Pituitary stem cells produce paracrine WNT signals to control the expansion of their descendant progenitor cells

  1. John P Russell
  2. Xinhong Lim
  3. Alice Santambrogio
  4. Val Yianni
  5. Yasmine Kemkem
  6. Bruce Wang
  7. Matthew Fish
  8. Scott Haston
  9. Anaëlle Grabek
  10. Shirleen Hallang
  11. Emily J Lodge
  12. Amanda L Patist
  13. Andreas Schedl
  14. Patrice Mollard
  15. Roel Nusse
  16. Cynthia Lilian Andoniadou  Is a corresponding author
  1. King's College London, United Kingdom
  2. Agency for Science, Technology and Research, Singapore
  3. Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, France
  4. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, United States
  5. Stanford University, United States
  6. University College London, United Kingdom
  7. Université Côte d'Azur, France
  8. University of Manchester, United Kingdom

Abstract

In response to physiological demand, the pituitary gland generates new hormone-secreting cells from committed progenitor cells throughout life. It remains unclear to what extent pituitary stem cells (PSCs), which uniquely express SOX2, contribute to pituitary growth and renewal. Moreover, neither the signals that drive proliferation nor their sources have been elucidated. We have used genetic approaches in the mouse, showing that the WNT pathway is essential for proliferation of all lineages in the gland. We reveal that SOX2+ stem cells are a key source of WNT ligands. By blocking secretion of WNTs from SOX2+ PSCs in vivo, we demonstrate that proliferation of neighbouring committed progenitor cells declines, demonstrating that progenitor multiplication depends on the paracrine WNT secretion from SOX2+ PSCs. Our results indicate that stem cells can hold additional roles in tissue expansion and homeostasis, acting as paracrine signalling centres to coordinate the proliferation of neighbouring cells.

Data availability

Sequencing data can be accessed through the following link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/PRJNA421806

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. John P Russell

    Centre for Craniofacial and Regenerative Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Xinhong Lim

    Skin Research Institute of Singapore, Agency for Science, Technology and Research, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4725-5161
  3. Alice Santambrogio

    Centre for Craniofacial and Regenerative Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Val Yianni

    Centre for Craniofacial and Regenerative Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9857-7577
  5. Yasmine Kemkem

    Physiology, Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Bruce Wang

    Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Matthew Fish

    Developmental Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Scott Haston

    Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3928-4808
  9. Anaëlle Grabek

    Inserm, CNSR, iBV, Université Côte d'Azur, Nice, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. Shirleen Hallang

    Centre for Craniofacial and Regenerative Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Emily J Lodge

    Centre for Craniofacial and Regenerative Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0932-8515
  12. Amanda L Patist

    Centre for Endocrinology and Diabetes, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  13. Andreas Schedl

    Inserm, CNSR, iBV, Université Côte d'Azur, Nice, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  14. Patrice Mollard

    Physiology, Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2324-7589
  15. Roel Nusse

    Developmental Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    Roel Nusse, Reviewing editor, eLife.
  16. Cynthia Lilian Andoniadou

    Centre for Craniofacial and Regenerative Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    cynthia.andoniadou@kcl.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4311-5855

Funding

Medical Research Council (MR/L016729/1)

  • Cynthia Lilian Andoniadou

Medical Research Council (MR/T012153/1)

  • Cynthia Lilian Andoniadou

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (314061271 - TRR 205)

  • Cynthia Lilian Andoniadou

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Roel Nusse

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-18-CE14-0017)

  • Patrice Mollard

Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale (DEQ20150331732)

  • Patrice Mollard

Lister Institute of Preventive Medicine

  • Cynthia Lilian Andoniadou

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed under compliance of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, Home Office License (P5F0A1579) and KCL Biological Safety approval for project 'Function and Regulation of Pituitary Stem Cells in Mammals'

Reviewing Editor

  1. Marianne E Bronner, California Institute of Technology, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: May 20, 2020
  2. Accepted: January 4, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: January 5, 2021 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: January 12, 2021 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2021, Russell et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,964
    Page views
  • 274
    Downloads
  • 13
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. John P Russell
  2. Xinhong Lim
  3. Alice Santambrogio
  4. Val Yianni
  5. Yasmine Kemkem
  6. Bruce Wang
  7. Matthew Fish
  8. Scott Haston
  9. Anaëlle Grabek
  10. Shirleen Hallang
  11. Emily J Lodge
  12. Amanda L Patist
  13. Andreas Schedl
  14. Patrice Mollard
  15. Roel Nusse
  16. Cynthia Lilian Andoniadou
(2021)
Pituitary stem cells produce paracrine WNT signals to control the expansion of their descendant progenitor cells
eLife 10:e59142.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.59142

Further reading

    1. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    Dennis May, Sangwon Yun ... Valentina Greco
    Research Article Updated

    Stem cell differentiation requires dramatic changes in gene expression and global remodeling of chromatin architecture. How and when chromatin remodels relative to the transcriptional, behavioral, and morphological changes during differentiation remain unclear, particularly in an intact tissue context. Here, we develop a quantitative pipeline which leverages fluorescently-tagged histones and longitudinal imaging to track large-scale chromatin compaction changes within individual cells in a live mouse. Applying this pipeline to epidermal stem cells, we reveal that cell-to-cell chromatin compaction heterogeneity within the stem cell compartment emerges independent of cell cycle status, and instead is reflective of differentiation status. Chromatin compaction state gradually transitions over days as differentiating cells exit the stem cell compartment. Moreover, establishing live imaging of Keratin-10 (K10) nascent RNA, which marks the onset of stem cell differentiation, we find that Keratin-10 transcription is highly dynamic and largely precedes the global chromatin compaction changes associated with differentiation. Together, these analyses reveal that stem cell differentiation involves dynamic transcriptional states and gradual chromatin rearrangement.

    1. Stem Cells and Regenerative Medicine
    2. Cancer Biology
    Rui Zhang, Qingxi Liu ... Wenjian Ma
    Research Article Updated

    Stem cells play critical roles both in the development of cancer and therapy resistance. Although mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) can actively migrate to tumor sites, their impact on chimeric antigen receptor modified T cell (CAR-T) immunotherapy has been little addressed. Using an in vitro cell co-culture model including lymphoma cells and macrophages, here we report that CAR-T cell-mediated cytotoxicity was significantly inhibited in the presence of MSCs. MSCs caused an increase of CD4+ T cells and Treg cells but a decrease of CD8+ T cells. In addition, MSCs stimulated the expression of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase and programmed cell death-ligand 1 which contributes to the immune-suppressive function of tumors. Moreover, MSCs suppressed key components of the NLRP3 inflammasome by modulating mitochondrial reactive oxygen species release. Interestingly, all these suppressive events hindering CAR-T efficacy could be abrogated if the stanniocalcin-1 (STC1) gene, which encodes the glycoprotein hormone STC-1, was knockdown in MSC. Using xenograft mice, we confirmed that CAR-T function could also be inhibited by MSC in vivo, and STC1 played a critical role. These data revealed a novel function of MSC and STC-1 in suppressing CAR-T efficacy, which should be considered in cancer therapy and may also have potential applications in controlling the toxicity arising from the excessive immune response.