|
|
Previous Article | Table of Contents | Next Article 
Blood, Vol. 91 No. 7 (April 1), 1998:
pp. 2565-2572
Response of Monocyte Iron Regulatory Protein Activity to
Inflammation: Abnormal Behavior in Genetic Hemochromatosis
By
Stefania Recalcati,
Roberta Pometta,
Sonia Levi,
Dario Conte, and
Gaetano Cairo
From the Cattedra di Gastroenterologia I, Università degli
Studi, IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore; DIBIT Istituto Scientifico Ospedale San
Raffaele; and Centro di Studio sulla Patologia Cellulare CNR, Milano,
Italy.
 |
ABSTRACT |
In genetic hemochromatosis (GH), iron overload affects mainly
parenchymal cells, whereas little iron is found in reticuloendothelial (RE) cells. We previously found that RE cells from GH patients had an
inappropriately high activity of iron regulatory protein (IRP), the key
regulator of intracellular iron homeostasis. Elevated IRP should
reflect a reduction of the iron pool, possibly because of a failure to
retain iron. A defect in iron handling by RE cells that results in a
lack of feedback regulation of intestinal absorption might be the basic
abnormality in GH. To further investigate the capacity of iron
retention in RE cells of GH patients, we used inflammation as a model
system as it is characterized by a block of iron release from
macrophages. We analyzed the iron status of RE cells by assaying IRP
activity and ferritin content after 4, 8, and 24 hours of incubation
with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and interferon- (IFN- ).
RNA-bandshift assays showed that in monocytes and macrophages from 16 control subjects, IRP activity was transiently elevated 4 hours after
treatment with LPS and IFN- but remarkably downregulated thereafter.
Treatment with NO donors produced the same effects whereas an inducible
Nitric Oxide Synthase (iNOS) inhibitor prevented them, which suggests that the NO pathway was involved. Decreased IRP activity was also found
in monocytes from eight patients with inflammation. Interestingly, no
late decrease of IRP activity was detected in cytokine-treated RE cells
from 12 GH patients. Ferritin content was increased 24 hours after
treatment in monocytes from normal subjects but not in monocytes from
GH patients. The lack of downregulation of IRP activity under
inflammatory conditions seems to confirm that the control of iron
release from RE cells is defective in GH.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
IN RECENT years considerable advances
have been made in the knowledge of the molecular events regulating iron
delivery to cells by transferrin. Most cells acquire iron through
receptor-mediated internalization of iron-laden transferrin and then
either use iron for metabolic needs or store excess metal in
ferritin.1 Intracellular iron homeostasis is therefore
maintained through regulation of ferritin and transferrin receptor
synthesis in a coordinated and opposite manner.2 This is
achieved by two cytoplasmic proteins, iron regulatory proteins 1 and 2 (IRP-1 and IRP-2), which bind in an iron-dependent way to iron
responsive elements (IRE) in untranslated regions of ferritin and
transferrin receptor mRNA. IRP-1 has two mutually exclusive functions
that are switched by changes in a 4Fe-4S cluster. Under conditions of
iron deficiency in the cellular labile iron pool (LIP), the cluster is
disassembled, and IRP-1 binds to IRE and decreases the synthesis of
ferritin but enhances that of transferrin receptor, thus providing the cell with readily available iron. Conversely, when iron is abundant, the cluster is reconstituted, IRP-1 dissociates from IRE and thus acquires aconitase function, and iron sequestration prevails over iron
uptake.3-5 IRP-2 controls the expression of ferritin and transferrin receptor mRNAs with a specificity and efficacy similar to
those of IRP-1, but it lacks an iron sulfur cluster, is regulated by
iron through proteolysis, and is expressed differently in various tissues.5,6 In addition, IRP-2 is modulated differentially under some pathophysiological situations.7-10 According to
the above notions, it can easily be seen that IRP is the main and most
reliable indicator of cellular iron status even though factors other
than iron levels themselves, such as bioradicals, can directly or
indirectly influence IRP activity.8-12
In contrast to the improvements in molecular analysis of the regulatory
pathways of cellular iron acquisition and storage, little progress has
been made in elucidating the mechanisms underlying iron egress from the
cell.13 Knowledge of how iron release is controlled is
particularly important for the understanding of iron metabolism in
reticuloendothelial (RE) cells, which process more than 80% of the
iron entering the plasma each day and thus represent a fundamental
compartment in systemic iron metabolism.14 Furthermore, the
abnormalities in RE iron metabolism that appear in certain diseases
seem related to alterations in iron extrusion from the cell. Indeed,
the hypoferremia that accompanies chronic inflammation and anemia of
chronic disease (ACD) is mainly caused by enhanced iron retention in RE
cells,15 even though the molecular events responsible for
the block in the release of iron from macrophages are not completely
understood.16 Alterations of RE iron metabolism are also
present in genetic hemochromatosis (GH), a common inherited disorder of
iron metabolism characterized by unregulated iron absorption.17 In fact, both in GH patients and in 2
microglobulin knockout mice representing a rodent model of
hemochromatosis,18 the metal accumulates preferentially in
parenchymal cells, with little iron stored in RE cells until late in
the disease.19,20 The pathogenetic biochemical defect of GH
is unknown, and even the identification of a strong candidate gene
(HFE) encoding an HLA-like protein21 with a peculiar
pattern of expression in the gastrointestinal tract22 has
given no clues to the underlying metabolic derangement. A defect in
iron handling by RE cells that causes both excess deposition in
parenchymal cells and lack of feedback regulation of intestinal
absorption might be the basic abnormality in GH. Indeed, our
demonstration of an inappropriately high IRP activity in RE cells from
GH patients suggested a low iron level in the LIP, possibly caused by
enhanced iron release.23 The latter observation constituted
molecular evidence to support previous results showing inappropriately
high rates of iron release in patients with GH24 and
therefore supported the idea that defective iron handling by the RE
compartment is critical for the development of this disease.
In the present study, we used inflammation, which is characterized by a
block of iron release from macrophages,13,15 as a model
system to further investigate the capacity of iron retention in RE
cells of GH patients. We analyzed the iron status of RE cells from both
control subjects and GH patients by assaying IRP activity and ferritin
content in monocytes and monocyte-derived macrophages after treatment
with inflammatory agents.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Reagents.
RPMI 1640, minimum essential medium (MEM), and fetal calf serum (FCS)
were purchased from ICN Biomedicals (Opera, Milano, Italy); Ficoll-Paque and Percoll from Pharmacia Biotech (Cologno Monzese, Milano, Italy); Dynabeads M-450 and anti-human CD14 antibody from Unipath (Garbagnate, Milano, Italy); Enzymun-test for serum ferritin immunoassay from Boehringer Mannheim (Milano, Italy); Magic-Fer radioimmunoassay kit for ferritin from Ciba Corning (Cassina
de' Pecchi, Milano, Italy); human recombinant IFN- (Imukin) from
Boehringer Ingelheim (Firenze, Italy); Desferrioxamine,
NG-Monomethyl-L-arginine monoacetate (NMMA),
S-nitroso-N-acetyl-D,L-penicillamine (SNAP),
N-acetyl-D,L-penicillamine (NAP) and lipopolysaccharide from
Escherichia coli serotype 0111:B4 (LPS) from Sigma Chemical Co
(Milano, Italy); and antiserum to mouse macrophage inducible Nitric
Oxide Synthase (iNOS) from Alexis Corp (Inalco SpA, Milano, Italy). The
kit for tumor necrosis factor- (TNF- ) determination was supplied
by Genzyme srl. (Cinisello B, Italy) and Hybond membranes, ECL Plus,
and -32P UTP by Amersham Co (Milano, Italy).
Subjects.
Thirty-nine subjects were studied, and their iron indexes are reported
in Table 1. Informed consent was obtained
from them all, and the study protocol was approved by the Ethics
Committee of the University of Milano.
The control group consisted of 16 healthy blood donors (11 men and 5 women, age range 26 to 64 years) without a clinical history of
disorders of iron metabolism and with normal serum iron indexes.
The GH group consisted of 12 patients (10 men and 2 women, age range 32 to 63 years), 8 untreated and 4 on a phlebotomy program. The diagnosis
of GH was established according to standard criteria as previously
reported.25 Nine subjects were homozygous for the major
C282Y mutation in the HFE gene, and 3 were negative. Removal of excess
body iron was defined as normalization of serum iron
indexes.23
The secondary hemochromatosis (SH) group consisted of 3 patients (all
men, age range 28 to 53 years), 2 with thalassemia intermedia and 1 with alcoholic liver disease. None of them were undergoing phlebotomy
therapy at the time of the study.
The inflammation group consisted of 8 patients (6 men and 2 women, age
range 23 to 57 years) with inflammation secondary to inflammatory bowel
disease in 5 and pneumonia in 3. Serum inflammatory indexes were as
follows: white blood cell count (11,287 ± 2,606/µL), erythrocyte
sedimentation rate (64 ± 22), C-reactive protein concentration (8 ± 5 mg/dL), mucoprotein concentration (181 ± 31 mg/dL), and fibrinogen level (561 ± 130 mg/dL).
All the subjects except 3 GH patients were unrelated.
Biochemical evaluation.
Serum iron, total iron binding capacity, and transferrin saturation
index were determined by standard techniques as previously reported.25 Serum ferritin was measured by an enzyme
immunoassay. Hepatic iron stores were evaluated and graded
microscopically (0 to 4) by two independent observers and chemically by
atomic absorption spectrophotometry as described
previously.25
Serum inflammatory indexes were measured by standard techniques.
Isolation, culture, and treatment of monocytes.
Monocytes were purified as already described.23 Buffy coats
were prepared from venous heparinized blood, and mononuclear cells were
separated on Ficoll-Paque solution. Monocytes were then separated from
lymphocytes by density gradient centrifugation on a solution composed
of RPMI 1640 medium (54%) and 285 mosm Percoll (46%). Yield, purity,
viability, and recovery of monocytes were as previously
reported.23 The cells were either pelletted and stored at
80°C in aliquots or cultured (see below). Monocytes from
patients with inflammation were separated from 50 mL of blood using
magnetic beads coated with anti-human CD14 antibody.26 Purity and viability of monocytes were similar as above.23
For culturing, monocytes were resuspended in RPMI 1640 medium
containing 2 mmol/L glutamine, antibiotics, and 20% heat-inactivated
human serum and kept in 5% CO2 at 37°C.23
Medium and all reagents were endotoxin-free.
To induce differentiation to macrophages, monocytes (approximately 1.5 × 106 cells) were maintained in culture for 6 days.
Both monocytes and macrophages were stimulated for different time
periods (4, 8, and 24 hours) with 1 µg/mL LPS plus 100 U/mL IFN-
in the presence and absence of 250 µmol/L NMMA and 50 µmol/L DFO.
Cells were also exposed to 0.5 mmol/L SNAP or NAP for various time
periods as reported above. At the end of the treatments cells were
obtained, pelletted, and stored at 80°C. J774 mouse
macrophage cells were grown in MEM supplemented with 10%
heat-inactivated FCS, 2 mmol/L glutamine, 100 U/mL penicillin, and 0.1 ng/mL streptomycin at 37°C in 5% CO2 and treated with
cytokines as described above.
Tumor necrosis factor- (TNF- ) concentration was measured in cell
supernatants using a specific enzyme-linked immunoassay according to
the manufacturer's instructions.
In vitro RNA transcription.
The pSPT-fer plasmid containing the IRE of the human ferritin H
chain27 was linearized with BamHI and transcribed
in vitro with T7 RNA polymerase in the presence of 100 µCi of
( -32P) UTP (800 Ci/mmol).
RNA-protein bandshift assay.
Cells were lysed in the buffer described by Leibold and
Munro,28 the lysate was centrifuged at 16,000g for
5 minutes, and the supernatant was used for RNA-protein bandshift
assays. Equal amounts of protein (2 µg as determined using the
Bio-Rad [Segrate, Milano, Italy] protein assay kit) were
incubated with a molar excess of IRE probe in the absence and presence
of 2% 2-mercaptoethanol and treated sequentially with RNase
T1 and heparin as already described.7 After separation on
6% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gels, RNA-protein complexes were
visualized by autoradiography. For quantitation of IRP activity,
radioactivity of bands excised from dried gels was determined by liquid
scintillation counting.29
Determination of ferritin content.
Ferritin intracellular concentration was determined in aliquots of the
cytoplasmic extracts used for bandshift assays using a radioimmunoassay
kit (Magic-Fer, Ciba Corning) based on an anti-human liver ferritin
antibody.
Western blot analysis.
Aliquots of the cytosolic extracts used for the determination of IRP
activity containing equal amounts of proteins were electrophoresed in
10% acrylamide-sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) gels, electroblotted to
Hybond membranes, and incubated with anti-serum to mouse iNOS. iNOS was
detected by chemiluminescence using an immunodetection kit (ECL Plus,
Amersham Co) according to instructions.
Statistical analysis.
Values are expressed as means ± SD. The significance of differences
was evaluated with the t test using the Stat View 4.0 program
(Abacus Concept Inc, Berkeley, CA).
 |
RESULTS |
Time course of IRP activity in monocytes and monocyte-derived
macrophages from control subjects stimulated with
LPS/IFN- .
To investigate the response of iron metabolism to inflammatory stimuli
in human cells of the macrophage lineage, we assessed IRP activity in
extracts of cytokine-stimulated RE cells. A representative RNA-bandshift assay is shown in Fig 1A, and
Table 2 summarizes the results of all experiments;
despite some variability from patient to patient, the trend was similar
in all individuals. In monocytes from control subjects stimulated with
LPS/IFN- , IRP activity rose transiently (1.5-fold) at 4 hours,
returned to control levels at 8 hours, and was clearly downregulated at 24 hours. Incubation for the same periods of time in the absence of
cytokines did not significantly alter IRP activity (Fig 1B). Macrophages derived from monocytes after 6 days of culture had higher
IRP binding activity23 but showed the same pattern of response to cytokine stimulation (Fig 1C). Treatment of extracts with
2% 2-mercaptoethanol fully activated IRE binding activity, indicating
that the effect of cytokines was mediated by a post-translational switch (Fig 1, lower panels). As previously reported,23 the small remaining differences in total IRP activity are possibly caused
by the presence in the IRE-IRP complex of IRP-2, which cannot be
separated from IRP-1 in extracts of human cells and which is not
sensitive to reducing agents.5,6 The production of TNF- ,
an indicator of inflammatory response,30 was consistently enhanced after cytokine stimulation.

View larger version (53K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 1.
Time course of IRP activity in monocytes and
monocyte-derived macrophages from control subjects treated with
LPs/IFN- . Monocytes from healthy blood donors were
cultured in RPMI 1640 medium containing 20% autologous serum for
4, 8, and 24 hours in the presence (A) and absence (B) of
cytokines (100 U/mL IFN- + 1 µg/mL LPS). Cells were
also maintained in culture for 6 days to allow differentiation to
macrophages and were then treated with cytokines for the same time
periods (C). Cytoplasmic extracts (2 µg protein) were analyzed for
IRE-binding activity by RNA-bandshift assay with excess
32P-labeled IRE probe in the absence (upper panels) and
presence (lower panels) of 2% 2-mercaptoethanol. TNF- production
was assayed in the culture medium by enzyme-linked
immunoassay. After a transient increase, IRP activity returned to that
of untreated cells and was eventually downregulated at 24 hours after
stimulation with LPS/IFN- in both monocytes and monocyte-derived
macrophages.
|
|
Involvement of the iNOS pathway in the modulation of IRP activity in
immunostimulated monocytes from control subjects.
A functional interaction between iron and NO has been
shown16 with modulation of IRP activity by
NO.8,10,11 Moreover, LPS and IFN- synergize to induce NO
synthesis.31 Therefore, as NO production by human RE cells
is virtually undetectable by chemical determination of NO metabolites
in the medium, whereas induction of iNOS expression has been
documented,32 we evaluated iNOS induction by Western blot
analysis to assess the role of the iNOS pathway in the changes of IRP
activity reported above. Immunoblot assay of human monocyte proteins
with anti-iNOS antibody (Fig 2) revealed induction of a
band of approximately 130 kD molecular mass in cytokine treated cells.
This band comigrated with immunoreactive material in extracts of
activated mouse J774 macrophages, although in much smaller amount. To
further investigate the role of the iNOS pathway, we treated RE cells
with LPS/IFN- in the presence of NMMA, an iNOS inhibitor. In this
condition, the changes of IRE-binding activity triggered by cytokine
treatment were largely prevented in both monocytes (Fig
3A and Table 2) and monocyte-derived macrophages (data not shown) from
control subjects. IRP activity was not appreciably modified by
incubation in the presence of NMMA alone (Fig 3B). Continuing our
assessment of the involvement of NO in the modulation of IRP activity,
we treated monocytes with the NO donor SNAP. The addition of SNAP, but
not of its inactive non-nitrosylated counterpart NAP (data not shown),
profoundly affected IRP activity with a time course similar to that
obtained during treatment with LPS/IFN- (Fig 3C and Table 2).
Comparable results were obtained with monocyte-derived macrophages
(data not shown). Treating RE cells with cytokines for 24 hours in the presence of the iron chelator DFO prevented the decrease of IRP activity, suggesting that cytokines and NO may act indirectly by
increasing iron availability (Table
2).

View larger version (57K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 2.
Induction of iNOS accumulation in LPS/IFN- -treated
monocytes. Cytosolic extracts were prepared from untreated monocytes
and from monocytes and murine J774 macrophages treated with cytokines for 24 hours as described in Fig 1. Proteins (100 µg) of treated and
untreated monocytes and 25 µg of J774 cells were analyzed on SDS 10%
polyacrylamide gels and blotted to filters that were incubated with
primary (anti-iNOS, 1:500 dilution) and secondary antibody as described
in Materials and Methods. Bands were visualized by chemiluminescence.
Migration of molecular mass markers (myosin, phosphorylase B, and
glutamic dehydrogenase, 250, 148, and 60 kD, respectively) loaded on
the same gel is shown on the left. Similar results were obtained in all
the experiments on cytokine stimulation of both monocytes and
monocyte-derived macrophages. Accumulation of iNOS was detected in
human monocytes after LPS/IFN- stimulation, although to a lower
extent than in mouse J774 macrophages.
|
|

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 3.
Effect of NO on IRP activity in monocytes from control
subjects. (A) Monocytes of control subjects were treated with 100 U/mL IFN- plus 1 µg/mL LPS for 4 and 24 hours, in the presence and absence of 0.1 mmol/L NMMA. IRP activity and TNF- were determined as
described in Fig 1. (B) Monocytes of control subjects were incubated
for 4 and 24 hours in the presence and absence of 0.1 mmol/L NMMA. (C)
Monocytes of control subjects were treated with 0.5 mmol/L SNAP for 4, 8, and 24 hours. Lysates were assayed for IRP activity as described in
Fig 1. The results of treatment with the iNOS inhibitor NMMA and with
the NO donor SNAP indicated a role for NO in the modulation of monocyte
IRP activity by cytokines.
|
|
Effect of cytokine stimulation on ferritin content of monocytes from
control subjects.
To investigate whether ferritin content inversely reflects variations
of IRP activity, as predicted by the model of IRP-regulated cellular
iron metabolism, we measured intracellular ferritin concentration in
monocytes at various times after treatment with LPS/IFN- . At 4 hours
no appreciable effects on ferritin content were evident (data not
shown). On the contrary, the amount of ferritin in RE cells, in spite
of some variability among subjects, was significantly enhanced by
cytokine treatment at 24 hours, concomitantly with the downregulation
of IRP activity (Table 2). This indicated that the effect of in vitro
treatment of monocytes and monocyte-derived macrophages with
LPS/IFN- mirrors the retention of iron in RE cells, which has been
reported to occur under inflammatory conditions in vivo.15
IRP activity in monocytes from patients with inflammation.
To confirm that observations made in vitro after treating cells with
LPS/IFN- correctly mimicked an in vivo inflammatory status, we
analyzed IRP activity in monocytes purified from patients with various
diseases causing acute and chronic inflammation (Table 1).
Figure 4 shows a representative bandshift
assay demonstrating that in subjects with inflammation, with serum iron
indexes compatible with enhanced iron retention in RE cells, IRP
activity was consistently lower than in control subjects and only
slightly higher than in patients with SH, a condition associated with
RE iron overload.

View larger version (60K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 4.
IRP activity in monocytes from control subjects and
patients with SH or inflammation. Lysates of monocytes from control
subjects (lanes 1 through 3), patients with inflammation disorders
(lanes 4 and 5), and patients with SH (lane 6) were assayed for IRP
activity as described in Fig 1. IRP activity was lower in patients with inflammation than in control subjects and was comparable with that of
patients with SH.
|
|
IRP activity and ferritin content in immunostimulated monocytes from
GH patients.
Having established the effect of cytokine stimulation on IRP activity
in RE cells from control subjects, we investigated the response in GH
patients. As shown by a typical bandshift reported in
Fig 5A, IRP activity in monocytes from GH
patients stimulated with LPS/IFN- rose transiently at 4 hours but
was not downregulated at 24 hours when it returned only to the level of
unstimulated samples (Fig 5A). As previously shown for monocytes from
control subjects (Fig 1B), incubation of GH monocytes without cytokines for up to 24 hours did not affect IRP activity (Fig 5B). Quantitation of the results obtained in all the patients showed that, in contrast with the findings in controls, IRE binding activity was not
significantly altered by incubation with cytokines for 24 hours (Table
2). Similar results were observed when cells were treated with SNAP (Table 2). On the contrary, IRP downregulation at 24 hours was detected
in cells from SH patients with a tissue iron burden equivalent to that
of GH patients (Fig 5C). TNF- production stimulated by LPS/IFN-
was similar in all the groups of subjects studied, thus indicating that
other indexes of inflammatory response were not impaired in GH
subjects. A similar pattern was also obtained when monocyte-derived
macrophages from GH patients were examined (data not shown). No
significant differences were detected either between untreated and
phlebotomy-treated patients or between patients positive and negative
for the C282Y mutation in the HFE gene (data not shown). In agreement
with the lack of changes of IRP activity, ferritin concentration in
monocytes from GH patients did not vary appreciably after treatment
with cytokines or SNAP (Table 2).

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
| Fig 5.
Effect of LPS/IFN- on IRP activity in monocytes from
GH patients. Monocytes of GH patients were incubated for 4, 8, and 24 hours in the presence (A) and in absence (B) of cytokines (100 U/mL
IFN- + 1 µg/mL LPS). Monocytes of control subjects (C), patients
with GH, and secondary hemochromatosis (SH) were treated with
LPS/IFN- for 24 hours (C). IRP activity and TNF- were determined as described in Fig 1. IRP activity in monocytes from patients with GH
rose transiently 4 hours after stimulation with LPS/IFN- but was not
downregulated at 24 hours. On the contrary, in cells from SH patients
IRP downregulation was observed at 24 hours.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
The role of cells of the macrophage lineage in the systemic changes of
iron metabolism that accompany inflammatory states is pivotal. Indeed,
low serum iron levels in chronic inflammation are in part caused by
decreased iron absorption in the gut but are mainly caused by enhanced
iron retention in RE cells.15 However, the molecular events
responsible for the block in the release of iron from macrophages are
not completely understood. Moreover, the effects of inflammatory agents
such as cytokines and NO on iron metabolism have primarily been studied
in murine cell lines, and data on human RE cells are
lacking.16 Analysis of the regulation of macrophage iron
traffic could also give insights into the mechanisms underlying the
defective control of iron retention by RE cells in
GH,23,24,33,34 which could represent the basic defect of
this disorder. In the present study we assessed the effects of
inflammatory stimuli on the regulatory mechanisms of iron metabolism in
human monocytes and macrophages by assaying the activity of IRP, the
key regulator of cellular iron homeostasis. We found that the main
effect of inflammation was downregulation of IRP accompanied by
increased iron retention, as shown by greater ferritin content. We also
obtained evidence for a lack of response in GH patients.
A link between NO and iron metabolism exists16 and, in
particular, stimulation of IRP binding activity by NO has been observed in various cellular systems,10,11,35,36 including RE
cells,37-39 but how NO-mediated activation of IRP in murine
macrophagic cell lines and mouse primary macrophages correlates with
alterations of systemic iron traffic occurring in human chronic
inflammatory disease is not clear. In fact, one would expect enhanced
IRP binding activity to result in reduced ferritin expression and, in
turn, in decreased iron storage capacity, a picture that is not
consistent with the recognized enhancement of iron retention in RE
cells under inflammatory conditions.13,15,16 This study
showed that in human RE cells from a large number of control subjects,
stimulation with inflammatory cytokines caused only a transient early
increase in IRP activity, whereas a marked downregulation was observed at later times of treatment. Experiments with an iNOS inhibitor and a
NO donor seem to suggest that modulation of IRP activity is NO
dependent. The decrease of IRP activity reported here, which was
accompanied by increased ferritin content, fits better with the
enhanced iron retention that is the physiologic effect of cytokine
action on iron metabolism in RE cells.13,15,16 The conclusion that IRP downregulation by in vitro treatment with cytokines
is truly representative of an in vivo inflammatory condition is
strongly supported by the finding that IRP activity is severely depressed in monocytes from patients with inflammation. Chronic inflammation may lead to ACD in which iron availability to erythroid precursors for hemoglobin synthesis is restricted despite normal total
body iron content.15 Evidence that NO has a role in the overall alterations of iron metabolism present in ACD has recently been
suggested by studies on K562 cells.36,40,41 However, it is
still not fully understood how derangements triggered by NO might lead
to reduced iron utilization by the bone marrow. The finding of reduced
IRP activity in monocytes from patients with inflammation provides a
novel insight into the molecular mechanisms underlying enhanced iron
sequestration in the RE system and hence the reduced iron availability
for hematopoiesis in ACD.
As to the mechanistic aspects of the action of cytokines on IRP,
cytokine-mediated transcriptional induction42 could trigger ferritin synthesis which, in turn, could cause sequestration of iron
from the labile pool into ferritin and thus increase IRP activity at 4 hours. However, as we did not detect increased ferritin accumulation at
4 hours of treatment, this interpretation seems unlikely.
Alternatively, the early activation of IRP may depend on direct
interaction of NO with the 4Fe-4S cluster.43 On the other
hand, the slow, iron dependent-like kinetics of inactivation at later
times suggests that NO may act indirectly by increasing iron
availability in the LIP. IRP downregulation is likely to be the
expression of an expansion of the iron pool; indeed, we showed that the
fall of IRP activity is prevented by treatment with an iron chelator
and that ferritin accumulation is enhanced by cytokine treatment.
A complex and sequential interplay between NO and iron involving
IRP-mediated modulation of transferrin receptor expression has been
invoked to account for enhanced intracellular iron levels in the
presence of increased IRP activity.16 A number of
studies44 have been performed on the regulation of
transferrin receptor in activated macrophages, but the results were
frequently discordant. However, in our opinion transferrin
receptor-mediated iron uptake may be of limited importance in RE cells.
In fact, erythrophagocytosis is the most important way for these cells
to acquire iron, as also shown by the relatively low number of
receptors present on the surface of macrophages.44 Thus, in
an alternative model, enhanced iron accumulation, and hence IRP
downregulation, could instead be caused by the block of metal release
previously described in stimulated murine macrophages13 and
in patients with inflammation.24 The finding that both NMMA
and SNAP can, in opposite ways, interact with this process seems to
indicate that the poorly characterized mechanisms of iron release from
the cell are under the control of the NO pathway.
The present results also show that RE cells of GH patients do not
downregulate IRP activity after cytokine treatment. The lack of
response does not seem to be caused by an impaired general response to
inflammation, as shown by the observation that TNF- levels in
supernatants of mononuclear-phagocytes from GH subjects increased after
stimulation with LPS/IFN- (Fig 5A). Moreover, in contrast to the
previously reported low concentration of TNF- in LPS-treated
monocytes from GH patients,45 we did not find significant
differences in TNF- production between GH subjects and healthy
controls after LPS/IFN- stimulation. If, as discussed above,
inflammatory stimuli cause the fall of IRP activity by increasing iron
levels in the LIP, the lack of downregulation in GH patients could be
caused by a reduced or no expansion of the pool. Only these
iron-dependent mechanisms of control of IRP seem altered in GH; in
fact, the NO-mediated enhancement of IRP activity at 4 hours, which may
depend on direct interaction of NO with the cluster, is maintained also
in GH patients. A further indication of the impaired capacity of RE
cells of GH patients to retain iron in response to inflammation is
provided by the lack of enhanced ferritin accumulation in response to
cytokines. High levels of intracellular iron, which could act as an NO
scavenger, should not be responsible for the lack of response in RE
cells of GH subjects, as a remarkable downregulation of IRP activity was observed in monocytes from SH patients with an iron burden similar
to that of GH patients. Moreover, IRP remained insensitive to cytokine
or SNAP treatment also in RE cells from iron-depleted GH patients.
Analysis of the activation state of the IRP, the most reliable
indicator of intracellular iron status, showed that the LIP is
inappropriately reduced in RE cells from GH patients.23
This could be because of abnormally high rates of iron release, as shown by radioiron kinetics experiments.24 The present data indicate that the capacity of RE cells of GH patients to retain iron is
impaired not only under normal conditions but even in response to a
stimulus that induces a block of iron release, such as inflammation. In
this regard, the localization of HFE, the product of the recently
identified GH gene, on the basolateral membrane in most cell
types22 suggests that this protein, possibly in cooperation
with other members of the Nramp family of iron-transporting proteins
,46,47 may play a role in controlling the poorly
characterized mechanisms underlying iron release from the cell. In GH,
lack of cell-surface presentation of HFE21,48 could thus
contribute to the reduced iron storage capacity in cells of the RE
system. This will eventually result in lack of feedback regulation of
intestinal iron absorption and in high levels of circulating
nontransferrin-bound iron. The latter is avidly taken up by parenchymal
cells and iron overload and tissue damage ensue.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
Submitted July 17, 1997;
accepted November 12, 1997.
Supported by grants from Ministero Università e Ricerca
Scientifica e Tecnologica (MURST), Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), and from IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore, Milano, Italy.
Address reprint requests to Dr Gaetano Cairo, Centro di Studio sulla
Patologia Cellulare CNR, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133 Milano, Italy.
The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" is accordance with 18 U.S.C. section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENT |
We thank F. Ravagnani for providing buffy coats of control subjects, D. Taramelli for determination of TNF- , L. Kuhn for the gift of the
pSPT-Fer plasmid, and A. Pietrangelo for reading the manuscript and
helpful discussion.
 |
REFERENCES |
1. Aisen P: The transferrin receptor and the release of iron from
transferrin, in Hershko C, Konijn AM, Aisen P (eds): Progress in Iron
Research. New York, NY, Plenum Press, 1994, p 331
2.
Theil EC:
Regulation of ferritin and transferrin receptor mRNAs.
J Biol Chem
265:4771,
1990[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3.
Leibold EA,
Guo B:
Iron-dependent regulation of ferritin and transferrin receptor expression by the iron-responsive element binding proteins.
Annu Rev Nutr
12:345,
1992[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
4.
Klausner RD,
Rouault TA,
Harford JB:
Regulating the fate of mRNA: The control of cellular iron metabolism.
Cell
72:19,
1993[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
5.
Hentze MW,
Kuhn LC:
Molecular control of vertebrate iron metabolism: mRNA-based regulatory circuits operated by iron, nitric oxide, and oxidative stress.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
93:8175,
1996[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Henderson BR: Iron regulatory proteins 1 and 2. BioEssays 18:739,
1996
7.
Cairo G,
Pietrangelo A:
Transferrin receptor gene expression during rat liver regeneration. Evidence for post-transcriptional regulation by iron regulatory factor B, a second iron-responsive element-binding protein.
J Biol Chem
269:6405,
1994[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8.
Cairo G,
Pietrangelo A:
Nitric-oxide-mediated activation of iron-regulatory protein controls hepatic iron metabolism during acute inflammation.
Eur J Biochem
232:358,
1995[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
9.
Cairo G,
Tacchini L,
Pogliaghi G,
Anzon E,
Tomasi A,
Bernelli-Zazzera A:
Induction of ferritin synthesis by oxidative stress. Transcriptional and post-transcriptional regulation by expansion of the "free" iron pool.
J Biol Chem
270:700,
1995[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10.
Phillips JD,
Kinikini DV,
Yu Y,
Guo B,
Leibold EA:
Differential regulation of IRP1and IRP2 by nitric oxide in rat hepatoma cells.
Blood
87:2983,
1996[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11.
Pantopoulos K,
Weiss G,
Hentze MW:
Nitric oxide and oxidative stress (H2O2) control mammalian iron metabolism by different pathways.
Mol Cell Biol
16:3781,
1996[Abstract]
12. Cairo G, Castrusini E, Minotti G, Bernelli-Zazzera A: Superoxide
and hydrogen peroxide-dependent inhibition of iron regulatory protein
activity: A protective stratagem against oxidative injury. FASEB J
10:1326, 1996
13. Brock JH: Iron and cells of the immune system, in de Sousa M,
Brock JH (eds): Iron in Immunity, Cancer and Inflammation. Chichester,
UK, John Wiley & Sons, 1989, p 81
14.
Finch CA,
Huebers H:
Perspectives in iron metabolism.
N Engl J Med
306:152,
1982
15. Konijn AM: Iron metabolism in inflammation. Baillières
Clin Haematol 7:829, 1994
16.
Weiss G,
Wachter H,
Fuchs D:
Linkage of cell-mediated immunity to iron metabolism.
Immunol Today
16:495,
1995[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
17.
Cox TM,
Lord DK:
Hereditary haemochromatosis.
Eur J Haematol
42:113,
1989[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
18.
Santos M,
Schilman MW,
Rademakers LHPM,
Marx JJM,
de Sousa M,
Clevers H:
Defective iron homeostasis in 2-microglobulin knockout mice recapitulates hereditary hemochromatosis in man.
J Exp Med
184:1975,
1996[Abstract/Free Full Text]
19.
Valberg LS,
Simon JB,
Manley PN,
Corbett WE,
Ludwig J:
Distribution of storage iron as body stores expand in patients with hemochromatosis.
J Lab Clin Med
86:479,
1975[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
20.
Brink B,
Disler P,
Lynch S,
Jacobs P,
Charlton R,
Bothwell T:
Patterns of iron storage in dietary iron overload and idiopathic hemochromatosis.
J Lab Clin Med
88:725,
1976[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
21.
Feder JN,
Gnirke A,
Thomas W,
Tsuchihashi Z,
Ruddy DA,
Basava A,
Dormishian F,
Domingo R Jr,
Ellis MC,
Fullan A,
Hinton LM,
Jones NL,
Kimmel BE,
Kronmal GS,
Lauer P,
Lee VK,
Loeb DB,
Mapa FA,
McClelland E,
Meyer NC,
Mintier GA,
Moeller N,
Moore T,
Morikang E,
Prass CE,
Quintana L,
Starnes SM,
Schatzaman RC,
Brunke KJ,
Drayna DT,
Risch NJ,
Bacon BR,
Wolff RK:
A novel MHC class I-like gene is mutated in patients with hereditary haemochromatosis.
Nat Genet
13:399,
1996[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
22.
Parkkila S,
Waheed A,
Britton RS,
Feder JN,
Tsuchihashi Z,
Schatzman RC,
Bacon BR,
Sly WS:
Immunohistochemistry of HLA-H, the protein defective in patients with hereditary hemochromatosis, reveals unique pattern of expression in gastrointestinal tract.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
94:2534,
1997[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23.
Cairo G,
Recalcati S,
Montosi G,
Castrusini E,
Conte D,
Pietrangelo A:
Inappropriately high iron regulatory protein activity in monocytes of patients with genetic hemochromatosis.
Blood
89:2546,
1997[Abstract/Free Full Text]
24.
Fillet G,
Beguin Y,
Baldelli L:
Model of reticuloendothelial iron metabolism in humans: Abnormal behavior in idiopathic hemochromatosis and in inflammation.
Blood
74:844,
1989[Abstract/Free Full Text]
25.
Pietrangelo A,
Casalgrandi G,
Quaglino D,
Gualdi R,
Conte D,
Milani S,
Montosi G,
Cesarini L,
Ventura E,
Cairo G:
Duodenal ferritin synthesis in genetic hemochromatosis.
Gastroenterology
108:208,
1995[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
26.
Hogg N,
Macdonald S,
Slusarenko M,
Beverley PCL:
Monoclonal antibodies specific for human monocytes, granulocytes and endothelium.
Immunology
53:753,
1984[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
27. Mullner EW, Neupert B, Kuhn LC: A specific mRNA binding factor
regulates the iron-dependent stability of cytoplasmic transferrin
receptor mRNA.Cell 58:373, 1989
28.
Leibold EA,
Munro HN:
Cytoplasmic protein binds in vitro to a highly conserved sequence in the 5 untranslated regions of ferritin heavy- and light-subunit mRNAs.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
85:2171,
1988[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29.
Mullner EW,
Rothenberger S,
Muller AM,
Kuhn LC:
In vivo and in vitro modulation of the mRNA-binding activity of iron-regulatory factor. Tissue distribution and effects of cell proliferation, iron levels and redox state.
Eur J Biochem
208:597,
1992[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
30.
Michie HR,
Manogue KR,
Spriggs DR,
Revhaug A,
O'Dwyer S,
Dinarello CA,
Cerami A,
Wolff SM,
Wilmore DW:
Detection of circulating tumor necrosis factor after endotoxin administration.
N Engl J Med
318:1481,
1988[Abstract]
31.
Stuehr DJ,
Marletta MA:
Synthesis of nitrite and nitrate in murine macrophage cell lines.
Cancer Res
47:5590,
1987[Abstract/Free Full Text]
32.
Albina JE:
On the expression of nitric oxide synthase by human macrophages. Why no NO?
J Leukocyte Biol
58:643,
1995[Abstract]
33.
Flanagan PR,
Lam D,
Banerjee D,
Valberg LS:
Ferritin release by mononuclear cells in hereditary hemochromatosis.
J Lab Clin Med
113:145,
1989[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
34.
McLaren GD:
Reticuloendothelial iron stores and hereditary hemochromatosis: A paradox.
J Lab Clin Med
113:137,
1989[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
35.
Jaffrey SR,
Cohen NA,
Rouault TA,
Klausner RD,
Snyder SH:
The iron-responsive element binding protein: A target for synaptic actions of nitric oxide.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
91:12995,
1994
36.
Richardson DR,
Neumannova V,
Nagy E,
Ponka P:
The effect of redox-related species of nitrogen monoxide on transferrin and iron uptake and cellular proliferation of erythroleukemia (K562) cells.
Blood
86:3211,
1995[Abstract/Free Full Text]
37.
Drapier JC,
Hirling H,
Wietzerbin J,
Kaldy P,
Kuhn LC:
Biosynthesis of nitric oxide activates iron regulatory factor in macrophages.
EMBO J
12:3643,
1993[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
38.
Weiss G,
Goossen B,
Doppler W,
Fuchs D,
Pantopoulos K,
Werner-Felmayer G,
Wachter H,
Hentze MW:
Translational regulation via iron-responsive elements by the nitric oxide/NO-synthase pathway.
EMBO J
12:3651,
1993[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
39.
Weiss G,
Bogdan C,
Hentze MW:
Pathways for the regulation of macrophage iron metabolism by the anti-inflammatory cytokines IL-4 and IL-13.
J Immunol
158:420,
1997[Abstract]
40.
Oria R,
Sanchez L,
Houston T,
Hentze MW,
Liew FY,
Brock JH:
Effect of nitric oxide on expression of transferrin receptor and ferritin and on cellular iron metabolism in K562 human erythroleukemia cells.
Blood
85:2962,
1995[Abstract/Free Full Text]
41.
Domachowske JB,
Rafferty SP,
Singhania N,
Mardiney III M,
Malech HL:
Nitric oxide alters the expression of globin, H-ferritin, and transferrin receptor in human K562 cells at the posttranscriptional level.
Blood
88:2980,
1996[Abstract/Free Full Text]
42.
Kwak EL,
Larochelle DA,
Beaumont C |