CD66b-CD64dimCD115- cells in the human bone marrow represent neutrophil-committed progenitors.

Here we report the identification of human CD66b-CD64dimCD115- neutrophil-committed progenitor cells (NCPs) within the SSCloCD45dimCD34+ and CD34dim/- subsets in the bone marrow. NCPs were either CD45RA+ or CD45RA-, and in vitro experiments showed that CD45RA acquisition was not mandatory for their maturation process. NCPs exclusively generated human CD66b+ neutrophils in both in vitro differentiation and in vivo adoptive transfer experiments. Single-cell RNA-sequencing analysis indicated NCPs fell into four clusters, characterized by different maturation stages and distributed along two differentiation routes. One of the clusters was characterized by an interferon-stimulated gene signature, consistent with the reported expansion of peripheral mature neutrophil subsets that express interferon-stimulated genes in diseased individuals. Finally, comparison of transcriptomic and phenotypic profiles indicated NCPs represented earlier neutrophil precursors than the previously described early neutrophil progenitors (eNePs), proNeus and COVID-19 proNeus. Altogether, our data shed light on the very early phases of neutrophil ontogeny.

Human CD34+/dim neutrophil-committed progenitors do not differentiate into neutrophil-like CXCR1+CD14+CD16- monocytes in vitro.

The advent of recent cutting-edge technologies has allowed the discovery and characterization of novel progenitors of human neutrophils, including SSCloCD66b+CD15+CD11b-CD49dhiproNeu1s, SSChiCD66b+CD15+CD11b-CD49dintproNeus2s, CD66b+CD15+CD11b+CD49d+CD101-preNeus, and Lin-CD66b+CD117+CD71+eNePs. In this research field, we recently identified CD66b-CD38+CD64dimCD115-, CD34+, and CD34dim/- cells exclusively committed to the neutrophil lineage (which we renamed as CD34+ and CD34dim/- neutrophil-committed progenitors), representing the earliest neutrophil precursors identifiable and sorted by flow cytometry. Moreover, based on their differential CD34 and CD45RA expression, we could identify 4 populations of neutrophil-committed progenitors: CD34+CD45RA-/NCP1s, CD34+CD45RA+/NCP2s, CD34dim/-CD45RA+/NCP3s, and CD34dim/-CD45RA-/NCP4s. This said, a very recent study by Ikeda and coworkers (PMID: 36862552) reported that neutrophil precursors, termed either neutrophil progenitors or "early neutrophil-committed progenitors," would generate immunosuppressive neutrophil-like CXCR1+CD14+CD16- monocytes. Hence, presuming that neutrophil progenitors/"early neutrophil-committed progenitors" correspond to neutrophil-committed progenitors, the selective neutrophil commitment that we attributed to neutrophil-committed progenitors is contradicted by Ikeda and coworkers' article. In this study, by performing a more analytical reevaluation at the phenotypic and molecular levels of the cells generated by neutrophil-committed progenitors 2 and 4 (selected as representatives of neutrophil-committed progenitors), we categorically exclude that neutrophil-committed progenitors generate neutrophil-like CXCR1+CD14+CD16- monocytes. Rather, we provide substantial evidence indicating that the cells generated by neutrophil progenitors/"early neutrophil-committed progenitors" are neutrophilic cells at a different stage of maturation, displaying moderate levels of CD14, instead of neutrophil-like CXCR1+CD14+CD16- monocytes, as pointed by Ikeda and coworkers. Hence, the conclusion that neutrophil progenitors/"early neutrophil-committed progenitors" aberrantly differentiate into neutrophil-like monocytes derives, in our opinion, from data misinterpretation.

The slan antigen identifies the prototypical non-classical CD16+-monocytes in human blood.

Introduction: Peripheral monocytes in humans are conventionally divided into classical (CL, CD14++CD16-), intermediate (INT, CD14++CD16+) and non-classical (NC, CD14dim/-CD16++) cells, based on their expression levels of CD14 and CD16. A major fraction of the NC-monocytes has been shown to express the 6-sulfo LacNAc (slan) antigen, but whether these slan+/NC-monocytes represent the prototypical non-classical monocytes or whether they are simply a sub-fraction with identical features as the remainder of NC monocytes is still unclear. Methods: We analyzed transcriptome (by bulk and single cell RNA-seq), proteome, cell surface markers and production of discrete cytokines by peripheral slan+/NC- and slan-/NC-monocytes, in comparison to total NC-, CL- and INT- monocytes. Results: By bulk RNA-seq and proteomic analysis, we found that slan+/NC-monocytes express higher levels of genes and proteins specific of NC-monocytes than slan-/NC-monocytes do. Unsupervised clustering of scRNA-seq data generated one cluster of NC- and one of INT-monocytes, where all slan+/NC-monocytes were allocated to the NC-monocyte cluster, while slan-/NC-monocytes were found, in part (13.4%), within the INT-monocyte cluster. In addition, total NC- and slan-/NC-monocytes, but not slan+/NC-monocytes, were found by both bulk RNA-seq and scRNA-seq to contain a small percentage of natural killer cells. Conclusion: In addition to comparatively characterize total NC-, slan-/NC- and slan+/NC-monocyte transcriptomes and proteomes, our data prove that slan+/NC-, but not slan-/NC-, monocytes are more representative of prototypical NC-monocytes.