griscelli C. A monoclonal antibody (HML-1) defining a novel membrane molecule present on human intestinal lymphocytes. Eur J Immunol (1987) 17:1279–85. doi:10.1002/eji.1830170910

68. Cepek KL, Parker CM, Madara JL, Brenner MB. Integrin alpha E beta 7 mediates adhesion of T lymphocytes to epithelial cells. J Immunol (1993) 150:3459–70.

69. Chaput N, Louafi S, Bardier A, Charlotte F, Vaillant JC, Menegaux F, et al. Identification of CD8+CD25+Foxp3+ suppressive T cells in colorectal cancer tissue. Gut (2009) 58:520–9. doi:10.1136/gut.2008.158824

70. Nigam P, Velu V, Kannanganat S, Chennareddi L, Kwa S, Siddiqui M, et al. Expansion of FOXP3+ CD8 T cells with suppressive potential in colorectal mucosa following a pathogenic simian immunodeficiency virus infection correlates with diminished antiviral T cell response and viral control. J Immunol (2010) 184:1690–701. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0902955

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Caramalho, Nunes-Cabaço, Foxall and Sousa. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

MINI REVIEW
published: 07 August 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00398

The contribution of chemokines and migration to the induction of central tolerance in the thymus

Zicheng Hu[†], Jessica Naomi Lancaster[†] and Lauren I. R. Ehrlich*

Ehrlich Laboratory, Department of Molecular Biosciences, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Monika R. Fleshner, University of Colorado, USA
Masaaki Murakami, Hokkaido University, Japan

*Correspondence:

Lauren I. R. Ehrlich, Ehrlich Laboratory, Department of Molecular Biosciences, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, The University of Texas at Austin, 2506 Speedway, A5000, Austin, TX 78712, USA
lehrlich@austin.utexas.edu

†Zicheng Hu and Jessica Naomi Lancaster have contributed equally to this work.

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 04 June 2015
Accepted: 20 July 2015
Published: 07 August 2015

Citation:

Hu Z, Lancaster JN and Ehrlich LIR (2015) The contribution of chemokines and migration to the induction of central tolerance in the thymus. Front. Immunol. 6:398. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00398

As T cells develop, they migrate throughout the thymus where they undergo essential bi-directional signaling with stromal cells in distinct thymic microenvironments. Immature thymocyte progenitors are located in the thymic cortex. Following T cell receptor expression and positive selection, thymocytes undergo a dramatic transition: they become rapidly motile and relocate to the thymic medulla. Antigen-presenting cells (APCs) within the cortex and medulla display peptides derived from a wide array of self-proteins, which promote thymocyte self-tolerance. If a thymocyte is auto-reactive against such antigens, it undergoes either negative selection, via apoptosis, or differentiation into the regulatory T cell lineage. This induction of central tolerance is critical for prevention of autoimmunity. Chemokines and adhesion molecules play an essential role in tolerance induction, as they promote migration of developing thymocytes through the different thymic microenvironments and enhance interactions with APCs displaying self-antigens. Herein, we review the contribution of chemokines and other regulators of thymocyte localization and motility to T cell development, with a focus on their contribution to the induction of central tolerance.

Keywords: thymus, negative selection, central tolerance, chemokine receptors, thymocyte migration

Introduction: Coordination of T Cell Development with Intrathymic Localization

Thymocytes migrate through distinct thymic microenvironments at discrete stages of differentiation in order to receive essential signals from surrounding stromal cells that govern further differentiation and selection (1, 2) (Figure 1). Early thymocyte progenitors (ETP) localize to the cortical side of the cortico-medullary junction (CMJ). As they commit to the T-lineage, thymocytes migrate into the mid-cortex, where they rearrange T cell receptor (TCR) β chain genes (3). Cells that successfully express TCRβ pass the β-selection checkpoint, and undergo proliferation and differentiation near the sub-capsule. Subsequent double positive (DP) thymocytes are localized throughout the cortex, where they rearrange TCRα chain genes. DP cells that receive weak TCR signals in the cortex undergo positive selection, promoting survival and differentiation of self-MHC-restricted single positive (SP) cells. SP thymocytes migrate into the medulla, where auto-reactive cells receiving strong TCR signals are culled from the repertoire or diverted into the regulatory T cell (Treg) lineage. We will review migratory and adhesion cues governing localization and cellular interactions of differentiating thymocytes and stromal cell subsets, with an emphasis on signals that promote central tolerance. Recent advances and open questions will be highlighted.

FIGURE 1 | Thymocyte migration through distinct thymic microenvironments occurs in an ordered fashion, enabling appropriate interactions with stromal cells. Thymocyte progenitors enter the thymus through vessels at the cortico-medullary junction (CMJ). ETPs (CD3−CD4−CD8−c-Kit+CD44+CD25−) integrate cTEC-derived signals in the cortex near the CMJ, which promote survival and T-lineage-commitment. DN2 (CD3−CD4−CD8−c-Kit+CD44+CD25+) thymocytes migrate into the mid-cortex, as they rearrange TCRβ chain genes. Subsequent DN3 (CD3−CD4−CD8−c-Kit−CD44−CD25+) thymocytes that pass the β-selection checkpoint proliferate at the sub-capsule, and differentiate through a DN4 (CD3−CD4−CD8−c-Kit−CD44−CD25−) stage to become DP (CD4+CD8+) thymocytes. DP cells, which rearrange TCRα chain genes, are localized throughout the cortex, with a bias toward the medulla. Interactions with cTECs induce positive selection of DP cells expressing TCRs with low avidity for self-peptide:MHCs. Auto-reactive DP thymocytes can be negatively selected in the cortex. Positively selected DP cells begin to migrate rapidly and enter the thymic medulla, guided by chemokine gradients, as they differentiate into SP thymocytes. SP cells rapidly scan mTECs and DCs during their 4–5-day residence time in the medulla to encounter a wide array of self-peptides, which induce auto-reactive cells to undergo apoptosis or diversion into the Treg lineage. Mature SP thymocytes egress from the thymus through blood vessels in the CMJ.

Migration and Stromal Interactions During Early Stages of Thymocyte Differentiation

Common lymphoid progenitors or their immediate progeny enter the thymus through vasculature at the CMJ (4), and subsequently give rise to developing T cells (5–7). Transmigration through the endothelium is initiated by selectin-mediated rolling (P-selectin), followed by firm adhesion via integrins (α4β1 and αLβ2) in concert with chemokine receptor signaling (CCR9, CCR7) (8–12). Within the thymus, cortical thymic epithelial cells (cTECs) provide IL7, SCF, and DLL4, which are indispensable for survival, differentiation, and T-lineage-commitment of thymocyte progenitors (13–15). ETP and double negative 2 (DN2) cells express CXCR4, which promotes chemotaxis toward cTEC-derived CXCL12 (16–20). Cortical thymocytes also express integrin α4β1, which binds VCAM-1 on cTECs. CXCR4 deficiency or impaired VCAM-1 adhesion inhibits thymocyte differentiation and migration from the CMJ to the mid-cortex (20–23). It remains to be determined how CCR7 promotes both thymic entry of progenitors into the cortex, and medullary accumulation of SP thymocytes (see below). As ETP do not express CCR7, rapid downregulation of CCR7 following thymic entry may enable cortical progenitor localization.

Migration and Stromal Interactions of Thymocytes Undergoing β-Selection

DN3 cells completing TCRβ rearrangements localize to the outer capsule (4). In addition to pre-TCR signals, activation of CXCR4 (24), NOTCH-1 (13, 25), and IL7R via cTEC ligands (1, 26) are required for differentiation and expansion at the β-selection checkpoint. The consequences of or signals governing sub-capsular localization of proliferating post-β selection cells remain to be elucidated (3). CCR9 is first expressed at the DN3 stage, and DN3 through DP thymocytes migrate toward CCL25, expressed by cTECs (17, 18, 27). Deficiency or overexpression of CCR9 prevents DN3 accumulation at the sub-capsule (12, 28, 29). However, a role for CCR9 in sub-capsular localization is hard to reconcile with the distribution of CCL25 throughout the cortex (30) or the CCR9-responsiveness of DP cells, which are also present throughout the cortex (17, 18). Moreover, we have shown that pre-positive selection DP thymocytes, which are CCR9 responsive, accumulate near the medulla, not the sub-capsule (31). Thus, signals governing DN3 accumulation at the sub-capsule remain to be identified.

Migratory Cues Governing Localization and Stromal Interactions of DP Thymocytes

We speculate that plexinD1 may promote rapid motility and peri-medullary accumulation of pre-positive selection DP cells (31). Sema3e, a soluble plexinD1 ligand produced in the medulla, inhibits CCR9-mediated chemotaxis, releases integrin α4β1 catch bonds, and is required for medullary localization of post-positive selection thymocytes (32–34). However, pre-positive selection DP cells also express plexinD1; thus, DP cells that reach the peri-medullary cortex, perhaps through random migration (35), would encounter Sema3e, potentially diminishing CCR9-mediated migration back into the cortex, and relaxing adhesion to VCAM-1 on cTECs, thus increasing motility. Recent studies demonstrate that GIT2, which modulates actin reorganization during cellular migration, also promotes rapid migration of cortical thymocytes (36). GIT2 and plexinD1 may coordinately enhance the ability of DP cells to efficiently scan cTECs for positively selecting ligands, which is consistent with the impaired positive selection in Git2−/− mice (36). Future studies may resolve the roles of plexinD1 and GIT2 in localization, migration, and positive selection of pre-positive selection DP thymocytes.

Migratory Cues and APCs Governing Cortical Negative Selection

Although the medulla is a critical environment for negative selection, there is mounting evidence that the cortex promotes deletion of a significant number of auto-reactive thymocytes. Thymocytes undergoing negative selection were recently quantified using Bim−/−; Nur77GFP mice (37), in which apoptotic cells survive due to deficiency in the Bcl2 family member Bim, and GFP levels reflect TCR signal strength, enabling quantification of cells that should have been deleted due to strong TCR signaling. In the absence of Bim, GFP+ DP and GFP+ SP cellularity was increased, demonstrating that negative selection occurs in both compartments. Interestingly, the increase in GFP+ DP cells was up to threefold higher than GFP+ SPs (37), suggesting that over 90% of positively selected DP thymocytes are fated for cortical deletion (38). Another study analyzed Helios levels in Bim−/− mice to estimate that 55% of TCR-signaled thymocytes are deleted at the DP stage (39). Together, these studies indicate that the majority of negative selection occurs in DP cells, raising the question of which cortical antigen-presenting cells (APCs) promote central tolerance.

Cortical thymic epithelial cells are uniquely responsible for inducing positive selection (40); however, their role in negative selection remains ambiguous. Early studies established that thymic grafts transplanted into allogeneic athymic hosts were tolerated by host-derived T cells (41–45). Developing T cells are likely tolerized to graft-derived peptide:MHCs expressed by medullary TECs (mTECs) or DCs, which does not clarify whether cTECs induce negative selection. To address this, transgenic mice were developed in which MHC-I (46) or MHC-II (47) was expressed exclusively on cTECs. cTECs in these mice induced positive selection of CD8SP or CD4SP thymocytes, respectively, but could not tolerize polyclonal thymocytes. In light of the essential contribution of mTECs to negative selection against diverse self-antigens (see below), these findings do not resolve whether cTECs induce deletion of some auto-reactive clones. Expression of model antigens uniquely in cTECs resulted in deletion of TCR transgenic thymocytes, indicating that cTECs can mediate negative selection (48). However, when a TCR transgene was more faithfully expressed at the later DP stage in the HYCD4 model, cTECs expressing the cognate antigen induced TCR activation, but not apoptosis of auto-reactive DP cells (49). Thus, cTECs can clearly activate auto-reactive TCRs, but their ability to mediate deletion remains uncertain.

DCs have emerged as likely mediators of cortical negative selection. DCs express high levels of costimulatory and MHC molecules, enabling strong TCR activation (50). Strikingly, in a model of cortical negative selection, thymocytes undergoing apoptosis were localized adjacent to cortical DCs, and negative selection was impaired when DCs were conditionally ablated (49). The migratory cues that promote thymocyte:DC interactions during cortical negative selection have yet to be elucidated. Cortical DCs accumulate near vasculature, where CCR7 ligands are presented (30, 51, 52). Thymic DCs undergo CCR7-mediated chemotaxis (53), suggesting CCR7 may position DCs near cortical blood vessels. CCR7 was also postulated to induce cortical thymocytes to associate with DCs under positively selecting conditions (52). However, CCR7 is not up-regulated until the SP stage (54), when thymocytes home to the medulla, and CCR7 was dispensable for cortical deletion in the HYcd4 model (49). Thus, CCR7 signaling may position cortical DCs near vasculature, but is unlikely to promote thymocyte:DC interactions during cortical negative selection. CCR2 also contributes to cortical DC positioning, as it recruits migratory DCs to perivascular spaces in the cortex to induce deletion against blood-borne antigens (55, 56). CCX-CKR1 (CCRL1) regulates bioavailability of CCL19, CCL21, and CCL25, but its expression by cTECs and impact on tolerance are currently controversial (57, 58). Further investigation is needed to elucidate the contributions of APCs and migratory cues governing cortical negative selection.

Migration of Post-Positive Selection Thymocytes into the Medulla

The migration of post-positive selection thymocytes into the medulla is critical for the induction of central tolerance. If the medulla does not develop, or thymocytes cannot accumulate therein, negative selection is impaired, and autoimmunity arises (59–64). Only positively selected thymocytes gain access to the medulla (31); recent evidence suggests CXCR4 is responsible for cortical retention of DP cells (65). Following positive selection, thymocytes migrate much more rapidly (12–16 μm/min post-selection versus 6–8 μm/min pre-selection) and undergo chemotaxis toward the medulla (31, 66, 67). It is commonly assumed that thymocytes enter the medulla at the SP stage. However, plexinD1 deficiency results in relocalization of CD69+ cells from the medulla into the cortex, suggesting post-positive selection CD69+ DP cells may enter the medulla (32, 33). Furthermore, the kinetics of medullary entry after positive selection, compared to the timing of differentiation from the DP to SP stage indicates that CD69+ DP cells enter the medulla (68). Thus, positive selection likely induces rapid thymocyte medullary entry; further studies are required to determine if and how CD69+ DP cells overcome cortical retention to enter the medulla.

The chemokine receptor CCR7 is critical for thymocyte localization in the medulla (31, 51). CCR7 is expressed by SP thymocytes (51, 54, 69, 70), while the ligands CCL19 and CCL21 are expressed by mTECs (71). In mice deficient for CCR7 or its ligands, medullary accumulation of SP cells is diminished, negative selection is impaired, and autoimmunity ensues (59, 60). Although CCR7 is required for SP chemotaxis toward the medulla and accumulation therein, Ccr7−/− SP cells enter and migrate within the medulla (31). In contrast, SP medullary entry is abrogated by pertussis toxin (31, 69), which blocks signaling through Gαi-associated G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs), including chemokine receptors. Thus, other GPCRs must contribute to thymocyte medullary localization. We speculate that CCR4 may contribute to medullary entry. CD69 + DP and CD69 + CD4SP thymocytes express CCR4 (54, 69) and undergo chemotaxis toward the ligands CCL17 and CCL22 (17), which are expressed in the medulla (18, 72). CCR4 is up-regulated early after positive selection, while CCR7 is expressed on more mature SP cells (54), suggesting differential roles in guiding thymocytes into the medulla. CCR4 may be responsible for initial medullary entry of post-positive selection cells, while CCR7 may promote retention of maturing SPs (Figure 2). Future studies are required to address the relative contributions of CCR4 and other GPCRs to medullary entry and central tolerance, though a recent study did not identify a role for CCR4 in these processes (54).

FIGURE 2 | Signals that impact motility and localization of positively selected thymocytes. After positive selection, thymocytes up-regulate CD69 and the chemokine receptor CCR4. CCR4 ligands are expressed by medullary DCs, thus creating a chemotactic gradient that may promote medullary entry of post-positive selection thymocytes. PlexinD1 is expressed on DP and immature SP thymocytes, and may also promote medullary entry by inhibiting responses to cortical chemokines and releasing thymocytes from tight interactions with cTECs. As SP cells mature, they up-regulate CCR7, promoting chemotaxis toward the gradient of CCR7 ligands produced by mTEClo (CD80loMHC-IIlo) and mTEChi (CD80+MHC-IIhi) cells. CCR7 signaling is critical for maintaining SP thymocytes within the medulla. In the absence of CCR7, SP cells do not undergo efficient negative selection against TRAs. Expression of CCR7 and CCR4 on SP thymocytes may also promote chemokinesis, or rapid motility of SP thymocytes, as well as efficient interactions with the two main subsets of medullary APCs, mTEChi cells and DCs, respectively. Thus, chemokine-guided migration likely impacts multiple aspects of SP motility and cellular interactions that are required to ensure SP thymocytes efficiently scan numerous medullary APCs to encounter the full array of self-antigens that induce central tolerance.

APCs Governing Medullary Negative Selection and Treg Generation

Once SP thymocytes migrate into the medulla, they encounter heterogeneous APCs that enforce self-tolerance (Figure 2). Medullary APCs display peptides derived from a wide array of tissue-restricted antigens (TRAs), proteins otherwise expressed by peripheral tissues. mTEChi cells express high levels of CD80 and MHC-II, as well as the transcriptional regulator AIRE, which induces mTEC differentiation and expression of diverse TRAs that were previously epigenetically silenced (73–81). AIRE-dependent expression of such TRAs is essential for the induction of central tolerance in mice and humans (82–87). Medullary DCs also contribute to negative selection; they can be divided into intrathymically derived Sirpα− conventional DC (cDC), migratory Sirpα+ cDC, and plasmacytoid DCs (pDC) (88, 89). Other APCs, such as B cells, may also contribute to negative selection (90–92), but are not discussed here.

Several experimental models indicate that mTECs can directly present peptide:MHCs to mediate negative selection and Treg induction. Negative selection against model self-antigens was intact following ablation of DCs or MHC-II expression on hematopoietic cells, demonstrating that mTECs can be sufficient to mediate negative selection (93, 94). Furthermore, miRNA-mediated reduction of MHC-II expression in mTECs resulted in diminished negative selection of TCR transgenic thymocytes to a model TRA, demonstrating that direct antigen presentation by mTECs is required for deletion in some cases (95). Direct presentation of TRAs by mTECs can also induce Treg differentiation (96). While endogenous proteins in mTECs will naturally access the MHC-I processing and presentation pathway, presentation on MHC-II is facilitated by macroautophagy, which is required for central tolerance (97). Thus, mTECs have an intrinsic capacity to present diverse self-antigens to mediate central tolerance of CD4SP and CD8SP cells.

DCs are also critical for thymic central tolerance. DC ablation in a CD11c-DTA model resulted in impaired negative selection and fatal autoimmunity (98). MHC-II ablation on hematopoietic cells impaired both Treg induction and negative selection against serum-borne and soluble TRAs (99–101). Sirpα+ cDC and pDC can acquire peripheral antigens and traffic them to the thymus to induce negative selection (102, 103). Also, in some models of mTEC-expressed TRAs, DCs isolated from the thymus stimulate TRA-specific T cells specific more efficiently than mTECs themselves, indicating that antigens are transferred efficiently from mTECs to DCs to mediate deletion (104). Transfer of model TRAs from mTECs to DCs can be AIRE-dependent and required for negative selection (99, 104). The mechanisms of antigen transfer between mTECs and DCs remain to be elucidated. mTECs may secrete or release antigen in vesicles; DCs may acquire antigen by endocytosis of apoptotic mTECs (105); or peptide:MHC complexes may be acquired by DCs from mTEC cell membranes (104, 106). Thus, the heterogeneous thymic DC compartment promotes central tolerance against peripheral, blood-borne, and mTEC-derived self-antigens.

While both mTECs and DCs induce tolerance to some antigens, their relative contributions to central tolerance of polyclonal thymocytes have been difficult to ascertain. Using TCR repertoire analysis of Treg and naïve T cells, Perry et al. recently compared the impact of restricting antigen presentation to DCs versus mTECs (107). mTECs and DCs mediated negative selection of non-overlapping TCRs, and DCs deleted about threefold more TCRs. These findings are in keeping with studies showing that both subsets are important for negative selection. Furthermore, both mTECs and DCs induced Treg differentiation. AIRE was critical for negative selection and Treg induction of lower frequency TCRs, and the Sirpα− subset of cDC was required for AIRE-dependent Treg generation (107). Importantly, this study compared the effects of diminished MHC-II expression on mTECs with ablated MHC-II expression on DCs, and may thus underestimate the relative contribution of mTECs to central tolerance. Nonetheless, it is clear that complete central tolerance will require efficient thymocyte interactions with both mTECs and DCs.

Migratory Cues Promoting Medullary Central Tolerance

Given that DCs acquire TRAs from mTECs, it is likely DCs must localize near mTECs to mediate efficient central tolerance. Consistent with this, XCR1, which is expressed on Sirpα−cDC, was required for localization of cDC to the center of the medulla (53). In Xcl1−/− mice, Treg cellularity was diminished, the TCR repertoire was altered, and autoimmune manifestations occurred, indicating that medullary localization of Sirpα−cDC is required for central tolerance (53). This suggests a model in which XCR1 promotes direct apposition of Sirpα−DCs with mTECs for TRA acquisition. Sirpα+ cDC and pDC, which carry peripheral antigens into the medulla, migrate into the thymus through vasculature in a P-selectin, VLA4, and GPCR-dependent manner (103). CCR9 is required for thymic entry of pDC, but the corresponding GPCR for Sirpα+ cDC has not been identified (102). Although thymic DCs express CCR7 and migrate toward CCR7 ligands, Ccr7−/− DCs localize properly within the medulla (53). Thus, signals required for medullary localization of Sirpα+ DCs and pDCs remain to be identified.

SP thymocytes were recently estimated to have a medullary residence time of ~4–5 days (108), shorter than the previous estimate of ~12 days (109), and each AIRE-dependent TRA is expressed on only 1–3% of AIRE+mTEChi cells (74, 110). Thus, thymocytes must rapidly scan multiple mTECs and DCs to encounter the full spectrum of medullary self-antigens that promote central tolerance. Chemokines can promote lymphocyte chemokinesis (111), and CCR7 has been shown to promote rapid motility of SP thymocytes (31). Fast SP migration is also dependent on MST1, which promotes integrin-mediated binding of SP thymocytes to ICAM1 in the context of CCL21 (112). It remains to be determined whether other chemokine signals are required for rapid motility of SP thymocytes.

It remains to be established whether interactions between thymocytes and medullary APCs are driven by chemotaxis toward APCs or random encounters due to fast SP motility. Several studies suggest chemokines may facilitate T cell:APC interactions in secondary lymphoid organs. Using microspheres releasing CCL19 and CCL21, a recent study demonstrated that when sources of CCR7 ligands were interspersed, T cells hopped between microspheres, potentially facilitating antigen sampling (113). Both CCR4 and CCR7 have been implicated in promoting T cell:APC interactions that drive naïve T cell activation (114, 115). Thus, CCR4 and CCR7 may also promote cellular interactions between SP cells and DCs and mTECs, respectively. Indeed, Mst1 was required for efficient interactions between SP cells undergoing negative selection and Aire+mTECs expressing a model TRA (112), suggesting that CCR7 may enhance adhesion between SP cells and mTECs via intergrin:ICAM1 interactions. Furthermore, CCR7 deficiency was recently shown to result in increased Treg cellularity (54), which may also reflect the contribution of CCR7 to avid APC interactions. Although the basis for the decision to undergo apoptosis versus Treg specification is not resolved, current models favor an avidity model in which the highest avidity TCR signals promote negative selection, while a range of slightly lower avidity signals promote Treg induction as well as negative selection (116, 117). Thus, if CCR7 promotes T cell:APC interactions, CCR7 deficiency might result in lower avidity interactions that favor Treg induction. The fact that CCR7 ligands are expressed by mTECs, while CCR4 ligands are expressed by DCs also raises the possibility that CCR7 and CCR4 promote interactions with mTECs and DCs, respectively (Figure 2). Further investigation will be required to elucidate the contribution of chemokines or other adhesion molecules to interactions with medullary APCs driving central tolerance.

Areas for Future Investigation

Chemokine receptors and integrins promote migration and adhesion required for thymocyte:stromal interactions that drive T cell differentiation and selection. However, multiple localization and migration cues remain to be elucidated. We have not identified signals driving localization of DN3 thymocytes to the sub-capsule, accumulation of pre-selection DP cells near the medulla, or thymocyte:APC interactions during cortical negative selection. The identities of GPCRs other than CCR7 that promote medullary entry and APC interactions remain to be determined. We are just beginning to appreciate that localization of stromal cells is critical for thymocyte differentiation, and future studies will likely identify factors driving proper stromal organization. Thus, many open questions remain regarding the localization and adhesion cues that promote differentiation of a fully functional and self-tolerant T cell compartment.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grant R01 AI104870 to LE.

References

1. Petrie HT, Zuniga-Pflucker J-C. Zoned out: functional mapping stromal signaling microenvironments in the thymus. Annu Rev Immunol (2007) 25:649–79. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.23.021704.115715

2. Love PE, Bhandoola A. Signal integration and crosstalk during thymocyte migration and emigration. Nat Rev Immunol (2011) 11:469–77. doi:10.1038/nri2989

3. Lind EF, Prockop SE, Porritt HE, Petrie HT. Mapping precursor movement through the postnatal thymus reveals specific microenvironments supporting defined stages of early lymphoid development. J Exp Med (2001) 194:127–34. doi:10.1084/jem.194.2.127

4. Porritt HE, Gordon K, Petrie HT. Kinetics of steady-state differentiation and mapping of intrathymic-signaling environments by stem cell transplantation in nonirradiated mice. J Exp Med (2003) 198:957–62. doi:10.1084/jem.20030837

5. Serwold T, Ehrlich LI, Weissman IL. Reductive isolation from bone marrow and blood implicates common lymphoid progenitors as the major source of thymopoiesis. Blood (2009) 113:807–15. doi:10.1182/blood-2008-08-173682

6. Schlenner SM, Madan V, Busch K, Tietz A, Laufle C, Costa C, et al. Fate mapping reveals separate origins of T cells and myeloid lineages in the thymus. Immunity (2010) 32:426–36. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2010.03.005

7. Ehrlich LIR, Serwold T, Weissman IL. In vitro assays misrepresent in vivo lineage potentials of murine lymphoid progenitors. Blood (2011) 117:2618–24. doi:10.1182/blood-2010-05-287102

8. Scimone ML, Aifantis I, Apostolou I, Boehmer HV, Andrian UHV. A multistep adhesion cascade for lymphoid progenitor cell homing to the thymus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2006) 103:7006–11. doi:10.1073/pnas.0602024103

9. Rossi FM, Corbel SY, Merzaban JS, Carlow DA, Gossens K, Duenas J, et al. Recruitment of adult thymic progenitors is regulated by P-selectin and its ligand PSGL-1. Nat Immunol (2005) 6:626–34. doi:10.1038/ni1203

10. Krueger A, Willenzon S, Lyszkiewicz M, Kremmer E, Forster R. CC chemokine receptor 7 and 9 double-deficient hematopoietic progenitors are severely impaired in seeding the adult thymus. Blood (2010) 115:1906–12. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-07-235721

11. Zlotoff DA, Sambandam A, Logan TD, Bell JJ, Schwarz BA, Bhandoola A. CCR7 and CCR9 together recruit hematopoietic progenitors to the adult thymus. Blood (2010) 115:1897–905. doi:10.1182/blood-2009-08-237784

12. Uehara S, Grinberg A, Farber JM, Love PE. A role for CCR9 in T lymphocyte development and migration. J Immunol (2002) 168:2811–9. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.168.6.2811

13. Shah DK, Zuniga-Pflucker JC. An overview of the intrathymic intricacies of T cell development. J Immunol (2014) 192:4017–23. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1302259

14. Rothenberg EV. T cell lineage commitment: identity and renunciation. J Immunol (2011) 186:6649–55. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1003703

15. Yuan JS, Kousis PC, Suliman S, Visan I, Guidos CJ. Functions of Notch signaling in the immune system: consensus and controversies. Annu Rev Immunol (2010) 28:343–65. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.021908.132719

16. Kim CH, Pelus LM, White JR, Broxmeyer HE. Differential chemotactic behavior of developing T cells in response to thymic chemokines. Blood (1998) 91:4434–43.

17. Campbell JJ, Pan J, Butcher EC. Cutting edge: developmental switches in chemokine responses during T cell maturation. J Immunol (1999) 163:2353–7.

18. Bleul CC, Boehm T. Chemokines define distinct microenvironments in the developing thymus. Eur J Immunol (2000) 30:3371–9. doi:10.1002/1521-4141(2000012)30:12<3371::AID-IMMU3371>3.0.CO;2-L

19. Ki S, Park D, Selden HJ, Seita J, Chung H, Kim J, et al. Global transcriptional profiling reveals distinct functions of thymic stromal subsets and age-related changes during thymic involution. Cell Rep (2014) 9:402–15. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2014.08.070

20. Plotkin J, Prockop SE, Lepique A, Petrie HT. Critical role for CXCR4 signaling in progenitor localization and T cell differentiation in the postnatal thymus. J Immunol (2003) 171:4521–7. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.171.9.4521

21. Salomon DR, Crisa L, Mojcik CF, Ishii JK, Klier G, Shevach EM. Vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 is expressed by cortical thymic epithelial cells and mediates thymocyte adhesion. Implications for the function of alpha4beta1 (VLA4) integrin in T-cell development. Blood (1997) 89:2461–71.

22. Prockop SE, Palencia S, Ryan CM, Gordon K, Gray D, Petrie HT. Stromal cells provide the matrix for migration of early lymphoid progenitors through the thymic cortex. J Immunol (2002) 169:4354–61. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.169.8.4354

23. Ara T, Itoi M, Kawabata K, Egawa T, Tokoyoda K, Sugiyama T, et al. A role of CXC chemokine ligand 12/stromal cell-derived factor-1/pre-B cell growth stimulating factor and its receptor CXCR4 in fetal and adult T cell development in vivo. J Immunol (2003) 170:4649–55. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.170.9.4649

24. Trampont PC, Tosello-Trampont AC, Shen Y, Duley AK, Sutherland AE, Bender TP, et al. CXCR4 acts as a costimulator during thymic beta-selection. Nat Immunol (2010) 11:162–70. doi:10.1038/ni.1830

25. Ciofani M, Schmitt TM, Ciofani A, Michie AM, Cuburu N, Aublin A, et al. Obligatory role for cooperative signaling by pre-TCR and Notch during thymocyte differentiation. J Immunol (2004) 172:5230–9. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.172.9.5230

26. Boudil A, Matei IR, Shih HY, Bogdanoski G, Yuan JS, Chang SG, et al. IL-7 coordinates proliferation, differentiation and Tcra recombination during thymocyte beta-selection. Nat Immunol (2015) 16:397–405. doi:10.1038/ni.3122

27. Wurbel MA, Malissen B, Campbell JJ. Complex regulation of CCR9 at multiple discrete stages of T cell development. Eur J Immunol (2006) 36:73–81. doi:10.1002/eji.200535203

28. Uehara S, Hayes SM, Li L, El-Khoury D, Canelles M, Fowlkes BJ, et al. Premature expression of chemokine receptor CCR9 impairs T cell development. J Immunol (2006) 176:75–84. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.176.1.75

29. Benz C, Heinzel K, Bleul CC. Homing of immature thymocytes to the subcapsular microenvironment within the thymus is not an absolute requirement for T cell development. Eur J Immunol (2004) 34:3652–63. doi:10.1002/eji.200425248

30. Misslitz A, Pabst O, Hintzen G, Ohl L, Kremmer E, Petrie HT, et al. Thymic T cell development and progenitor localization depend of CCR7. J Exp Med (2004) 200:481–91. doi:10.1084/jem.20040383

31. Ehrlich LIR, Oh DY, Weissman IL, Lewis RS. Differential contribution of chemotaxis and substrate restriction to segregation of immature and mature thymocytes. Immunity (2009) 31:986–98. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2009.09.020

32. Choi YI, Duke-Cohan JS, Ahmed WB, Handley MA, Mann F, Epstein JA, et al. PlexinD1 glycoprotein controls migration of positively selected thymocytes into the medulla. Immunity (2008) 29:888–98. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.10.008

33. Choi YI, Duke-Cohan JS, Tan J, Gui J, Singh MK, Epstein JA, et al. Plxnd1 expression in thymocytes regulates their intrathymic migration while that in thymic endothelium impacts medullary topology. Front Immunol (2013) 4:392. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2013.00392

34. Choi YI, Duke-Cohan JS, Chen W, Liu B, Rossy J, Tabrin T, et al. Dynamic control of beta1 integrin adhesion by the plexinD1-sema3E axis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2014) 111:379–84. doi:10.1073/pnas.1314209111

35. Petrie HT. Cell migration and the control of post-natal T-cell lymphopoiesis in the thymus. Nat Rev Immunol (2003) 3:859–66. doi:10.1038/nri1223

36. Phee H, Dzhagalov I, Mollenauer M, Wang Y, Irvine DJ, Robey E, et al. Regulation of thymocyte positive selection and motility by GIT2. Nat Immunol (2010) 503:503–11. doi:10.1038/ni.1868

37. Stritesky G, Xing Y, Erickson JR, Kalekar LA, Wang X, Mueller DL, et al. Murine thymic selection quantified using a unique method to capture deleted T cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:4679–84. doi:10.1073/pnas.1217532110

38. Sawicka M, Stritesky GL, Reynolds J, Abourashchi N, Lythe G, Molina-Paris C, et al. From pre-DP, post-DP, SP4, and SP8 thymocyte cell counts to a dynamical model of cortical and medullary selection. Front Immunol (2014) 5:19. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2014.00019

39. Daley SR, Hu DY, Goodnow CC. Helios marks strongly autoreactive CD4+ T cells in two major waves of thymic deletion distinguished by induction of PD-1 or NF-kB. J Exp Med (2013) 210:269–85. doi:10.1084/jem.20121458

40. Takahama Y, Takada K, Murata S, Tanaka K. b5t-containing thymoproteasome: specific expression in thymic cortical epithelial cells and role in positive selection of CD8+ T cells. Curr Opin Immunol (2012) 24:92–8. doi:10.1016/j.coi.2012.01.006

41. Bonomo A, Matzinger P. Thymus epithelium induces tissue-specific tolerance. J Exp Med (1993) 177:1153–64. doi:10.1084/jem.177.4.1153

42. Carlow DA, Teh S-J, Teh H-S. Altered thymocyte development resulting from expressing a deleting ligand on selecting thymic epithelium. J Immunol (1992) 148:2988–95.

43. Hoffman MW, Heath WR, Ruschmeyer D, Miller JFAP. Deletion of high-avidity T cells by thymic epithelium. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1992) 92:9851–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.92.21.9851

44. Jordan RK, Robinson JH, Hopkinson NA, House KC, Bentley AL. Thymic epithelium and the induction of transplantation tolerance in nude mice. Nature (1985) 314:454–6. doi:10.1038/314454a0

45. Modigliani Y, Thomas-Vaslin V, Bandeira A, Coltey M, Douarin NML, Coutinho A, et al. Lymphocytes selected in allogeneic thymic epithelium mediate dominant tolerance toward tissue grafts of the thymic epithelium haplotype. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1995) 92:7555–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.92.16.7555

46. Capone M, Romagnani P, Beermann F, MacDonald HR, van Meerwijk JP. Dissociation of thymic positive and negative selection in transgenic mice expressing major histocompatibility complex class I molecules exclusively on thymic cortical epithelial cells. Blood (2001) 97:1336–43. doi:10.1182/blood.V97.5.1336

47. Laufer TM, DeKoning J, Markowitz JS, Lo D, Glimcher LH. Unopposed positive selection and autoreactivity in mice expressing class II MHC only on thymic cortex. Nature (1996) 383:81–5. doi:10.1038/383081a0

48. Mayerova D, Hogquist KA. Central tolerance to self-antigen expressed by cortical epithelial cells. J Immunol (2003) 172:851–6. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.172.2.851

49. McCaughtry TM, Baldwin TA, Wilken MS, Hogquist KA. Clonal deletion of thymocytes can occur in the cortex with no involvement of the medulla. J Exp Med (2008) 205:2575–84. doi:10.1084/jem.20080866

50. Gray DHD, Seach N, Ueno T, Milton MK, Liston A, Lew AM, et al. Developmental kinetics, turnover, and stimulatory capacity of thymic epithelial cells. Blood (2006) 108:3777–85. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-02-004531

51. Ueno T, Saito F, Gray DHD, Kuse S, Hieshima K, Nakano H, et al. CCR7 signals are essential for cortex-medulla migration of developing thymocytes. J Exp Med (2004) 200:493–505. doi:10.1084/jem.20040643

52. Ladi E, Schwickert TA, Chtanova T, Chen Y, Herzmark P, Yin X, et al. Thymocyte-dendritic cell interactions near sources of CCR7 ligands in the thymic cortex. J Immunol (2008) 181:7014–23. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.181.10.7014

53. Lei Y, Ripen AM, Ishimaru N, Ohigashi I, Nagasawa T, Jeker LT, et al. Aire-dependent production of XCL1 mediates medullary accumulation of thymic dendritic cells and contributes to regulatory T cell development. J Exp Med (2011) 208:383–94. doi:10.1084/jem.20102327

54. Cowan JE, McCarthy NI, Parnell SM, White AJ, Bacon A, Serge A, et al. Differential requirement for CCR4 and CCR7 during the development of innate and adaptive alpha beta T cells in the adult thymus. J Immunol (2014) 193:1204–12. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1400993

55. Baba T, Nakamoto Y, Mukaida N. Crucial contribution of thymic Sirpa+ conventional dendritic cells to central tolerance against blood-borne antigens in a CCR2-dependent manner. J Immunol (2009) 183:3053–63. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0900438

56. Cedile O, Lobner M, Toft-Hansen H, Frank I, Wlodarczyk A, Irla M, et al. Thymic CCL2 influences induction of T-cell tolerance. J Autoimmun (2014) 55:73–85. doi:10.1016/j.jaut.2014.07.004

57. Bunting MD, Comerford I, Seach N, Hammett MV, Asquith DL, Korner H, et al. CCX-CKR deficiency alters thymic stroma impairing thymocyte development and promoting autoimmunity. Blood (2012) 121:118–28. doi:10.1182/blood-2012-06-434886

58. Lucas B, White AJ, Ulvmar MH, Nibbs RJB, Sitnik KM, Agace WW, et al. CCRL1/ACKR4 is expressed in key thymic microenvironments but is dispensable for T lymphopoiesis at steady state in adult mice. Eur J Immunol (2015) 45:574–83. doi:10.1002/eji.201445015

59. Kurobe H, Liu C, Ueno T, Saito F, Ohigashi I, Seach N, et al. CCR7-dependent cortex-to-medulla migration of positively selected thymocytes is essential for establishing central tolerance. Immunity (2006) 24:165–77. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2005.12.011

60. Nitta T, Nitta S, Lei Y, Lipp M, Takahama Y. CCR7-mediated migration of developing thymocytes to the medulla is essential for negative selection to tissue-restricted antigens. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2009) 106:17129–33. doi:10.1073/pnas.0906956106

61. Bonito AJ, Aloman C, Fiel MI, Danzl NM, Cha S, Weinstein EG, et al. Medullary thymic epithelial cell depletion leads to autoimmune hepatitis. J Clin Investig (2013) 123:3510–24. doi:10.1172/JCI65414

62. Burkly L, Hession C, Ogata L, Reilly C, Marconi LA, Olson D, et al. Expression of relB is required for the development of thymic medulla and dendritic cells. Nature (1995) 373:531–6. doi:10.1038/373531a0

63. Lomada D, Liu B, Coghlan L, Hu Y, Richie ER. Thymus medulla formation and central tolerance are restored in IKKalpha-/- mice that express an IKKalpha transgene in keratin 5+ thymic epithelial cells. J Immunol (2007) 178:829–37. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.178.2.829

64. Jenkinson SR, Williams JA, Jeon H, Zhang J, Nitta T, Ohigashi I, et al. TRAF3 enforces the requirement for T cell cross-talk in thymic medullary epithelial development. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:21107–12. doi:10.1073/pnas.1314859111

65. Halkias J, Melichar HJ, Taylor KT, Ross JO, Yen B, Cooper SB, et al. Opposing chemokine gradients control human thymocyte migration in situ. J Clin Investig (2013) 123:2131–42. doi:10.1172/JCI67175

66. LeBorgne M, Ladi E, Dzhagalov I, Herzmark P, Liao YF, Chakraborty AK, et al. The impact of negative selection on thymocytes migration in the medulla. Nat Immunol (2009) 823:823–30. doi:10.1038/ni.1761

67. Witt CM, Raychaudhuri S, Scaefer B, Chakraborty AK, Robey EA. Directed migration of positively selected thymocytes visualized in real time. PLoS Biol (2005) 3:e160. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030373

68. Ross JO, Melichar HJ, Au-Yeung BB, Herzmark P, Weiss A, Robey EA. Distinct phases in the positive selection of CD8+ T cells distinguished by intrathymic migration and T-cell receptor signaling patterns. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2014) 111:E2550–8. doi:10.1073/pnas.1408482111

69. Suzuki G, Sawa H, Kobayashi Y, Nakata Y, Nakagawa K-I, Uzawa A, et al. Pertussis toxin-sensitive signal controls the trafficking of thymocytes across the corticomedullary junction in the thymus. J Immunol (1999) 162:5981–5.

70. Davalos-Misslitz AC, Worbs T, Willenzon S, Bernhardt G, Forster R. Impaired responsiveness to T-cell receptor stimulation and defective negative selection of thymocytes in CCR7-deficient mice. Blood (2007) 110:4351–9. doi:10.1182/blood-2007-01-070284

71. Lkhagvasuren E, Sakata M, Ohigashi I, Takahama Y. Lymphotoxin beta receptor regulates the development of CCL21-expressing subset of postnatal medullary thymic epithelial cells. J Immunol (2013) 190:5110–7. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1203203

72. Alferink J, Lieberam I, Reindl W, Behrens A, Weiss S, Huser N, et al. Compartmentalized production of CCL17 in vivo: strong inducibility in peripheral dendritic cells contrasts selective absence from the spleen. J Exp Med (2003) 197:585–99. doi:10.1084/jem.20021859

73. Derbinski J, Schulte A, Kyewski B, Klein L. Promiscuous gene expression in medullary thymic epithelial cells mirrors the peripheral self. Nat Immunol (2001) 2:1032–9. doi:10.1038/ni723

74. Sansom SN, Shikama-Dorn N, Zhanybekova S, Nusspaumer G, Macaulay IC, Deadman ME, et al. Population and single-cell genomics reveal the Aire dependency, relief from Polycomb silencing, and distribution of self-antigen expression in thymic epithelia. Genome Res (2014) 24:1918–31. doi:10.1101/gr.171645.113

75. Derbinski J, Gabler J, Brors B, Tierling S, Jonnakuty S, Hergenhahn M, et al. Promiscuous gene expression in thymic epithelial cells is regulated at multiple levels. J Exp Med (2005) 202:33–45. doi:10.1084/jem.20050471

76. Nishikawa Y, Hirota F, Yano M, Kitajima H, Miyazaki J, Kawamoto H, et al. Biphasic Aire expression in early embryos and in medullary thymic epithelial cells before end-stage terminal differentiation. J Exp Med (2010) 207:963–71. doi:10.1084/jem.20092144

77. Yano M, Kuroda N, Han H, Meguro-Horike M, Nishikawa Y, Kiyonari H, et al. Aire controls the differentiation program of thymic epithelial cells in the medulla for the establishment of self-tolerance. J Exp Med (2008) 205:2827–38. doi:10.1084/jem.20080046

78. Dooley J, Erickson M, Farr AG. Alterations of the medullary epithelial compartment in the Aire-deficient thymus: implications for programs of thymic epithelial differentiation. J Immunol (2008) 181:5225–32. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.181.8.5225

79. Anderson MS, Venanzi ES, Chen Z, Berzins SP, Benoist C, Mathis D. The cellular mechanism of Aire control of T cell tolerance. Immunity (2005) 23:227–39. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2005.07.005

80. Metzger TC, Khan IS, Gardner JM, Mouchess ML, Johannes KP, Krawisz AK, et al. Lineage tracing and cell ablation identify a post-Aire-expressing thymic epithelial cell population. Cell Rep (2013) 5:166–79. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2013.08.038

81. Koh AS, Kuo AJ, Park SY, Cheung P, Abramson J, Bua D, et al. Aire employs a histone-binding module to mediate immunological tolerance, linking chromatin regulation with organ-specific autoimmunity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105:15878–83. doi:10.1073/pnas.0808470105

82. Liston A, Lesage S, Wilson J, Peltonen L, Goodnow CC. Aire regulates negative selection of organ-specific T cells. Nat Immunol (2003) 4:350–4. doi:10.1038/ni906

83. Liston A, Gray DH, Lesage S, Fletcher AL, Wilson J, Webster KE, et al. Gene dosage – limiting role of Aire in thymic expression, clonal deletion, and organ-specific autoimmunity. J Exp Med (2004) 200:1015–26. doi:10.1084/jem.20040581

84. Nagamine K, Peterson P, Scott HS, Kudoh J, Minoshima S, Heino M, et al. Positional cloning of the APECED gene. Nat Genet (1997) 17:393–8. doi:10.1038/ng1297-393

85. DeVoss J, Hou Y, Johannes K, Lu W, Liou GI, Rinn J, et al. Spontaneous autoimmunity prevented by thymic expression of a single self-antigen. J Exp Med (2006) 203:2727–35. doi:10.1084/jem.20061864

86. Anderson MS, Venanzi ES, Klein L, Chen Z, Berzins SP, Turley S, et al. Projection of an immunological self shadow within the thymus by the Aire protein. Science (2002) 298:1395–401. doi:10.1126/science.1075958

87. Finnish-German APECED Consortium. An autoimmune disease, APECED, caused by mutations in a novel gene featuring two PHD-type zinc-finger domains. Nat Genet (1997) 17:399–403. doi:10.1038/ng1297-399

88. Wu L, Shortman K. Heterogeneity of thymic dendritic cells. Semin Immunol (2005) 17:304–12. doi:10.1016/j.smim.2005.05.001

89. Li J, Park J, Foss D, Goldschneider I. Thymus-homing peripheral dendritic cells constitute two of the three major subsets of dendritic cells in the steady-state thymus. J Exp Med (2009) 206:607–22. doi:10.1084/jem.20082232

90. Frommer F, Waisman A. B cells participate in thymic negative selection of murine autoreactive CD4+ T cells. PLoS One (2010) 5:e15372. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0015372

91. Perera J, Meng L, Meng F, Huang H. Autoreactive thymic B cells are efficient antigen-presenting cells of cognate self-antigens for T cell negative selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:17011–6. doi:10.1073/pnas.1313001110

92. Yamano T, Nedjic J, Hinterberger M, Steinert M, Koser S, Pinto S, et al. Thymic B cells are licensed to present self antigens for central T cell tolerance induction. Immunity (2015) 42:1–15. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2015.05.013

93. Birnberg T, Bar-On L, Sapoznikov A, Caton ML, Cervantes-Barragan L, Makia D, et al. Lack of conventional dendritic cells is compatible with normal development and T cell homeostasis, but causes myeloid proliferative syndrome. Immunity (2008) 29:986–97. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.10.012

94. Gallegos AM, Bevan MJ. Central tolerance to tissue-specific antigens mediated by direct and indirect antigen presentation. J Exp Med (2004) 200:1039–49. doi:10.1084/jem.20041457

95. Hinterberger M, Aichinger M, Costa OPD, Voehringer D, Hoffman R, Klein L. Autonomous role of medullary thymic epithelial cells in central CD4+ T cell tolerance. Nat Immunol (2010) 11:512–9. doi:10.1038/ni.1874

96. Aschenbrenner K, D’Cruz LM, Vollmann EH, Hinterberger M, Emmerich J, Swee LK, et al. Selection of Foxp3+ regulatory T cells specific for self antigen expressed and presented by Aire+ medullary thymic epithelial cells. Nat Immunol (2007) 8:351–8. doi:10.1038/ni1444

97. Aichinger M, Wu C, Nedjic J, Klein L. Macroautophagy substrates are loaded onto MHC class II of medullary thymic epithelial cells for central tolerance. J Exp Med (2013) 210:287–300. doi:10.1084/jem.20122149

98. Ohnmacht C, Pullner A, King SBS, Drexler I, Meier S, Brocker T, et al. Constitutive ablation of dendritic cells breaks self-tolerance of CD4 T cells and results in spontaneous fatal autoimmunity. J Exp Med (2009) 206:549–59. doi:10.1084/jem.20082394

99. Hubert F-X, Kinkel SA, Davey GM, Phipson B, Mueller SN, Liston A, et al. Aire regulates the transfer of antigen from mTECs to dendritic cells for induction of thymic tolerance. Blood (2011) 118:2462–72. doi:10.1182/blood-2010-06-286393

100. Klein L, Roettinger B, Kyewski B. Sampling of complementing self-antigen pools by thymic stromal cells maximizes the scope of central T cell tolerance. Eur J Immunol (2001) 31:2476–86. doi:10.1002/1521-4141(200108)31:8<2476::AID-IMMU2476>3.0.CO;2-T

101. Proietto AI, Dommelen SV, Zhou P, Rizzitelli A, D’Amico A, Steptoe RJ, et al. Dendritic cells in the thymus contribute to T-regulatory cell induction. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105:19869–74. doi:10.1073/pnas.0810268105

102. Hadeiba H, Lahl K, Edalati A, Oderup C, Habtezion A, Pachynski R, et al. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells transport peripheral antigens to the thymus to promote central tolerance. Immunity (2012) 36:438–50. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2012.01.017

103. Bonasio R, Scimone ML, Schaerli P, Grabie N, Lichtman AH, Andrian UHV. Clonal deletion of thymocytes by circulating cells homing to the thymus. Nat Immunol (2006) 7:1092–100. doi:10.1038/ni1106-1234b

104. Koble C, Kyewski B. The thymic medulla: a unique microenvironment for intercellular self-antigen transfer. J Exp Med (2009) 206:1505–13. doi:10.1084/jem.20082449

105. Gray D, Abramson J, Benoist C, Mathis D. Proliferative arrest and rapid turnover of thymic epithelial cells expressing Aire. J Exp Med (2007) 204:2521–8. doi:10.1084/jem.20070795

106. Millet V, Naquet P, Guinamard RR. Intercellular MHC transfer between thymic epithelial dendritic cells. Eur J Immunol (2008) 38:1257–63. doi:10.1002/eji.200737982

107. Perry JSA, Lio C-WJ, Kau AL, Nutsch K, Yang Z, Gordon JI, et al. Distinct contributions of Aire and antigen-presenting cell subsets to the generation of self-tolerance in the thymus. Immunity (2014) 41:414–26. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2014.08.007

108. McCaughtry TM, Wilken MS, Hogquist KA. Thymic emigration revisited. J Exp Med (2007) 204:2513–20. doi:10.1084/jem.20070601

109. Egerton M, Scollay R, Shortman K. Kinetics of mature T-cell development in the thymus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1990) 87:2579–82. doi:10.1073/pnas.87.7.2579

110. Derbinski J, Pinto S, Rosch S, Hexel K, Kyewski B. Promiscuous gene expression patterns in single medullary thymic epithelial cells argue for a stochastic mechanism. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105:657–62. doi:10.1073/pnas.0707486105

111. Stachowiak AN, Wang Y, Huang YC, Irvine DJ. Homeostatic lymphoid chemokines synergize with adhesion ligands to trigger T and B lymphocyte chemokinesis. J Immunol (2006) 177:2340–8. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.177.4.2340

112. Ueda Y, Katagiri K, Tomiyama T, Yasuda K, Habiro K, Katakai T, et al. Mst1 regulates integrin-dependent thymocyte trafficking and antigen recognition in the thymus. Nat Commun (2012) 3:1098–113. doi:10.1038/ncomms2105

113. Wang Y, Irvine DJ. Convolution of chemoattractant secretion rate, source density, and receptor desensitization direct diverse migration patterns in leukocytes. Integr Biol (2013) 5:481–94. doi:10.1039/c3ib20249f

114. Tang HL, Cyster JG. Chemokine up-regulation and activated T cell attraction by maturing dendritic cells. Science (1999) 284:819–22. doi:10.1126/science.284.5415.819

115. Friedman RS, Jacobelli J, Krummel MF. Surface-bound chemokines capture and prime T cells for synapse formation. Nat Immunol (2006) 7:1101–8. doi:10.1038/ni1106-1234a

116. Klein L, Kyewski B, Allen PM, Hogquist KA. Positive and negative selection of the T cell repertoire: what thymocytes see (and don’t see). Nat Rev Immunol (2014) 14:377–91. doi:10.1038/nri3667

117. Lee HM, Bautista JL, Scott-Browne J, Mohan JF, Hsieh CS. A broad range of self-reactivity drives thymic regulatory T cell selection to limit responses to self. Immunity (2012) 37:475–86. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2012.07.009

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Hu, Lancaster and Ehrlich. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH
published: 21 August 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00428

Differential expression of microRNAs in thymic epithelial cells from Trypanosoma cruzi acutely infected mice: putative role in thymic atrophy

Leandra Linhares-Lacerda[1]*[†], Cintia Cristina Palu1†, Marcelo Ribeiro-Alves[2], Bruno Diaz Paredes[3], Alexandre Morrot[4], Maria Rosa Garcia-Silva[5], Alfonso Cayota[5] and Wilson Savino[1]

1 Laboratory on Thymus Research, Institute Oswaldo Cruz, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

2 HIV/AIDS Clinical Research Center, National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

3 The National Institute of Science and Technology for Structural Biology and Bioimaging, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

4 Department of Immunology, Microbiology Institute, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

5 Functional Genomics Unit, Institut Pasteur de Montevideo, Montevideo, Uruguay

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Ernna Hérida Oliveira, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Muriel Moser, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium
Bin Li, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China

*Correspondence:

Leandra Linhares-Lacerda, Laboratory on Thymus Research, Oswaldo Cruz Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Av. Brasil, No 4365. Pavilhão 26/Sala: 506-FIOCRUZ-Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro 21040-360, Brazil
leandralacerda@gmail.com

†Leandra Linhares-Lacerda and Cintia Cristina Palu have contributed equally to this work.

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 13 May 2015
Accepted: 06 August 2015
Published: 21 August 2015

Citation:

Linhares-Lacerda L, Palu CC, Ribeiro-Alves M, Paredes BD, Morrot A, Garcia-Silva MR, Cayota A and Savino W (2015) Differential expression of microRNAs in thymic epithelial cells from Trypanosoma cruzi acutely infected mice: putative role in thymic atrophy. Front. Immunol. 6:428. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00428

A common feature seen in acute infections is a severe atrophy of the thymus. This occurs in the murine model of acute Chagas disease. Moreover, in thymuses from Trypanosoma cruzi acutely infected mice, thymocytes exhibit an increase in the density of fibronectin and laminin integrin-type receptors, with an increase in migratory response ex vivo. Thymic epithelial cells (TEC) play a major role in the intrathymic T cell differentiation. To date, the consequences of molecular changes promoted by parasite infection upon thymus have not been elucidated. Considering the importance of microRNA for gene expression regulation, 85 microRNAs (mRNAs) were analyzed in TEC from T. cruzi acutely infected mice. The infection significantly modulated 29 miRNAs and modulation of 9 was also dependent whether TEC sorted out from the thymus exhibited cortical or medullary phenotype. In silico analysis revealed that these miRNAs may control target mRNAs known to be responsible for chemotaxis, cell adhesion, and cell death. Considering that we sorted TEC in the initial phase of thymocyte loss, it is conceivable that changes in TEC miRNA expression profile are functionally related to thymic atrophy, providing new clues to better understanding the mechanisms of the thymic involution seen in experimental Chagas disease.

Keywords: Chagas disease, thymus atrophy, thymic epithelial cell, microRNA, thymocyte migration

Introduction

The thymus is a common target organ in infectious diseases (1). This primary lymphoid organ is responsible for bone marrow-derived T cell precursors differentiation from the most immature CD4−CD8− phenotype to CD4+CD8+ and finally in CD4+CD8− or CD4−CD8+ T cells that will colonize secondary lymphoid organs (2). These maturation steps occur while these cells migrate through the thymic lobules and interact with microenvironmental cells, particularly thymic epithelial cells (TEC) (3). TEC guide the T cell maturation by production of cytokines, chemokines, hormones, adhesion molecules, extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins, and by expression of different ligands, like Notch, as well as self-peptides in the context of major histocompatibility complex (MHC). The self-peptide presentation determines T cell fate through positive and negative selection events, where immature lymphocytes expressing randomly rearranged T-cell receptor will be selected based on their differential ability to recognize the complex peptide/MHC (4–7). All intrathymic T cell maturation steps generate lineage committed and self-tolerant T cells capable to perform immunological functions in the periphery. However, the intrathymic homeostasis is disrupted in numerous acute infectious diseases leading to thymus atrophy (1). The transient thymic involution can be caused not only by infection but also due to other forms of stress and also occurs progressively with aging in a permanent way, as reviewed elsewhere (8). The biological advantages of thymic involution are currently uncertain, although there is evidence that thymic alterations triggered by Trypanosoma cruzi infection explain part of the clinical outcomes observed in chagasic patients (8, 9).

Chagas disease acute phase is characterized by apparent circulating parasites and tissue parasitism with intense production of reactive nitrogen intermediates, such as nitric oxide (NO) and cytokine release: interleukin (IL)-12, interferon (IFN) γ, tumor necrosis factor (TNF) α by macrophages, natural killer (NK) and T cells, with an activation pattern characterized by a polarized type-I response (10). However, there is also the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines, such as IL-4, IL-10, and transforming growth factor (TGF) β, that together with glucocorticoids (GC) control the immune response (11). Such response plays a role in containing parasite replication in acute phase and influences disease severity during the chronic phase of the infection (12).

Trypanosoma cruzi acute infection in mice causes a severe thymic atrophy, which becomes noticeable during early infection and increases progressively in parallel with parasitemia and pro-inflammatory cytokine levels (10). Additionally, even though T. cruzi infected cells can be found in the thymus (13, 14), current evidence demonstrates that the organ is mostly affected by systemic effects of the infection (15, 16). Actually, the parasite-associated response goes beyond the immune system with the activation of hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis, resulting in hormonal imbalance that affects intrathymic homeostasis (9, 17). The neuroendocrineimmnune imbalance promotes a massive depletion of immature CD4+CD8+ T cells, which together with the export of these thymocytes to periphery, trigger thymic atrophy (16). Those intrathymic migratory abnormalities somehow benefit the immature thymocytes to bypass negative selection events, which reinforces the role of TEC in thymic atrophy, since in acutely T. cruzi infection, TEC enhanced the deposition of ECM, such as laminin and fibronectin, as well as chemokines, favoring developing T-cell migration (18–21). Nevertheless, the mechanism by which TEC mediate thymic involution remains poorly understood. microRNAs (miRNAs) can be envisioned as one group of candidates. miRNAs are small non-coding RNA molecules that suppress gene expression at the post-transcriptional level, and are fine-tuning regulators of diverse biological processes (22, 23).

In these respect, it has been shown that induction of thymic involution through poli(I:C) treatment is under tight control of miRNA-29a, which regulates interferon-α receptor (IFNαR1) in TEC, resulting in a very sensitive mechanism of thymic atrophy (24). In fact, TEC are programed to reduce functionality and suspend thymopoiesis in response to IFN-α (8). Recent studies suggest that miRNAs are important factors in the maintenance of tissue-restricted antigens expression in medullary TEC (7). Taken together, a molecular regulation of infection-associated thymic involution prompted us to analyze the expression of miRNAs in cortical and medullary TEC from T. cruzi acutely infected mice.

Materials and Methods

Experimental Acute Trypanosoma cruzi Infection

Male C57BL/6 mice were provided by the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation animal facilities (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil). Five weeks old mice were infected by intraperitoneal injection of 1 × 10^3 T. cruzi (Y strain) trypomastigotes. The parasites were maintained by serial passages in male mice from the same strain, harvested after 7 days post-infection (dpi) through cardiac puncture. The collected blood was harvested in vials containing 200 μl of sodium citrate, centrifuged (1,200 rpm) for 10 min, later the plasma was collected after incubating for 30 min in 37°C and centrifuged (3,000 rpm) during 10 min. The pellet containing parasites was resuspended and the trypomastigote concentration was estimated using Neubauer chamber in order to prepare a solution with 5,000 parasites/ml was prepared. Each mouse was infected with 200 μl of this solution. The uninfected (control) mice were kept under the same conditions through the infection progress.

Parasitemia was estimated for all infected animals by direct microscopic observation of 5 ml blood obtained from the tip of the tail. Initially, 10 mice were infected and the parasitemia was done on the following 6–18 days, once the parasitemia pick was determined, the estimation of circulating trypomastigotes was done solely 8 dpi to confirm that the infection was well succeeded.

All experiments and animal handling were conducted according to the rules prescribed by the official ethics committee for animal research of the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation.

Analysis of Thymocyte Subpopulations

Sixteen mice were infected as described above and their thymuses were harvested between 9 and 12 dpi, 4 thymuses plus 1 from control mouse per day (total of 16 acutely Chagas infected mice and 4 controls). The organs were individually squeezed in PBS containing fetal calf serum 10% (Gibco). For analysis of thymocyte subsets, cells were resuspended in mouse serum during 15 min and incubated with specific monoclonal antibodies for 30 min at 4°C in the dark (anti-CD4/APC, anti-CD8/FITC, from BD Pharmingen), followed by washing and analysis on flow cytometer FACS Canto II (BD Biosciences) and using the FACS Diva v6.1.3 software. In order to determine specific fluorescence intensity, the background staining values obtained with fluorochrome-matched IgG isotype controls were subtracted. Thymocytes from 12 to 14 dpi also underwent these procedures, four infected and two control mice each time, in order to confirm that the infection led to thymic atrophy.

The variation of CD4+CD8+ cells due to infection progression was tested by one-way ANOVA, followed by the Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) post hoc test.

Thymic Epithelial Cell Sorting

Five thymuses from 12 days post-infection mice or control mice were used for TEC isolation procedure, which was performed as described (25) with some modifications. Briefly, thymuses were minced and transferred to round-bottom tubes and agitated in 50 ml of RPMI-1640 for 30 min for initial thymocytes release, after which the remaining tissue was digested with two sequential changes of collagenase/DNAse I solution [50 mg/ml collagenase D (Roche), 1 mg/ml DNAse I (Roche) in RPMI medium] at 37°C for 15 min each, followed by one collagenase/dispase/DNAse I [50 mg/ml collagenase/dispase (Roche), 1 mg/ml DNAse I in RPMI medium] at 37°C for 30 min under continuous stirring. Cells were then centrifuged, pooled, and resuspended in cold EDTA/FACS buffer (5 mM EDTA in PBS with 2% FCS and 0.02% NaN_3), filtered through 100 μm mesh and counted in Neubauer chamber. Then, anti-CD4 and anti-CD8 Dynabeads (Invitrogen) were added at 500 μl/10^8 cells according to the manufacturer’s protocols. Remaining cells were then pooled and recovered by centrifugation, washed in EDTA/FACS buffer and 5 × 10^6 cells dispensed into the wells of a 96-well round-bottomed plate for staining. We incubated the biotinylated anti-mouse I-A[b] primary antibody (BD Pharmingen) for 30 min at 4°C, followed by a wash in 100 μl of EDTA/FACS buffer, after we added the secondary APC-Cy7-conjugated streptavidin and the conjugates: FITC-conjugated UEA-1 lectin (Vector), PerCP conjugated anti-CD45 antibody (clone 30-F11), PE-conjugated anti-Ly51 antibody (clone 6C3), APC-conjugated CD326 antibody (EpCAM, clone D8.8), all from BD Pharmingen. Cells isolated and stained as outlined above were resuspended in EDTA/FACS buffer at 1 × 10^6 cells/ml. Sorting was performed in a FACS Aria II cell sorter (BD Biosciences). Samples were collected in 50% (v/v) fetal calf serum in RPMI, recovered by centrifugation, counted and analyzed for purity.

RNA Extraction

The sorted population was submitted to RNA extraction using miRNEasy (Qiagen), which allows the isolation of small RNA (with miRNAs) and messenger RNA (mRNA) separately. To allow normalization of sample-to-sample variation in miRNA isolation, cDNA synthesis and real-time PCR, synthetic Caenorhabditis elegans miRNA cel-miR-39 (Qiagen) was added as 5 μl of 25 pmol solution to each denatured sample (i.e., after combining the sample with Qiazol) and quantified in all samples with an average recovery ranging from 26 to 36 in crossing point (CP) (Figure S1 in Supplementary Material). After this, we proceeded with other extraction steps following the manufacturer’s instructions. The quantity and quality of RNA were assessed on NanoDrop ND-1000 Spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific) and 2100 Bioanalyzer (Agilent Technologies) using the small RNA LabChip kit and RNA 6000 nano kit (Agilent Technologies).

AIRE Gene Expression by Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction

Gene expression for AIRE (Autoimmune regulator gene) and reference genes were carried out using 30 ng of total RNA with SuperScript III kit (Invitrogen) for reverse transcription reaction and FAST SYBR Green Master Mix (Applied Biosystems) and the following primers: AIRE (F-GGCAGGTGGGGATGGAATGC and R-TTCAGACGGAGCGTCTCCTGG), HPRT (F-TCCCAGCGTCGTGATTAGCGATG and R-GGCCACAATGTGATGGCCTCCC) and RPL13 (F-CCAAGCAGGTACTTCTGGGCCGGAA and R-CAGTGCGCCAGAAAATGCGGC) for quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) on Step ONE Plus Fast Real Time PCR System (Applied Biosystems).

miRNA Expression Profiling

microRNA (30 ng) was submitted to reverse transcription by poly-A-tailing using RT^2 miRNA First Strand Kit (Qiagen) as described in the manufacturer’s protocol. We then performed miRNA expression profiling using a custom PCR array plate with 85 miRNA (Qiagen) and RT^2 SYBR Green qPCR Mastermix (Qiagen) on Step ONE Plus Fast Real Time PCR System (Applied Biosystems). For normalization, we used all five references cel-miR-39, snoRNA142, snoRNA251, Rnu6, and snoRNA20 (Figure S1 in Supplementary Material) after gene expression stability analysis (26).

Quantitative PCR Analysis

The fluorescence accumulation data of real-time RT-PCR reactions of each sample were used to fit four parameters sigmoid curves to represent each amplification curve using the library qPCR (27) for the R statistical package version 3.1.2 (28). The cycle of quantification was determined for each amplification, by the maximum of the second derivative of the fitted sigmoid curve. The efficiency of each amplification reaction was calculated as the ratio between the fluorescence of the cycle of quantification and the fluorescence of the cycle immediately preceding that. The estimated efficiency of each miRNA or gene was obtained by the mean of the efficiencies calculated for each amplification reaction of that precise miRNA or gene. microRNA normalization among the different amplified samples was achieved by the calculation of normalization factors given by the geometric mean of the expression value of all expressed miRNAs in a given sample (26). AIRE normalization was done by the geometric mean of the expression value of HPRT and RPL13 reference genes. The comparisons of means of normalized miRNA or AIRE expression values between groups were performed by a non-parametric one-way ANOVA with 1,000 unrestricted permutations, followed by post hoc pair-wise comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment by a non-parametric t-test also with 1,000 permutations (29). Additionally, false-positive ratios (FDR) were estimated to adjust for multiple comparisons (30). Results were represented in graphs displaying the expression levels mean ± SE. Two-tailed levels of significance ≤0.01, 0.05, and 0.1 were considered as “highly significant,” “significant,” and “suggestive,” respectively.

Bioinformatics-Based Enrichment Analysis of miRNA Targets

To predict miRNA targets, we identified putative target genes based on predictions from five online softwares: miRanda[1], Microcosm Target[2], miRNAMap[3], miRTarBase[4], and Target Scan[5]. Any gene was considered a putative target if it was predicted in at least three out of the five predicting software. We then performed a gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) with putative target genes. A gene set was defined as all putative target genes that share the same ontology based on the gene ontology (GO) database (31). The over representation was assessed with a statistical score based on a hypergeometric test with p-values ≤0.001. The Rgraphviz package[6] was used to illustrate the relationship between putative targets, miRNAs and biological processes, and in calculations of the k-core structures of the input networks using the degree as centrality measure. Graphs follow virtual physical models with low energy configuration, and only vectors containing the maximum core membership for each vertex, equal to 11 or greater, were displayed.

Results

Thymic Atrophy in Trypanosoma cruzi Acute Infection

Since the interaction between thymocytes and TEC play a major role in T-cell development, variations in TEC gene expression may alter the thymic environment with consequences on thymocyte fate (4). Accordingly, we analyzed miRNA profiles variation due to infection in the initial point of thymic atrophy to avoid secondary effects caused by thymocyte loss or consequent microenvironmental modifications. We used the decay of CD4+CD8+ thymocytes number to define when the thymus should be harvested. Intraperitoneal acute infection led to a parasite load picking at 8 dpi, and characterized by the high number of metacyclic trypomastigotes found circulating in the peripheral blood (Figure 1A). During the following days a decrease of CD4+CD8+ thymocytes was observed (Figure 1B) and later, a severe thymic atrophy with an average loss of 80% of CD4+CD8+ thymocytes was seen on the 14th dpi (Figure 1C). On the 12th dpi, this cell subpopulation was significantly reduced when compared with cell counting from control and 9–10 dpi mice (Figure 1B), preceding the thymic atrophy, thus we perform the following experiments using samples at this time point of infection.

FIGURE 1 | Trypanosoma cruzi acute infection induces progressive thymic atrophy and CD4+CD8+ thymocyte loss. Nine C57BL/6 mice were infected with 1,000 metacyclic trypomastigotes and in the following 6–18 days the parasitemia was accessed to verify the infection progression. (A) The box plot shows the median amount of parasites per blood milliliter, upper and lower quartiles, maximum and minimum values (whiskers) excluding outliers (circles). Once the infection peak was identified (8 dpi), the thymocyte subpopulation variation in the following days was studied in order to identify when the CD4+CD8+ thymocyte loss starts. (B) The cytofluorometric profiles of thymocytes were obtained staining with anti-CD4 and anti-CD8. Thymocytes from three or four mice were submitted to FACS analysis on days 9–12 post-infection (dpi). The plots represent the mean number of cells ±SD in each day. The described decrease on CD4+CD8+ thymocyte subpopulation due to infection progression was confirmed (ANOVA p-value = 0.0002) and the Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) post-test revealed significant differences in each dpi. (adjusted p-value ≤*0.05, **0.01, and ***0.001) (C) Thymocyte subpopulation percentages data derived from the cytofluorometric profiles show that by 14 dpi the thymic atrophy is reached. Each bar represents thymocytes from a single mouse.

Cortical and Medullary TEC Sorting

In order to prepare pure populations of primary (freshly harvested) cortical and medullary TEC (respectively cTEC and mTEC), thymuses from control and infected mice were harvested at 12 dpi and disaggregated by enzymatic digestion, where most thymocytes were eliminated and TEC were enriched, allowing cell sorting. Sorted population was then stained with Ulex europaeus Lectin 1 (UEA1) and antibodies against CD45, MHC-II, EpCAM, and Ly51 and sorted (Figures 2A–D). Post-sort analysis revealed more than 98% purity for cortical TEC (CD45−MHCII+EpCAM+Ly51+UEA1−) and 95% for medullary TEC (CD45−MHCII+EpCAM+Ly51−UEA1+) populations (Figures 2E–F, respectively).

FIGURE 2 | Ex vivo thymic epithelial cell sorting. Five replicates of thymic cell pools from control and infected mice were sorted using flow cytometry in order to isolate TEC. (A) Initially, CD45− cells were selected based on size, (B) from this population, MHC-II positive cells were isolated after EpCAM confirmation (C). (D) Then, according to UEA-1 and Ly51 surface markers, these cells were distinguished between cortical TEC (cTEC, Ly51+, and UEA−, orange) and medullary TEC (mTEC, Ly51−, and UEA+, blue) phenotypes. Post-sorting analysis revealed 98% purity in cTEC (E) while 95% purity in mTEC (F). (G) After miRNA isolation, the remaining mRNA from three experimental pools allowed us to analyze AIRE gene expression, confirming if the sorted cells matched the correct expected TEC profile. The bar plot represents the average expression in each condition. “a” indicates the magnitude of the expression ratio (log−2) due to TEC phenotype, whereas a positive value shows a higher expression in mTEC. “ab” indicates the expression ratio magnitude (in log−2) as consequence of the combination between infection and cell type, whereas a negative value shows that the AIRE expression in infected mTEC is lower than in control mTEC.

To further validate the purity of sorted cell populations, we analyzed AIRE gene expression (Figure 2G), typical of medullary TEC. As expected, the AIRE expression was higher in medullary TEC populations, with the subpopulation classified as cTEC exhibiting average expression close to zero. In fact, the data from three independent sorting pointed out that, on average, AIRE relative expression on mTEC is 29.45 times higher than in cTEC. There was no significant difference between samples from control and infected condition (p = 0.31), indicating that the infection by itself does not affect AIRE levels, although we have detected a significant interaction effect. This result suggests that the difference on AIRE expression due to TEC phenotype varies if there is infection (p = 0.04). Actually, the detected levels in TEC from infected animals where 13.45 times lower than samples from control mice.

Changes in TEC-Derived microRNA Profiling in Response to Experimental Chagas Disease

We analyzed herein 85 miRNAs in order to approach putative molecular alterations in TEC following response to T. cruzi acute infection, and that might be related to the previously reported thymic atrophy and abnormal scape of immature thymocyte (20, 21, 32, 33). We found that 29 out of the 85 miRNAs were significantly differently expressed between TEC from infected and normal mice (adjusted p ≤ 0.05), all were up-regulated (Figure 3) whereas differences in further 13 miRNAs were suggestive (Figure S3 in Supplementary Material).

FIGURE 3 | miRNA relative expression in thymic epithelial cells from control and infected mice. The miRNA expression of 85 miRNAs was analyzed for each sorted TEC population, in five replicates, with samples from control (dark blue) and infected (light blue) mice being paired. We present the 29 miRNAs that were significant (adjusted p-value ≤0.05) differentially expressed due to infection and the samples clustered according to expression profile similarity. Three groups of samples were identified based on their expression profile, as illustrated by the dendrogram.

We also detected significant interaction effect for 9 miRNAs (adjusted p-value ≤0.05 FDR corrected), where the response to the infection differed according to the TEC phenotype (Figure 3; Figure S2 in Supplementary Material), indicating that the increase rate of miRNA expression is higher in cortical TEC.

Additionally, seven miRNAs exhibited a consistent pattern of no amplification in TEC from infected animals (miR-144, miR-208b, miR-291b-3p, miR-295, miR-302a, miR-488, and miR-654-3p, Figure S4 in Supplementary Material). These miRNA can target genes involved with TGF-β signaling pathway (Palu et al., unpublished data).

Trypanosoma cruzi Acute Infection Increases Expression of miRNA known to Modulate Important Biological Processes

More than 60% of mammalian mRNAs are regulated by miRNA, whereas many can be targeted by more than one miRNA. Conversely, a single miRNA can have more than one target (34). Here, we identified miRNAs modulated in TEC due to T. cruzi infection, based on differential expression between infected and control mice.

To approach the putative roles of these miRNAs, we identified potential targets using available algorithms. Yet, these algorithms usually predict hundreds of potential target genes for a single miRNA and often generate false-positive candidates. In order to reduce such a high number of theoretical targets, and to make a more reliable prediction, we applied five different algorithms, and considered as potential targets only those genes predicted by at least three of these algorithms. The results from miRNAs predicted targets analysis were then combined with GO-term enrichment analysis to identified biological processes over represented among the list of target genes, so that to identify miRNA associated biological functions. Significant enrichment of predicted targets revealed cell adhesion, cell migration, and cell death among others biological processes (Figure 4).

FIGURE 4 | Putative enriched biological processes modulated by TEC miRNA following Trypanosoma cruzi infection. The putative mRNA targets for the 29 miRNAs that were differentially expressed due to infection are consistently involved in a long list of biological processes. Here, we show the most relevant processes in the context of cell death (blue), adhesion (green), and migration (red). The full length of the bars represent the total putative target mRNAs known to be involved in this process, in opposition to the colored bar inside, that represents the expected mRNA number. On the right side of each bar, there is the adjusted p-value indicating that the enrichment of those events is not by chance.

Potential Network among miRNAs and Corresponding Predicted Targets

Given the lack of data regarding TEC molecular pathways during infection, we evaluated in silico potential interaction network between 29 differentially expressed miRNAs and the predicted targets related to cell death, cell migration, and cell adhesion (Table S1 in Supplementary Material). The complexity of the relationships is shown in Figure 5, where the elements shown were selected based on having the minimum of 11 relations. All 17 miRNAs have at least one putative target related to the negative regulation of extrinsic apoptotic signaling (GO:2001237), a process that was also related to 12 out of the 58 illustrated genes. Nevertheless, among the genes involved in cell death, only Bcl2l11 was exclusively related to positive regulation of cell death. These miRNAs could be targeting Serpine1, Tgfbr1, Vegfa, Igf1, Hgf, Snai2, Rffl, Map2k5, Itgav, and Sgms1 mRNAs, which are related to inhibition of apoptotic externals signals.

FIGURE 5 | Theoretical relationship among the most recurrent miRNA, mRNA, and biological processes. The network of the 29 differentially expressed miRNAs and their targets is very complex. To illustrate this network, only molecules or processes related with at least 11 elements are shown. There are 17 miR differentially expressed due to infection (cyan) and their 58 putative targets (yellow), plus 18 biological processes related to it. Biological processes are identified by gene ontology (GO) tags, where blue represents cell death, red are cell adhesion, and green cell migration. The relationships are illustrated by the arrows.

Many putative targets (32 out of 56) were related to cell migration, whereas 18 were associated to chemotaxis. More interesting, the presence of 21 targets associated with positive regulation of cell migration suggests that miRNAs could be inhibiting molecules that promote migration. Among the 17 targets associated to adhesion, 8 are known to be involved in positive regulation (GO:0045785) and cell-cell adhesion (GO:0016337). The increase in miRNA targeting genes that favor adhesion may explain some of the described alterations in T. cruzi acutely infected mice.

Discussion

The mechanisms by which TEC regulate thymic atrophy appear to be under the tight control of miRNAs (24). Here, we analyzed the miRNA expression in cortical and medullary TEC from T. cruzi acutely infected mice. Our results provide novel insights into the molecular regulation of TEC-associated thymic involution secondary to infection, using the experimental model of acute Chagas disease.

It has been previously shown that thymic involution, reduction on T cell output, increased susceptibility to autoimmune disease and loss of TEC numbers are associated with ablation of mature miRNAs (7). Although those are events similar to the ones observed in infected mice, it is noteworthy that the infection induced an upregulation of differentially expressed miRNAs in both cTEC and mTEC subsets, whereas in some cases the increase in expression was significantly higher only in cTEC, suggesting that the T. cruzi infection triggers different responses according to TEC phenotype.

Among miRNAs significantly modulated due infection, miR-27a and miR-27b, also exhibited dependence whether TEC sorted out from the thymus exhibited cortical or medullary phenotype. Mature miR-27a and miR-27b differ from each other by just one nucleotide and are transcribed from paralog clusters, the intergenic miR-23a~27a~24 cluster (localized in chromosome 9q22) and the intronic miR-23b~27b~24 cluster (localized in chromosome 19p13) (35, 36). Yet, there is limited information regarding the functions of this cluster in infectious diseases. Herein, we found an upregulation of the miR-23b~27b~24 cluster, thus at variance with the findings observed in primary macrophages, which exhibit rapid decrease miR-27a and miR-27b expression upon murine cytomegalovirus infection (37). Nevertheless, the Cryptosporidium parvum infection, a protozoan parasite that infects the gastrointestinal epithelium, causes miR-27b upregulation that suppresses KH-type splicing regulatory protein and contributed to epithelial production of NO, helping the epithelial antimicrobial defense (38). In T. cruzi infection, the serum levels of NO increase both in mice and humans (9, 39), and high intracardiac contents of NO synthase and NO metabolites have been detected (40). Interestingly, T. cruzi can infect TEC and, although only small fractions of TEC are invaded (13, 14), the presence of the parasite may trigger NO production.

Regarding the 23b~27b~24 cluster upregulation, miR-24 can be highlighted. It is known that mRNA-target for a particular miRNA depends of cell context and this is the case of miR-24, which has been described in apoptosis and cell survival (41–44). In cardiomyocytes, miR-24 directly targets the proapoptotic protein Bim and inhibits apoptosis. Moreover, in vivo delivery after myocardial infarction suppressed cardiac cell death and rescued cardiac dysfunction (42). Yet, miR-24 function is complex since it enhanced survival in myeloid and B cell lines, as well as primary hematopoietic cells (44). Importantly, it has been shown that miR-24 expression differed in age-related thymic involution. When comparing young versus aged TEC (a mix of cTEC and mTEC) a decrease in miR-148b, miR-19b, miR-24, and miR-322 expression was seen in aging (45). Herein, using T. cruzi-induced thymic atrophy, we showed an upregulation of these miRNAs in TEC. Both infection and aging-induced thymic involution are due to multifactorial events; in the aging case, we can highlight the sex hormone dependence and the increase in adipose tissue, whereas in infection, the immune inflammatory response and stress-related hormones are undoubtedly relevant (16, 46, 47). Nevertheless, it has yet to be established the tuned regulation of this miRNA in the various thymic atrophy induced situations.

It is important to take into account that changes in miRNA profile seen here are in consequence of the thymic stress brought out by the infection with activation of the immune system and the hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal axis. This stress results in hormonal imbalance (high levels of GC) that affects intrathymic homeostasis promoting thymic atrophy by a massive depletion of immature CD4+CD8+ T cells and the export of immature thymocytes to periphery (9, 16, 17). Under stress conditions, miRNA can act as restorer to homeostasis or as an enforcer of new gene expression program so that to adapt to the new condition (34). An example is the regulatory action exerted by miR-10a and miR-182 upon Th1- or Th2-associated T regulatory cells, respectively, where CD4+Foxp3+ cells orchestrate distinct miRNA pathways in response to local environmental factors (48). Furthermore, miR-10a expression is stimulated by TGF-β, making it a good example of how environmental factors coordinate distinct miRNA pathways and regulates cell fate. In fact, TGF-β seems to be a molecular node of the infection since the gene encoding its receptor appears in the middle of our microRNA network (Figure 5), where the gene for TGF-β2 is also present. TGF-β is able to regulate CD4−CD8− development through direct interaction with thymocytes but also by binding to TEC surface (49). Although, it is unclear if the increased miR-10a in TEC from infected mice is part of a host response due TGF-β enhancement or if miR-10a is a fine-tuning factor in TEC, our results suggest that TGF-β signaling is a key pathway in the thymic involution process. More studies will be necessary to define TGF-β role in TEC, but it has been already shown that the inhibition of this pathway decelerates the process of age-related thymic involution (50), therefore suggesting a common pathway between thymic involution due to senescence and infection.

Interestingly, GC also regulated miRNAs (51, 52). The systemic stress induced by dexamethasone intraperitoneal injection, a synthetic GC causes a significant loss of the CD4+CD8+ thymocytes within 24 h and a reduction in miR-17-92 cluster (miR-17, miR-20a, miR-20b, and miR-106a) in whole thymus samples (52). Although we were also studying miRNA expression in a condition where there is CD4+CD8+ cell loss, in TEC we observed an upregulation of miR-20b and a suggestive increase in miR-20a expression, suggesting that intrathymic regulation of miR-20b is cell type specific.

Glucocorticoids can also reduced the protein expression of Drosha’s co-factor DGCR8/Pasha and Dicer, two indispensable enzymes for miRNA bioprocessing pathway in thymocytes (51). Moreover, Dicer- and DGCR8-deficient mice are incapable to sustain proper thymic architecture and promote thymocyte development, with a severe loss of TEC, demonstrating the miRNA role in TEC maintenance and function (32, 33). In fact, in mice where TEC do not produce miRNA due conditionally inactivate Dgcr8 gene, there is a specific loss of mature mTEChi and AIRE+ subsets that induce a breakdown in thymic central tolerance with the presence of autoantibodies or development of spontaneous autoimmunity (33). On the other hand, AIRE knockdown results in modulation of different miRNAs (53, 54), with upregulation of miR-20b, miR-191, and miR-411 (54), which is consistent with our observation. In our study, there was donwregulation of AIRE expression due infection, concomitant with upregulation of those miRNAs.

Abnormally release of potential autoreactive T cells from the thymus occurs in patients with severe clinical form of Chronic Chagas disease and also in mouse experimental model (19). Intriguingly, despite the thymic escape of T cells bearing “forbidden” T cell receptor that should be deleted by negative selection (21), some evidence points to normal promiscuous gene expression in infected thymuses suggesting that negative selection can induce tolerance. Indeed, the escape of CD4+CD8+ T cells to the periphery seems to be more related with a higher fibronectin-driven migration than defects in negative selection (18, 20, 21). Considering that TEC play a role in thymocyte migration and that we defined enhanced intrathymic fibronectin and laminin deposition in T. cruzi acutely infected mice (1), we performed biological processes GO-term enrichment analysis and evaluated in silico potential interaction network among the 29 differentially expressed miRNAs and their predicted targets. This network analysis predicted cell adhesion, regulation of cell–matrix adhesion, cell migration, chemotaxis, regulation of programed cell death, and apoptotic processes to be altered as a consequence of T. cruzi acute infection. Taking together, these data point out miRNA as candidates to orchestrate thymic atrophy from the TEC perspective, since the alteration herein studied precedes the involution.

The intrathymic T cell migration is a multivectorial process where each individual vector represents a given molecular interaction, as, for example, those interactions mediated by ECM. Accordingly, changes in the ECM contents should result in modulation of thymocyte migration (4, 20). Although there are studies in cancer (55), there is a lack of information concerning the role miRNAs in regulating ECM molecules in the thymus, and more particularly in TEC. We found correlations indicating putative intrathymic functions for some miRNAs, such as miR-183 that direct regulates integrin β1 expression (56), miR-143, suppressing fibronectin directly (57), miR-218 controlling focal adhesion kinase (58), and miR-203 increasing metalloproteinase-1 expression (59).

Overall, in this study, we show differentially expressed miRNAs in TEC from T. cruzi acutely infected mice, highlighting miRNAs as possible mediators of thymic atrophy. To our knowledge, this is the first study to show miRNA expression in TEC from infected mice. Further studies are needed to define the targets and dissect the role of TEC miRNAs in the context of infection.

Author Contributions

LL-L and CP designed and performed the experiments, analyzed and interpreted the data, and wrote the manuscript; MR-A performed quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis and the bioinformatics analyses; BP performed the cell sorting; AM contributed to cell sorting standardization and to writing the manuscript; MG-S and AC contributed to the microRNA assays; and WS conceived the project, provided the budget, and participated in writing the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

We thank the financial support from Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq), The Foundation for Research Support in the State of Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz, Brazil), and the FOCEM program of Mercosul.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fimmu.2015.00428

Figure S1 | Selection of multiple internal control reference for normalization. (A) Calculation of average expression stability values of five different internal control reference, including one spike-in (cel-miR-39), using geNorm (23). The geometric mean of five small RNAs (Rnu6, cel-miR-39, snoRNA251, snoRNA 142, and snoRNA 202) was used for normalization. Crossing point mean of the samples shows the level of expression for (B) cel-miR-39 (C), snoRNA 142, and (D) snoRNA202.

Figure S2 | Significant differentially expressed miRNA in thymic epithelial cells from control and infected mice separated by TEC phenotype. The miRNA expression of 85 miRNAs were analyzed for each sorted TEC subpopulation, in five replicates, where samples from control, cortical TEC (orange) and medullary TEC (dark blue) and infected, cortical infected TEC (yellow) and medullary infected TEC (light blue). We present the 29 miRNAs that were significantly differentially expressed (adjusted p-value ≤0.05) due to infection.

Figure S3 | Suggestive differentially expressed miRNA in thymic epithelial cells from control and infected mice separated by TEC phenotype. The expression of 85 miRNAs was analyzed for each sorted TEC subpopulation, in five replicates, where samples from control, cortical TEC (orange) and medullary TEC (dark blue) and infected, cortical (yellow) and medullary TEC (light blue) are showed. We present the 13 miRNAs that were suggestive significance (adjusted p-value ≤0.1) differentially expressed due to infection.

Figure S4 | miRNAs with a consistent pattern of no amplification in TEC from infected animals. The miRNA expression of 85 miRNAs was analyzed for each sorted TEC subpopulation, in five replicates, where samples from control, cortical TEC (orange) and medullary TEC (dark blue) and infected, cortical (yellow) and medullary TEC (light blue) are showed. We present the seven miRNAs that exhibited a consistent pattern of no amplification in TEC from infected animals, being clearly detected in control samples.

Table S1 | List of microRNAs and the respective putative mRNA targets.

Abbreviations

AIRE, autoimmune regulator; ECM, extracellular matrix; pGE, promiscuous gene expression; TEC, thymic epithelial cells.

References

1. Savino W. The thymus is a common target organ in infectious diseases. PLoS Pathog (2006) 2:e62. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.0020062

2. Ciofani M, Zúñiga-Pflücker JC. The thymus as an inductive site for T lymphopoiesis. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol (2007) 23:463–93. doi:10.1146/annurev.cellbio.23.090506.123547

3. Savino W. Thymocyte migration: an affair of multiple cellular interactions? Brazilian J Med Biol Res (2003) 36:1015–25.

4. Savino W. Intrathymic T cell migration is a multivectorial process under a complex neuroendocrine control. Neuroimmunomodulation (2010) 17:142–5. doi:10.1159/000258708

5. Carpenter AC, Bosselut R. Decision checkpoints in the thymus. Nat Immunol (2010) 11:666–73. doi:10.1038/ni.1887

6. Derbinski J, Kyewski B. How thymic antigen presenting cells sample the body’s self-antigens. Curr Opin Immunol (2010) 22:592–600. doi:10.1016/j.coi.2010.08.003

7. Ucar O, Rattay K. Promiscuous gene expression in the thymus: a matter of epigenetics, miRNA, and more? Front Immunol (2015) 6:93. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2015.00093

8. Dooley J, Liston A. Molecular control over thymic involution: from cytokines and microRNA to aging and adipose tissue. Eur J Immunol (2012) 42:1073–9. doi:10.1002/eji.201142305

9. Pérez AR, Silva-Barbosa SD, Berbert LR, Revelli S, Beloscar J, Savino W, et al. Immunoneuroendocrine alterations in patients with progressive forms of chronic chagas disease. J Neuroimmunol (2011) 235:84–90. doi:10.1016/j.jneuroim.2011.03.010

10. Savino W, Villa-Verde DMS, Mendes-da-Cruz DA, Silva-Monteiro E, Perez AR, Aoki MDP, et al. Cytokines and cell adhesion receptors in the regulation of immunity to Trypanosoma cruzi. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev (2007) 18:107–24. doi:10.1016/j.cytogfr.2007.01.010

11. Roggero E, Pérez AR, Tamae-Kakazu M, Piazzon I, Nepomnaschy I, Besedovsky HO, et al. Endogenous glucocorticoids cause thymus atrophy but are protective during acute Trypanosoma cruzi infection. J Endocrinol (2006) 190:495–503. doi:10.1677/joe.1.06642

12. De Meis J, Barreto de Albuquerque J, Silva Dos Santos D, Farias-de-Oliveira DA, Berbert LR, Cotta-de-Almeida V, et al. Trypanosoma cruzi entrance through systemic or mucosal infection sites differentially modulates regional immune response following acute infection in mice. Front Immunol (2013) 4:216. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2013.00216

13. Savino W, Leite-de-Moraes MC, Hontebeyrie-Joskowicz M, Dardenne M. Studies on the thymus in Chagas’ disease I. Changes in the thymic microenvironment in mice acutely infected with Trypanosoma cruzi. Eur J Immunol (1989) 19:1727–33. doi:10.1002/eji.1830190930

14. Da Costa S, Calabrese K, Bauer P, Savino W, Lagrange P. Studies of the thymus in Chagas’ disease: III. Colonization of the thymus and other lymphoid organs of adult and newborn mice by Trypanosoma cruzi. Pathol Biol (Paris) (1991) 39:91–7.

15. Pérez AR, Silva-Barbosa SD, Roggero E, Calmon-Hamaty F, Villar SR, Gutierrez FR, et al. Immunoendocrinology of the thymus in Chagas disease. Neuroimmunomodulation (2011) 18:328–38. doi:10.1159/000329494

16. Lepletier A, de Carvalho VF, Rodrigues e Silva PM, Villar S, Pérez AR, Savino W, et al. Trypanosoma cruzi disrupts thymic homeostasis by altering intrathymic and systemic stress-related endocrine circuitries. PLoS Negl Trop Dis (2013) 7:e2470. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0002470

17. Lepletier A, de Frias Carvalho V, Morrot A, Savino W. Thymic atrophy in acute experimental Chagas disease is associated with an imbalance of stress hormones. Ann N Y Acad Sci (2012) 1262:45–50. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2012.06601.x

18. Pérez AR, Berbert LR, Lepletier A, Revelli S, Bottasso O, Silva-Barbosa SD, et al. TNF-α is involved in the abnormal thymocyte migration during experimental Trypanosoma cruzi infection and favors the export of immature cells. PLoS One (2012) 7:e34360. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0034360

19. Morrot A, Terra-Granado E, Pérez AR, Silva-Barbosa SD, Milićević NM, Farias-de-Oliveira DA, et al. Chagasic thymic atrophy does not affect negative selection but results in the export of activated CD4+CD8+ T cells in severe forms of human disease. PLoS Negl Trop Dis (2011) 5:e1268. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0001268

20. Cotta-de-Almeida V, Bonomo A, Mendes-da-Cruz DA, Riederer I, de Meis J, Ferreira Lima-Quaresma KR, et al. Trypanosoma cruzi infection modulates intrathymic contents of extracellular matrix ligands and receptors and alters thymocyte migration. Eur J Immunol (2003) 33:2439–48. doi:10.1002/eji.200323860

21. Mendes-da-Cruz DA, de Meis J, Cotta-de-Almeida V, Savino W. Experimental Trypanosoma cruzi infection alters the shaping of the central and peripheral T-cell repertoire. Microbes Infect (2003) 5:825–32. doi:10.1016/S1286-4579(03)00156-4

22. Manzano-román R, Siles-lucas M. microRNAs in parasitic diseases: potential for diagnosis and targeting. Mol Biochem Parasitol (2012) 186:81–6. doi:10.1016/j.molbiopara.2012.10.001

23. Ghildiyal M, Zamore PD. Small silencing RNAs: an expanding universe. Nat Rev Genet (2009) 10:94–108. doi:10.1038/nrg2504

24. Papadopoulou AS, Dooley J, Linterman MA, Pierson W, Ucar O, Kyewski B, et al. The thymic epithelial microRNA network elevates the threshold for infection-associated thymic involution via miR-29a mediated suppression of the IFN-α receptor. Nat Immunol (2012) 13:181–7. doi:10.1038/ni.2193

25. Gray DHD, Fletcher AL, Hammett M, Seach N, Ueno T, Young LF, et al. Unbiased analysis, enrichment and purification of thymic stromal cells. J Immunol Methods (2008) 329:56–66. doi:10.1016/j.jim.2007.09.010

26. Vandesompele J, De Preter K, Poppe B, Van Roy N, De Paepe A. Accurate normalization of real-time quantitative RT-PCR data by geometric averaging of multiple internal control genes. Genome Biol (2002) 3:1–12.

27. Ritz C, Spiess A-N. qpcR: an R package for sigmoidal model selection in quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis. Bioinformatics (2008) 24:1549–51. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btn227

28. R Development Core Team (2009). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Found Stat Comput Vienna Austria (2010). Available from: http://www.r-project.org

29. Basso D, Pesarin F, Salmaso L, Solari A. Nonparametric one-way ANOVA. In: Permutation Tests for Stochastic Ordering and ANOVA. Theory and Applications with R. New York: Springer (2009). p. 133–172. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-85956-9_5

30. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Ser B (1995) 57:289–300. doi:10.2307/2346101

31. Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Nat Genet (2000) 25:25–9. doi:10.1038/75556

32. Zuklys S, Mayer CE, Zhanybekova S, Stefanski HE, Nusspaumer G, Gill J, et al. microRNAs control the maintenance of thymic epithelia and their competence for T lineage commitment and thymocyte selection. J Immunol (2012) 189:3894–904. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1200783

33. Khan IS, Taniguchi RT, Fasano KJ, Anderson MS, Jeker LT. Canonical microRNAs in thymic epithelial cells promote central tolerance. Eur J Immunol (2014) 44:1313–9. doi:10.1002/eji.201344079

34. Leung AKL, Sharp PA. microRNA functions in stress responses. Mol Cell (2010) 40:205–15. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2010.09.027

35. Chhabra R, Adlakha YK, Hariharan M, Scaria V, Saini N. Upregulation of miR-23a-27a-24-2 cluster induces caspase-dependent and -independent apoptosis in human embryonic kidney cells. PLoS One (2009) 4:e5848. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005848

36. Liang T, Yu J, Liu C, Guo L. An exploration of evolution, maturation, expression and function relationships in mir-23 ∼ 27 ∼ 24 cluster. PLoS One (2014) 9:e106223. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0106223

37. Buck AMYH, Perot J, Chisholm MA, Kumar DS, Tuddenham LEE, Cognat RIE, et al. Post-transcriptional regulation of miR-27 in murine Cytomegalovirus infection. RNA (2010) 16:307–15. doi:10.1261/rna.1819210

38. Zhou R, Gong A-Y, Eischeid AN, Chen X-M. miR-27b targets KSRP to coordinate TLR4-mediated epithelial defense against Cryptosporidium parvum infection. PLoS Pathog (2012) 8:e1002702. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1002702

39. Roggero E, Perez A, Tamae-Kakazu M, Piazzon I, Nepomnaschy I, Wietzerbin J, et al. Differential susceptibility to acute Trypanosoma cruzi infection in BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice is not associated with a distinct parasite load but cytokine abnormalities. Clin Exp Immunol (2002) 128:421–8. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2249.2002.01874.x

40. Chandrasekar B, Melby PC, Troyer DA, Freeman G. Differential regulation of nitric oxide synthase isoforms in experimental acute chagasic cardiomyopathy. Clin Exp Immunol (2000) 121:112–9. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2249.2000.01258.x

41. Qin W, Shi Y, Zhao B, Yao C, Jin L, Ma J, et al. miR-24 regulates apoptosis by targeting the open reading frame (ORF) region of FAF1 in cancer cells. PLoS One (2010) 5:e9429. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009429

42. Qian L, Van Laake LW, Huang Y, Liu S, Wendland MF, Srivastava D. miR-24 inhibits apoptosis and represses Bim in mouse cardiomyocytes. J Exp Med (2011) 208:549–60. doi:10.1084/jem.20101547

43. Wang L, Qian L. miR-24 regulates intrinsic apoptosis pathway in mouse cardiomyocytes. PLoS One (2014) 9:e85389. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0085389

44. Nguyen T, Rich A, Dahl R. MiR-24 promotes the survival of hematopoietic cells. PLoS One (2013) 8:e55406. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0055406

45. Guo Z, Chi F, Song Y, Wang C, Yu R, Wei T, et al. Transcriptome analysis of murine thymic epithelial cells reveals age-associated changes in microRNA expression. Int J Mol Med (2013) 32:835–42. doi:10.3892/ijmm.2013.1471

46. Olsen NJ, Olson G, Viselli SM, Gu X, Kovacs WJ. Androgen receptors in thymic epithelium modulate thymus size and thymocyte development. Endocrinology (2001) 142:1278–83. doi:10.1210/endo.142.3.8032

47. Sutherland JS, Goldberg GL, Hammett MV, Uldrich AP, Berzins SP, Heng TS, et al. Activation of thymic regeneration in mice and humans following androgen blockade. J Immunol (2005) 175:2741–53. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.175.4.2741

48. Kelada S, Sethupathy P, Okoye IS, Kistasis E, Czieso S, White SD, et al. miR-182 and miR-10a are key regulators of Treg specialisation and stability during Schistosome and Leishmania-associated inflammation. PLoS Pathog (2013) 9:e1003451. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1003451

49. Takahama BY, Letterio JJ, Suzuki H, Farr AG, Singer A. Early progression of thymocytes along the CD4/CD8 developmental pathway is regulated by a subset of thymic epithelial cells expressing transforming growth factor B. J Exp Med (1994) 179:1495–506. doi:10.1084/jem.179.5.1495

50. Hauri-hohl MM, Zuklys S, Keller MP, Jeker LT, Barthlott T, Moon AM. TGF-beta signaling in thymic epithelial cells regulates thymic involution and postirradiation reconstitution. Blood (2008) 112:626–35. doi:10.1182/blood-2007-10-115618.The

51. Smith LK, Shah RR, Cidlowski JA. Glucocorticoids modulate microRNA expression and processing during lymphocyte apoptosis. J Biol Chem (2010) 285:36698–708. doi:10.1074/jbc.M110.162123

52. Belkaya S, Silge RL, Hoover AR, Medeiros JJ, Eitson JL, Becker AM, et al. Dynamic modulation of thymic microRNAs in response to stress. PLoS One (2011) 6:e27580. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027580

53. Ucar O, Tykocinski L-O, Dooley J, Liston A, Kyewski B. An evolutionarily conserved mutual interdependence between Aire and microRNAs in promiscuous gene expression. Eur J Immunol (2013) 43:1769–78. doi:10.1002/eji.201343343

54. Macedo C, Evangelista AF, Marques MM, Octacílio-Silva S, Donadi EA, Sakamoto-Hojo ET, et al. Autoimmune regulator (Aire) controls the expression of microRNAs in medullary thymic epithelial cells. Immunobiology (2013) 218:554–60. doi:10.1016/j.imbio.2012.06.013

55. Rutnam ZJ, Wight TN, Yang BB. miRNAs regulate expression and function of extracellular matrix molecules. Matrix Biol (2013) 32:74–85. doi:10.1016/j.matbio.2012.11.003

56. Li G, Luna C, Qiu J, Epstein DL, Gonzalez P. Targeting of integrin beta1 and kinesin 2alpha by microRNA 183. J Biol Chem (2010) 285:5461–71. doi:10.1074/jbc.M109.037127

57. Zhang X, Liu S, Hu T, Liu S, He Y, Sun S. Up-regulated microRNA-143 transcribed by nuclear factor kappa B enhances hepatocarcinoma metastasis by repressing fibronectin expression. Hepatology (2009) 50:490–9. doi:10.1002/hep.23008

58. Guo F, Carter DE, Leask A. miR-218 regulates focal adhesion kinase-dependent TGFβ signaling in fibroblasts. Mol Biol Cell (2014) 25:1151–8. doi:10.1091/mbc.E13-08-0451

59. Stanczyk J, Ospelt C, Karouzakis E, Filer A, Raza K, Kolling C, et al. Altered expression of microRNA-203 in rheumatoid arthritis synovial fibroblasts and its role in fibroblast activation. Arthritis Rheum (2011) 63:373–81. doi:10.1002/art.30115

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Linhares-Lacerda, Palu, Ribeiro-Alves, Paredes, Morrot, Garcia-Silva, Cayota and Savino. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

[1]http://www.mirbase.org/ftp.shtml

[2]http://www.microrna.org/microrna/getDownloads.do

[3]ftp://mirnamap.mbc.nctu.edu.tw/miRNAMap2/miRNA_Targets/Mus_musculus/

[4]http://mirtarbase.mbc.nctu.edu.tw/php/download.php

[5]http://www.targetscan.org/cgi-bin/targetscan/data_download.cgi?db=mmu_61

[6]http://www.bioconductor.org/packages/release/bioc/html/Rgraphviz.html

MINI REVIEW
published: 08 September 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00461

Positive and negative regulatory mechanisms for fine-tuning cellularity and functions of medullary thymic epithelial cells

Taishin Akiyama[1]*, Ryosuke Tateishi[1], Nobuko Akiyama[1], Riko Yoshinaga[1] and Tetsuya J. Kobayashi[2]*

1 Division of Cellular and Molecular Biology, Institute of Medical Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

2 Institute of Industrial Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Alain Le Moine, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium
Magali Irla, INSERM, France

*Correspondence:

Taishin Akiyama, Division of Cellular and Molecular Biology, Institute of Medical Science, University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Shirokane-dai, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8639, Japan
taishin@ims.u-tokyo.ac.jp;
Tetsuya J. Kobayashi, Institute of Industrial Science, University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Komaba, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153-8505, Japan
tetsuya@mail.crmind.net

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 19 May 2015
Accepted: 24 August 2015
Published: 08 September 2015

Citation:

Akiyama T, Tateishi R, Akiyama N, Yoshinaga R and Kobayashi TJ (2015) Positive and negative regulatory mechanisms for fine-tuning cellularity and functions of medullary thymic epithelial cells. Front. Immunol. 6:461. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00461

Self-tolerant T cells and regulatory T cells develop in the thymus. A wide variety of cell–cell interactions in the thymus is required for the differentiation, proliferation, and repertoire selection of T cells. Various secreted and cell surface molecules expressed in thymic epithelial cells (TECs) mediate these processes. Moreover, cytokines expressed by cells of hematopoietic origin regulate the cellularity of TECs. Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) family RANK ligand, lymphotoxin, and CD40 ligand, expressed in T cells and innate lymphoid cells (ILCs), promote the differentiation and proliferation of medullary TECs (mTECs) that play critical roles in the induction of immune tolerance. A recent study suggests that interleukin-22 (IL-22) produced by ILCs promotes regeneration of TECs after irradiation. Intriguingly, tumor growth factor-β and osteoprotegerin limit cellularity of mTECs, thereby attenuating regulatory T cell generation. We will review recent insights into the molecular basis for cell–cell interactions regulating differentiation and proliferation of mTECs and also discuss about a perspective on use of mathematical models for understanding this complicated system.

Keywords: medullary thymic epithelial cells, autoimmune disease, negative feedback, mathematical modeling, T cells, thymus

Introduction

Thymic epithelial cells (TECs) are essential for T cell development and self-tolerance induction in the thymus (1). TECs are classified into medullary TECs (mTECs) and cortical TECs (cTECs) according to their localizations in the thymus. While cTECs mainly support the early differentiation and proliferation of T cells and positive selection of self-MHC-restricted T cells, several lines of evidence indicate critical roles of mTECs in preventing the onset of autoimmune diseases in human and mice (2). mTECs uniquely express many kinds of tissue-specific self-antigens (TSAs) (2–4). mTECs expressing high levels of MHC class II and co-stimulatory molecules, such as CD80, would be capable of directly presenting these TSAs to medullary T cells (5). Alternatively, TSAs in mTECs are transferred to thymic dendritic cells (DCs) and indirectly presented to T cells (6, 7). When T cells recognize these presented TSAs through high avidity interactions, they undergo apoptosis or are converted into regulatory T cells (Tregs) (2). Expression of TSAs is, in part, regulated by nuclear protein autoimmune regulator (AIRE), and dysfunctional mutations in AIRE provoke autoimmune diseases in humans (3, 8, 9). In addition to such roles in preventing autoimmunity, recent studies suggest that immune tolerance to some tumors might be under the control of mTECs (10–12). Therefore, understanding cellular and molecular mechanisms to regulate mTEC differentiation, proliferation, and apoptosis is an important issue.

Recent studies have revealed new aspects of mTEC differentiation and proliferation (13–15). One recent study indicated a new mechanism that promotes recovery of TECs following thymic injury induced by γ-irradiation (13). In addition, molecular mechanisms of negative regulation in mTEC differentiation have been reported (14, 15). In this review, we will summarize these new findings. Moreover, these new findings together with previous studies imply the existence of considerably more complicated cellular and molecular mechanisms regulating mTEC cellularity than was previously recognized. Such a sophisticated system can ensure precise regulation of TEC functions in T cell differentiation, selection, and tolerance induction. Therefore, we also present our perspectives on how mathematical modeling might contribute to understanding regulation of TEC cellularity and functions.

Positive Regulatory Mechanisms for mTEC Differentiation and Regeneration

Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptor Family Signaling and NF-κB Pathways in mTEC Differentiation

Medullary TECs constitute a heterogeneous cell population under constant differentiation (1). The roles of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor family signaling on mTEC differentiation were previously summarized (16). Therefore, we briefly mention this topic. Receptor activator of NF-κB (RANK), CD40, and lymphotoxin β-receptor (LtβR), and all members of the TNF receptor family, have been reported to promote mTEC differentiation. RANK signaling appears to play a dominant role in the differentiation of mTECs expressing Aire (16–19). The role of CD40 may be similar to that of RANK in the postnatal period because deletion of both RANK and CD40 signaling resulted in almost complete loss of Aire-expressing mTECs, as compared to a partial reduction of mature mTECs by the absence of either RANK or CD40 signaling (16). In the embryonic thymus, only RANK signaling is active (18) because thymic expression of CD40 ligand starts in the perinatal period (20). LtβR might control several distinct steps in mTEC differentiation (16, 21–23). An early study suggests that LtβR signaling induces Aire expression (24). However, later studies did not support the direct connection between LtβR signaling and Aire expression (25, 26). This apparent discrepancy remains to be solved. Moreover, some studies revealed that the absence of LtβR signaling causes a disturbance in three-dimensional organization of mTECs (27, 28), suggesting a distinct role of LtβR signaling from other TNF receptor signaling.

Ligands of these TNF receptor family members are expressed mainly in cells of hematopoietic origin. Previous studies revealed that RANK ligand (RANKL) is expressed in innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) and positively selected CD4+CD8− T cells (CD4SP) (16, 19). Moreover, RANKL expression was detected in fractions of CD4−CD8− thymocytes (double negative, DN) and γδT cells (29, 30). Conditional deletion of RANKL from each cell type would be needed to identify what types of cells are major sources of the RANKL for mTEC differentiation unambiguously. CD40 ligand is most highly expressed in CD4SP (19, 31). The ligand of LtβR is a heterotrimer consisting of secreted lymphotoxin α and membrane bound lymphotoxin β. Expression of lymphotoxin β appears to be high in CD4SP, CD8SP, and ILCs (19, 25, 32). Consequently, interactions with these cells might be required for differentiation of mTECs.

Signaling by RANK, CD40, and LtβR activates the transcription factor NF-κB. The NF-κB family consisting of five members (i.e., RelA, RelB, c-Rel, p105/p50, and p100/p52) that form hetero- and homodimers and are sequestered in the cytosol typically by binding to their inhibitor protein IκBs in unstimulated cells. Signal-dependent degradation of IκBs by the ubiquitin–proteasome pathway results in the translocation of NF-κB into the nucleus, which in turn promotes the expression of genes controlling various cellular responses (33). RANK, CD40, and LtβR signaling are capable of activating two distinct NF-κB pathways: the canonical NF-κB pathway and the non-canonical NF-κB pathway (16, 33). Briefly, activation of the canonical NF-κB pathway leads to nuclear translocation of RelA or c-Rel bound to p50. On the other hand, the non-canonical NF-κB pathway results in nuclear translocation of RelB bound to p52.

RelB deficiency and a dysfunctional mutation of NF-κB inducing kinase (NIK), a signal transducing molecule of the non-canonical NF-κB pathway, cause a severe reduction in the number of mature mTECs (34–37), suggesting an essential role for the non-canonical NF-κB pathway in mTEC differentiation. TNF receptor-associated factor 6 is a signal transducer of the canonical NF-κB pathway and is also essential for the mTEC differentiation (38). These data imply that roles of the canonical and non-canonical NF-κB pathways are not redundant, but that both are essential for mTEC differentiation. Elucidation of the functional differences between these two NF-κB pathways in mTEC differentiation remains to be determined.

Role of IL-22 Signaling in the Regeneration of TECs

Many stressors, such as psychological stress, virus infection, chemotherapy, and irradiation in bone marrow transplantation therapy, provoke acute thymic involution in which TECs and thymocytes rapidly decrease (39, 40). Although recovery from these acute thymic injuries usually occurs, incomplete recovery of thymic cells can increase the risk of immunodeficiency and autoimmunity (39, 40). Therefore, understanding the molecular and cellular mechanisms of acute thymic involution and its recovery is necessary. A recent study revealed a critical role for IL-22 in the repair of TECs after thymic involution induced by radiation (13).

IL-22 is reportedly produced by T helper 1 (Th1) cells, Th17 cells, and Th22 cells (41, 42). In addition, group 3 ILCs secret high amounts of IL-22 (41, 42). The IL-22 signal is transmitted through the IL-22 receptor (IL-22R), consisting of IL-22R1 and IL-10R2 subunits, and activates various downstream signaling (41). The IL-22 signal promotes the regeneration of epithelial cells in the liver, airway, and intestine after injury (42).

Dudakov et al. (13) reported that expression of IL-22 is upregulated in the thymus after total body irradiation in mice, which may mimic thymic injury by radiation therapy for malignant leukemia. IL-22 expression showed an inverse correlation with changes in thymic cell numbers after the irradiation. They further demonstrated a delay of TEC recovery in IL-22-deficient mice (Il22−/−) after the irradiation. Because thymic cell numbers were not reduced in the thymus of untreated Il22−/− mice, IL-22 appears to function in the regeneration of TECs specifically. They also determined that lymphoid tissue inducer (Lti), which belongs to group 3 ILCs, was the producer of IL-22 in this context. IL-22 expression in the Lti was induced by signaling of IL-23 secreted from thymic DCs. The reduction of CD4+CD8+ thymocytes (double positive, DP) by irradiation triggered the secretion of IL-23 from DCs, although the molecular mechanism remains unclear. IL-22 appears to enhance proliferation of mTECs as well as cTECs. Because Aire-positive mTECs are reportedly post-mitotic (43), it should be determined in the future whether IL-22 signaling alone is capable of inducing the proliferation of Aire-positive mTECs in this situation or whether other signals are necessary for the recovery of Aire-positive mTECs.

Negative Regulatory Mechanisms for Fine-Tuning the Cellularity of mTECs

Negative Regulation of mTEC Cellularity by TGF-β Signaling

Tumor growth factor (TGF)-β has diverse functions during the development and homeostasis of various tissues (44). Binding of TGF-β to its cell surface receptor complex, consisting of type II receptors (TGF-β RII) and the type I receptors (TGF-β RI), induces activity in its cytoplasmic serine/threonine kinases, thereby activating Smad protein complex. The activated Smad complex is subsequently translocated into the nucleus and promotes gene expression. As a result, TGF-β signaling induces anti-proliferative and pro-apoptotic effects in many types of cells.

In the thymus, TGF-β is expressed by cTECs and immature thymocytes (45, 46). On the other hand, the TGF-β receptor complex is expressed in both cTECs and mTECs (47). Hauri-Hohl et al. have recently reported a role for TGF-β signaling in regulation of mTEC number (14). They prepared mice lacking TGF-β RII expression specifically in TECs. Interestingly, the cellularity of only mTECs was increased by the lack of TGF-β signaling in TECs. Consistently, administration of a TGF-β RI inhibitor also increased the mTEC number. Thus, TGF-β signaling limits mTEC cellularity selectively, although both mTEC and cTECs should receive the signals.

The limitation of mTEC number by TGF-β signaling is less likely due to its anti-proliferative and pro-apoptotic effects. Instead, in vitro data have suggested that TGF-β signaling interferes with the activation of non-canonical NF-κB signaling; the mechanism, however, remains unclear. Given that RANK, CD40, and LtβR signaling all activate non-canonical NF-κB signaling, it is possible that TGF-β inhibits non-canonical NF-κB signaling triggered by these receptors, thereby limiting the mTEC cellularity. This idea might explain the mTEC-selective inhibition by TGF-β.

Regulation of Gene Expression and Differentiation of mTECs by the ETS Family Member Spi-B

The Ets family transcription factor Spi-B has been recently identified as a regulator of mTEC differentiation (15). RANKL signaling rapidly upregulates Spi-B expression in in vitro thymic stromal culture via the NIK-dependent NF-κB pathway. Lack of Spi-B caused an increase in the number of mTECs expressing high levels of MHC II. On the other hand, expression of co-stimulatory molecule CD80, CD86, and some of TSAs in mTECs were strikingly reduced in Spi-B-deficient (Spib−/−) mTECs. Thus, Spi-B apparently has dual functions in mTEC differentiation: Spi-B limits the number of mature mTECs and promotes some mTEC-functional genes. In addition, expression of osteoprotegerin (OPG), a decoy receptor of RANKL (48), was significantly reduced in Spib−/− mTECs. OPG was previously reported to be a negative regulator of mTEC differentiation by inhibiting RANKL signaling (19). Moreover, the Spi-B-mediated limitation of mTEC cellularity was not detected in the absence of OPG. These facts suggest that Spi-B induced by RANK signaling upregulates OPG expression in mTECs, thereby competitively inhibiting the RANKL signal-inducing mTEC differentiation (Figure 1). Thus, this negative feedback regulation finely tunes the cellularity of mTECs. Noticeably, negative regulation of mTEC differentiation by the Spi-B–OPG axis starts in the peri- to neonatal period, during which Aire mediates long-lived tolerance (49, 50).

FIGURE 1 | Negative regulation of mTEC differentiation by the RANK–Spi-B–OPG–RANKL feedback loop. mTECs are derived from a common progenitor that can give rise to both mTECs and cTECs. RANK signaling promotes differentiation of relatively immature mTECs into mTECs expressing high levels of MHC class II (MHC II), CD80, and Aire. A recent study suggested that RANK signaling upregulates expression of Spi-B. Spi-B promotes expression of some TSAs, CD80, and osteoprotegerin (OPG), a secreted decoy receptor for RANK, in mTECs. OPG, in turn, competitively inhibits RANKL–RANK interactions, thereby inhibiting the RANKL-dependent process of mTEC differentiation.

Biological and Physiological Significance of Negative Regulation of mTEC Cellularity

The effect of TGF-β signaling in mTECs on thymic T cell differentiation was investigated (14). The number of SP thymocytes and the frequency of CD4SP were mildly increased by the absence of TGF-β signaling. Moreover, export of thymic T cells to the periphery was delayed in the postnatal period of these mice. These data suggest that the increase in mTEC number prolongs the dwelling time of mature T cells in the thymic medulla. The absence of TGF-β signaling in TECs resulted in an increase in thymic Tregs and their precursors and a reduction in the frequency of thymic and peripheral Th17 cells.

Osteoprotegerin-deficient (Opg−/−) mice were used to investigate the role of the negative feedback circuit consisting of RANKL–Spi-B–OPG in thymic T cell selection (15). The OPG deletion in the thymic stroma led to an increase in the number and frequency of Tregs and Treg precursors in the thymus. Together with the findings on TGF-β-mediated TEC regulation, this suggested that negative regulation of mTECs attenuates the generation of thymic Tregs. Importantly, the increase in Treg generation by the deletion of OPG initiates in the perinatal period. A recent study revealed that Tregs generated during this period are functionally distinct from those produced in the adult thymus and that these Tregs play a critical role in long-lived tolerance induction (49, 50). Therefore, fine-tuning in the generation of Tregs during this period by this negative feedback loop could have an impact on T cell tolerance in adults.

What is the physiological impact of these negative regulations? Suppose that mTECs simply played a role in preventing the onset of autoimmune disease by negative selection and conversion of Tregs. In this case, the inhibitory regulations of mTEC differentiation might be harmful to the body. Indeed, the absence of TGF-β signaling in TECs attenuates autoimmunity caused by a chronic ablation of Tregs (14), suggesting a reduction of self-tissue reactive T cells by abolishing TGF-β-mediated negative regulation. Thus, this finding supports the idea that negative regulation of mTECs would increase the risk of autoimmunity. Besides the critical role of mTECs in inducing tolerance toward various self-tissues, recent studies have shown that mTECs promote T cell tolerance to tumors (10–12). The roles of RANKL–Spi-B–OPG negative feedback regulation in tumor immunity were tested. When this negative feedback loop was abolished by OPG depletion in the thymic stroma, tumor growth, and incidence of carcinogenesis were increased (14). These findings suggest that this negative feedback regulation might promote tumor immunity and optimize the trade-off between prevention of autoimmunity and induction of tumor immunity. Thus, negative regulation of mTEC number may contribute to immune responses toward self-antigens in tumors that are originally derived from self-tissues.

Perspective on Mathematical Modeling for TEC Cellularity

As described above, many cell types and molecules are involved in the regulation of mTEC cellularity. Consequently, T cell selection and tolerance induction supported by mTECs could be finely tuned by a combination of various mechanisms under steady state and pathological condition. Mathematical modeling would help us to understand this complicated situation. However, mathematical modeling on dynamics of TECs, including mTECs, has not been reported yet. On the other hand, there are several studies on mathematical modeling of thymocyte development. The similar mathematical approach as that used for investigations into thymocyte development can be employed for TEC development. Moreover, because interactions with thymocytes are critical for differentiation, proliferation, and survival of TECs, dynamics of thymocytes should be included in the mathematical modeling of TECs. In this section, we briefly discuss about a perspective on use of mathematical models to understand dynamics of TEC population by referring to previous mathematical modeling studies on thymocytes.

Generally, tracking cell fates over time at the single-cell level is experimentally demanding and almost impossible in vivo. Therefore, mathematical models are indispensable to extract biologically relevant information on cellular dynamics and differentiation from population-level measurements. As more detailed information is obtained by new experimental methods, the mathematical models have also evolved from simple ordinary differential equations (ODEs) to cellular automata, compartment models, and stochastic models in order to account for different subtypes of lymphocytes, their cellular heterogeneity, and spatial niches that they reside.

Although dynamics of thymocyte populations were modeled by their types, i.e., DN, DP, and SPs, the interactions of thymocytes with TECs were not explicitly incorporated in many models (51–55). In order to investigate the contributions of cortical and medullary selection, the influence of the TECs and the thymic environment were incorporated more explicitly into models in other studies. Fano et al. modeled the interaction of the thymocytes with the cortical and medullary APCs to estimate the fractions of the positively and negatively selected thymocytes in the cortex and the medulla in relation to the diversity of presenting ligands (56). In other studies (57, 58), the anatomical structure of the thymus, together with cell types, was incorporated explicitly into an investigation of the interrelation between thymocyte migration and selection. In these studies, however, the TECs were considered to be in a static thymic environment. In reality, the TECs also differentiate and proliferate homeostatically in the thymus.

Influence of the thymocyte dynamics should be incorporated into the mathematical modeling of TEC development because not only intra- but also inter-regulation of thymocytes and TECs is quite important when we consider the differentiation process of TECs and recovery of TECs from damage and its involution by aging, in which both thymocytes and TECs change their population dynamically (59, 60). Thus, we think that mathematical models will be crucial for understanding the joint dynamics of thymocytes and TECs by disentangling their complicated cell–cell interactions.

Concluding Remarks

Several types of cells and various positive and negative signaling pathways appear to control the cellularity of mTECs under physiological and pathological condition. Because cellular development and recovery from injuries are time-dependent processes, these mechanisms should be regulated in a precise and timely manner. Employment of mathematical modeling is a promising approach to understand these temporally regulated processes in the future.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a grant from the Specially Promoted Project of the Toyota Physical and Chemical Research Institute (TA and TK), a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas (TA), and a Grant-in-Aid for Challenging Exploratory Research (TA and TK).

References

1. Anderson G, Takahama Y. Thymic epithelial cells: working class heroes for T cell development and repertoire selection. Trends Immunol (2012) 33:256–63. doi:10.1016/j.it.2012.03.005

2. Kyewski B, Klein L. A central role for central tolerance. Annu Rev Immunol (2006) 24:571–606. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.23.021704.115601

3. Akiyama T, Shinzawa M, Qin J, Akiyama N. Regulations of gene expression in medullary thymic epithelial cells required for preventing the onset of autoimmune diseases. Front Immunol (2013) 4:249. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2013.00249

4. Sansom SN, Shikama-Dorn N, Zhanybekova S, Nusspaumer G, Macaulay IC, Deadman ME, et al. Population and single-cell genomics reveal the Aire dependency, relief from Polycomb silencing, and distribution of self-antigen expression in thymic epithelia. Genome Res (2014) 24:1918–31. doi:10.1101/gr.171645.113

5. Klein L, Kyewski B, Allen PM, Hogquist KA. Positive and negative selection of the T cell repertoire: what thymocytes see (and don’t see). Nat Rev Immunol (2014) 14:377–91. doi:10.1038/nri3667

6. Gallegos AM, Bevan MJ. Central tolerance to tissue-specific antigens mediated by direct and indirect antigen presentation. J Exp Med (2004) 200:1039–49. doi:10.1084/jem.20041457

7. Koble C, Kyewski B. The thymic medulla: a unique microenvironment for intercellular self-antigen transfer. J Exp Med (2009) 206:1505–13. doi:10.1084/jem.20082449

8. Mathis D, Benoist C. Aire. Annu Rev Immunol (2009) 27:287–312. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.25.022106.141532

9. Nagamine K, Peterson P, Scott HS, Kudoh J, Minoshima S, Heino M, et al. Positional cloning of the APECED gene. Nat Genet (1997) 17:393–8. doi:10.1038/ng1297-393

10. Malchow S, Leventhal DS, Nishi S, Fischer BI, Shen L, Paner GP, et al. Aire-dependent thymic development of tumor-associated regulatory T cells. Science (2013) 339:1219–24. doi:10.1126/science.1233913

11. Zhu ML, Nagavalli A, Su MA. Aire deficiency promotes TRP-1-specific immune rejection of melanoma. Cancer Res (2013) 73:2104–16. doi:10.1158/0008-5472

12. Träger U, Sierro S, Djordjevic G, Bouzo B, Khandwala S, Meloni A, et al. The immune response to melanoma is limited by thymic selection of self-antigens. PLoS One (2012) 7:e35005. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035005

13. Dudakov JA, Hanash AM, Jenq RR, Young LF, Ghosh A, Singer NV, et al. Interleukin-22 drives endogenous thymic regeneration in mice. Science (2012) 336:91–5. doi:10.1126/science.1218004

14. Hauri-Hohl M, Zuklys S, Holländer GA, Ziegler SF. A regulatory role for TGF-β signaling in the establishment and function of the thymic medulla. Nat Immunol (2014) 15:554–61. doi:10.1038/ni.2869

15. Akiyama N, Shinzawa M, Miyauchi M, Yanai H, Tateishi R, Shimo Y, et al. Limitation of immune tolerance-inducing thymic epithelial cell development by Spi-B-mediated negative feedback regulation. J Exp Med (2014) 211:2425–38. doi:10.1084/jem.20141207

16. Akiyama T, Shinzawa M, Akiyama N. TNF receptor family signaling in the development and functions of medullary thymic epithelial cells. Front Immunol (2012) 3:278. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2012.00278

17. Rossi S, Kim M, Leibbrandt A, Parnell S, Jenkinson W, Glanville S, et al. RANK signals from CD4(+)3(-) inducer cells regulate development of Aire-expressing epithelial cells in the thymic medulla. J Exp Med (2007) 204:1267–72. doi:10.1084/jem.20062497

18. Akiyama T, Shimo Y, Yanai H, Qin J, Ohshima D, Maruyama Y, et al. The tumor necrosis factor family receptors RANK and CD40 cooperatively establish the thymic medullary microenvironment and self-tolerance. Immunity (2008) 29:423–37. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.06.015

19. Hikosaka Y, Nitta T, Ohigashi I, Yano K, Ishimaru N, Hayashi Y, et al. The cytokine RANKL produced by positively selected thymocytes fosters medullary thymic epithelial cells that express autoimmune regulator. Immunity (2008) 29:438–50. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.06.018

20. Dunn R, Luedecker CJ, Haugen HS, Clegg CH, Farr AG. Thymic overexpression of CD40 ligand disrupts normal thymic epithelial organization. J Histochem Cytochem (1997) 45:129–41. doi:10.1177/002215549704500116

21. White AJ, Nakamura K, Jenkinson WE, Saini M, Sinclair C, Seddon B, et al. Lymphotoxin signals from positively selected thymocytes regulate the terminal differentiation of medullary thymic epithelial cells. J Immunol (2010) 185:4769–76. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1002151

22. Mouri Y, Yano M, Shinzawa M, Shimo Y, Hirota F, Nishikawa Y, et al. Lymphotoxin signal promotes thymic organogenesis by eliciting RANK expression in the embryonic thymic stroma. J Immunol (2011) 186:5047–57. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1003533

23. Lkhagvasuren E, Sakata M, Ohigashi I, Takahama Y. Lymphotoxin β receptor regulates the development of CCL21-expressing subset of postnatal medullary thymic epithelial cells. J Immunol (2013) 190:5110–7. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1203203

24. Chin RK, Lo JC, Kim O, Blink SE, Christiansen PA, Peterson P, et al. Lymphotoxin pathway directs thymic Aire expression. Nat Immunol (2003) 4:1121–7. doi:10.1038/ni982

25. Seach N, Ueno T, Fletcher AL, Lowen T, Mattesich M, Engwerda CR. The lymphotoxin pathway regulates Aire-independent expression of ectopic genes and chemokines in thymic stromal cells. J Immunol (2008) 180:5384–92. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.180.8.5384

26. Venanzi ES, Gray DH, Benoist C, Mathis D. Lymphotoxin pathway and Aire influences on thymic medullary epithelial cells are unconnected. J Immunol (2007) 179:5693–700. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.179.9.5693

27. Boehm T, Scheu S, Pfeffer K, Bleul CC. Thymic medullary epithelial cell differentiation, thymocyte emigration, and the control of autoimmunity require lympho-epithelial cross talk via LTbetaR. J Exp Med (2003) 198:757–69. doi:10.1084/jem.20030794

28. Irla M, Guenot J, Sealy G, Reith W, Imhof BA, Sergé A. Three-dimensional visualization of the mouse thymus organization in health and immunodeficiency. J Immunol (2013) 190:586–96. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1200119

29. Roberts NA, White AJ, Jenkinson WE, Turchinovich G, Nakamura K, Withers DR, et al. Rank signaling links the development of invariant γδ T cell progenitors and Aire(+) medullary epithelium. Immunity (2012) 36:427–37. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2012.01.016

30. Awong G, Singh J, Mohtashami M, Malm M, La Motte-Mohs RN, Benveniste PM, et al. Human proT-cells generated in vitro facilitate hematopoietic stem cell-derived T-lymphopoiesis in vivo and restore thymic architecture. Blood (2013) 122:4210–9. doi:10.1182/blood-2012-12-472803

31. Irla M, Hugues S, Gill J, Nitta T, Hikosaka Y, Williams IR, et al. Autoantigen-specific interactions with CD4+ thymocytes control mature medullary thymic epithelial cell cellularity. Immunity (2008) 29:451–63. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2008.08.007

32. Vondenhoff MF, Greuter MM, Goverse M, Elewaut D, Dewint P, Ware CF, et al. LTbetaR signaling induces cytokine expression and up-regulates lymphangiogenic factors in lymph node anlagen. J Immunol (2009) 182:5439–45. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0801165

33. Oeckinghaus A, Hayden MS, Ghosh S. Crosstalk in NF-κB signaling pathways. Nat Immunol (2011) 12:695–708. doi:10.1038/ni.2065

34. Kajiura F, Sun S, Nomura T, Izumi K, Ueno K, Bando Y, et al. NF-kappa B-inducing kinase establishes self-tolerance in a thymic stroma-dependent manner. J Immunol (2004) 172:2067–75. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.172.4.2067

35. Shinzawa M, Maruyama Y, Qin J, Akiyama N, Miyauchi M, Yanai H, et al. Splenic extramedullary hemopoiesis caused by a dysfunctional mutation in the NF-κB-inducing kinase gene. Biochem Biophys Res Commun (2011) 414:773–8. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2011

36. Burkly L, Hession C, Ogata L, Reilly C, Marconi L, Olson D, et al. Expression of relB is required for the development of thymic medulla and dendritic cells. Nature (1995) 373:531–6. doi:10.1038/373531a0

37. Weih F, Carrasco D, Durham S, Barton D, Rizzo C, Ryseck R, et al. Multiorgan inflammation and hematopoietic abnormalities in mice with a targeted disruption of RelB, a member of the NF-kappa B/Rel family. Cell (1995) 80:331–40. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(95)90416-6

38. Akiyama T, Maeda S, Yamane S, Ogino K, Kasai M, Kajiura F, et al. Dependence of self-tolerance on TRAF6-directed development of thymic stroma. Science (2005) 308:248–51. doi:10.1126/science.1105677

39. Dooley J, Liston A. Molecular control over thymic involution: from cytokines and microRNA to aging and adipose tissue. Eur J Immunol (2012) 42:1073–9. doi:10.1002/eji.201142305

40. Gruver AL, Sempowski GD. Cytokines, leptin, and stress-induced thymic atrophy. J Leukoc Biol (2008) 84:915–23. doi:10.1189/jlb.0108025

41. Sabat R, Ouyang W, Wolk K. Therapeutic opportunities of the IL-22-IL-22R1 system. Nat Rev Drug Discov (2014) 13:21–38. doi:10.1038/nrd4176

42. Sonnenberg GF, Fouser LA, Artis D. Border patrol: regulation of immunity, inflammation and tissue homeostasis at barrier surfaces by IL-22. Nat Immunol (2011) 12:383–90. doi:10.1038/ni.2025

43. Gray D, Abramson J, Benoist C, Mathis D. Proliferative arrest and rapid turnover of thymic epithelial cells expressing Aire. J Exp Med (2007) 204:2521–8. doi:10.1084/jem.20070795

44. Massagué J. TGFβ signalling in context. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol (2012) 13:616–30. doi:10.1038/nrm3434

45. Takahama Y, Letterio JJ, Suzuki H, Farr AG, Singer A. Early progression of thymocytes along the CD4/CD8 developmental pathway is regulated by a subset of thymic epithelial cells expressing transforming growth factor beta. J Exp Med (1994) 179:1495–506. doi:10.1084/jem.179.5.1495

46. Chen W, Frank ME, Jin W, Wahl SM. TGF-beta released by apoptotic T cells contributes to an immunosuppressive milieu. Immunity (2001) 14:715–25. doi:10.1016/S1074-7613(01)00147-9

47. Hauri-Hohl MM, Zuklys S, Keller MP, Jeker LT, Barthlott T, Moon AM, et al. TGF-beta signaling in thymic epithelial cells regulates thymic involution and postirradiation reconstitution. Blood (2008) 112:626–34. doi:10.1182/blood-2007-10-115618

48. Leibbrandt A, Penninger JM. RANK/RANKL: regulators of immune responses and bone physiology. Ann N Y Acad Sci (2008) 1143:123–50. doi:10.1196/annals.1443.016

49. Guerau-de-Arellano M, Martinic M, Benoist C, Mathis D. Neonatal tolerance revisited: a perinatal window for Aire control of autoimmunity. J Exp Med (2009) 206:1245–52. doi:10.1084/jem.20090300

50. Yang S, Fujikado N, Kolodin D, Benoist C, Mathis D. Immune tolerance. Regulatory T cells generated early in life play a distinct role in maintaining self-tolerance. Science (2015) 348:589–94. doi:10.1126/science.aaa7017

51. Yates AJ. Theories and quantification of thymic selection. Front Immunol (2014) 5:13. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2014.00013

52. Mehr R, Fridkis-Hareli M, Abel L, Segel L, Globerson A. Lymphocyte development in irradiated thymuses: dynamics of colonization by progenitor cells and regeneration of resident cells. J Theor Biol (1995) 177:181–92. doi:10.1006/jtbi.1995.0237

53. Mehr R, Perelson AS, Fridkis-Hareli M, Globerson A. Feedback regulation of T cell development in the thymus. J Theor Biol (1996) 181:157–67. doi:10.1006/jtbi.1996.0122

54. Sinclair C, Bains I, Yates AJ, Seddon B. Asymmetric thymocyte death underlies the CD4:CD8 T-cell ratio in the adaptive immune system. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:E2905–14. doi:10.1073/pnas.1304859110

55. Thomas-Vaslin V, Altes HK, de Boer RJ, Klatzmann D. Comprehensive assessment and mathematical modeling of T cell population dynamics and homeostasis. J Immunol (2008) 180:2240–50. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.180.4.2240

56. Faro J, Velasco S, González-Fernández A, Bandeira A. The impact of thymic antigen diversity on the size of the selected T cell repertoire. J Immunol (2004) 172:2247–55. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.172.4.2247

57. Efroni S, Harel D, Cohen IR. Emergent dynamics of thymocyte development and lineage determination. PLoS Comput Biol (2007) 3:e13. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030013

58. Souza-e-Silva H, Savino W, Feijóo RA, Vasconcelos AT. A cellular automata-based mathematical model for thymocyte development. PLoS One (2009) 4:e8233. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0008233

59. Johnson PL, Goronzy JJ, Antia R. A population biological approach to understanding the maintenance and loss of the T-cell repertoire during aging. Immunology (2014) 142:167–75. doi:10.1111/imm.12244

60. Boehm T, Swann JB. Thymus involution and regeneration: two sides of the same coin? Nat Rev Immunol (2013) 13:831–8. doi:10.1038/nri3534

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Akiyama, Tateishi, Akiyama, Yoshinaga and Kobayashi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

REVIEW
published: 10 September 2015
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00442

A tale from TGF-β superfamily for thymus ontogeny and function

Arnon Dias Jurberg1,2*, Larissa Vasconcelos-Fontes[1] and Vinícius Cotta-de-Almeida[1]*

1 Laboratory on Thymus Research, Oswaldo Cruz Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

2 Graduate Program in Cell and Developmental Biology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

OPEN ACCESS

Edited by:

Geraldo Aleixo Passos, University of São Paulo, Brazil

Reviewed by:

Natalio Garbi, University of Bonn, Germany
Amanda Freire Assis, University of São Paulo, Brazil

*Correspondence:

Arnon Dias Jurberg and Vinícius Cotta-de-Almeida, Laboratory on Thymus Research, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Oswaldo Cruz Institute, Avenida Brasil 4365, Pavilhão Leônidas Deane, 5º andar – Sala 510, Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro 21040-360., Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
ajurberg@ioc.fiocruz.br,
ajurberg@gmail.com;
vca@ioc.fiocruz.br

Specialty section:

This article was submitted to Immunological Tolerance, a section of the journal Frontiers in Immunology

Received: 20 June 2015
Accepted: 14 August 2015
Published: 10 September 2015

Citation:

Jurberg AD, Vasconcelos-Fontes L and Cotta-de-Almeida V (2015) A tale from TGF-β superfamily for thymus ontogeny and function. Front. Immunol. 6:442. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00442

Multiple signaling pathways control every aspect of cell behavior, organ formation, and tissue homeostasis throughout the lifespan of any individual. This review takes an ontogenetic view focused on the large superfamily of TGF-β/bone morphogenetic protein ligands to address thymus morphogenesis and function in T cell differentiation. Recent findings on a role of GDF11 for reversing aging-related phenotypes are also discussed.

Keywords: TGF-β, BMP, thymus, thymopoiesis, T cell development

Introduction

The adaptive immune system evolved as a complex set of defense mechanisms amplified by the specificity properties of antigen receptor-bearing B and T lymphocytes (1). Following blood trafficking into the thymus, bone marrow-derived lymphoid progenitors become committed to T cell lineage development. Within this organ, cell specialization occurs gradually in a manner that T cell development results in the generation of conventional CD4 and CD8 αβ T cells along with natural killer T cell (NKT; an innate-like T cell subpopulation), regulatory T cell (Treg), and γδ T cell subsets (2). Classically, commitment to T cell lineage was found to rely on the Delta-class Notch ligand Delta-like 4 (DLL4) and the interleukin-7 (IL-7) along with kit and flt3 ligands at stages usually prior to TCRβ chain assembling (3–6). Branching into distinct paths can be observed throughout the mainstream developmental pathway, from the double-negative (DN; CD4−CD8−) T cell precursors to the highly expanded double-positive (DP; CD4+CD8+) cells, and the resulting mature single-positive (SP; CD4+CD8− or CD4−CD8+) stages. Thus, at specific niches, the thymus provides to developing T cells signals that trigger a series of ordered events leading to cell proliferation, TCR gene rearrangements, and selective checkpoints along with massive cell death (7). Altogether, these events culminate in a proper repertoire of distinct and specialized mature thymocyte subpopulations able to emigrate to the periphery. In this review paper, we highlight the role of members of the large transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) superfamily (Box 1) during thymic ontogeny, thymic epithelial cell (TEC) differentiation and function, as well as T cell maturation. Lastly, we discuss recent information on a possible regenerative potential of TGF-β ligands to rescue aging-related thymus atrophy.

BOX 1 | Multiple roads for signaling by TGF-β superfamily members.

The TGF-β superfamily comprises TGF-β1–3, bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs), growth and differentiation factors (GDFs), Nodal, activins/inhibins, Müllerian inhibiting substance (MIS)/anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), and Lefty. These ligands were initially grouped accordingly to the functional roles observed following their original identification (8–11). As it became clear that most ligands play multiple functions depending on cell type, developmental stage, or tissue conditions, they are now classified by sequence similarity and the downstream pathway they activate (12). Each family member has an overall basic structure, in which inactive forms are produced with an N-terminal secretion peptide and a large propeptide domain known as latency-associated peptide (LAP). Cleavage of the propeptide domain by proprotein convertases releases a mature domain at the C-terminus, which eventually dimerizes (13). The propeptide domain has major regulatory roles. It influences protein stability and functions as chaperone during secretion, also mediating diffusion through interactions with the extracellular matrix and inhibiting the active peptide form even after cleavage (14–16).

Signaling by TGF-β superfamily members occurs through a similar mechanism, but operates with distinct components. Ligands bind single-pass transmembrane receptor serine/threonine kinases, which relay the signal for intracellular effectors capable of translocating into the nucleus to modulate gene transcription (Figure 1). More specifically, these receptors are classified into two structurally similar types. Ligand binding occurs only through type II receptors, which then recruit and phosphorylate type I receptors [e.g., Ref. (17, 18)]. Type II receptors, such as ActRII (Acvr2a) or ActRIIB (Acvr2b), may take part in many distinct pathways or may be specific for a given group of ligands, such as AMHR2 (Amhr2) for MIS/AMH, BMPRII (Bmpr2) for most BMPs and Gdf9, and TβRII (Tgfbr2) for TGF-βs (19, 20). Type I receptors are also known as activin receptor-like kinases (ALKs) due to their sequence similarity to activin receptors (21). These receptors are usually specific to a more restricted set of ligands. For instance, Nodal, Gdf1, Gdf11, activins, and inhibins bind ActRII to recruit Alk4 (Acvr1b) and Alk7 (Acvr1c) or they bind ActRIIB to recruit either Alk4, Alk7, or Alk5 (Tgfbr1) (19). Together, type II and type I receptors form a heterotetrameric complex, in which the type I receptor further phosphorylates intracellular effectors of the Smad family (22). Depending on the ligand/receptor complex they are responding to, receptor-activated Smads (R-Smads) can be subdivided into two groups: a BMP-related set gathers Smad1, Smad5, and Smad9 (formerly Smad8), whereas Smad2 and Smad3 are responsive to TGF-β-related signals (Figure 1). An N-terminal MH1 domain negatively regulates the MH2 domain, being indispensable for Smad translocation into the nucleus and DNA binding (23–25). However, these functional properties do not hold true for all R-Smads. In particular, Smad2 seems to interact to DNA only indirectly (24).

A common mediator Smad (co-Smad), or Smad4, integrates signals from both branches by associating with the R-Smads (Figure 1). They form transcriptional complexes able to translocate into the nucleus (26–28). Nuclear transportation of Smads depends on accessory proteins, particularly importins, exportins, and nucleoporins (29, 30). The presence of DNA molecules harboring Smad-binding elements favors heterodimerization between R-Smads and co-Smad (28). They ultimately associate with cell-type-specific transcription factors and co-activators to regulate a plethora of target genes (31).

Regulation of Smad activity occurs through multiple mechanisms (32). Two inhibitory Smads (I-Smads) impair signaling by competing with R-Smads for receptors or by co-Smad interaction (33). For instance, Smad6 forms stable interactions with type I receptors, blocking phosphorylation of Smad2 and Smad1, but not Smad3 (34, 35). Similarly, Smad7, the other I-Smad member, also binds type I receptors and suppresses further phosphorylation by targeting them for proteasome-dependent degradation (35, 36). The available literature on the molecular interactions of TGF-β superfamily members is vast, but not in the scope of this review. Further information can be found elsewhere (33, 37–40).

FIGURE 1 | Signaling by ligands of the TGF-β superfamily in the thymus. Members of the TGF-β superfamily may signal by either the TGF-β (reddish) or the BMP branch (bluish). Upon binding to type II serine/threonine receptors occurs the recruitment of type I receptors, which further phosphorylate Smad proteins. Whereas ActRIIA and ActRIIB may be shared between both pathways, TβRII and BMPRII are specific to TGF-β and BMP signaling, respectively. In general, Smad2 and Smad3 relay signals from the Alk4, Alk5, and Alk7 receptors, while Smad1, Smad5, and Smad8/9 are phosphorylated by Alk2, Alk3, and Alk6 receptors. However, Alk2, Alk6, and Alk7 are not expressed during thymocyte maturation. Modulation of gene expression occurs after Smad complex translocates into the nucleus and depends on the interaction with additional protein complexes (not shown).

TGF-β Signaling and Thymus Formation

Organogenesis relies on well-organized interactions between distinct germ layers and differentiating cell types controlled by intricate molecular hierarchies. Thymus development occurs from common parathyroid bilateral rudiments in the epithelial endodermal lining of the third pharyngeal pouch around embryonic days (E) 9.0–9.5 in mice and early week 5 in humans (Figure 2A) (41–44). As growth continues through E10.5 in mice and early week 6 in humans, the contact between the third pharyngeal pouch and the third pharyngeal cleft ectoderm determines paired organ primordia with stratified epithelium and a central lumen lined by precursors of medullary thymic epithelial cells (mTECs). These cells are characterized by the expression of both claudin-3/4 and cytokeratin-5 (K5) (46, 47). Further development of thymic medulla also depends on the successful establishment of the cortical region, as observed in mice with arrested T cell development (48). Within each primordium, a dorso-rostralmost domain expressing Gcm2 gives rise to a parathyroid gland from E9.5 in mice or as early as the onset of week 6 in humans, whereas a ventro-caudalmost domain identified by Foxn1 expression produces a thymic lobe from E11.25 in mice or mid-week 6 in humans (Figure 2B) (44, 49–52). Epithelial cell proliferation fills the pharyngeal pouch lumen by forming cord-like structures with smaller lumina, similar to branching morphogenetic events in other organs (Figure 2C) (47). In this context, activation of Foxn1 blocks the respiratory development (53) and, along with subsequent colonization by lymphocyte precursors, seems to be responsible to produce a concentric medulla less densely cellular than the surrounding cortex (47). Fetal liver-derived lymphocyte progenitors colonize the embryonic thymus from E11.5 in mice and week 8 in humans (54, 55), whereas short-term apoptotic events around E12.0 disconnect the developing anlagen from the embryonic pharynx (41). The rudiments migrate downwards at different paces, gradually resolving the Gcm2- and Foxn1-restricted domains into two morphologically distinct structures enclosed by neural crest-derived mesenchyme (Figures 2C–F) (51, 56). Parathyroid primordia usually lag behind and move toward the tracheal region dorsally to the thyroid gland, whereas thymic rudiments move ventrally and more caudally into the thoracic cavity (Figures 2D,E). The thymic primordia ultimately fuse at the midline to produce a bi-lobed organ above the developing heart (Figure 2F). Unlike mice, humans exhibit superior parathyroid glands derived from the fourth pharyngeal pouch (Figure 2) (43), whereas organogenesis of the human thymus is essentially similar to mice both morphologically and molecularly (44). Each of these morphogenetic events during thymus organogenesis is controlled by a multitude of signals, including members of the TGF-β superfamily.

FIGURE 2 | Signaling by TGF-β superfamily members during thymus organogenesis. Schematic representation of thymus formation at different stages of development. (A–C) Thymus specification viewed dorsally at the ventral half of the pharyngeal region. (A) The common parathyroid–thymus primordium arises from the third pharyngeal pouch endoderm. (B) Within each anlage, mTEC precursors line a central lumen surrounded by a dorso-rostralmost domain expressing the BMP-antagonist Noggin and the parathyroid specific gene Gcm2 (light green), whereas the ventro-caudalmost domain expresses Bmp4 and the thymus-specific gene Foxn1 (blue). (C) Each primordium grows in size while proliferating cells fill the rudiment lumen, later colonized by lymphocyte precursors to produce an inner medulla. (D–F) Thymus migration toward the heart. The inferior parathyroid (light green) and the thymus (blue) primordia are gradually resolved as they migrate downwards. (D) TGF-β cues from the endothelium of pharyngeal blood vessels (e.g., carotid arteries) seem to orient thymic and parathyroid migration toward their final location. (E) The third pharyngeal pouch-derived thymic and the inferior parathyroid rudiments pass by the primordia of the superior parathyroid (dark green), which migrate only a short distance downward the tracheal region. (F) Fusion of the thymic primordia occurs at the midline just above the developing heart (not shown) [modified from Ref. (45)].

Thymus Specification and Thymic Epithelial Cell Differentiation

Early production of Bmp4 by the endoderm, the surrounding neural crest-derived mesenchyme, and the overlying ectoderm of the third pharyngeal arch and cleft raised the possibility that bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) signals may trigger thymus and parathyroid formation (57). However, conditional inactivation of Bmp4 in both pharyngeal endoderm and mesenchyme using a Foxg1–Cre line had no effect in organ induction, but resulted in abnormal morphogenesis (see below) (58). This could be the result of a short-time window of 24 h necessary to establish the prospective thymic and parathyroid domains as observed in chicken embryos (59). Indeed, Patel et al. have observed using a Bmp4lacZ-reporter line that the onset of Bmp4 production occurred at E9.5 in the ventral pharynx close to the third pouch entrance, but not in the pouch endoderm or mesenchyme proper (57). Expression in these tissues was later achieved and expanded to the overlying ectoderm (57). The realization that endoderm patterning occurs before primitive gut and pharyngeal pouch formation still hampers the identification of signals responsible for thymus specification in vivo and other members of the TGF-β superfamily may also be at play (60). Particularly, activin A is required to induce definitive endoderm prior to the differentiation of third pharyngeal pouch endoderm in vitro (61). Since gene targeting of some superfamily ligands or their receptors results in embryonic lethality (62–64), new conditional mutants should be produced taking into consideration that gene deletion may have to occur earlier and at different embryonic compartments than previously thought.

The possibility that thymus induction depends on synergistic effects of TGF-β superfamily ligands with non-superfamily signals is a likely case (59). Endoderm-derived undifferentiated epithelial cells comprise a homogeneous population phenotypically defined as cytokeratin (K)5+K8+EpCAM+MTS24+ in the thymic primordium of mouse embryos at E12.0 (65). When a single progenitor cell labeled with enhanced yellow fluorescent protein (eYFP) was microinjected into an unlabeled syngeneic thymus rudiment with the same age, and transplanted under the kidney capsule, both cortical and medullary portions showed scattered eYFP+ TECs also positive for region-specific markers after 4 weeks, revealing that common bipotent progenitors are able to produce both epithelial lineages during embryogenesis (65). Recently, thymic epithelial progenitor cells (TEPCs) bearing stem-cell features were also identified in the thymus of adult mice as a MHCIIlowα6 integrinhighSca-1high subset (66). They mature in a highly complex stepwise process not fully understood, ultimately producing cortical TECs (cTECs) or mTECs (67).

Cortical TECs are sparsely distributed and may be identified as CD45−EpCAM+Ly51(CD249)+Ulex europaeus lectin 1 (UEA-1)−K5−K8+ cells with high levels of both MHC II and the proteasome subunit β5t (68–71). Considering the TGF-β-related pathways, cells from neonatal mice express both the Acvr2a (ActRII) and Acvr2b (ActRIIB) genes for the common receptors, in addition to Acvr1 (Alk2), Bmpr1a (Alk3), and Bmpr2 (BMPRII) for the BMP-specific receptors, and the TGF-β-specific type I receptors, Alk4 (Acvr1b) and Alk5 (Tgfbr1), and type II receptor TβRII (Tgfbr2) (71, 72). This set of receptor genes allows cTEC to respond to both signaling branches of the TGF-β superfamily, even though the BMP receptor, Bmpr1b (Alk6), and the TGF-β receptor, Acvr1c (Alk7), are not present. Yet, expression of subunit genes Inha and Inhbb for inhibins and activins, Bmp2 and Bmp4, and Tgfb1 and Tgfb3 makes possible the existence of an autocrine circuitry for thymic homeostasis, and indicate that these factors might influence early thymopoiesis (71, 72).

In the thymic medulla, mTECs are characterized by a CD45−EpCAM+Ly51−K5+K8− phenotype with variable levels of UEA-1, MHCII, CD80, and Aire (67). These distinct expression profiles seem to take part in the differentiation program in which MHCIIhighCD80high mature mTECs expressing Aire are responsible for the production of numerous peripheral self-antigens in the thymus, a critical event for central tolerance (67, 73–77). Hence, SP cells that strongly interact with self peptides through MHC molecules (pMHC) arrest migration, exhibit sustained TCR activation, persistent high levels of cytosolic Ca2+, and early caspase activation, leading to macrophage-dependent phagocytosis (78, 79). Surprisingly, thymocyte apoptosis triggers the production of all three TGF-β ligands by dendritic cells (DC), macrophages, and TECs in the medullary region of neonate or adult thymuses, a phenotype that was partially impaired in Bim mutants (80). In addition, apoptosis-driven production of TGF-β signals resulted in an increased generation of thymic regulatory T (tTreg) cells (see below) (80). Interestingly, mTECs are the cell type in the thymus that express most ligand genes of the TGF-β superfamily and their cognate receptors – Inha and Inhbb, Bmp2, Bmp3, Bmp4, Bmp5, Bmp6, and Gdf6/Bmp13, Gdf3, Gdf6/Bmp13, Gdf8/myostatin, Gdf10, Gdf11, and Gdf15, Lefty1 and Lefty2, Tgfb1, Tgfb2, and Tgfb3 along with Acvr2a (ActRII), and Acvr2b (ActRIIB), Acvr1 (Alk2), Bmpr1a (Alk3), and Bmpr2 (BMPRII) for BMP/growth and differentiation factor (GDF) signaling, and Acvr1b (Alk4) and Tgfbr1 (Alk5) for the TGF-β/Activin/Nodal pathway, in addition to the type III receptor gene Tdgf1 (Cripto) (71, 72, 81, 82).

The possibility that members of the TGF-β superfamily produced by mTECs may influence T cell differentiation or impact thymus physiology cannot be ruled out and remains to be thoroughly investigated. For instance, despite the previously identified BMP ligands in mTECs – Bmp3/osteogenin, Bmp5, Bmp6, and Bmp13 – there is no available functional information regarding their activities in the thymus to our knowledge. It is known, on the other hand, that Bmp6 exerts an antiproliferative effect in peripheral CD19+ B cells and induces apoptosis in CD27+ memory B cells (83). By contrast, Tgfbr2 deficiency in differentiating T cells increased apoptosis of TCRβhighCD4+ and TCRβhighCD8+ mature SP cells after anti-CD3 treatment or of TCRβhighOT-II T cells after antigen-dependent stimulation, thus revealing that TGF-β signals might be involved in thymocyte-negative selection (84). Interestingly, loss of Tgfbr2 in TECs using a Foxn1–Cre mouse line resulted in an expansion of the mTEC compartment – especially MHCIIhigh cells – without affecting cTEC cellularity and the morphology of the corticomedullary junction (85). Indeed, other lymphocyte-derived signals than TGF-β ligands are known to influence mTEC maturation, a phenomenon that is largely known as “thymic cross-talk” (86).

Signaling by TGF-β superfamily members appears to play a secondary role in regulating a master regulator of thymus development and function. Inactivation of the transcription factor Foxn1 results in an athymic phenotype despite the formation of an epithelial anlagen during embryogenesis (49, 87). Expression of Foxn1 in thymic primordia is anticipated by the production of Bmp4 and Wnt4 in the epithelium and the adjacent mesenchyme of the third pharyngeal pouch from E10.5 in mice and from mid-week 6 in human embryos (23, 57, 88). Accordingly, in vitro treatment of fetal thymic organ culture (FTOC) with BMP4 or overexpression of Wnt4 in a TEC cell line upregulated the expression of Foxn1 (88, 89). However, conditional inactivation of Bmp4 in the pharyngeal endoderm and mesenchyme did not affect Foxn1 expression (58), similarly to transgenic embryos expressing the BMP-antagonist Noggin in TECs (90). In turn, information on blockage of Wnt4 and its effect over the expression of Foxn1 is limited. In particular, Talaber et al. have shown that a single administration of dexamethasone caused the reduction of both Wnt4 and Foxn1 levels (91). Interestingly, conditional deletion of β-catenin in mTECs using a BK5–CreERT line resulted in Foxn1 downregulation (92). Altogether, the available evidence suggests that induction or maintenance of such an essential transcription factor in the thymic epithelia relies on an intricate molecular hierarchy with a key participation for BMP and WNT signals, which may provide some kind of redundancy for TEC differentiation and function.

With a great potential for translational medicine, differentiation of TEPCs from mouse or human embryonic stem cells (ESCs) can be achieved under culture conditions by the addition of selected growth factors, including TGF-β superfamily ligands. For instance, Lai and Jin have initially reported that incubation with Fgf7, Bmp4, Egf, and Fgf10 produced K5+K8+EpCAM+ cells from mouse ESCs (93). These cells were able to further differentiate into medullary K5+K8− and cortical K5−K8+ TECs when transplanted with CD4−CD8−CD45+ thymocytes under the kidney capsule and sustain normal T cell maturation (93). In humans, an Activin A-dependent inductive stepwise process first differentiate ESCs into definitive endoderm (94), and later into SOX2+FOXA2+CDX2− anterior foregut endodermal cells by the concurrent inhibition of BMP and Activin/TGF-β signaling using Noggin and the type I receptor-specific inhibitor SB-431542, respectively (95). Further development into TEPC may be achieved by relatively similar approaches, generally modulating retinoic acid, canonical Wnt, and BMP level (61, 96).

Thymus Colonization by Lymphoid Precursors

Colonization of the thymic primordia occurs through intermittent cell flow based on chemokine-dependent mechanisms (55, 97–100). It begins discretely prior to organ vascularization with T cell-restricted progenitors that are unable to definitely populate the thymus (55, 97). Cell influx is transiently interrupted during thymus migration to the thoracic cavity (42). Then, a second wave of cell colonization brings multipotent T cell- and NK-cell progenitors before birth (55). The most significant chemokines currently identified for attracting early T lineage progenitors (ETPs) to the developing avascularized thymus are CCL25 and CCL21 (98). Curiously, whereas CCL25 is produced by both Foxn1-positive TECs and the adjacent parathyroid primordium, CCL21 is expressed only by Gcm2-positive cells (99, 101). These ligands signal, respectively, through the CCR9 and CCR7 receptors present in CD45+ ETPs (102–105). However, it is still poor defined whether members of the TGF-β superfamily directly or indirectly influence or are modulated by these chemokines during thymus colonization. In particular, Gordon et al. observed delayed ETP homing into Bmp4-deficient thymic primordia at E11.5, but no significant differences in CCL25 expression in relation to wild-type thymus (58). The relationship with CCL21, other chemokines and their cognate receptors in the embryonic thymus, if present, remains to be determined. Of note, many pathological conditions and morphogenetic events show participation of TGF-βs, BMPs/GDFs, and activins/inhibins in the modulation of chemokine production and vice versa (106–113).

Interaction of immigrating lymphocyte progenitors with the thymic stroma is critical for adult thymus organization, but not for TEC differentiation during embryonic development. Using CD3ϵ transgenic mouse embryos, known to exhibit arrested T cell maturation at the triple negative (TN) CD3−CD4−CD8−CD44+CD25− ETP stage (114, 115), Jenkinson et al. have shown that K5+K8+ bipotent TEPCs normally differentiate into functional K5+K8− medullary and K5−K8+ cortical TECs, although adult thymus in these transgenic animals exhibit persistent flat organization with morphologically abnormal cortex (115, 116). In particular, transfer of normal bone marrow cells into RAG2−/−; tgϵ26 chimeric mice, in which bone marrow cells from mice mutant for the recombination activating gene 2 (RAG2) were previously transplanted into newborn tgϵ26 mice, rescued thymic organization and cellularity in the adult (48).

Thymus Migration

The subsequent migration of the thymus into the thoracic cavity also relies on signaling by members of the TGF-β superfamily and depends on neural crest cells. Despite a minor contribution in thymus cellularity, forced production of the BMP-antagonist Noggin in the caudal hindbrain prior to neural crest migration using B2-NC:Noggin transgenic mice culminated in thymic hypoplasia or aplasia later in development (117). Indeed, Bmp2 induces Cdc42-dependent actin cytoskeleton reorganization and filopodia formation in neural crest cells, consequently affecting their subsequent migration (118). Moreover, conditional loss of Bmp4 in mice expressing Foxg1–Cre impaired the separation between correctly patterned parathyroid and thymus, which also exhibited a partially compromised capsule (58). Yet, based on observations performed for thyroid migration (119), Gordon and Manley have proposed that the downward migration of the thymus may be driven by signals from the pharyngeal blood vessels, more specifically the carotid arteries (Figures 2D–F) (42). Remarkably, mouse embryos with cardiac neural crest cells deficient for the type I receptor Alk5 (Tgfbr1) show defective cardiac outflow development, with atypical branching of carotid arteries and failed migration of still connected parathyroid and capsule-encased thymus (120). This raises the possibility that the directional cue for thymus migration might be Alk5 ligand (e.g., TGF-β1–3 or Gdf11), possibly secreted or released through the endothelium (Figures 2D–F). By contrast, conditional inactivation of Tgfbr2 in TECs by a Foxn1–Cre mouse line does not affect thymus final positioning (121). Although producing distinct phenotypes, each signaling branch by members of the TGF-β superfamily is involved in the downward migration of thymic primordia and reveals a critical, but still poorly understood role for the neural crest-derived capsule during thymus organogenesis. Neural crest cells may also differentiate into endothelial cells, pericytes, and smooth muscle cells, and were found to persist in adult mice up to the onset of thymus involution (122).

Thymus Organization and Maturation of T Cells Under TGF-β Superfamily Signals

The adult thymus exhibits two gross anatomical regions easily identified by their histological staining patterns. The peripheral cortex harbors more immature and mostly small thymocytes, and is darker-stained due to a higher cell density. A corticomedullary junction supplied by numerous septal blood vessels makes the transition between the cortex and the central medulla. This latter region is paler due to cell size and a lower T cell density (123–125). A capsule of connective tissue encases the organ. It consists of an outer layer rich in type I collagen and an inner layer of reticular fibers containing type III collagen, and projects type I collagen-containing septa into the parenchyma, partially subdividing the thymus into smaller lobules (126).

Signals from members of the TGF-β superfamily have a major influence on T cell differentiation and thymus homeostasis. As secreted molecules, they may be locally produced by thymic stromal cells and act over developing T cells as paracrine factors or be produced by the thymocytes themselves and work autocrinely. Alternatively, factors from the developing T cells may similarly operate over stromal cells to support thymus homeostasis. However, thymocytes do not express most members of the TGF-β superfamily and the ones present vary in expression as cells differentiate (Figure 3). Similar changes are also found for receptor genes (127). Such differences in gene expression occur during T cell maturation, but also when comparing the same stage from fetal and adult thymuses (127–131). Nevertheless, provision of soluble growth factors seems to rely mostly to stromal cells, particularly TECs (71, 127). It is still possible that members of the TGF-β superfamily also act over large distances, being produced by other organs and reaching the thymus through the circulatory system (132). The importance of endocrine stimuli for intrathymic T cell maturation has been largely investigated (133), but whether a given TGF-β ligand exerts long-range effects over thymopoiesis remains to be properly addressed.

FIGURE 3 | TGF-β superfamily during thymopoiesis. Levels of selected ligands, receptors, and Smad intracellular effectors during the differentiation of αβ T lymphocytes. Common receptors between the TGF-β and the BMP branches are colored in shades of gray, whereas components of the BMP and the TGF-β pathways are colored in shades of blue and red, respectively. The darker orange region of the scheme represents the thymic cortex, whereas light orange represents the thymic medulla. A thin corticomedullary region is represented in between the cortex and medulla. Omitted components are either not present during thymocyte maturation or no information is available at present. DN, double-negative; DP, double-positive; SP, single-positive.

Changes in phosphorylation levels of Smad2/3 (pSmad2/3) and Smad1/5/8 (pSmad1/5/8), respectively, used as read-outs for the activities of TGF-β/Activin/Nodal and BMP/GDF signaling, follow differences in the expression of respective cognate receptors as thymocytes mature (134, 135). Thymocytes differentiate in a stepwise process that involves the somatic rearrangement of T cell receptor (TCR) genes while migrating in close contact with stromal cells and the extracellular matrix (ECM) throughout thymic compartments (136, 137). In this process, a major group of αβ TCR-bearing T cells are produced, which ultimately function by recognizing peptide antigens presented by class I or class II major histocompatibility complexes (MHC I or MHC II, respectively) on the surface of host cells (138). Alternatively, a distinct lineage of T cells bearing γδ TCR chains develop, which recognize a quite unique group of molecules (139). Noteworthy, intrathymic lineage restriction and cell fate are determined not only by the type of TCR and its avidity for self-antigens but also by the acquisition of co-receptors that relay signals to intracellular effectors during T cell activation. Hence, generation of distinct cell types are tightly controlled as thymocyte progresses through thymic niches (7). Herein, we will point out some key aspects of the expression and influence of TGF-β superfamily signaling molecules on the distinct paths of thymocyte development: from CD4−CD8− DN T cell precursors (further subdivided in DN1 to DN4 stages based on the surface expression of CD44 and CD25) to the highly expanded immature CD4+CD8+ DP cells, and upon the mature CD4+CD8− or CD4−CD8+ SP cells.

DN1 to DN2 Cells

Entry of bone marrow-derived Lin−cKithighCD44+CD25− cells, or ETPs, into the thymus occurs through the corticomedullary junction. In this intermediate region, these immature cells with T cell–B cell–myeloid potential come into contact with K5+K8+ bipotent TEPCs and mature T cells (67, 124, 140). They subsequently move into the thymus cortex toward the subcapsular zone as DN cells, as defined by the lack of CD4 and CD8 co-receptors (7, 141). In the cortex, developing thymocytes then upregulate CD25 – the α chain of the IL-2 receptor – to become CD44+CD25+ DN2 cells, which undergo Dβ to Jβ recombination of the β-chain locus (142, 143). This DN1 to DN2 transition is accompanied by a strong downregulation of Bmpr1a (Alk3) and Bmpr2 (BMPRII) expression (127, 129). Most cells at this stage present high levels of pSmad2 along with Alk4 (Acvr1b) and ActRII (Acvr2a) on their cell surface, although a few cells also exhibit Alk5 (Tgfbr1) and TβRII (Tgfbr2) receptors (134). DN cells also express the type III co-receptor betaglycan/TβRIII (Tgfbr3), with highest levels at DN3 cells (144). Betaglycan seems to increase the binding strength of some ligands with their cognate receptors, therefore potentializing their effects (145–147). Thymocytes express no Bmpr1b (Alk6), Acvr1 (Alk2), and Acvr1c (Alk7) during thymopoiesis (127, 129). Yet, high levels of inhibin βA subunit (Inhba) and TGF-β1 (Tgfb1) contrast with reduced levels of the inhibin α subunit (Inha), Bmp2, Bmp4, and Bmp7 at the DN2 stage (81, 82, 127, 130). When Inha mutants were used for E14.0 FTOC, a partial arrest at the DN2 stage impaired further T cell maturation (148). Likewise, antibody-dependent blocking of betaglycan in E14.0 FTOC resulted in a reduction of both DN2 and DP cells (144). By contrast, addition of TGF-β1 or TGF-β2 in E14.0 FTOC strongly inhibited T cell development by mainly impairing the differentiation of DN1 cells into DN2 (149). A slightly less strong impact after BMP4 treatment of E15.0–E15.5 FTOC or suspension cultures of fetal thymocytes resulted in cell cycle arrest at the DN1 stage without induction of apoptosis (89, 150). The use of BMP4-treated chimeric human–mouse FTOC produced similar findings (81), revealing a conserved role for Bmp4 during evolution. Besides, partial redundancy between BMP ligands also seems to occur in the thymus, since treatment of FTOC with BMP2, but not with BMP7, similarly affected the production of DP cells (150).

DN2 to DN3 Cells

Following T cell differentiation into CD44−/lowCD25+ DN3 cells, Vβ to DJβ recombination gives rise to the β chain of the pre-TCR (143). At this stage, the levels of Inha, Bmp2, and Bmp4 remain relatively low, Bmp7 becomes upregulated up to the CD3−CD8+ intermediate single-positive (ISP) stage, and expression of Inhba and Tgfb1 declines (82, 127, 130). Levels of Alk4 (Acvr1c), Alk5 (Tgfbr1), and ActRII (Acvr2a) gradually reduce as thymocytes mature, in contrast to TβRII, which is slowly upregulated – at this stage, Alk4 and Alk5 are co-expressed (134). Expression of Bmpr1a (Alk3) and Bmpr2 (BMPRII) presents a small recovery at the DN3 and DN4 stages (127, 129). Nevertheless, conditional inactivation of Bmp7 in the hematopoietic lineage using a vav-iCre line had no significant impact on T cell differentiation and total cell numbers, likely because endoderm-derived cTECs and mTECs may supply enough Bmp7 or other redundant factor for the mutant thymocytes (71, 82, 150). In particular, subcapsular cTECs, cortical DCs, and mTECs express Bmp2 and Bmp4 (71, 81, 82). Activation of the Bmp4 pathway in stromal cells indirectly impacts the DN to DP transition, as revealed by reconstitution experiments with thymocyte-depleted stroma treated with BMP4 or untreated stroma with BMP4-treated DN cells (89). Of note, although highly expressed up to the transition from DN2 to DN3, being downregulated up to the DP stage, and sustained at low levels at SP subsets (127), the gene referred as Bmp1 is a procollagen C-proteinase involved in ventral body wall closure during embryogenesis. To our knowledge, there is no available functional information regarding its role during thymopoiesis, except that it was also found in cTECs and mTECs (71, 151).

DN3 to DN4 Cells

Should rearrangements result in unproductive β chains, DN3 cells undergo apoptosis and are phagocytized by cortical macrophages or DCs in a process termed β-selection (143, 152). Otherwise, successful recombination leads to a reduction in CD25 expression and the expansion of CD44−CD25− DN4 thymocytes (153, 154). Both activin A and inhibin A similarly stimulate the DN3 to DN4 transition, as revealed in FTOC from wild-type fetuses at E14.0. However, treatment with activin A led to higher numbers of mature CD24lowCD8+TCRβhigh T cells at the expense of CD4+ cells, in contrast to inhibin A treatment, which stimulated the transition from DN4 to DP cells (148).

DP Cells

Rearrangement of the TCRα chain occurs at the DP stage and cells move from the cortical zone toward the thymic medulla (143, 155). During this migration, cTECs present self peptides through MHC molecules (pMHC) to the TCR of intermingling DP thymocytes in a process known as positive selection, in which interactions of low-avidity drive clones to survive and continue maturation (156). At the DP stage, Alk4 (Acvr1b), Alk5 (Tgfbr1), and ActRII (Acvr2a) reach their lowest levels, but the number of cells concomitantly presenting Alk5 and pSmad2 increases in relation to Alk4-positive cells (134). By contrast, Bmpr1a (Alk3) and Bmpr2 (BMPRII) are highly expressed (127, 129). Two members of the GDF subgroup, Gdf7 and Gdf11, seem to be induced in DP cells and sustained at SP stages, with CD4+ T cells presenting relatively higher levels than CD8+ T cells (127). Gdf7 signals through BMP-specific receptors as Alk3 and BMPRII, whereas Gdf11 binds TGF-β-related receptors, as Alk4 and Alk5 (157–159). Their roles on T cell function are largely obscure, if any. Mouse mutants for Gdf7 exhibit variable hydrocephalus and fail to produce a class of commissural neurons (160). Male mutants are sterile due to impaired differentiation and branching morphogenesis of the seminal vesicle, with no other affected reproductive structure (161). In turn, mutants for Gdf11 show homeotic transformations due to a delayed trunk to tail transition (162, 163). They die after birth because of renal defects, which may vary from hypoplasia to complete bilateral agenesis (164). Curiously, oral infection with Gram-negative bacteria, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans, in rats led to a chronic upregulation of Gdf11 expression among other cytokines in both peripheral CD45RA+CD4+ T cells and B cells (165). At present, however, little is known on the effects of GDFs over thymopoiesis.

SP Cells

Still in the cortex, differentiating thymocytes start to lose the expression of either CD4 or CD8 and migrate toward the medulla. The choice for either CD4 or CD8 SP lineage seems to occur at a transitional step defined as CD4+CD8low and depends on TCR interaction with the MHC class II or class I, respectively (166, 167). Additionally, it also relies on the triggering of a transcriptional machinery that operates distinctly for final differentiation (165, 166). Noteworthy, the SP cells sustain Bmpr1a (Alk3) and Bmpr2 (BMPRII) expression, and upregulate Alk5 (Tgfbr1) and TβRII (Tgfbr2), which lead to increased levels of pSmad2 (84, 127, 129, 134). At this stage, fine-tuning of TGF-β signaling may occur by type III co-receptors – CD4+CD8− cells upregulate Tgfbr3 (betaglycan), whereas CD4−CD8+ cells exhibit higher levels of Cripto (Tdgf1) (127, 144). Genetic loss of Tgfbr3 in FTOC resulted in decreased numbers of both DP and SP cells, probably related to the high rates of apoptosis in DN, DP, and CD4+ SP subsets (144). An apoptotic phenotype was also observed in the liver of Tgfbr3 mutants (168). However, a functional role for Cripto during thymopoiesis is currently unresolved, despite its importance for TGF-β binding and inhibition (169). Mutants for this gene present a strong deleterious phenotype during gastrulation and die shortly afterward (170, 171). Modulation of TGF-β family members, their receptors, and co-receptors at the DP stage is therefore associated with the terminal differentiation of thymocytes.

Impact of TGF-β Signals on the Differentiation of Thymic Regulatory T Cells

Regulatory T (Treg) cells have the ability to suppress autoreactive T cells, and they can originate from the thymus or be induced in the periphery (172). Thymus-derived Treg (tTreg) arise in the thymus from SP CD4+ T cells that escape negative selection during maturation by presenting TCR signals of variable affinities (80, 172–174). More specifically, TCRs with high avidity for self-antigens trigger a new upregulation of CD25 (IL-2 receptor α chain) and therefore exhibit an increased responsiveness to IL-2, ultimately inducing the expression of the transcription factor forkhead box P3 (Foxp3) through a STAT5-dependent mechanism (175–177). Foxp3 is the critical transcription factor for Treg cell lineage, as its loss abolishes tTreg cells and lead to systemic autoimmunity and death (178, 179). Conversely, forced expression of Foxp3 in CD25−CD45RBhighCD4+ SP cells transferred into severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) hosts suppressed exacerbated inflammation (180). Unlike previously thought (181), however, expression of Foxp3 in developing tTreg cells induced apoptosis instead of cell survival. Cell death is prevented by limiting concentrations of γc-mediated survival signals enough to sustain only fewer than one million Foxp3+ cells (182).

Signals from members of TGF-β superfamily also play important roles over the differentiation and survival of tTreg cells. In particular, conditional loss of Tgfbr1 (Alk5) in thymocytes seems to be involved in tTreg specification, since a Lck–Cre mouse line completely blocked differentiation of tTreg cells in neonatal mice, whereas later inactivation of Tgfbr1 by a Foxp3–Cre line produced no differences in tTreg numbers as compared to wild-type mice (80, 183). In addition, the intrathymic injection of an anti-TGF-β antibody suppressed Foxp3 expression in a TCR transgenic CD4+CD25− SP cells (80). Of note, impaired Alk5 signaling induced by the Lck–Cre line caused no significant impact on CD4+ and CD8+ SP cell numbers (183). A later increase in Treg cells induced in the periphery (pTreg) in these mutant mice relied on IL-2 signaling, since ablation of this cytokine produced no detectable cells in organs, such as the spleen and liver (183). Similarly, thymocyte deficiency of Tgfbr2 from a CD4–Cre mouse line resulted in reduced numbers of tTreg cells due to Bim-dependent apoptosis likely independent of γc-signaling, without affecting TCR-βhighCD4+Foxp3− mature T cells in neonatal mice (84). Unlike Tfgbr1-mutant thymocytes, conditional deletion of Tgfbr2 also resulted in low numbers of pTreg cells (84). Induction of pTreg cells relies on the Smad3-dependent upregulation of Foxp3 triggered by activation of both TCR and TGF-β signaling and facilitated by retinoic acid, which increased pSmad3 accessibility to regulatory sequences of the Foxp3 promoter and concurrently counteracted the suppressing effects of a c-Jun N-terminal Kinase (JNK) inhibitor (184, 185). Genetic analyses of the regulatory CNS1 region of Foxp3, which contains binding sites for NFAT, Smad3, and RAR/RXR, revealed that tTreg cell development occurs independently of its activation, whereas its chromosomal deletion largely impaired the production of pTreg cells in secondary lymphoid organs (184–186). In accordance to the different requirements revealed for tTreg in comparison to pTreg populations, TGF-β1 is essential for the peripheral differentiation and maintenance of pTreg cells, but seems to be dispensable for tTreg maturation (187).

Taking into consideration the upregulation of all three TGF-β ligands by stromal cells upon thymocyte apoptosis in the thymus, along with recent findings regarding mutants for distinct TGF-β-specific receptors (80, 84, 183), it is possible that TGF-β ligands may play a redundant yet underestimated role in the immune system. Noteworthy, mutants for TGF-β2 and TGF-β3 also exhibit perinatal mortality, a characteristic that complicates the examination of their role in adults (188–190). Although at first sight, the phenotypes observed in these mutants were generally non-overlapping, some particular structures showed similar defects between single mutants (e.g., cleft palate in either TGF-β2 and TGF-β3 mutants) or exclusive abnormalities in compound mutants, such as abnormal brain vascular morphogenesis and impaired midline fusion along with earlier embryonic lethality in Tgfb1RGE;Tgfb3 and Tgfb2;Tgfb3 compound mutants, respectively (191, 192). However, development of tTreg was never evaluated in these compound mutants. An alternative explanation may consider the participation of a previously unappreciated ligand of the TGF-β superfamily in the differentiation of tTreg cells. Whether this is indeed the case, this candidate ligand should probably signal through Alk5 and TβRII receptors to phosphorylate Smad2 and Smad3 intracellular effectors. Thereby, likely ligands to be thoroughly evaluated due to their expression pattern and receptor affinity are Gdf11 and Gdf8/myostatin – curiously two members that showed redundancy in patterning the axial skeleton as revealed by Gdf11;Mstn double mutants. Unfortunately, examination of fetal thymus morphology and T cell differentiation using FTOC was not performed in these mutants (193).

Noteworthy, TGF-β signals also regulate the thymic development of IL-17-producing cells. A subset of γδ T cells acquire the capacity to produce IL-17 inside the thymus via a TGF-β1-dependent machinery, and both Tgfβ1−/− and Smad3−/− mice were shown to be completely devoid of IL-17-producing γδ T cells (194). Additionally, NKT17 cells comprise a thymic-derived IL-17-producing, CD1d-restricted, and glycolipid antigen-reactive T cell subset (195, 196). These cells express high levels of TβRII and depend on TGF-β signals for differentiation and survival within the thymus and in the periphery (197, 198).

A TGF-β Member for Thymus Rejuvenation?

Aging is an inherent process of living beings, normally associated with gradual loss of function and structure over time – accumulation of reactive species, DNA damage, abnormally folded proteins, and telomere shortening are just some of the molecular changes that may be followed by increased apoptosis, cell transformation, or other cellular event that will ultimately lead to death (199). Although this negative scenario was initially thought to be irreversible, numerous evidences point out that at least in part it is possible to slow down or eventually reverses some specific aging phenotypes. Taking the thymus as example, aging is easily recognizable by a sharp decrease in cellularity of both lymphoid and stromal compartments, whereas the number of thymic adipocytes inversely increases (200, 201). Ultimately, these thymic changes lead to a reduction of naïve T cells in the periphery along with an increase of memory T cells, which reflects in the organism ability to respond to both infection and tumorigenesis (202).

Multiple factors may trigger thymic involution, including the production of sex steroid hormones from puberty, increased calorie intake, or diminished levels of some growth factors and cytokines, such as fibroblast growth factor 7 (FGF7)/keratinocyte growth factor (KGF), insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1), growth hormone (GH), interleukin-7 (IL-7), and IL-22 (203). Modulation of each of them is able to rescue the aged thymic phenotype and restore the immune function at some level (204–210). However, some of these strategies may be inefficient, invasive, non-specific, or produce undesirable side effects to be used in humans (211). A quest for thymic rejuvenation therapies therefore faces daunting challenges in the clinic. Of particular interest, forced expression of Foxn1 was shown to effectively reprogram fibroblasts into TECs or regenerate fully involuted thymuses at many different experimental setups, both in vitro or in vivo (212–214). In this context, signals that control Foxn1 expression might be used to restore the integrity of the thymic epithelial niche and subsequently flourish thymopoisesis in the elderly. In this scenario, administration of soluble factors, such as ligands of the TGF-β superfamily, may be used as regenerative drugs.

Recent findings have revealed that levels of some circulating factors vary with age and that heterochronic parabiosis, i.e., a surgical procedure that connects the circulatory systems of animals with different ages, was able to reverse age-related phenotypes as cardiac hypertrophy (132). These authors further identified the TGF-β member Gdf11 as responsible for restoring cardiac function in old mice, a finding that was further expanded to other systems. In particular, daily treatment of old mice with recombinant GDF11 improved skeletal muscle mass and strength, as well as the integrity of brain vasculature and cognitive function (215, 216). In culture, Gdf11 promoted osteoblastogenesis while inhibiting adipogenesis in bone marrow-derived cells (217). Administration of GDF11 in endothelial progenitor cells triggered cell sprouting and migration, also revealing a role in the formation of blood vessels (218).

Whether Gdf11 or other circulating factor can be used as a rejuvenating cytokine for the thymus remains to be thoroughly assessed. Indeed, Gdf11 is expressed in the thymus of young mice (132), whereas the levels of its non-exclusive receptors, Alk4 and Alk5, vary in thymocytes and TECs, as previously discussed. Of note, however, therapy with Gdf11 produced some side effects in mice (219), and a recent study by Egerman et al. has recently questioned the aforementioned observations (220). Whereas these controversial data on Gdf11 await further investigation, it is noteworthy that heterochronic parabiosis did not reverse thymic involution, but caused atrophy with mild effects on T cell subpopulations of young mice and a reduction in the number of CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ regulatory T cells in old partners to the level of the young pair (221). Although a putative rejuvenating factor for the thymus still awaits to be determined, this controversial matter helps to bring the debate on the role of TGF-β superfamily members for the thymus function.

Concluding Remarks

Although the differentiation of T cells is mainly driven by the rearrangement of TCR genes, many members of the TGF-β superfamily exert critical roles in their stepwise progression during thymic migration. Historically, special attention had been given to the activity of TGF-β ligands in the induction of Treg cells and tolerance to self-antigens, as well as to BMP signaling on thymus organogenesis. However, other members are also produced by developing thymocytes, thymic stromal cells, or may circulate throughout the body by the blood stream and reach the thymus. These ligands signal through the same limited sets of type I and type II receptors to produce dissimilar outcomes either by affecting distinct stages or cell types (e.g., thymocytes versus TECs). How such TGF-β superfamily ligands affect T cell maturation, thymus proper physiology, or its involution remain poorly understood and should be the focus of future research. In addition, a scenario in which a TGF-β superfamily member or its inhibitor acts to rejuvenate the aged thymus may be a likely case for future research.

Acknowledgments

This work benefited from data assembled by the ImmGen consortium and was supported by grants from the Brazilian Research Council/Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) and Rio de Janeiro State Research Council/Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ) (to ADJ and VC-A). LV-F received a Masters’ fellowship from CNPq.

References

1. Flajnik MF, Kasahara M. Origin and evolution of the adaptive immune system: genetic events and selective pressures. Nat Rev Genet (2010) 11:47–59. doi:10.1038/nrg2703

2. Cowan JE, Jenkinson WE, Anderson G. Thymus medulla fosters generation of natural Treg cells, invariant γδ T cells, and invariant NKT cells: what we learn from intrathymic migration. Eur J Immunol (2015) 45:652–60. doi:10.1002/eji.201445108

3. Agosti V, Corbacioglu S, Ehlers I, Waskow C, Sommer G, Berrozpe G, et al. Critical role for Kit-mediated Src kinase but not PI 3-kinase signaling in pro T and pro B cell development. J Exp Med (2004) 199:867–78. doi:10.1084/jem.20031983

4. Fry TJ, Sinha M, Milliron M, Chu YW, Kapoor V, Gress RE, et al. Flt3 ligand enhances thymic-dependent and thymic-independent immune reconstitution. Blood (2004) 104:2794–800. doi:10.1182/blood-2003-11-3789

5. Besseyrias V, Fiorini E, Strobl LJ, Zimber-strobl U, Dumortier A, Koch U, et al. Hierarchy of Notch–Delta interactions promoting T cell lineage commitment and maturation. J Exp Med (2007) 204:331–43. doi:10.1084/jem.20061442

6. Magri M, Yatim A, Benne C, Balbo M, Henry A, Serraf A, et al. Notch ligands potentiate IL-7-driven proliferation and survival of human thymocyte precursors. Eur J Immunol (2009) 39:1231–40. doi:10.1002/eji.200838765

7. Petrie HT, Zúñiga-Pflücker JC. Zoned out: functional mapping of stromal signaling microenvironments in the thymus. Annu Rev Immunol (2007) 25:649–79. doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.23.021704.115715

8. Urist MR. Bone: formation by autoinduction. Science (1965) 150:893–9. doi:10.1126/science.150.3698.893

9. De Larco JE, Todaro GJ. Growth factors from murine sarcoma virus-transformed cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1978) 75:4001–5. doi:10.1073/pnas.75.8.4001

10. Roberts AB, Lamb LC, Newton DL, Sporn MB, De Larco JE, Todaro GJ. Transforming growth factors: isolation of polypeptides from virally and chemically transformed cells by acid/ethanol extraction. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1980) 77:3494–8. doi:10.1073/pnas.77.6.3494

11. Frolik CA, Dart LL, Meyers CA, Smith DM, Sporn MB. Purification and initial characterization of a type beta transforming growth factor from human placenta. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1983) 80:3676–80. doi:10.1073/pnas.80.12.3676

12. Wrana JL. Signaling by the TGFβ superfamily. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol (2013) 5:a011197. doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a011197

13. Constam DB. Regulation of TGFβ and related signals by precursor processing. Semin Cell Dev Biol (2014) 32:85–97. doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2014.01.008

14. Degnin C, Jean F, Thomas G, Christian JL. Cleavages within the prodomain direct intracellular trafficking and degradation of mature bone morphogenetic protein-4. Mol Biol Cell (2004) 15:5012–20. doi:10.1091/mbc.E04-08-0673

15. Nelsen SM, Christian JL. Site-specific cleavage of BMP4 by furin, PC6, and PC7. J Biol Chem (2009) 284:27157–66. doi:10.1074/jbc.M109.028506

16. Li Z, Kawasumi M, Zhao B, Moisyadi S, Yang J. Transgenic over-expression of growth differentiation factor 11 propeptide in skeleton results in transformation of the seventh cervical vertebra into a thoracic vertebra. Mol Reprod Dev (2010) 77(11):990–7. doi:10.1002/mrd.21252

17. Wrana JL, Attisano L, Wieser R, Ventura F, Massagué J. Mechanism of activation of the TGF-beta receptor. Nature (1994) 370:341–7. doi:10.1038/370341a0

18. Kretzschmar M, Liu F, Hata A, Doody J, Massagué J. The TGF-β family mediator Smad1 is phosphorylated directly and activated functionally by the BMP receptor kinase. Genes Dev (1997) 11:984–95. doi:10.1101/gad.11.8.984

19. Massagué J, Gomis RR. The logic of TGFβ signaling. FEBS Lett (2006) 580:2811–20. doi:10.1016/j.febslet.2006.04.033

20. Mueller TD, Nickel J. Promiscuity and specificity in BMP receptor activation. FEBS Lett (2012) 586:1846–59. doi:10.1016/j.febslet.2012.02.043

21. Ten Dijke P, Ichijo H, Franzén P, Schulz P, Saras J, Toyoshima H, et al. Activin receptor-like kinases: a novel subclass of cell-surface receptors with predicted serine/threonine kinase activity. Oncogene (1993) 8:2879–87.

22. Wu G, Chen YG, Ozdamar B, Gyuricza CA, Chong PA, Wrana JL, et al. Structural basis of Smad2 recognition by the Smad anchor for receptor activation. Science (2000) 287:92–7. doi:10.1126/science.287.5450.92

23. Shi Y, Wang YF, Jayaraman L, Yang H, Massagué J, Pavletich NP. Crystal structure of a Smad MH1 domain bound to DNA: insights on DNA binding in TGF-beta signaling. Cell (1998) 94:585–94. doi:10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81600-1

24. Zawel L, Dai JL, Buckhaults P, Zhou S, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B, et al. Human Smad3 and Smad4 are sequence-specific transcription activators. Mol Cell (1998) 1:611–7. doi:10.1016/S1097-2765(00)80061-1

25. Makkar P, Metpally RPR, Sangadala S, Reddy BVB. Modeling and analysis of MH1 domain of Smads and their interaction with promoter DNA sequence motif. J Mol Graph Model (2009) 27:803–12. doi:10.1016/j.jmgm.2008.12.003

26. Xiao Z, Latek R, Lodish HF. An extended bipartite nuclear localization signal in Smad4 is required for its nuclear import and transcriptional activity. Oncogene (2003) 22:1057–69. doi:10.1038/sj.onc.1206212

27. Chacko BM, Qin BY, Tiwari A, Shi G, Lam S, Hayward LJ, et al. Structural basis of heteromeric smad protein assembly in TGF-beta signaling. Mol Cell (2004) 15:813–23. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2004.07.016

28. Baburajendran N, Jauch R, Tan CYZ, Narasimhan K, Kolatkar PR. Structural basis for the cooperative DNA recognition by Smad4 MH1 dimers. Nucleic Acids Res (2011) 39:8213–22. doi:10.1093/nar/gkr500

29. Chen X, Xu L. Specific nucleoporin requirement for Smad nuclear translocation. Mol Cell Biol (2010) 30:4022–34. doi:10.1128/MCB.00124-10

30. Cautain B, Hill R, de Pedro N, Link W. Components and regulation of nuclear transport processes. FEBS J (2015) 282:445–62. doi:10.1111/febs.13163

31. Morikawa M, Koinuma D, Miyazono K, Heldin C-H. Genome-wide mechanisms of Smad binding. Oncogene (2012) 32:1–7. doi:10.1038/onc.2012.191

32. Ross S, Hill CS. How the Smads regulate transcription. Int J Biochem Cell Biol (2008) 40:383–408. doi:10.1016/j.biocel.2007.09.006

33. Shi Y, Massagué J. Mechanisms of TGF-beta signaling from cell membrane to the nucleus. Cell (2003) 113:685–700. doi:10.1016/S0092-8674(03)00432-X

34. Imamura T, Takase M, Nishihara A, Oeda E, Hanai J, Kawabata M, et al. Smad6 inhibits signalling by the TGF-beta superfamily. Nature (1997) 389:622–6. doi:10.1038/39355

35. Hanyu A, Ishidou Y, Ebisawa T, Shimanuki T, Imamura T, Miyazono K. The N domain of Smad7 is essential for specific inhibition of transforming growth factor-beta signaling. J Cell Biol (2001) 155:1017–27. doi:10.1083/jcb.200106023

36. Kavsak P, Rasmussen RK, Causing CG, Bonni S, Zhu H, Thomsen GH, et al. Smad7 binds to Smurf2 to form an E3 ubiquitin ligase that targets the TGFβ receptor for degradation. Mol Cell (2000) 6:1365–75. doi:10.1016/S1097-2765(00)00134-9

37. Feng X-H, Derynck R. Specificity and versatility in Tgf-beta signaling through Smads. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol (2005) 21:659–93. doi:10.1146/annurev.cellbio.21.022404.142018

38. Wu MY, Hill CS. Tgf-beta superfamily signaling in embryonic development and homeostasis. Dev Cell (2009) 16:329–43. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2009.02.012

39. Massagué J, Xi Q. TGF-β control of stem cell differentiation genes. FEBS Lett (2012) 586:1953–8. doi:10.1016/j.febslet.2012.03.023

40. Xie F, Zhang Z, van Dam H, Zhang L, Zhou F. Regulation of TGF-β superfamily signaling by SMAD mono-ubiquitination. Cells (2014) 3:981–93. doi:10.3390/cells3040981

41. Gordon J, Wilson VA, Blair NF, Sheridan J, Farley A, Wilson L, et al. Functional evidence for a single endodermal origin for the thymic epithelium. Nat Immunol (2004) 5:546–53. doi:10.1038/ni1064

42. Gordon J, Manley NR. Mechanisms of thymus organogenesis and morphogenesis. Development (2011) 138:3865–78. doi:10.1242/dev.059998

43. Sadler TW. Langman’s Medical Embryology. 12th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (2012).

44. Farley AM, Morris LX, Vroegindeweij E, Depreter MLG, Vaidya H, Stenhouse FH, et al. Dynamics of thymus organogenesis and colonization in early human development. Development (2013) 140:2015–26. doi:10.1242/dev.087320

45. Manley NR, Capecchi MR. Hox group 3 paralogs regulate the development and migration of the thymus, thyroid, and parathyroid glands. Dev Biol (1998) 195:1–15. doi:10.1006/dbio.1997.8827

46. Hamazaki Y, Fujita H, Kobayashi T, Choi Y, Scott HS, Matsumoto M, et al. Medullary thymic epithelial cells expressing Aire represent a unique lineage derived from cells expressing claudin. Nat Immunol (2007) 8:304–11. doi:10.1038/ni1438

47. Muñoz JJ, Cejalvo T, Tobajas E, Fanlo L, Cortés A, Zapata AG. 3D immunofluorescence analysis of early thymic morphogenesis and medulla development. Histol Histopathol (2015) 30:589–99. doi:10.14670/HH-30.589

48. Van Ewijk W, Holländer G, Terhorst C, Wang B. Stepwise development of thymic microenvironments in vivo is regulated by thymocyte subsets. Development (2000) 127:1583–91.

49. Nehls M, Kyewski B, Messerle M, Waldschütz R, Schüddekopf K, Smith AJ, et al. Two genetically separable steps in the differentiation of thymic epithelium. Science (1996) 272:886–9. doi:10.1126/science.272.5263.886

50. Günther T, Chen ZF, Kim J, Priemel M, Rueger JM, Amling M, et al. Genetic ablation of parathyroid glands reveals another source of parathyroid hormone. Nature (2000) 406:199–203. doi:10.1038/35018111

51. Gordon J, Bennett AR, Blackburn CC, Manley NR. Gcm2 and Foxn1 mark early parathyroid- and thymus-specific domains in the developing third pharyngeal pouch. Mech Dev (2001) 103:141–3. doi:10.1016/S0925-4773(01)00333-1

52. Liu Z, Farley A, Chen L, Kirby BJ, Kovacs CS, Blackburn CC, et al. Thymus-associated parathyroid hormone has two cellular origins with distinct endocrine and immunological functions. PLoS Genet (2010) 6:e1001251. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001251

53. Dooley J, Erickson M, Roelink H, Farr AG. Nude thymic rudiment lacking functional Foxn1 resembles respiratory epithelium. Dev Dyn (2005) 233:1605–12. doi:10.1002/dvdy.20495

54. Haynes BF, Heinly CS. Early human T cell development: analysis of the human thymus at the time of initial entry of hematopoietic stem cells into the fetal thymic microenvironment. J Exp Med (1995) 181:1445–58. doi:10.1084/jem.181.4.1445

55. Ramond C, Berthault C, Burlen-Defranoux O, de Sousa AP, Guy-Grand D, Vieira P, et al. Two waves of distinct hematopoietic progenitor cells colonize the fetal thymus. Nat Immunol (2014) 15:27–35. doi:10.1038/ni.2782

56. Jiang X, Rowitch DH, Soriano P, McMahon AP, Sucov HM. Fate of the mammalian cardiac neural crest. Development (2000) 127:1607–16.

57. Patel SR, Gordon J, Mahbub F, Blackburn CC, Manley NR. Bmp4 and Noggin expression during early thymus and parathyroid organogenesis. Gene Expr Patterns (2006) 6:794–9. doi:10.1016/j.modgep.2006.01.011

58. Gordon J, Patel SR, Mishina Y, Manley NR. Evidence for an early role for BMP4 signaling in thymus and parathyroid morphogenesis. Dev Biol (2010) 339:141–54. doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2009.12.026

59. Neves H, Dupin E, Parreira L, Le Douarin NM. Modulation of Bmp4 signalling in the epithelial-mesenchymal interactions that take place in early thymus and parathyroid development in avian embryos. Dev Biol (2012) 361:208–19. doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2011.10.022

60. Moore-Scott BA, Opoka R, Lin S-CJ, Kordich JJ, Wells JM. Identification of molecular markers that are expressed in discrete anterior-posterior domains of the endoderm from the gastrula stage to mid-gestation. Dev Dyn (2007) 236:1997–2003. doi:10.1002/dvdy.21204

61. Sun X, Xu J, Lu H, Liu W, Miao Z, Sui X, et al. Directed differentiation of human embryonic stem cells into thymic epithelial progenitor-like cells reconstitutes the thymic microenvironment in vivo. Cell Stem Cell (2013) 13:230–6. doi:10.1016/j.stem.2013.06.014

62. Conlon FL, Lyons KM, Takaesu N, Barth KS, Kispert A, Herrmann B, et al. A primary requirement for nodal in the formation and maintenance of the primitive streak in the mouse. Development (1994) 120:1919–28.

63. Zhang H, Bradley A. Mice deficient for BMP2 are nonviable and have defects in amnion/chorion and cardiac development. Development (1996) 122:2977–86.

64. Lawson KA, Dunn NR, Roelen BAJ, Zeinstra LM, Davis AM, Wright CVE, et al. Bmp4 is required for the generation of primordial germ cells in the mouse embryo. Genes Dev (1999) 13:424–36. doi:10.1101/gad.13.4.424

65. Rossi SW, Jenkinson WE, Anderson G, Jenkinson EJ. Clonal analysis reveals a common progenitor for thymic cortical and medullary epithelium. Nature (2006) 441:988–91. doi:10.1038/nature04813

66. Wong K, Lister NL, Barsanti M, Lim JMC, Hammett MV, Khong DM, et al. Multilineage potential and self-renewal define an epithelial progenitor cell population in the adult thymus. Cell Rep (2014) 8:1198–209. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2014.07.029

67. Danzl NM, Jeong S, Choi Y, Alexandropoulos K. Identification of novel thymic epithelial cell subsets whose differentiation is regulated by RANKL and Traf6. PLoS One (2014) 9:e86129. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0086129

68. Farr AG, Anderson SK. Epithelial heterogeneity in the murine thymus: fucose-specific lectins bind medullary epithelial cells. J Immunol (1985) 134:2971–7.

69. Klug DB, Carter C, Crouch E, Roop D, Conti CJ, Richie ER. Interdependence of cortical thymic epithelial cell differentiation and T-lineage commitment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1998) 95:11822–7. doi:10.1073/pnas.95.20.11822

70. Murata S, Sasaki K, Kishimoto T, Niwa S, Hayashi H, Takahama Y, et al. Regulation of CD8+ T cell development by thymus-specific proteasomes. Science (2007) 316:1349–53. doi:10.1126/science.1141915

71. St-Pierre C, Brochu S, Vanegas JR, Dumont-Lagacé M, Lemieux S, Perreault C. Transcriptome sequencing of neonatal thymic epithelial cells. Sci Rep (2013) 3:1860. doi:10.1038/srep01860

72. Schluns KS, Grutkoski PS, Cook JE, Engelmann GL, Le PT. Human thymic epithelial cells produce TGF-beta 3 and express TGF-beta receptors. Int Immunol (1995) 7:1681–90. doi:10.1093/intimm/7.10.1681

73. Anderson MS, Venanzi ES, Klein L, Chen Z, Berzins SP, Turley SJ, et al. Projection of an immunological self shadow within the thymus by the aire protein. Science (2002) 298:1395–401. doi:10.1126/science.1075958

74. Anderson MS, Venanzi ES, Chen Z, Berzins SP, Benoist C, Mathis D. The cellular mechanism of Aire control of T cell tolerance. Immunity (2005) 23:227–39. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2005.07.005

75. Derbinski J, Gäbler J, Brors B, Tierling S, Jonnakuty S, Hergenhahn M, et al. Promiscuous gene expression in thymic epithelial cells is regulated at multiple levels. J Exp Med (2005) 202:33–45. doi:10.1084/jem.20050471

76. Ohigashi I, Zuklys S, Sakata M, Mayer CE, Zhanybekova S, Murata S, et al. Aire-expressing thymic medullary epithelial cells originate from β5t-expressing progenitor cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2013) 110:9885–90. doi:10.1073/pnas.1301799110

77. Derbinski J, Schulte A, Kyewski B, Klein L. Promiscuous gene expression in medullary thymic epithelial cells mirrors the peripheral self. Nat Immunol (2001) 2:1032–9. doi:10.1038/ni723

78. Melichar HJ, Ross JO, Herzmark P, Hogquist KA, Robey EA. Distinct temporal patterns of T cell receptor signaling during positive versus negative selection in situ. Sci Signal (2013) 6:ra92. doi:10.1126/scisignal.2004400

79. Dzhagalov IL, Chen KG, Herzmark P, Robey EA. Elimination of self-reactive T cells in the thymus: a timeline for negative selection. PLoS Biol (2013) 11:e1001566. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001566

80. Konkel JE, Jin W, Abbatiello B, Grainger JR, Chen W. Thymocyte apoptosis drives the intrathymic generation of regulatory T cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2014) 111:E465–73. doi:10.1073/pnas.1320319111

81. Cejalvo T, Sacedón R, Hernández-López C, Diez B, Gutierrez-Frías C, Valencia J, et al. Bone morphogenetic protein-2/4 signalling pathway components are expressed in the human thymus and inhibit early T-cell development. Immunology (2007) 121:94–104. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2567.2007.02541.x

82. Passa O, Tsalavos S, Belyaev NN, Petryk A, Potocnik AJ, Graf D. Compartmentalization of bone morphogenetic proteins and their antagonists in lymphoid progenitors and supporting microenvironments and functional implications. Immunology (2011) 134:349–59. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2567.2011.03495.x

83. Kersten C, Sivertsen EA, Hystad ME, Forfang L, Smeland EB, Myklebust JH. BMP-6 inhibits growth of mature human B cells; induction of Smad phosphorylation and upregulation of Id1. BMC Immunol (2005) 6:9. doi:10.1186/1471-2172-6-9

84. Ouyang W, Beckett O, Ma Q, Li MO. Transforming growth factor-beta signaling curbs thymic negative selection promoting regulatory T cell development. Immunity (2010) 32:642–53. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2010.04.012

85. Hauri-Hohl M, Zuklys S, Holländer GA, Ziegler SF. A regulatory role for TGF-β signaling in the establishment and function of the thymic medulla. Nat Immunol (2014) 15:554–61. doi:10.1038/ni.2869

86. Marrella V, Poliani PL, Notarangelo LD, Villa A. Rag defects and thymic stroma: lessons from animal models. Front Immunol (2014) 5:529. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2014.00259

87. Nehls M, Pfeifer D, Schorpp M, Hedrich H, Boehm T. New member of the winged-helix protein family disrupted in mouse and rat nude mutations. Nature (1994) 372:103–7. doi:10.1038/372103a0

88. Balciunaite G, Keller MP, Balciunaite E, Piali L, Zuklys S, Mathieu YD, et al. Wnt glycoproteins regulate the expression of FoxN1, the gene defective in nude mice. Nat Immunol (2002) 3:1102–8. doi:10.1038/ni850

89. Tsai PT, Lee RA, Wu H. BMP4 acts upstream of FGF in modulating thymic stroma and regulating thymopoiesis. Blood (2003) 102:3947–53. doi:10.1182/blood-2003-05-1657

90. Bleul CC, Boehm T. BMP signaling is required for normal thymus development. J Immunol (2005) 175:5213–21. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.175.8.5213

91. Talaber G, Kvell K, Varecza Z, Boldizsar F, Parnell SM, Jenkinson EJ, et al. Wnt-4 protects thymic epithelial cells against dexamethasone-induced senescence. Rejuvenation Res (2011) 14:241–8. doi:10.1089/rej.2010.1110

92. Liang C-C, You L-R, Yen JJ, Liao N-S, Yang-Yen H-F, Chen C-M. Thymic epithelial β-catenin is required for adult thymic homeostasis and function. Immunol Cell Biol (2013) 91:511–23. doi:10.1038/icb.2013.34

93. Lai L, Jin J. Generation of thymic epithelial cell progenitors by mouse embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells (2009) 27:3012–20. doi:10.1002/stem.238

94. D’Amour KA, Agulnick AD, Eliazer S, Kelly OG, Kroon E, Baetge EE. Efficient differentiation of human embryonic stem cells to definitive endoderm. Nat Biotechnol (2005) 23:1534–41. doi:10.1038/nbt1163

95. Green MD, Chen A, Nostro M-C, d’Souza SL, Schaniel C, Lemischka IR, et al. Generation of anterior foregut endoderm from human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells. Nat Biotechnol (2011) 29:267–72. doi:10.1038/nbt.1788

96. Parent AV, Russ HA, Khan IS, Laflam TN, Metzger TC, Anderson MS, et al. Generation of functional thymic epithelium from human embryonic stem cells that supports host T cell development. Cell Stem Cell (2013) 13:219–29. doi:10.1016/j.stem.2013.04.004

97. Douagi I, Andre I, Ferraz JC, Cumano A. Characterization of T cell precursor activity in the murine fetal thymus: evidence for an input of T cell precursors between days 12 and 14 of gestation. Eur J Immunol (2000) 30:2201–10. doi:10.1002/1521-4141(2000)30:8<2201:AID-IMMU2201>3.0.CO;2-2

98. Liu C, Ueno T, Kuse S, Saito F, Nitta T, Piali L, et al. The role of CCL21 in recruitment of T-precursor cells to fetal thymi. Blood (2005) 105:31–9. doi:10.1182/blood-2004-04-1369

99. Liu C, Saito F, Liu Z, Lei Y, Uehara S, Love P, et al. Coordination between CCR7- and CCR9-mediated chemokine signals in prevascular fetal thymus colonization. Blood (2006) 108:2531–9. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-05-024190

100. Calderón L, Boehm T. Three chemokine receptors cooperatively regulate homing of hematopoietic progenitors to the embryonic mouse thymus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2011) 108:7517–22. doi:10.1073/pnas.1016428108

101. Bleul CC, Boehm T. Chemokines define distinct microenvironments in the developing thymus. Eur J Immunol (2000) 30:3371–9. doi:10.1002/1521-4141(2000012)30:12<3371:AID-IMMU3371>3.0.CO;2-L

102. Zaballos A, Gutiérrez J, Varona R, Ardavín C, Márquez G. Cutting edge: identification of the orphan chemokine receptor GPR-9-6 as CCR9, the receptor for the chemokine TECK. J Immunol (1999) 162:5671–5.

103. Youn BS, Kim CH, Smith FO, Broxmeyer HE. TECK, an efficacious chemoattractant for human thymocytes, uses GPR-9-6/CCR9 as a specific receptor. Blood (1999) 94:2533–6.

104. Yoshida R, Nagira M, Kitaura M, Imagawa N, Imai T, Yoshie O. Secondary lymphoid-tissue chemokine is a functional ligand for the CC chemokine receptor CCR7. J Biol Chem (1998) 273:7118–22. doi:10.1074/jbc.273.12.7118

105. Jenkinson WE, Rossi SW, Parnell SM, Agace WW, Takahama Y, Jenkinson EJ, et al. Chemokine receptor expression defines heterogeneity in the earliest thymic migrants. Eur J Immunol (2007) 37:2090–6. doi:10.1002/eji.200737212

106. Hillyer P, Mordelet E, Flynn G, Male D. Chemokines, chemokine receptors and adhesion molecules on different human endothelia: discriminating the tissue-specific functions that affect leucocyte migration. Clin Exp Immunol (2003) 134:431–41. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2249.2003.02323.x

107. Lambrecht S, Smith V, De Wilde K, Coudenys J, Decuman S, Deforce D, et al. Growth differentiation factor 15, a marker of lung involvement in systemic sclerosis, is involved in fibrosis development but is not indispensable for fibrosis development. Arthritis Rheumatol (2014) 66:418–27. doi:10.1002/art.38241

108. Kempf T, Zarbock A, Widera C, Butz S, Stadtmann A, Rossaint J, et al. GDF-15 is an inhibitor of leukocyte integrin activation required for survival after myocardial infarction in mice. Nat Med (2011) 17:581–8. doi:10.1038/nm.2354

109. Carrillo-García C, Prochnow S, Simeonova IK, Strelau J, Hölzl-Wenig G, Mandl C, et al. Growth/differentiation factor 15 promotes EGFR signalling, and regulates proliferation and migration in the hippocampus of neonatal and young adult mice. Development (2014) 141:773–83. doi:10.1242/dev.096131

110. Zhao X, Huang Y, Huang Y, Lei P, Peng J, Wu S, et al. Transforming growth factor-beta1 upregulates the expression of CXC chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4) in human breast cancer MCF-7 cells. Acta Pharmacol Sin (2010) 31:347–54. doi:10.1038/aps.2009.204

111. Yu S, Crawford D, Tsuchihashi T, Behrens TW, Srivastava D. The chemokine receptor CXCR7 functions to regulate cardiac valve remodeling. Dev Dyn (2011) 240:384–93. doi:10.1002/dvdy.22549

112. Park BY, Hong CS, Sohail FA, Saint-Jeannet JP. Developmental expression and regulation of the chemokine CXCL14 in Xenopus. Int J Dev Biol (2009) 53:535–40. doi:10.1387/ijdb.092855bp

113. Sierra-Filardi E, Nieto C, Domínguez-Soto A, Barroso R, Sánchez-Mateos P, Puig-Kroger A, et al. CCL2 shapes macrophage polarization by GM-CSF and M-CSF: identification of CCL2/CCR2-dependent gene expression profile. J Immunol (2014) 192:3858–67. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1302821

114. Wang B, Biron C, She J, Higgins K, Sunshine MJ, Lacy E, et al. A block in both early T lymphocyte and natural killer cell development in transgenic mice with high-copy numbers of the human CD3E gene. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (1994) 91:9402–6. doi:10.1073/pnas.91.20.9402

115. Holländer GA, Wang B, Nichogiannopoulou A, Platenburg PP, van Ewijk W, Burakoff SJ, et al. Developmental control point in induction of thymic cortex regulated by a subpopulation of prothymocytes. Nature (1995) 373:350–3. doi:10.1038/373350a0

116. Jenkinson WE, Rossi SW, Jenkinson EJ, Anderson G. Development of functional thymic epithelial cells occurs independently of lymphostromal interactions. Mech Dev (2005) 122:1294–9. doi:10.1016/j.mod.2005.08.003

117. Ohnemus S, Kanzler B, Jerome-Majewska LA, Papaioannou VE, Boehm T, Mallo M. Aortic arch and pharyngeal phenotype in the absence of BMP-dependent neural crest in the mouse. Mech Dev (2002) 119:127–35. doi:10.1016/S0925-4773(02)00345-3

118. Liu Y, Jin Y, Li J, Seto E, Kuo E, Yu W, et al. Inactivation of Cdc42 in neural crest cells causes craniofacial and cardiovascular morphogenesis defects. Dev Biol (2013) 383:239–52. doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2013.09.013

119. Alt B, Elsalini OA, Schrumpf P, Haufs N, Lawson ND, Schwabe GC, et al. Arteries define the position of the thyroid gland during its developmental relocalisation. Development (2006) 133:3797–804. doi:10.1242/dev.02550

120. Wang J, Nagy A, Larsson J, Dudas M, Sucov HM, Kaartinen V. Defective ALK5 signaling in the neural crest leads to increased postmigratory neural crest cell apoptosis and severe outflow tract defects. BMC Dev Biol (2006) 6:51. doi:10.1186/1471-213X-6-51

121. Hauri-Hohl MM, Zuklys S, Keller MP, Jeker LT, Barthlott T, Moon AM, et al. TGF-beta signaling in thymic epithelial cells regulates thymic involution and postirradiation reconstitution. Blood (2008) 112:626–34. doi:10.1182/blood-2007-10-115618

122. Foster K, Sheridan J, Veiga-Fernandes H, Roderick K, Pachnis V, Adams R, et al. Contribution of neural crest-derived cells in the embryonic and adult thymus. J Immunol (2008) 180:3183–9. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.180.5.3183

123. Crivellato E, Vacca A, Ribatti D. Setting the stage: an anatomist’s view of the immune system. Trends Immunol (2004) 25:210–7. doi:10.1016/j.it.2004.02.008

124. Pearse G. Normal structure, function and histology of the thymus. Toxicol Pathol (2006) 34:504–14. doi:10.1080/01926230600865549

125. Gameiro J, Nagib P, Verinaud L. The thymus microenvironment in regulating thymocyte differentiation. Cell Adh Migr (2010) 4:382–90. doi:10.4161/cam.4.3.11789

126. Berrih S, Savino W, Cohen S. Extracellular matrix of the human thymus: immunofluorescence studies on frozen sections and cultured epithelial cells. J Histochem Cytochem (1985) 33:655–64. doi:10.1177/33.7.3891843

127. Heng TSP, Painter MW. The Immunological Genome Project: networks of gene expression in immune cells. Nat Immunol (2008) 9:1091–4. doi:10.1038/ni1008-1091

128. Hager-Theodorides AL, Outram SV, Shah DK, Sacedon R, Shrimpton RE, Vicente A, et al. Bone morphogenetic protein 2/4 signaling regulates early thymocyte differentiation. J Immunol (2002) 169:5496–504. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.169.10.5496

129. Hager-Theodorides AL, Ross SE, Sahni H, Mishina Y, Furmanski AL, Crompton T. Direct BMP2/4 signaling through BMP receptor IA regulates fetal thymocyte progenitor homeostasis and differentiation to CD4+CD8+ double-positive cell. Cell Cycle (2014) 13:324–33. doi:10.4161/cc.27118

130. Licona P, Chimal-Monroy J, Soldevila G. Inhibins are the major activin ligands expressed during early thymocyte development. Dev Dyn (2006) 235:1124–32. doi:10.1002/dvdy.20707

131. Mingueneau M, Kreslavsky T, Gray D, Heng T, Cruse R, Ericson J, et al. The transcriptional landscape of αβ T cell differentiation. Nat Immunol (2013) 14:619–32. doi:10.1038/ni.2590

132. Loffredo FS, Steinhauser ML, Jay SM, Gannon J, Pancoast JR, Yalamanchi P, et al. Growth differentiation factor 11 is a circulating factor that reverses age-related cardiac hypertrophy. Cell (2013) 153:828–39. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2013.04.015

133. Savino W. Intrathymic T cell migration is a multivectorial process under a complex neuroendocrine control. Neuroimmunomodulation (2010) 17:142–5. doi:10.1159/000258708

134. Rosendahl A, Speletas M, Leandersson K, Ivars F, Sideras P. Transforming growth factor-beta- and Activin-Smad signaling pathways are activated at distinct maturation stages of the thymopoeisis. Int Immunol (2003) 15:1401–14. doi:10.1093/intimm/dxg139

135. Yoshioka Y, Ono M, Osaki M, Konishi I, Sakaguchi S. Differential effects of inhibition of bone morphogenic protein (BMP) signalling on T-cell activation and differentiation. Eur J Immunol (2012) 42:749–59. doi:10.1002/eji.201141702

136. Sanos SL, Nowak J, Fallet M, Bajenoff M. Stromal cell networks regulate thymocyte migration and dendritic cell behavior in the thymus. J Immunol (2011) 186:2835–41. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1003563

137. Savino W, Mendes-Da-Cruz DA, Smaniotto S, Silva-Monteiro E, Villa-Verde DMS. Molecular mechanisms governing thymocyte migration: combined role of chemokines and extracellular matrix. J Leukoc Biol (2004) 75:951–61. doi:10.1189/jlb.1003455

138. Von Boehmer H. Selection of the T-cell repertoire: receptor-controlled checkpoints in T-cell development. Adv Immunol (2004) 84:201–38. doi:10.1016/S0065-2776(04)84006-9

139. Ferreira LMR. Gammadelta T cells: innately adaptive immune cells? Int Rev Immunol (2013) 32:223–48. doi:10.3109/08830185.2013.783831

140. Luc S, Luis TC, Boukarabila H, Macaulay IC, Buza-Vidas N, Bouriez-Jones T, et al. The earliest thymic T cell progenitors sustain B cell and myeloid lineage potential. Nat Immunol (2012) 13:412–9. doi:10.1038/ni.2255

141. Ciofani M, Zúñiga-Pflücker JC. The thymus as an inductive site for T lymphopoiesis. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol (2007) 23:463–93. doi:10.1146/annurev.cellbio.23.090506.123547

142. Schmitt TM, Ciofani M, Petrie HT, Zúñiga-Pflücker JC. Maintenance of T cell specification and differentiation requires recurrent notch receptor-ligand interactions. J Exp Med (2004) 200:469–79. doi:10.1084/jem.20040394

143. Dudley EC, Petrie HT, Shah LM, Owen MJ, Hayday AC. T cell receptor beta chain gene rearrangement and selection during thymocyte development in adult mice. Immunity (1994) 1:83–93. doi:10.1016/1074-7613(94)90102-3

144. Aleman-Muench GR, Mendoza V, Stenvers K, Garcia-Zepeda EA, Lopez-Casillas F, Raman C, et al. Betaglycan (TβRIII) is expressed in the thymus and regulates T cell development by protecting thymocytes from apoptosis. PLoS One (2012) 7:e44217. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0044217

145. López-Casillas F, Wrana JL, Massagué J. Betaglycan presents ligand to the TGF beta signaling receptor. Cell (1993) 73:1435–44. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(93)90368-Z

146. López-Casillas F, Payne HM, Andres JL, Massagué J. Betaglycan can act as a dual modulator of TGF-β access to signaling receptors: mapping of ligand binding and GAG attachment sites. J Cell Biol (1994) 124:557–68. doi:10.1083/jcb.124.4.557

147. Eickelberg O, Centrella M, Reiss M, Kashgarian M, Wells RG. Betaglycan inhibits TGF-β signaling by preventing type I-type II receptor complex formation: glycosaminoglycan modifications alter betaglycan function. J Biol Chem (2002) 277:823–9. doi:10.1074/jbc.M105110200

148. Licona-Limón P, Alemán-Muench G, Chimal-Monroy J, Macías-Silva M, García-Zepeda EA, Matzuk MM, et al. Activins and inhibins: novel regulators of thymocyte development. Biochem Biophys Res Commun (2009) 381:229–35. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2009.02.029

149. Plum J, De Smedt M, Leclercq G, Vandekerckhove B. Influence of TGF-beta on murine thymocyte development in fetal thymus organ culture. J Immunol (1995) 154:5789–98.

150. Graf D, Nethisinghe S, Palmer DB, Fisher AG, Merkenschlager M. The developmentally regulated expression of Twisted gastrulation reveals a role for bone morphogenetic proteins in the control of T cell development. J Exp Med (2002) 196:163–71. doi:10.1084/jem.20020276

151. Suzuki N, Labosky PA, Furuta Y, Hargett L, Dunn R, Fogo AB, et al. Failure of ventral body wall closure in mouse embryos lacking a procollagen C-proteinase encoded by Bmp1, a mammalian gene related to Drosophila tolloid. Development (1996) 122:3587–95.

152. Surh CD, Sprent J. T-cell apoptosis detected in situ during positive and negative selection in the thymus. Nature (1994) 372:100–3. doi:10.1038/372100a0

153. Yamasaki S, Ishikawa E, Sakuma M, Ogata K, Sakata-Sogawa K, Hiroshima M, et al. Mechanistic basis of pre-T cell receptor-mediated autonomous signaling critical for thymocyte development. Nat Immunol (2006) 7:67–75. doi:10.1038/ni1290

154. Crompton T, Moore M, MacDonald HR, Malissen B. Double-negative thymocyte subsets in CD3ζ chain-deficient mice: absence of HSA+CD44-CD25- cells. Eur J Immunol (1994) 24:1903–7. doi:10.1002/eji.1830240828

155. Petrie HT, Livak F, Schatz DG, Strasser A, Crispe IN, Shortman K. Multiple rearrangements in T cell receptor alpha chain genes maximize the production of useful thymocytes. J Exp Med (1993) 178:615–22. doi:10.1084/jem.178.2.615

156. Morris GP, Allen PM. How the TCR balances sensitivity and specificity for the recognition of self and pathogens. Nat Immunol (2012) 13:121–8. doi:10.1038/ni.2190

157. Oh SP, Yeo C-Y, Lee Y, Schrewe H, Whitman M, Li E. Activin type IIA and IIB receptors mediate Gdf11 signaling in axial vertebral patterning. Genes Dev (2002) 16:2749–54. doi:10.1101/gad.1021802

158. Mazerbourg S, Sangkuhl K, Luo CW, Sudo S, Klein C, Hsueh AJW. Identification of receptors and signaling pathways for orphan bone morphogenetic protein/growth differentiation factor ligands based on genomic analyses. J Biol Chem (2005) 280:32122–32. doi:10.1074/jbc.M504629200

159. Andersson O, Reissmann E, Ibáñez CF. Growth differentiation factor 11 signals through the transforming growth factor-beta receptor ALK5 to regionalize the anterior-posterior axis. EMBO Rep (2006) 7:831–7. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400752

160. Lee KJ, Mendelsohn M, Jessell TM. Neuronal patterning by BMPs: a requirement for GDF7 in the generation of a discrete class of commissural interneurons in the mouse spinal cord. Genes Dev (1998) 12:3394–407. doi:10.1101/gad.12.21.3394

161. Settle S, Marker P, Gurley K, Sinha A, Thacker A, Wang Y, et al. The BMP family member Gdf7 is required for seminal vesicle growth, branching morphogenesis, and cytodifferentiation. Dev Biol (2001) 234:138–50. doi:10.1006/dbio.2001.0244

162. McPherron AC, Lawler AM, Lee SJ. Regulation of anterior/posterior patterning of the axial skeleton by growth/differentiation factor 11. Nat Genet (1999) 22:260–4. doi:10.1038/10320

163. Jurberg AD, Aires R, Varela-Lasheras I, Nóvoa A, Mallo M. Switching axial progenitors from producing trunk to tail tissues in vertebrate embryos. Dev Cell (2013) 25:451–62. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2013.05.009

164. Esquela AF, Lee S-J. Regulation of metanephric kidney development by growth/differentiation factor 11. Dev Biol (2003) 257:356–70. doi:10.1016/S0012-1606(03)00100-3

165. Li Y, Messina C, Bendaoud M, Fine DH, Schreiner H, Tsiagbe VK. Adaptive immune response in osteoclastic bone resorption induced by orally administered Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans in a rat model of periodontal disease. Mol Oral Microbiol (2010) 25:275–92. doi:10.1111/j.2041-1014.2010.00576.x

166. Singer A, Adoro S, Park J-H. Lineage fate and intense debate: myths, models and mechanisms of CD4- versus CD8-lineage choice. Nat Rev Immunol (2008) 8:788–801. doi:10.1038/nri2416

167. Adoro S, McCaughtry T, Erman B, Alag A, Van Laethem F, Park J-H, et al. Coreceptor gene imprinting governs thymocyte lineage fate. EMBO J (2012) 31:366–77. doi:10.1038/emboj.2011.388

168. Stenvers KL, Tursky ML, Harder KW, Kountouri N, Amatayakul-Chantler S, Grail D, et al. Heart and liver defects and reduced transforming growth factor beta2 sensitivity in transforming growth factor beta type III receptor-deficient embryos. Mol Cell Biol (2003) 23:4371–85. doi:10.1128/MCB.23.12.4371-4385.2003

169. Gray PC, Shani G, Aung K, Kelber J, Vale W. Cripto binds transforming growth factor beta (TGF-beta) and inhibits TGF-beta signaling. Mol Cell Biol (2006) 26:9268–78. doi:10.1128/MCB.01168-06

170. Ding J, Yang L, Yan YT, Chen A, Desai N, Wynshaw-Boris A, et al. Cripto is required for correct orientation of the anterior-posterior axis in the mouse embryo. Nature (1998) 395:702–7. doi:10.1038/27215

171. Xu C, Liguori G, Persico MG, Adamson ED. Abrogation of the Cripto gene in mouse leads to failure of postgastrulation morphogenesis and lack of differentiation of cardiomyocytes. Development (1999) 126:483–94. doi:10.1006/dbio.1998.8862

172. Ohkura N, Kitagawa Y, Sakaguchi S. Development and maintenance of regulatory T cells. Immunity (2013) 38:414–23. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2013.03.002

173. Lee HM, Bautista JL, Scott-Browne J, Mohan JF, Hsieh CSA. Broad range of self-reactivity drives thymic regulatory T cell selection to limit responses to self. Immunity (2012) 37:475–86. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2012.07.009

174. Klein L, Kyewski B, Allen PM, Hogquist KA. Positive and negative selection of the T cell repertoire: what thymocytes see (and don’t see). Nat Rev Immunol (2014) 14:377–91. doi:10.1038/nri3667

175. Zorn E, Nelson EA, Mohseni M, Porcheray F, Kim H, Litsa D, et al. IL-2 regulates FOXP3 expression in human CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells through a STAT-dependent mechanism and induces the expansion of these cells in vivo. Blood (2006) 108:1571–9. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-02-004747

176. Zeiser R, Negrin RS. Interleukin-2 receptor downstream events in regulatory T cells: implications for the choice of immunosuppressive drug therapy. Cell Cycle (2008) 7:458–62. doi:10.4161/cc.7.4.5454

177. Burchill MA, Yang J, Vang KB, Moon JJ, Chu HH, Lio C-WJ, et al. Linked T cell receptor and cytokine signaling govern the development of the regulatory T cell repertoire. Immunity (2008) 28:112–21. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2007.11.022

178. Brunkow ME, Jeffery EW, Hjerrild KA, Paeper B, Clark LB, Yasayko SA, et al. Disruption of a new forkhead/winged-helix protein, scurfin, results in the fatal lymphoproliferative disorder of the scurfy mouse. Nat Genet (2001) 27:68–73. doi:10.1038/83784

179. Fontenot JD, Gavin MA, Rudensky AY. Foxp3 programs the development and function of CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells. Nat Immunol (2003) 4:330–6. doi:10.1038/ni904

180. Hori S, Nomura T, Sakaguchi S. Control of regulatory T cell development by the transcription factor Foxp3. Science (2003) 299:1057–61. doi:10.1126/science.1079490

181. Gavin MA, Rasmussen JP, Fontenot JD, Vasta V, Manganiello VC, Beavo JA, et al. Foxp3-dependent programme of regulatory T-cell differentiation. Nature (2007) 445:771–5. doi:10.1038/nature05543

182. Tai X, Erman B, Alag A, Mu J, Kimura M, Katz G, et al. Foxp3 transcription factor is proapoptotic and lethal to developing regulatory T cells unless counterbalanced by cytokine survival signals. Immunity (2013) 38:1116–28. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2013.02.022

183. Liu Y, Zhang P, Li J, Kulkarni AB, Perruche S, Chen W. A critical function for TGF-beta signaling in the development of natural CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ regulatory T cells. Nat Immunol (2008) 9:632–40. doi:10.1038/ni.1607

184. Tone Y, Furuuchi K, Kojima Y, Tykocinski ML, Greene MI, Tone M. Smad3 and NFAT cooperate to induce Foxp3 expression through its enhancer. Nat Immunol (2008) 9:194–202. doi:10.1038/ni1549

185. Xu L, Kitani A, Stuelten C, McGrady G, Fuss I, Strober W. Positive and negative transcriptional regulation of the Foxp3 gene is mediated by access and binding of the Smad3 protein to enhancer I. Immunity (2010) 33:313–25. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2010.09.001

186. Josefowicz SZ, Niec RE, Kim HY, Treuting P, Chinen T, Zheng Y, et al. Extrathymically generated regulatory T cells control mucosal TH2 inflammation. Nature (2012) 482:395–9. doi:10.1038/nature10772

187. Marie JC, Letterio JJ, Gavin M, Rudensky AY. TGF-beta1 maintains suppressor function and Foxp3 expression in CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells. J Exp Med (2005) 201:1061–7. doi:10.1084/jem.20042276

188. Kaartinen V, Voncken JW, Shuler C, Warburton D, Bu D, Heisterkamp N, et al. Abnormal lung development and cleft palate in mice lacking TGF-beta 3 indicates defects of epithelial-mesenchymal interaction. Nat Genet (1995) 11:415–21. doi:10.1038/ng1295-415

189. Sanford LP, Ormsby I, Gittenberger-de Groot AC, Sariola H, Friedman R, Boivin GP, et al. TGFbeta2 knockout mice have multiple developmental defects that are non-overlapping with other TGFbeta knockout phenotypes. Development (1997) 124:2659–70.

190. Proetzel G, Pawlowski SA, Wiles MV, Yin M, Boivin GP, Howles PN, et al. Transforming growth factor-beta 3 is required for secondary palate fusion. Nat Genet (1995) 11:409–14. doi:10.1038/ng1295-409

191. Dünker N, Krieglstein K. Tgfβ2-/-Tgfβ3-/- double knockout mice display severe midline fusion defects and early embryonic lethality. Anat Embryol (Berl) (2002) 206:73–83. doi:10.1007/s00429-002-0273-6

192. Mu Z, Yang Z, Yu D, Zhao Z, Munger JS. TGFβ1 and TGFβ3 are partially redundant effectors in brain vascular morphogenesis. Mech Dev (2008) 125:508–16. doi:10.1016/j.mod.2008.01.003

193. McPherron AC, Huynh TV, Lee S-J. Redundancy of myostatin and growth/differentiation factor 11 function. BMC Dev Biol (2009) 9:24. doi:10.1186/1471-213X-9-24

194. Do J, Fink PJ, Li L, Spolski R, Robinson J, Leonard WJ, et al. Cutting edge: spontaneous development of IL-17-producing gamma delta T cells in the thymus occurs via a TGF-beta 1-dependent mechanism. J Immunol (2010) 184:1675–9. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.0903539

195. Michel M-L, Mendes-da-Cruz D, Keller AC, Lochner M, Schneider E, Dy M, et al. Critical role of ROR-γt in a new thymic pathway leading to IL-17-producing invariant NKT cell differentiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A (2008) 105:19845–50. doi:10.1073/pnas.0806472105

196. Lee YJ, Holzapfel KL, Zhu J, Jameson SC, Hogquist KA. Steady-state production of IL-4 modulates immunity in mouse strains and is determined by lineage diversity of iNKT cells. Nat Immunol (2013) 14:1146–54. doi:10.1038/ni.2731

197. Monteiro M, Almeida CF, Agua-Doce A, Graca L. Induced IL-17-producing invariant NKT cells require activation in presence of TGF-β and IL-1β. J Immunol (2013) 190:805–11. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.1201010

198. Havenar-Daughton C, Li S, Benlagha K, Marie JC. Development and function of murine ROR t+ iNKT cells are under TGF-signaling control. Blood (2012) 119:3486–94. doi:10.1182/blood-2012-01-401604

199. Rando TA, Chang HY. Aging, rejuvenation, and epigenetic reprogramming: resetting the aging clock. Cell (2012) 148:46–57. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2012.01.003

200. Douek DC, McFarland RD, Keiser PH, Gage EA, Massey JM, Haynes BF, et al. Changes in thymic function with age and during the treatment of HIV infection. Nature (1998) 396:690–5. doi:10.1038/25374

201. Coelho VDM, Bunbury A, Rangel LB, Giri B, Weeraratna A, Morin PJ, et al. Fat-storing multilocular cells expressing CCR5 increase in the thymus with advancing age: potential role for CCR5 ligands on the differentiation and migration of preadipocytes. Int J Med Sci (2010) 7:1–14. doi:10.7150/ijms.7.1

202. Müller L, Pawelec G. Aging and immunity – impact of behavioral intervention. Brain Behav Immun (2014) 39:8–22. doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2013.11.015

203. Ventevogel MS, Sempowski GD. Thymic rejuvenation and aging. Curr Opin Immunol (2013) 25:516–22. doi:10.1016/j.coi.2013.06.002

204. Sutherland JS, Goldberg GL, Hammett MV, Uldrich AP, Berzins SP, Heng TS, et al. Activation of thymic regeneration in mice and humans following androgen blockade. J Immunol (2005) 175:2741–53. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.175.4.2741

205. Hirakata A, Okumi M, Griesemer AD, Shimizu A, Nobori S, Tena A, et al. Reversal of age-related thymic involution by an LHRH agonist in miniature swine. Transpl Immunol (2010) 24:76–81. doi:10.1016/j.trim.2010.08.001

206. Berent-Maoz B, Montecino-Rodriguez E, Signer RAJ, Dorshkind K. Fibroblast growth factor-7 partially reverses murine thymocyte progenitor aging by repression of Ink4a. Blood (2012) 119:5715–21. doi:10.1182/blood-2011-12-400002

207. Min D, Panoskaltsis-Mortari A, Kuro-o M, Holländer GA, Blazar BR, Weinberg KI. Sustained thymopoiesis and improvement in functional immunity induced by exogenous KGF administration in murine models of aging. Blood (2007) 109:2529–37. doi:10.1182/blood-2006-08-043794

208. Morrhaye G, Kermani H, Legros J-J, Baron F, Beguin Y, Moutschen M, et al. Impact of growth hormone (GH) deficiency and GH replacement upon thymus function in adult patients. PLoS One (2009) 4:e5668. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005668

209. Taub DD, Murphy WJ, Longo DL. Rejuvenation of the aging thymus: growth hormone-mediated and ghrelin-mediated signaling pathways. Curr Opin Pharmacol (2010) 10:408–24. doi:10.1016/j.coph.2010.04.015

210. Phillips JA, Brondstetter TI, English CA, Lee HE, Virts EL, Thoman ML. IL-7 gene therapy in aging restores early thymopoiesis without reversing involution. J Immunol (2004) 173:4867–74. doi:10.4049/jimmunol.173.8.4867

211. Velardi E, Dudakov JA, Van den Brink MRM. Clinical strategies to enhance thymic recovery after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Immunol Lett (2013) 155:31–5. doi:10.1016/j.imlet.2013.09.016

212. Zook EC, Krishack PA, Zhang S, Zeleznik-Le NJ, Firulli AB, Witte PL, et al. Overexpression of Foxn1 attenuates age-associated thymic involution and prevents the expansion of peripheral CD4 memory T cells. Blood (2011) 118:5723–31. doi:10.1182/blood-2011-03-342097

213. Bredenkamp N, Nowell CS, Blackburn CC. Regeneration of the aged thymus by a single transcription factor. Development (2014) 141:1627–37. doi:10.1242/dev.103614

214. Bredenkamp N, Ulyanchenko S, O’Neill KE, Manley NR, Vaidya HJ, Blackburn CC. An organized and functional thymus generated from FOXN1-reprogrammed fibroblasts. Nat Cell Biol (2014) 16(9):902–8. doi:10.1038/ncb3023

215. Sinha M, Jang YC, Oh J, Khong D, Wu EY, Manohar R, et al. Restoring systemic GDF11 levels reverses age-related dysfunction in mouse skeletal muscle. Science (2014) 344:649–52. doi:10.1126/science.1251152

216. Katsimpardi L, Litterman NK, Schein PA, Miller CM, Loffredo FS, Wojtkiewicz GR, et al. Vascular and neurogenic rejuvenation of the aging mouse brain by young systemic factors. Science (2014) 344:630–4. doi:10.1126/science.1251141

217. Zhang Y, Shao J, Wang Z, Yang T, Liu S, Liu Y, et al. Growth differentiation factor 11 is a protective factor for osteoblastogenesis by targeting PPARgamma. Gene (2014) 557(2):6–11. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2014.12.039

218. Finkenzeller G, Stark GB, Strassburg S. Growth differentiation factor 11 supports migration and sprouting of endothelial progenitor cells. J Surg Res (2015) 198(1):1–7. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2015.05.001

219. Suragani RNVS, Cadena SM, Cawley SM, Sako D, Mitchell D, Li R, et al. Transforming growth factor-β superfamily ligand trap ACE-536 corrects anemia by promoting late-stage erythropoiesis. Nat Med (2014) 20:408–14. doi:10.1038/nm.3512

220. Egerman MA, Cadena SM, Gilbert JA, Meyer A, Nelson HN, Swalley SE, et al. GDF11 increases with age and inhibits skeletal muscle regeneration. Cell Metab (2015) 22(1):1–11. doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2015.05.010

221. Pishel I, Shytikov D, Orlova T, Peregudov A, Artyuhov I, Butenko G. Accelerated aging versus rejuvenation of the immune system in heterochronic parabiosis. Rejuvenation Res (2012) 15:239–48. doi:10.1089/rej.2012.1331

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2015 Jurberg, Vasconcelos-Fontes and Cotta-de-Almeida. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.