» Articles » PMID: 38405787

Novel 3-D Macrophage Spheroid Model Reveals Reciprocal Regulation of Immunomechanical Stress and Mechano-immunological Response

Overview
Journal bioRxiv
Date 2024 Feb 26
PMID 38405787
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: In many diseases, an overabundance of macrophages contributes to adverse outcomes. While numerous studies have compared macrophage phenotype after mechanical stimulation or with varying local stiffness, it is unclear if and how macrophages themselves contribute to mechanical forces in their microenvironment.

Methods: Raw 264.7 murine macrophages were embedded in a confining agarose gel, where they proliferated to form spheroids over time. Gels were synthesized at various concentrations to tune the stiffness and treated with various growth supplements to promote macrophage polarization. The spheroids were then analyzed by immunofluorescent staining and qPCR for markers of proliferation, mechanosensory channels, and polarization. Finally, spheroid geometries were used to computationally model the strain generated in the agarose by macrophage spheroid growth.

Results: Macrophages form spheroids and generate growth-induced mechanical forces (i.e., solid stress) within confining agarose gels, which can be maintained for at least 16 days in culture. Increasing agarose concentration restricts spheroid expansion, promotes discoid geometries, limits gel deformation, and induces an increase in iNOS expression. LPS stimulation increases spheroid growth, though this effect is reversed with the addition of IFN-γ. Ki67 expression decreases with increasing agarose concentration, in line with the growth measurements.

Conclusions: Macrophages alone both respond to and generate solid stress. Understanding how macrophage generation of growth-induced solid stress responds to different environmental conditions will help to inform treatment strategies for the plethora of diseases that involve macrophage accumulation.

References
1.
Yuan X, Zhang J, Li D, Mao Y, Mo F, Du W . Prognostic significance of tumor-associated macrophages in ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2017; 147(1):181-187. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.07.007. View

2.
Mittelheisser V, Gensbittel V, Bonati L, Li W, Tang L, Goetz J . Evidence and therapeutic implications of biomechanically regulated immunosurveillance in cancer and other diseases. Nat Nanotechnol. 2024; 19(3):281-297. DOI: 10.1038/s41565-023-01535-8. View

3.
Flores-Toro J, Luo D, Gopinath A, Sarkisian M, Campbell J, Charo I . CCR2 inhibition reduces tumor myeloid cells and unmasks a checkpoint inhibitor effect to slow progression of resistant murine gliomas. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019; 117(2):1129-1138. PMC: 6969504. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1910856117. View

4.
Berry M, Engler A, Woo Y, Pirolli T, Bish L, Jayasankar V . Mesenchymal stem cell injection after myocardial infarction improves myocardial compliance. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2006; 290(6):H2196-203. DOI: 10.1152/ajpheart.01017.2005. View

5.
Hang J, Chen J, Zhang W, Yuan T, Xu Y, Zhou B . Correlation between elastic modulus and clinical severity of pathological scars: a cross-sectional study. Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):23324. PMC: 8639709. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-02730-0. View