Blockade of HMGB1 Attenuates Diabetic Nephropathy in Mice.

Activation of TLR2 or TLR4 by endogenous ligands such as high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) may mediate inflammation causing diabetic kidney injury. We determined whether blockade of HMGB1 signaling by: (1) supra-physiological production of endogenous secretory Receptor for Advanced Glycation End-products (esRAGE), a receptor for HMGB1; (2) administration of HMGB1 A Box, a specific competitive antagonist, would inhibit development of streptozotocin induced diabetic nephropathy (DN). Wild-type diabetic mice developed albuminuria, glomerular injuries, interstitial fibrosis and renal inflammation. Using an adeno-associated virus vector, systemic over-expression of esRAGE afforded significant protection from all parameters. No protection was achieved by a control vector which expressed human serum albumin. Administration of A Box was similarly protective against development of DN. To determine the mechanism(s) of protection, we found that whilst deficiency of TLR2, TLR4 or RAGE afforded partial protection from development of DN, over-expression of esRAGE provided additional protection in TLR2-/-, modest protection against podocyte damage only in TLR4-/- and no protection in RAGE-/- diabetic mice, suggesting the protection provided by esRAGE was primarily through interruption of RAGE and TLR4 pathways. We conclude that strategies to block the interaction between HMGB1 and its receptors may be effective in preventing the development of DN.

Optimized method for ureteric reconstruction in a mouse kidney transplant model.

BACKGROUND: Murine kidney transplantation is an important model for studies of transplantation immunobiology. The most challenging aspect of the difficult surgical procedure is the ureteric anastomosis. METHODS: Two different approaches to ureteric reconstruction are compared here. Method 1, Patch: this involves anastomosis of the donor ureter together with a patch of donor bladder to recipient bladder. Method 2, Implant: this utilizes a 5-0 suture to pull the ureter through the bladder wall. The ureter's peripheral tissue is then fixed to the bladder wall at the implant site with 10-0 micro-sutures. RESULTS: In animals transplanted with the patch method, the initial success rate, defined as survival up to the third post-operative day, was 79% (n = 62), whereas the initial success rate for the implant method was 86.1% (n = 101; P = 0.28). The death rate from unknown and/or unspecified causes in the initial period was 16.1% (10/62) for the patch method, and 8.9% (9/101) for the implant method (P = 0.21). The average donor/recipient operation time with the implant method was 14.8 ± 2.2/61.4 ± 4.7 min (76 min per transplant), whereas operation time with the patch method was 28.3 ± 2.4/77.8 ± 5.5 min (106 min per transplant; P < 0.001). The ureteric implant method resulted in a lower rate of urinary leak compared with the patch method (1.1% versus 10.2%; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The ureteric implant method for mouse kidney transplantation is a reliable approach with at least as high a success rate as the bladder patch method and with a shorter operation time.

Liver transplant tolerance and its application to the clinic: can we exploit the high dose effect?

The tolerogenic properties of the liver have long been recognised, especially in regard to transplantation. Spontaneous acceptance of liver grafts occurs in a number of experimental models and also in a proportion of clinical transplant recipients. Liver graft acceptance results from donor antigen-specific tolerance, demonstrated by the extension of tolerance to other grafts of donor origin. A number of factors have been proposed to be involved in liver transplant tolerance induction, including the release of soluble major histocompatibility (MHC) molecules from the liver, its complement of immunosuppressive donor leucocytes, and the ability of hepatocytes to directly interact with and destroy antigen-specific T cells. The large tissue mass of the liver has also been suggested to act as a cytokine sink, with the potential to exhaust the immune response. In this review, we outline the growing body of evidence, from experimental models and clinical transplantation, which supports a role for large tissue mass and high antigen dose in the induction of tolerance. We also discuss a novel gene therapy approach to exploit this dose effect and induce antigen-specific tolerance robust enough to overcome a primed T cell memory response.

Gene therapy for tolerance: high-level expression of donor major histocompatibility complex in the liver overcomes naive and memory alloresponses to skin grafts.

BACKGROUND: The liver has long been recognized as having tolerogenic properties. We investigated whether recombinant adenoassociated virus (rAAV)-mediated expression of donor major histocompatibility complex in recipient livers could induce tolerance to donor-strain grafts. METHODS: Naive B10.BR (H-2) or B10.BR recipients primed with a H-2K-expressing (K) skin graft were injected with rAAV-expressing H-2K (rAAV-K) to induce K expression on hepatocytes 7 days before challenge with a K skin graft. K-specific responses were measured by interferon (IFN)-γ ELISpot and flow cytometric assessment of directly H-2K reactive cells. Fully allogeneic grafts from C57BL/6 (H-2) donors were transplanted onto longstanding B10.BR recipients of K skin to test for linked epitope suppression. RESULTS: rAAV-K-treated B10.BR mice accepted K skin grafts with increased median survival time (MST) more than 169 days compared to uninoculated (MST=18.5 days) and rAAV-K-treated controls (MST=19 days). rAAV-K-treated B10.BR animals primed with K skin grafts also accepted secondary K skin grafts in the long term (MST>100 days) compared to accelerated rejection in primed, uninoculated mice (MST=12 days). Treatments did not induce liver pathology, assessed by serum alanine aminotransferase levels and histology. IFN-γ ELISpot analysis of splenocytes from rAAV-K-treated mice indicated reduced responses to donor K antigen, but protection was not extended to fully allogeneic C57BL/6 skin or heart grafts, even in recipients that had accepted K skin grafts in the long term. CONCLUSIONS: High-level expression of donor major histocompatibility complex in recipient livers promotes tolerance to skin allografts, even in animals primed to produce a memory response. This provides proof of concept for an approach using liver-targeted gene delivery for tolerance induction to donor antigen.