|
|
||||||||
B Signaling Pathway Components1


* Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD 21201;
Departments of Microbiology and Oral Biology, University of Alabama, Birmingham, AL 35294; and
Regulation of Cell Growth Laboratory, National Cancer Institute, Frederick, MD 21702
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
B activation. Pretreatment of macrophages with a pure TLR4
agonist (protein-free Escherichia coli (Ec) LPS) or with
TLR2 agonists (Porphyromonas gingivalis LPS or synthetic
lipoprotein Pam3Cys) led to suppression of TNF-
secretion,
IL-1R-associated kinase-1, and I
B kinase (IKK) kinase
activities, c-jun N-terminal kinase, and extracellular signal-regulated
kinase phosphorylation, and to suppression of NF-
B DNA binding and
transactivation upon challenge with the same agonist (TLR4 or TLR2
"homotolerance," respectively). Despite inhibited NF-
B DNA
binding, increased levels of nuclear NF-
B were detected in
agonist-pretreated macrophages. For all the intermediate signaling
elements, heterotolerance was weaker than TLR4 or TLR2 homotolerance
with the exception of IKK kinase activity. IKK kinase activity was
unperturbed in heterotolerance. TNF-
secretion was also suppressed
in P. gingivalis LPS-pretreated, Ec LPS-challenged
cells, but not vice versa, while Pam3Cys and Ec LPS did not induce a
state of cross-tolerance at the level of TNF-
. Experiments designed
to elucidate novel mechanisms of NF-
B inhibition in tolerized cells
revealed the potential contribution of I
B
and I
B
inhibitory
proteins and the necessity of TLR4 engagement for induction of
tolerance to Toll receptor-IL-1R domain-containing adapter
protein/MyD88-adapter-like-dependent gene expression. Collectively,
these data demonstrate that induction of homotolerance affects a
broader spectrum of signaling components than in heterotolerance, with
selective modulation of specific elements within the NF-
B signaling
pathway. | Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
, IL-1, and IL-6 that, in turn, serve as
endogenous inflammatory mediators. An integral component of the LPS
receptor complex is Toll-like receptor
(TLR)3 4. Mice that
express critical mutations or a targeted mutation in the
tlr4 gene are unresponsive to enterobacterial LPS
(1, 2, 3). TLR4 is a member of a larger family of signal
transducing molecules that share homology with Drosophila
Toll, a transmembrane protein that mediates dorsal ventral patterning
in embryos and antifungal resistance in imago (4, 5). Ten
mammalian TLRs have been identified (6).
Although TLR4 is the principal TLR species involved in LPS signaling,
recent studies indicate that TLR2 is the primary signal tranducing
molecule for LPS from certain nonenterobacterial Gram-negative
organisms, including Porphyromonas gingivalis
(7) and Leptospira interrogans
(8). TLR1 has also been implicated as a coreceptor for
TLR2 in that its coexpression in transfected cells augmented the
TLR4-independent response to Escherichia coli LPS and
Neisseria meningitidis lipooligosaccharide (9).
However, TLR2 is best recognized as the predominant signal transducing
molecule for diverse bacterial lipoproteins and the synthetic
lipopeptide, Pam3Cys (6). All TLRs, as well as the IL-1
and IL-18 receptors, share the capacity to bind the intracellular
adaptor molecule, MyD88, to a homologous intracytoplasmic domain
(6). A second adaptor molecule, Toll receptor IL-1R
domain-containing adapter protein (TIRAP)/MyD88-adapter-like (Mal),
mediates TLR4-dependent, but MyD88-independent, signaling. However,
TLR3, TLR9, and the IL-1 and IL-18 receptors appear not to
engage this pathway to any significant extent (10, 11, 12).
MyD88 and TIRAP/Mal initiate signaling cascades that lead to
recruitment of serine/threonine kinases, IL-1R-associated kinase
(IRAK)-1 and/or IRAK-2 (11). Recently, two other
serine/threonine kinases, receptor interacting protein 2 and
IRAK-4, were also shown to be necessary for cytokine production and
NF-
B activation by IL-1R/TLR agonists (13, 14). These
kinases, in turn, activate TNFR-associated factor 6-dependent
signaling cascade(s) that culminate in NF-
B activation
(15). However, the precise mechanism(s) by which these
downstream signaling cascades function has yet to be elucidated.
Prior exposure to LPS both in vitro and in vivo can lead to
desensitization of immune cells to subsequent challenge with LPS, a
phenomenon that has been referred to as "endotoxin tolerance." One
of the main characteristics of LPS tolerance in vitro is a change in
the pattern of inflammatory gene expression in cells of myeloid
lineage, when responses to a single or two sequential LPS exposures are
compared (16). For example, restimulation of monocytes and
macrophages previously exposed to LPS fails to elicit TNF-
, IL-1
,
IL-6, IL-12, and Jun B gene expression, although other genes, including
IL-10, IL-1R antagonist, and TNFRII, are expressed at normal or
elevated levels (17). Induction of an endotoxin tolerant
phenotype is not specific to the initiating action of LPS because
engagement of TLR/IL-1R family members, other than TLR4, has also been
found to result in macrophage refractoriness to subsequent LPS
challenge. The capacity of a stimulus that does not share structural
homology with LPS, yet elicits the tolerant phenotype, has been
referred to as "cross-tolerance." For example, pretreatment of
murine peritoneal macrophages with IL-1
results in inhibition of
NF-
B and AP-1 transactivation in response to LPS (18).
LPS-induced NF-
B DNA binding, c-jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) kinase
activity, and TNF-
secretion were significantly inhibited in murine
macrophages pre-exposed to a mycoplasma lipopeptide,
macrophage-activating lipopeptide (MALP)-2, which signals
through TLR2 (19). Pretreatment of macrophages with
another bacterial product, lipoteichoic acid (LTA), results in
inhibition of TNF-
secretion induced by LPS (20).
Desensitization of macrophages to LPS challenge can also be achieved by
other non-TLR stimuli. For example, pre-exposure of human macrophages
to 25-hydroxycholesterol, the product of oxidative modification of low
density lipoproteins involved in atherogenesis, inhibits NF-
B
binding to the TNF-
promoter and TNF-
mRNA expression in response
to LPS restimulation (21). Human macrophages derived from
patients after hemorrhage, surgery, trauma, and blood transfusion
manifest suppressed responses to LPS ex vivo
(22, 23, 24). These stressors also inhibit NF-
B DNA binding
and/or suppress TNF-
gene expression in response to LPS challenge.
Thus, various exogenous and endogenous stimuli can induce a
hyporesponsive state to a challenge with enterobacterial LPS.
Many studies have sought to determine the molecular mechanisms that
underlie endotoxin tolerance induced by LPS or other stimuli. Clearly,
disruption of the major signaling components leading to NF-
B
translocation have been identified in LPS-pretreated macrophages,
including IRAK-1, I
B
, and I
B
(18, 19, 25).
Using an Ab that detects TLR4 in complex with MD-2, a molecule that
facilitates signaling through TLR4 (26), Nomura et al.
(27) correlated a reduction in cell surface TLR4/MD-2
complex expression with development of the tolerant phenotype; however,
diminished TLR4/MD-2 expression was very transient, and was not
observed at low doses of LPS that are fully capable of inducing a
tolerant phenotype in vitro (16). Furthermore, cells
engineered to overexpress TLR4 and MD-2 are readily tolerized by LPS
(28). Lastly, if down-regulation of TLR4/MD-2 was the
fundamental mechanism by which desensitization to LPS occurred, then
one would predict a global shutdown of LPS-induced gene expression,
rather than the complex pattern of suppressed and overexpressed genes
that is observed. In cells pretreated with the TLR2 agonist, MALP-2,
tolerance to LPS was observed, but was not associated with
down-regulation of TLR4/MD-2 expression (19).
Given these discrepancies, coupled with the fact that many previous
studies were conducted using commercial LPS preparations that were
contaminated with non-LPS microbial components that activate cells via
TLR2 (7), and perhaps, through other TLRs, we sought to
carry out a systematic comparison of a highly purified, pure TLR4
agonist, Ec K235 LPS, and two previously well-characterized TLR2
agonists, synthetic Pam3Cys and highly purified, natural P.
gingivalis (Pg) LPS, for the capacity to induce a tolerant
phenotype in mouse macrophages. The focus of the present study was to
define the effects of TLR homotolerance (i.e., the tolerizing stimulus
and the challenge stimulus use the same TLR) and TLR heterotolerance
(i.e., the tolerizing and secondary stimuli use different TLRs) on the
major components of the NF-
B activating pathway. Our results
indicate that TLR homo- and heterotolerance differ significantly in
strength of induction and their relative capacities to modulate various
components along the NF-
B signaling pathway, and result in
differential TNF-
secretion. Moreover, during this analysis, two
proteins were identified that may contribute to tolerance by inhibiting
the interaction of NF-
B with DNA.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
C3H/OuJ and C57BL/6J females, 4- to 6-wk-old, were obtained from The Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, ME). All experiments were conducted in compliance with guidelines set forth by the National Institute of Health Guide for Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, with Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, and University of Maryland-Baltimore institutional (Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee) approval.
TLR4 and TLR2 agonists
Protein-free Ec K235 LPS (18) was used as the prototypic TLR4 agonist. Repurified, protein-free LPS from Pg (7) and synthetic lipoprotein S-[2,3-bis(palmitoyloxy)-(2-RS)-propyl]-N-palmitoyl-(R)-Cys-(S)-Ser-Lys4-OH, trihydrochloride (Pam3Cys; EMC Microcollections, Tubingen, Germany) were used as TLR2 agonists.
Antisera
Rabbit antisera raised against synthetic peptides were used and
most have been described previously (29, 30, 31):
anti-mouse p50 (no. 1263), p65 (no. 1207), p52 (no. 1495), cRel
(no. 1266), RelB (no. 1319), I
B
(no. 751), I
B
(no. 3279),
and I
B kinase (IKK)
(no. 4165). Anti-IRAK-1 Ab was from
Cell Sciences (Norwood, MA). Anti-
-actin antiserum was from Chemicon
International (Temecula, CA). Abs specific for the activated forms of
JNK 1,2 and extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) 1,2 were from
Promega (Madison, WI).
Cell culture and transient transfection
Thioglycollate-elicited murine peritoneal macrophages were obtained and cultured as described before (18). Human embryonic kidney cells (HEK 293) were purchased from the American Type Culture Collection (Manassas, VA). The RAW 264.7 macrophage cell line was kindly provided by Dr. G. Feldmann (Food and Drug Administration, Bethesda, MD). Cells were cultured in DMEM (BioWhittaker, Walkersville, MD), supplemented with 10% (v/v) heat-inactivated FBS (HyClone Laboratories, Logan, UT), 10 U/ml penicillin, and 100 µg/ml streptomycin at 37°C in 5% CO2 in air. The endotoxin content in the medium was <0.01 EU/ml, according to the manufacturers. Cells passaged >20 times were not used. Transient transfection of cells with the DNA constructs listed below were performed using FuGene6 (Roche, Indianapolis, IN) or SuperFect (Qiagen, Valencia, CA) according to manufacturers instructions.
DNA constructs
The NF-
B-responsive reporter plasmid, pELAM-Luc, was a kind
gift of Dr. D. T. Golenbock (University of Massachusetts, Amherst,
MA). The pCMV-1/
-galactosidase (
-gal) plasmid was
described previously (32, 33, 34) and used for monitoring
transfection efficiency and normalization. The expression vectors
pcDNA3.1+ and
pcDNA3.1+/I
B
were described previously
(31).
Cell fractionation and EMSA
Conditions for cell fractionation and EMSA have been described previously (29, 30).
Reporter assay
NF-
B driven luciferase activity was measured as described
previously (18). The ratio of luciferase relative light
units divided by
-gal relative light units was calculated for each
sample.
Western blot analysis
Thirty micrograms of total protein were incubated in NuPAGE sample buffer for 2 min at 85°C, resolved on 10% tricine SDS-PAGE (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA), and transferred to "Westran" polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Schleicher & Schuell, Keene, NH). Immunoreactive proteins were detected with an ECL system (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Little Chalfont Buckinghamshire, U.K.).
In vitro kinase assay
IKK
was immunoprecipitated with 1 µl of antiserum no. 4165.
After three washes with TNT buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 200 mM
NaCl, 5 mM EDTA, pH 8.0, 1% Triton X-100) and three washes in kinase
buffer (20 mM HEPES, pH7.4, 10 mM MgCl2, 2 mM
MnCl2), precipitated kinases were incubated with
either wild-type or S32/36A mutant human recombinant I
B
(171
aa) in the presence of 0.5 µM [
-32P]ATP
for 30 min at 30°C. Products of the kinase reactions were separated
on a 1020% tricine gradient gel (NOVEX, San Diego, CA), dried, and
exposed to X-OMAT film (Kodak, Rochester, NY). IRAK-1 was
immunoprecipitated with 2 µg/ml affinity purified Ab that does not
cross-react with other members of the IRAK family. The kinase assay was
performed as described previously (35).
ELISA
Murine TNF-
in macrophage culture supernatants was detected
with a murine TNF-
ELISA kit (R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN)
according to manufacturers instructions.
Analysis of mRNA
Total RNA was isolated using the RNeasy purification kit
(Qiagen, Valencia, CA). For Northern blot analysis, 10 µg of total
RNA was separated on 0.7% agarose gel, transferred onto a Hybond
N+ nylon membrane, UV cross-linked, and
hybridized with a 32P-labeled DNA fragment
corresponding to 314750 bp of murine I
B
(AB 047549). This DNA
fragment was generated by RT-PCR from RNA isolated from RAW 264.7 cells
stimulated for 1 h with 1 µg of Ec K235 LPS. Identity of this
PCR fragment to murine I
B
was confirmed by sequence
analysis. Detection of IFN-
mRNA by RT-PCR with ethidium bromide
incorporation and Southern blot analysis was conducted as described
(36).
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis of data was performed using SPSS 10.1.3
software (Chicago, IL). Data were subjected to one-way ANOVA with post
hoc multiple comparisons Fishers least significant difference
test. A value of p
0.05 was accepted as the level of
significance.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
secretion by tolerized macrophages
TNF-
secretion by macrophages is inhibited in TLR2 and TLR4
homotolerance and Pg LPS and Ec LPS heterotolerance, but is not
affected in Ec LPS and Pam3Cys heterotolerance. Both TLR2 and TLR4
agonists are potent inducers of TNF-
(37). Many
previous studies have shown that TLR4 homotolerance results in markedly
decreased levels of secreted TNF-
(16, 19, 20, 38, 39).
However, only a few studies have been conducted using TLR2 agonists as
"tolerizing" agents in macrophages, e.g., Pg LPS (40),
MALP2 (19), or LTA (20), and only two studies
have examined the effects of "cross-tolerance" between TLR2 and
TLR4 agonists (19, 20). However, in some of these studies,
commercial preparations of enterobacterial LPS and LTA were used that
likely contained contaminants that initially engaged TLRs other than
TLR4 or TLR2, respectively. In addition, MALP2, used in the study by
Sato et al. (19), was later demonstrated to require both
TLR2 and TLR6 for signaling (41). Given the possibility
that the observed results were confounded by the engagement of multiple
TLRs during the initial "tolerizing" exposure, we sought to revisit
the issue of TLR2 and TLR4 homo- and heterotolerance by using highly
purified agonists that had been well-characterized with respect to TLR2
or TLR4 specificity. Therefore, we first analyzed how exposure of
murine peritoneal macrophages to TLR2 (Pg LPS or Pam3Cys) or the TLR4
agonist, protein-free Ec K235 LPS, influences subsequent production of
TNF-
upon restimulation of cells with these agonists. The
concentration of each agonist was chosen based on the ability to elicit
comparable NF-
B DNA binding (data not shown). Fig. 1
A shows that the induction of
TNF-
by Ec LPS and Pam3Cys in medium-pretreated cells was not
statistically different. Both agonists induced statistically
significant homotolerance (p
0.05), while
neither induced heterotolerance. In fact, Pam3Cys pretreatment
significantly increased the response to Ec LPS
(p
0.05). Similar experiments were performed
using Pg LPS as TLR2 agonist. However, Fig. 1
B shows a
somewhat different pattern of TNF-
secretion. Again, strong
homotolerance was observed using either Ec LPS or the Pg LPS. The Ec
LPS failed to inhibit and even enhanced (p
0.05) TNF-
production in response to subsequent challenge with Pg
LPS. However, unlike Pam3Cys, pretreatment of macrophages with Pg LPS
resulted in a state of cross-tolerance to Ec LPS challenge. In each of
six separate experiments, Pg LPS-induced heterotolerance was weaker
than Ec LPS-induced homotolerance (p
0.05).
Finally, given the differences in TLR heterotolerance observed for the
two TLR2 agonists, experiments were conducted to determine whether the
two TLR2 agonists would induce tolerance to each other. Fig. 1
C demonstrates that strong tolerance was induced regardless
of which TLR2 agonist was used to pretreat and challenge the
macrophages. Thus, TLR2 and TLR4 homotolerance is consistently stronger
than TLR heterotolerance at the level of TNF-
secretion, and Pam3Cys
differs from Pg LPS in its ability to induce heterotolerance to Ec
LPS.
|
mRNA is suppressed in TLR4 homotolerance, but is not
affected in TLR2/TLR4 heterotolerance
We recently demonstrated that in contrast to TNF-
mRNA, IFN-
mRNA is strongly up-regulated by TLR4 agonists, but not TLR2 agonists,
and that its expression is MyD88-independent, but TIRAP/Mal-dependent
(36). IFN-
gene expression was measured following TLR
homo- and heterotolerance induction as described for Fig. 1
A. As reported previously, Ec LPS induced strong
steady-state IFN-
mRNA, while neither Pg LPS nor Pam3Cys were
active (Fig. 1
D). More importantly, IFN-
gene
expression was completely inhibited by TLR4 homotolerance, but not by
prior exposure to either TLR2 agonist.
IRAK-1 activation is inhibited by TLR homotolerance and heterotolerance
It was previously shown that activation of IRAK-1, a key kinase in
Toll/IL-1R NF-
B signal transduction, is inhibited in macrophages
rendered endotoxin-tolerant in vitro (25, 27). Therefore,
we next analyzed how pretreatment of macrophages with Ec LPS or Pg LPS
would influence the activation of IRAK-1 in response to subsequent
challenge with these agonists. Fig. 2
, A (autoradiogram) and B (densitometry
measurements), illustrates that both the TLR4 (Ec LPS) and TLR2 (Pg
LPS) agonists induce a comparable IRAK-1-associated kinase activity in
medium-pretreated macrophages, as evidenced by phosphorylation of
immunoprecipitated IRAK-1. Pre-exposure of cells to Ec LPS results in
significant inhibition of IRAK-1 activation followed by the second
challenge with the same agonist (i.e., TLR4 homotolerance), but
slightly less inhibition when Pg LPS was used as the challenge stimulus
(p = 0.014 at 30 min). Pretreatment of cells
with TLR2 agonist, Pg LPS, also significantly inhibited IRAK-1
activation upon either TLR4 or TLR2 restimulation
(p
0.05). Analysis of IRAK1
immunoprecipitates by Western blot did not reveal differences in the
IRAK protein content between control and tolerant cells (data not
shown). Thus, IRAK-1-associated kinase activity is significantly
suppressed in both homo- and heterotolerance.
|
kinase activity is inhibited in TLR homotolerance, but not
in TLR heterotolerance
The next downstream event in the cascade leading to NF-
B
activation is the phosphorylation of the NF-
B inhibitor, I
B, by a
specific kinase complex that is composed of two serine/threonine
kinases, IKK
and IKK
, and a scaffolding protein, IKK
(NF-
B
essential modulator or NEMO). Of these, IKK
is considered to
be the primary I
B kinase because mice deficient in this protein
demonstrate no I
B phosphorylation in response to various
inflammatory stimuli (15). Using an in vitro kinase assay,
we measured the capacity of IKK
to phosphorylate its substrate,
I
B
, in macrophages subjected to TLR homotolerance or
heterotolerance. Fig. 3
illustrates that
the kinase activity of this protein is rapidly stimulated by both TLR2
(Pg LPS and Pam3Cys) and TLR4 (Ec LPS) agonists within 1 h in
medium-pretreated macrophages, with maximum IKK
kinase activity
observed between 30 and 60 min of treatment with all three agonists. In
vitro phosphorylation of the substrate, I
B
, in response to Ec LPS
was completely abolished in macrophages pre-exposed to Ec LPS (i.e.,
TLR4 homotolerance); however, this same pretreatment did not inhibit
kinase activity induced by either TLR2 agonist. Similarly, if
macrophages were pre-exposed to either Pg LPS or Pam3Cys, no
significant elevation in IKK
kinase activity was observed in
response to subsequent challenge with either of these TLR2 agonists,
while challenge with Ec LPS led to kinase activation comparable to that
observed in medium-pretreated, Ec LPS-stimulated cells (Fig. 3
).
Expression of IKK
and the scaffold protein IKK
was studied by
Western blot and was comparable in medium- and agonist-pretreated cells
(data not shown). To quantify this effect of TLR2 or TLR4 pretreatment
on IKK kinase activity, we analyzed the densitometric results of two
additional experiments conducted at the 45-min time point. Fig. 3
B shows that only TLR homotolerance is induced
significantly (p
0.05) at the level of IKK
kinase activity. Thus, IKK
kinase activity is inhibited in TLR2 or
TLR4 homotolerance, but is not affected in TLR heterotolerance.
|
Positive cooperation between activated IKK and a member of the
mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) superfamily, JNK, in the
regulation of NF-
B transcriptional activation was demonstrated
recently (42) and occurs at the step of I
B
modification that precedes its degradation, i.e., IKK phosphorylates
I
B on two conserved serine residues, while JNK regulates the
abundance and activity of
-TrCP, a protein that mediates I
B
ubiquitination through recruitment of a ubiquitin ligase (42, 43). Activation of JNK and other members of the MAPK family of
proteins were demonstrated to be perturbed in Ec LPS homotolerance, as
well as in Ec LPS and MALP2 heterotolerance (18, 19).
Therefore, we analyzed the activity of JNK 1,2 and another MAPK, ERK
1,2, that share a common upstream kinase, MAPK kinase kinase
(MEKK)1. Fig. 4
illustrates that both the
TLR4 agonist (Ec LPS) and TLR2 agonist (Pg LPS) induce rapid and
comparable phosphorylation of JNK 1,2 and ERK 1,2. Pretreatment of
macrophages with Ec LPS prevents JNK 1,2 and ERK 1,2 phosphorylation in
response to subsequent challenge with Ec LPS (TLR4 homotolerance),
while restimulation of the same pretreated cells with Pg LPS permits
weak activation of these kinases (TLR4/TLR2 heterotolerance).
Pretreatment of macrophages with Pg LPS completely blocked JNK 1,2
activation in response to subsequent treatment with Ec LPS
(TLR2/TLR4 heterotolerance) and Pg LPS (TLR2 homotolerance). However,
residual activation of ERK 1,2 in TLR2 agonist-pretreated cells was
observed after restimulation with either Ec LPS or Pg LPS (TLR2/TLR4
heterotolerance and TLR2 homotolerance, respectively). Similar data
were obtained when Pam3Cys was used as a TLR2 agonist (data not
shown).
|
B DNA binding is suppressed in TLR2 and TLR4 homo- and
heterotolerance
To analyze the effects of TLR2 and TLR4 pre-exposure of
macrophages on NF-
B DNA binding activity, C3H/OuJ macrophages were
first treated with medium only or with Ec LPS, Pg LPS, or Pam3Cys.
After 24 h, macrophages were washed and restimulated with medium,
Ec LPS, Pg LPS, or Pam3Cys and NF-
B DNA binding activity was
assessed 1 h later. Fig. 5
A shows that cells exposed to
medium only (M) in both the pretreatment and "challenge" exhibit
barely detectable NF-
B DNA binding in the nuclear fraction, in
contrast to the strong NF-
B DNA binding seen in medium-pretreated
macrophages challenged with any of the three agonists. Pretreatment
with any of the three agonists also resulted in elevated basal levels
of NF-
B DNA binding when these cultures were subsequently challenged
with medium only (compare pretreatment/challenge stimulation: M/M to
Ec/M, Pg/M, and Pam3Cys/M). Both TLR homo- and heterotolerance can be
seen in the autoradiography results shown in Fig. 5
A. In
cells pretreated with Ec LPS, the relative increase in NF-
B DNA
binding over a medium "challenged" background is diminished for all
three agonists (Fig. 5
A). Densitometry of NF-
B-DNA
complexes was performed on three independent experiments (Fig. 5
C). All three agonists comparably suppressed NF-
B DNA
binding induced by Ec LPS (p
0.05). However,
both TLR2 agonists induced stronger tolerance to the two TLR2 agonists
than did pretreatment with Ec LPS (TLR4/TLR2 heterotolerance;
p
0.001). Analysis of corresponding nuclear
fractions by Western blot using anti-p50 and anti-p65 Abs
confirmed rapid translocation of these proteins from cytosol to nucleus
upon stimulation of medium-pretreated macrophages with either TLR4 or
TLR2 agonists. However, these experiments revealed an unexpected
phenomenon, i.e., in the nuclear fraction of cells tolerized by either
TLR4 or TLR2, we observed high levels of both p50 and p65 proteins
(Fig. 5
B), while EMSA reveals diminished binding of these
NF-
B subunits to DNA (Fig. 5
A). This indicates that
although the p50 and p65 proteins translocate to the nucleus, their
binding to DNA is somehow inhibited.
|
B binding than at the level
of TNF-
secretion or IKK
kinase activity.
Formation of a NF-
B complex composed of p50 and C-terminally
truncated p65
A NF-
B complex composed of p50 and C-terminally
truncated p65 is formed in medium-pretreated macrophages stimulated
with TLR2 and TLR4 agonists, but not in cells subjected to TLR
homotolerance or heterotolerance. In addition to the effects of
prestimulation of macrophages by TLR2 and TLR4 agonists described
above, we noted a difference in the composition of the NF-
B
complexes induced in medium-pretreated vs agonist-pretreated cells.
Three discrete bands were resolved in nuclear extracts from cells that
were medium-pretreated, agonist-stimulated cells. In contrast, in all
agonist-pretreated samples, band no. 3 was no longer detected (Fig. 5
A). To establish the composition of these complexes,
supershift analyses of LPS-induced NF-
B were performed. Lane
1 of Fig. 5
D illustrates the three major species in the
absence of Ab. Lane 2 demonstrates that anti-p50 Ab
completely displaces complex no. 2, and largely displaces complexes no.
1 and no. 3. This is consistent with the complex being composed
primarily of p50 homodimers as has been reported elsewhere
(29). An Ab directed against the C terminus of the p65
subunit diminishes the intensity of band no. 1, with no apparent effect
on band nos. 3 and 4. These data confirm that band no. 1 contains p50
and p65 subunits of NF-
B predominantly. Conversely, an Ab directed
against the N terminus of p65 results in a supershift of band no. 3 and
diminished band no. 1 intensity. This indicates that band no. 3 is
composed of C-terminally truncated p65 and p50. C-terminally truncated
p65 was also detected by Western analysis in the cytosol of
medium-pretreated, agonist-challenged cells (data not shown). The
effect of anti-c-Rel Ab was less striking. A minor amount of c-Rel
protein is suggested by the appearance of a slower migrating band in
position no. 4 that lacks the intensity observed when using
anti-p50 and anti-p65 Abs. Anti-RelB and anti-p52 antisera
behaved similarly to anti-c-Rel (data not shown). Using
combinations of Abs, the data suggest that all three bands
(1, 2, 3) are markedly diminished by the combination of
anti-p50 and anti-p65N, while anti-p50 + anti-c-Rel and
anti-p65N + anti-c-Rel were no more efficacious that
anti-p50 or anti-p65N alone. These complexes were confirmed in
medium-treated cells stimulated with either of the two TLR2 agonists
(data not shown). Thus, our data reveal the presence of a C-terminally
truncated p65 subunit of NF-
B only in medium-pretreated,
agonist-stimulated cells, but not macrophages rendered tolerant by
either TLR agonist and restimulated with Ec LPS, Pg LPS, or Pam3Cys
(data not shown).
Differential regulation of AP-1 and Oct-1 DNA binding
We conducted a series of additional experiments in which the same
nuclear extracts described in Fig. 1
A were analyzed by EMSA
with Oct-1- and AP-1-specific oligonucleotides. Oct-1 is an abundantly
expressed DNA binding protein present in the majority of cells and, as
such, is often used as a loading control for EMSA. However, the results
in Fig. 5
E revealed much stronger Oct-1 DNA binding in
agonist-pretreated cells compared with medium-pretreated controls. When
AP-1 was similarly analyzed by EMSA in these same preparations, we
found that in contrast to the comparability of NF-
B DNA binding
induced by the three agonists in medium-pretreated cells, the level of
AP-1 was significantly greater in response to Ec LPS than in response
to either TLR2 agonist. Despite the mitigation of IRAK1, ERK, and JNK
phosphorylation in TLR2 and TLR4 tolerance, AP-1 binding to DNA was
nonetheless detectable in the nuclear fractions of macrophages
pretreated with either TLR4 or TLR2 agonists (Fig. 5
E;
compare lanes M/M with Ec/M, Pg/M or P3C/M). Subsequent treatments with
Ec LPS, Pg LPS, or Pam3Cys resulted in differential modulation of AP-1
DNA binding activity. Thus, the pattern of NF-
B DNA binding in homo-
and heterotolerance is distinct from that of AP-1 and Oct-1,
demonstrating compositional differences in the pool of nuclear
transacting factors in macrophages pretreated with the three
agonists.
NF-
B transactivating activity is more strongly suppressed in TLR
homotolerance than in TLR heterotolerance
In the previous series of experiments, TLR tolerance was analyzed
at the level of NF-
B DNA binding. Therefore, NF-
B-dependent
transcription of the luciferase reporter gene was next measured
following transient transfection of the RAW 264.7 mouse macrophage cell
line with a NF-
B reporter plasmid, pELAM-Luc. Ec LPS induced a
dose-dependent increase in NF-
B-mediated luciferase activity in
medium-pretreated cells with maximal stimulation observed at 10 ng/ml
LPS (data not shown). Fig. 6
illustrates
that Ec LPS induces a 5-fold stimulation over medium-pretreated cells,
whereas NF-
B-dependent transactivation observed in response to
1 µg/ml Pg LPS was somewhat lower (i.e., 3.2-fold stimulation
over medium-pretreated cells). Pretreatment of RAW 264.7 macrophages
with Ec LPS resulted in a 46% inhibition of Ec LPS-mediated
transactivation, whereas pretreatment with Pg LPS suppressed the
response by 20%. Conversely, pretreatment of macrophages with Pg LPS
inhibited the capacity of cells to respond to subsequent homologous
stimulation by 40%, while Ec LPS pretreatment resulted in only 12.5%
inhibition of Pg LPS-mediated NF-
B-dependent transcription. These
data were subjected to statistical analysis, which confirmed
acquisition of TLR2 and TLR4 homo- and heterotolerance at the level of
NF-
B transactivation (p
0.05) and
established that TLR homotolerance is statistically significantly
greater than TLR heterotolerance at the level of NF-
B
transactivation (p < 0.001).
|
B
protein is elevated in the macrophages,
rendered tolerant by TLR2 and TLR4 agonists
NF-
B activation is preceded by degradation of inhibitor
proteins including I
B
, I
B
, and I
B
. Previous studies
have demonstrated inhibition of I
B
and I
B
in cells pretreated with TLR agonists and then challenged homologously
(18, 40) or heterologously (18). However, to
date, the potential role of I
B
in tolerance has never been
evaluated. Therefore, protein levels of I
B
and I
B
were
measured in total lysates of cells challenged with either TLR4 or TLR2
agonists. In medium-pretreated macrophages, both TLR2 and TLR4 agonists
induced degradation of these inhibitor proteins, although with
different kinetics, i.e., I
B
degradation is very fast and clearly
detected by 30 min, while degradation of I
B
is slower, yet
clearly observed after 1 h of treatment (Fig. 7
). In cells pretreated with Ec LPS,
degradation of I
B
in response to the same agonist (homotolerance)
was perturbed, i.e., it was not observed after 30 min of challenge and
was very weak after 1 h. If Ec LPS-treated cells were challenged
with TLR2 agonists, I
B
degradation was inhibited, but to a lesser
extent. A similar pattern was observed in cells pretreated with TLR2
agonists and challenged with either TLR2 or TLR4 agonists. These data
confirm and extend previous observations (18, 40) and also
demonstrate that homotolerance is stronger than heterotolerance at the
level of I
B
degradation.
|
B
, pretreatment of
macrophages with either TLR2 or TLR4 agonist results in a striking and
sustained increase in the level of I
B
(Fig. 7
B
). Macrophages pretreated
with TLR agonists and restimulated (either homotolerance or
heterotolerance) exhibited levels of I
B
that were well above
those observed following initial exposure to any of the agonists
tested. To determine whether overexpression of I
B
might
contribute to tolerance by inhibiting NF-
B DNA binding induced by
TLR2 and TLR4 agonists, we performed experiments with the HEK 293 cell
line (Fig. 8
B
, stimulated the
transfectants with Ec LPS, Pg LPS, or Pam3Cys, and measured
NF-
B DNA binding by EMSA. Fig. 8
B DNA binding,
while overexpression of I
B
(confirmed by Western blot, Fig. 8
B
induced by TLR
agonists may contribute to suppressed NF-
B activity observed in
tolerized murine macrophages.
|
B
mRNA that is
not detected in control cells
Recently, Yamazaki et al. (45) described another
related protein, I
B
, whose maximum mRNA expression is induced by
LPS and IL-1
within 1 h in RAW 264.7 cells and is maintained at
a low, but elevated, level as late as 48 h after LPS stimulation.
They also demonstrated that I
B
is able to bind to the p50 subunit
of NF-
B and prevent binding of the p50/p65 heterodimer to DNA. Fig. 9
shows that both TLR4 and TLR2 agonists
strongly induce expression of I
B
mRNA. These data suggest that
induced I
B
may also contribute to inhibition of NF-
B DNA
binding by TLR2 and TLR4 agonists that we observed in peritoneal
macrophages rendered TLR homotolerant or heterotolerant.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
B translocation, i.e., IRAK-1, I
B
, and I
B
, have been
reported to be perturbed in LPS-tolerized macrophages (18, 25, 27). In vitro tolerance has also been attributed to diminished
cell surface expression of the TLR4/MD2 complex (27);
however, the failure to observe this at low, but tolerizing, doses of
LPS, coupled with the observation that TLR4/MD2 overexpression does not
block tolerance (28), would argue against this as a
general mechanism of inducible hyporesponsiveness.
Using highly purified or synthetic TLR4 or TLR2 agonists, we found that
TNF-
secretion is strongly suppressed in TLR2 and TLR4 homotolerance
(Fig. 1
), consistent with many examples of in vitro tolerance induced
by other serotypes of enterobacterial LPS or TLR2 agonists such as
MALP2 and LTA (19, 20). However, our finding that Pg LPS
induces homotolerance in murine peritoneal macrophages contrasts with
previous findings by Martin et al. (40), who
demonstrated enhanced TNF-
production in response to Pg LPS in
PMA-differentiated THP-1 cells, pretreated with the same agonist. This
discrepancy may be due to the fact that PMA alone may modulate
expression of a variety of genes including those examined in the
context of TLR homotolerance. Although previous studies using MALP2 and
LTA for cross-tolerance with LPS showed clear induction of TLR
heterotolerance at the level of TNF-
secretion (19, 20), production of TNF-
by macrophages pretreated with the
TLR4 agonist and restimulated with TLR2 agonists (i.e., TLR4/TLR2
heterotolerance) was not affected in our study (Fig. 1
, A
and B). TLR2/TLR4 heterotolerance was induced by Pg LPS, but
not by the other TLR2 agonist, Pam3Cys, despite the fact that they both
tolerize against each other (Fig. 1
C).
Several factors may contribute to the observed differences between Pg
LPS and Pam3Cys effects on subsequent challenge with Ec LPS at the
level of TNF-
secretion. For example, MALP2 was recently shown to
require TLR6 in addition to TLR2, while Pam3Cys was found to require
both TLR1 and TLR2 (41, 48). LTA was initially reported to
require both TLR2 and TLR4; however, recent studies using highly
purified LTA indicate that it uses TLR2 and not TLR4 (3, 49). It is possible that unlike Pam3Cys, Pg
LPS uses a TLR complex other than TLR2 and TLR1 and, thus, elicits a
distinct signaling pattern revealed only in the context of Ec LPS
challenge. Both Pg LPS and Ec LPS also share a common coreceptor, CD14
(50); therefore, Pg LPS may cross-tolerize against Ec LPS
by modifying the expression and/or function of this component of the
receptor complex. The findings presented herein indicate that for
TNF-
secretion, TLR homotolerance (i.e., the tolerizing stimulus and
the challenge stimulus use the same TLR) is substantially stronger than
TLR heterotolerance (i.e., the tolerizing and secondary stimuli
activate different TLRs).
It has been previously shown that MyD88 is essential for TNF-
secretion, in response to both TLR2 and TLR4 agonists
(51), and more recently, it has been shown that TLR4
homotolerance is associated with a failure of MyD88 to be recruited to
TLR4 (52). In contrast, IFN-
gene expression is normal
in LPS-stimulated MyD88 null macrophages, but inhibited by expression
of a TIRAP/Mal dominant negative construct or by a TIRAP/Mal
inhibitory peptide (36). Here we show that expression of the IFN-
gene was completely inhibited in TLR4 homotolerance, but not by prior
exposure to either TLR2 agonist. Thus, engagement of the
MyD88-dependent arm of the TLR2 signaling pathway is not sufficient to
induce tolerance to the TIRAP/Mal-dependent pathway.
Certain cytokines produced by LPS-stimulated macrophages have been
suggested as potential mediators of the tolerant phenotype. However,
the participation of IL-10 and TNF have been excluded because
macrophages derived from IL-10-deficient mice or TNFR-I/TNFR-II double
knockout mice were readily tolerized by LPS and/or MALP2 (18, 19). IL-1 has also been implicated as a mediator of tolerance in
vivo (16, 53) and has been shown to induce a state of
cross-tolerance to LPS in vitro (18). However, we observed
no difference in the acquisition of the TLR4 and TLR2 tolerant
phenotype between IL-1R-/- and wild-type
macrophages at the level of TNF-
secretion and NF-
B DNA binding
(data not shown). Thus, IL-1 signaling does not contribute to the
tolerance induction in vitro.
To dissect the mechanism(s) that underlie in vitro tolerance induced by
TLR2 and TLR4 agonists in murine macrophages, we also analyzed the
major shared signaling elements of the NF-
B pathway. We first
analyzed IRAK-1 kinase, which acts downstream of the MyD88 adaptor
protein upon IL-R/TLR engagement (25, 35). Diminished
IRAK-1 kinase activity in LPS-tolerized human and murine macrophages
was described previously (25, 27). Our data extend these
findings by showing that the kinase activity associated with IRAK-1
immunoprecipitates was completely blocked in TLR4/TLR4 homotolerance
and TLR2/TLR4 heterotolerance, while residual activity was detected in
cells subjected to TLR4/TLR2 heterotolerance (Fig. 2
). It was recently
reported that IRAK-1 and IRAK-2 associate differently with MyD88 vs
TIRAP/Mal (12). In addition, recently, two other
serine/threonine kinases, IRAK-4 and receptor interacting protein
2, that act downstream of IL-1R, TLR2, TLR3, and TLR4 receptors,
but upstream of TNFR-associated factor 6, were demonstrated to be
important for cytokine production and NF-
B activation in macrophages
(13, 14). Therefore, it is possible that TLR2 and TLR4
agonists activate these kinases and their adaptor proteins
differentially. This is supported by the most recent observation of
Jacinto et al. (54), in which heterotolerance between
highly purified LTA and LPS was not observed at the level of IRAK-1
degradation.
Activation of the IKK complex is the next critical element in this
cascade and is absolutely necessary for NF-
B activation. Both
IKK
- and IKK
-deficient cells fail to activate NF-
B in response
to inflammatory stimuli, while IKK
deficiency has no effect on I
B
phosphorylation (15). We observed complete inhibition of
IKK
kinase activity in TLR2 and TLR4 homotolerance (Fig. 3
), but
surprisingly, IKK
kinase activity was not affected in
heterotolerance. This suggests that IKK
dysregulation may contribute
to the observation that TLR homotolerance is consistently stronger than
TLR heterotolerance. Recently, two atypical protein kinases (PK), i.e.,
PKC
and PKC
, were reported as critical for NF-
B activation by
LPS and IL-1 (55, 56) and were associated with IRAK
(57). If PKC-mediated signaling overlaps in part with that
of IRAK, this may represent an additional signaling arm differentially
affected by TLR2 and TLR4 agonists and explain why we observe IKK
activation in heterotolerance in the absence of IRAK
phosphorylation.
We next analyzed the effect of TLR homo- and heterotolerance on NF-
B
DNA binding. Induction of TLR2 and TLR4 homo- and heterotolerance was
evidenced by diminished nuclear translocation of the major NF-
B
components, p50 and p65. Again, TLR2 homotolerance is stronger than
TLR4/TLR2 heterotolerance as evidenced by statistical analysis of
NF-
B complexes bound to DNA. In several previous studies, the
involvement of p50 and p52 subunits of NF-
B that lack the
transactivating domain (and, thus, may serve as a transrepressors) in
the acquisition of the tolerant phenotype was described
(58, 59, 60). However, later data by Wysocka et al.
(61) demonstrating that p50 knockout mice and macrophages
derived from them are readily tolerized by LPS would suggest otherwise.
Our findings support those of Wysocka et al. (61).
Analysis of nuclear fractions by Western blot with Abs specific to p50
and p65 subunits of NF-
B, however, revealed the presence of both
these proteins at the levels comparable with that observed in
medium-pretreated/agonist-stimulated cells (Fig. 5
B). This
suggests the existence of additional inhibitory factors that prevent
NF-
B from binding to DNA. Analysis of the composition of NF-
B DNA
binding complexes induced by TLR2 and TLR4 agonists in
medium-pretreated macrophages revealed a faster migrating species not
observed in macrophages tolerized by TLR2 or TLR4 agonists. This
complex contains C-terminally truncated p65. Previous studies by Levkau
et al. (62) showed that p65 may be cleaved by activated
caspases. LPS-activated caspase activity has been reported
(63); however, no connection between p65 cleavage and
LPS-induced caspase activation has been demonstrated. A second possible
mechanism for the generation of this truncated species is in vitro
cleavage during cell fractionation by released cathepsin G and elastase
(64), the serine proteases expressed by monocytes and
immature macrophages and replaced during maturation by matrix
metalloproteinases (MMP), such as MMP9 (65). Murine
macrophages produce and secrete elastase and this ability is inhibited
by LPS (66), while induction of MMP9 mRNA by both TLR2 and
TLR4 agonists is detected (M. A. Dobrovolskaia, unpublished
observation). Therefore, the truncated p65 observed in
medium-pretreated, agonist-stimulated macrophages may be the result of
degradation of p65 by serine proteinase(s) and that 24 h
pretreatment of cells with either TLR2 or TLR4 agonists induces
macrophage differentiation and loss of these proteinases.
NF-
B activation is preceded by degradation of inhibitor proteins
including I
B
, I
B
, and I
B
. Previous studies have
demonstrated inhibition of I
B
and I
B
in cells pretreated
with TLR agonists and then challenged homologously (18, 40) or heterologously (18). However, to date, the
potential role of I
B
in tolerance has not been evaluated. Our
data extend previously published observations for I
B
(18, 40) by demonstrating that homotolerance is stronger than
heterotolerance. As was observed for TNF-
secretion, the effect of
Pg LPS on I
B degradation was different from that described in
PMA-differentiated THP-1 cells (40). Remarkably,
pretreatment of C3H/OuJ macrophages with either the TLR2 or TLR4
agonist results in a striking increase in I
B
in cells that is
sustained, regardless of subsequent stimulus. These data suggest that
I
B
might well contribute to the induction of TLR homotolerance or
heterotolerance, a hypothesis supported by our finding that
transfectants that overexpress I
B
exhibit profoundly suppressed
NF-
B DNA binding activity (Fig. 8
). The original paper, describing
I
B
, demonstrated elevated expression of I
B
in murine
embryonal fibroblasts from I
B
-deficient mice and suggested that
I
B
may substitute for I
B
(31). Our study
provides the first evidence for a physiologic effect of such a
"substitution." Recently, Lee demonstrated cytosol-to-nuclear
shuttling of I
B
as mechanism to control NF-
B function in the
nucleus (67). Therefore, it is possible that when induced
by TLR2 and TLR4 agonists, I
B
(Fig. 7
) prevents the p50 and p65
that we detect in the nuclear fractions by Western blot (Fig. 5
B) from binding to DNA studied by EMSA (Fig. 5
A). However, direct evidence for this was not possible as
the levels of endogenous I
B
bound to immunoprecipitable nuclear
p50/65 NF-
B complexes were extremely low (data not shown).
Expression of the mRNA for a novel I
B species, I
B
, was not
detected in medium-pretreated cells and was observed only in cells
exposed for 24 h to TLR2 orTLR4 agonists (Fig. 9
), coincident with
suppressed responsiveness to restimulation of cells with agonist.
Nuclear I
B
has been shown to inhibit p50/p65 binding to DNA and
transactivation. Future studies to establish a role for this molecule
in tolerance will be feasible only when specific immunologic and
molecular reagents become available. In addition to this, other factors
may contribute to the observed inhibition of NF-
B DNA binding. For
example, we found that tolerant cells have more Oct-1 bound to DNA. It
was recently reported that Oct-1 interacts with both p50 and p65 in
vitro and in vivo and leads to suppression of NF-
B DNA binding and
transactivation (68). TLR4, but not TLR2, agonists induce
NO production by macrophages (37). NO causes nitrosylation
of NF-
B and suppresses its activity (69). Thus, the
secondary effects of genes differentially induced by TLR4 vs TLR2
agonists may also contribute to NF-
B inhibition in tolerance.
Our findings revealed that exposure of macrophages to concentrations of
TLR4 or TLR2 agonists that led to equivalent NF-
B translocation
could be paralleled by unambiguous homotolerance at the level of
NF-
B DNA binding or TNF-
secretion. Therefore, for homotolerance,
NF-
B is a good surrogate marker. However, it is also clear that
restimulation with the opposite TLR agonist can result in augmentation,
no change, or inhibition of TNF-
secretion. We believe that this
represents "macrophage reprogramming" (70) due to the
action of different combinations of transactivating and transrepressing
factors that are elicited by and accumulate as a consequence of the
initial engagement of a specific TLR signaling pathway. A disconnect
between the "distal" cytokine data and "proximal" signaling
data demonstrated above, may be explained as follows. First, in
addition to NF-
B, TNF-
gene expression requires a specific set of
transcription factors (TFs), such as activating transcription factor 2,
Ets, Elk-1, c-jun, Egr-1, Sp-1, NFAT, coactivators, such as p300, and
architectural proteins to form an active higher-order nucleoprotein
complex, the enhanceosome (71). The latter is not
formed by a simple one-stimulus-to-one-response fashion or in a single
cell type. Despite the fact that different stimuli, such as LPS, virus,
and Ca2+ flux, are able to induce TNF-
secretion, this is achieved through the recruitment of different TFs to
the promoter region of the gene (72). Almost a decade ago
it was demonstrated, that unlike other LPS inducible promoters, the
NF-
B binding sites in the TNF-
promoter are neither required nor
sufficient for the induction of TNF by LPS (73). We have
recently applied protein/DNA array technique to analyze the differences
in the potential of TLR4 and TLR2 agonists to induce different TFs. Of
96 TFs analyzed, 21 (including p300, critical for TNF-
expression)
were induced solely by Ec LPS. Twenty-eight that were detected in
medium present macrophages and were further induced by TLR4 agonist
solely. Only seven were induced by both TLR4 and TLR2 agonists, though
the induction by TLR4 was stronger than that induced by the TLR2
agonist (M. A. Dobrovolskaia and S. N. Vogel, unpublished
observation). Thus, the composite pool of TFs induced by sequential
stimuli will undoubtedly share the repertoire of inducible
genes
In conclusion, we demonstrated that activation of NF-
B by TLR2 and
TLR4 agonists is a very complex event that is differentially affected
by TLR homo- and heterotolerance at each of the various components in
the signal transduction pathway. Our data suggest the existence of the
multi