Elsevier

Blood Cells, Molecules, and Diseases

Volume 32, Issue 1, January–February 2004, Pages 24-33
Blood Cells, Molecules, and Diseases

Establishing reliable criteria for isolating myogenic cell fractions with stem cell properties and enhanced regenerative capacity

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcmd.2003.09.012Get rights and content

Abstract

Despite a focused effort within the myogenic cell transplantation community, little progress has been made toward the reliable identification and isolation of progenitors that are capable of tolerating the initial posttransplantation environment and effectively regenerating clinically relevant quantities of muscle. The future success of myogenic-based treatment modalities requires an enhanced understanding of the highly heterogeneous nature of the myogenic progenitor cell pool, which has been previously documented by numerous researchers. Further, for translation of experimental animal results to clinical application, reliable in vitro selection criteria must be established and must be translatable across species. While research into the utility of surface markers is ongoing, as an alternative we have investigated in vitro cell behavioral characteristics under imposed conditions which challenge the propensity of myogenic progenitors to choose between various cell fates (i.e., proliferation, quiescence, or differentiation). Previous observations in the mouse suggest an enhanced in vivo regenerative capacity of myogenic populations with respect to their in vitro ability to maintain a proliferative and undifferentiated state [J. Cell Sci. 115 (2002) 4361]. From these observations it is thus proposed that such behavior may represent an a priori indicator of regenerative capacity following transplantation. To challenge this proposition, a rat cell isolation and transplantation model was evaluated in an identical manner. In agreement with the results obtained from the mouse, a significant correlation between regenerative capacity and induction of differentiation was observed. These results contribute to the growing body of scientific evidence documenting the underlying behavioral differences that exist between various myogenic progenitors while also, importantly, providing evidence that such differences may significantly impact the functional capabilities of these cells posttransplantation. This information further implies that from a therapeutic standpoint isolation strategies aimed toward obtaining efficient myogenic progenitors should, in the absence of a reliable surface marker(s), focus on identifying populations displaying desirable in vitro behavior (i.e., high proliferative capacity and low induced differentiation). Incorporating such criteria into cell isolation and/or purification schemes may yield significant returns in the clinical myogenic transplantation setting.

Introduction

Transplantation of myogenic progenitor or precursor cells, commonly referred to in the literature as myoblast transplantation, has been investigated as a treatment for many muscle-related disorders and also as a gene delivery system for therapeutic recombinant proteins. This approach has most recently received attention for its therapeutic potential in the repair of cardiac muscle (cellular cardiomyoplasty) [2], [3]. However, much of what is known regarding myogenic cell transplantation has evolved from studies investigating its therapeutic potential for the treatment of the most severe form of muscular dystrophy, Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). DMD is a lethal X chromosome-linked recessive disorder characterized by an absence or marked deficiency of the cytoskeletal protein dystrophin [4].

The necessity of restoring dystrophin expression to alleviate the progression of DMD and its associated debilitating symptoms has led to proposed experimental therapies involving both viral and cell-based gene delivery. Cell-based transplantation approaches have been investigated extensively in both animals and humans. Several clinical trials have been performed and, unfortunately, have met with a very limited degree of success [5], [6], [7], [8]. As a whole, little evidence of significant contribution to myofiber regeneration and dystrophin expression by the donor cells is typically observed.

In spite of these apparent clinical setbacks, ongoing investigations in animal models continue. Such studies have since revealed several inherent limitations that are thought to impede the use of the direct myogenic cell-injection approach to treat DMD. These include the low migratory capacity of the cells from the injection site and potential specific and nonspecific immune responses to both donor cells and the dystrophin protein itself [9]. Further, significant evidence for a large and rapid donor cell demise following injection has also been implicated as one of the primary reasons for the lack of clinical success [6], [10], [11], [12], [13]. This donor cell demise cannot only be attributed to specific cellular immune responses (poor restoration is encountered despite matching of donor–host major histocompatibility loci [14], [15]), has yet to be clarified by animal model experimentation, and has since been observed within immunocompromised and immunosuppressed, normal and dystrophic animal models, under conditions considered optimal for muscle cell transplantation. Such conditions include pretreatment of the host muscle with myonecrotic agents and irradiation to prime the muscle for a regeneration response and reduce host cell competition with donor cells [10], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20].

It is apparent that the initial transplantation environment, which includes nonspecific inflammatory reactions along with necrotic and possibly other undefined factors, influences initial cell survival [21], [22], [23]. Improvement in transplantation efficiency within animal models has been achieved through delivery of anti-inflammatory or anti-complement agents [20], [24]. However, experimental observations regarding cell survival suggest that specific populations of myogenic progenitor cells may be more suited to survive and flourish in the initial posttransplantation environment and contribute to the regeneration process [18], [25]. Still, in combination with current delivery techniques, the estimated yield of new muscle and its associated nuclei formed by transplanted cells falls well short of parity and is currently not amenable to treating the major muscle groups of the body [26]. The need to define and isolate efficient progenitor populations in terms of regenerative ability and dissemination quality has recently led to a focus on muscle-derived cells with stem cell-like properties. A review of currently described populations, as well as theories pertaining to their potential developmental origin, is presented within numerous reviews [21], [27], [28], [29], [30]. Some of these muscle-derived stem cell (MDSC) populations have demonstrated a remarkable ability to regenerate myofibers following transplantation [31]. However, the characteristics or qualities possessed by such cells that permit them to display this desired behavior are currently unknown.

The goal of the investigations described here was to further establish cellular traits that may be used to more easily identify efficient progenitor cells within culture, before their use in regenerative therapies, and also to generate potential mechanisms that may be used to explain why discrepancies in efficiency are observed. One possible explanation for the variation in regenerative efficiency stems from heterogeneity in the proliferative and/or fusion behavior of the donor populations. Such behavior has been previously described by numerous investigators [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37]. Thus, it is both of scientific and therapeutic interest to examine the potential association between inherent population expansion and regenerative capability within the myogenic progenitor compartment. Specifically, from previous observations made in the mouse model [1] it is proposed that the ability of a myogenic progenitor population, and the ability of its subsequent progeny's, to expand in number while consequently maintaining an undifferentiated state is reflected in their capacity to regenerate new myofibers following transplantation. With any isolation strategy, eventual clinical utilization requires that such observations not be limited in a species-dependent manner. Thus, within a rat animal model evaluation of both regeneration and fusion parameters, as previously established for the mouse model, are presented.

Section snippets

Cell isolation

A modified version of the preplate technique [31], [38], [39] was utilized to obtain various myogenic cultures from dissociated skeletal muscle. Both hindlimb gastrocnemius muscles from a single female rat (Sprague–Dawley, 6–10 weeks old) were combined for enzymatic digestion and cell isolation. The preplating protocol, including adhesion times and supplemented culture medium, was performed using the same materials and methodology described previously [1]. Enzymatic dissociation was performed

Desmin and CD34 expression

The average percentage of myogenic cells, as determined through desmin expression, within each preplate population from PP1 to PP6 was 14 ± 2, 34 ± 13, 58 ± 4, 86 ± 4, 86 ± 2, and 81, respectively. MDSC cultures contained an average percentage of 66 ± 1 desmin-expressing cells.

Flow cytometric evaluation of nonhematopoietic cells contained within the rat cell cultures revealed minimal CD34 expression. Less than 2% of the cells within each preplate (PP1–PP6) expressed CD34, regardless of donor

Discussion

We have sought to determine cellular traits that may be used to identify efficient myogenic progenitor cells within culture, with regard to their regenerative capacity following isolation from muscle biopsy and transplantation into skeletal muscle. Utilizing the same previously described procedures and parameters to define their behavior within culture we have observed, within a second animal model, that a given myogenic cell populations proliferation and fusion behavior in vitro correlates

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge funding support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH, 1R01 AR49684-01, HL 069368), the Muscular Dystrophy Association (MDA), the Parent Project (USA), and the Orris C. Hirtzel and Beatrice Dewey Hirtzel Memorial Foundation. This work was also supported by the William F. Donaldson Endowed Chair at the Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh and the Henry J. Mankin Endowed Chair at the University of Pittsburgh. This paper is based on a presentation at a

References (58)

  • C. Richler et al.

    The in vitro cultivation and differentiation capacities of myogenic cell lines

    Dev. Biol.

    (1970)
  • G. Cossu et al.

    In vitro differentiation of satellite cells isolated from normal and dystrophic mammalian muscles. A comparison with embryonic myogenic cells

    Cell Differ.

    (1980)
  • D.S. Krause et al.

    Characterization of murine CD34, a marker for hematopoietic progenitor and stem cells

    Blood

    (1994)
  • N. Mahmud et al.

    Primate skeletal muscle contains cells capable of sustaining in vitro hematopoiesis

    Exp. Hematol.

    (2002)
  • C. Dell'Agnola et al.

    In vitro and in vivo hematopoietic potential of human stem cells residing in muscle tissue

    Exp. Hematol.

    (2002)
  • A.B. Firulli et al.

    Modular regulation of muscle gene transcription: a mechanism for muscle cell diversity

    Trends Genet.

    (1997)
  • R.J. Jankowski et al.

    The role of CD34 expression and cellular fusion in the regeneration capacity of myogenic progenitor cells

    J. Cell Sci.

    (2002)
  • E.P. Hoffman et al.

    Dystrophin: the protein product of the Duchenne muscular dystrophy locus

    Biotechnology

    (1992)
  • J.R. Mendell et al.

    Myoblast transfer in the treatment of Duchenne's muscular dystrophy

    N. Engl. J. Med.

    (1995)
  • E. Gussoni et al.

    Normal dystrophin transcripts detected in Duchenne muscular dystrophy patients after myoblast transplantation

    Nature

    (1992)
  • J. Huard et al.

    Human myoblast transplantation: preliminary results of 4 cases

    Muscle Nerve

    (1992)
  • R.G. Miller et al.

    Myoblast implantation in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: the San Francisco study

    Muscle Nerve

    (1997)
  • Y. Ohtsuka et al.

    Dystrophin acts as a transplantation rejection antigen in dystrophin-deficient mice: implication for gene therapy

    J. Immunol.

    (1998)
  • J. Huard et al.

    Gene transfer into skeletal muscles by isogenic myoblasts

    Hum. Gene Ther.

    (1994)
  • J.P. Tremblay et al.

    Results of a triple blind clinical study of myoblast transplantations without immunosuppressive treatment in young boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy

    Cell Transplant.

    (1993)
  • J.E. Morgan et al.

    Normal myogenic cells from newborn mice restore normal histology to degenerating muscles of the mdx mouse

    J. Cell Biol.

    (1990)
  • A.M. Neumeyer et al.

    Pilot study of myoblast transfer in the treatment of Becker muscular dystrophy

    Neurology

    (1998)
  • J. Huard et al.

    Human myoblast transplantation between immunohistocompatible donors and recipients produces immune reactions

    Transplant. Proc.

    (1992)
  • Y. Fan et al.

    Rapid death of injected myoblasts in myoblast transfer therapy

    Muscle Nerve

    (1996)
  • Cited by (12)

    • Volumetric muscle loss injury repair using in situ fibrin gel cast seeded with muscle-derived stem cells (MDSCs)

      2018, Stem Cell Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, as one of the major limiting factors for muscle stem cell therapy is limited source of the satellite cells (Cao et al., 2005; Sohn and Gussoni, 2004), MDSCs have the unique advantage in this aspect as can be expanded exponentially in vitro without losing their proliferation and differentiation potential (Deasy et al., 2001; Usas and Huard, 2007). Another advantage of MDSCs for this application is their unique potential for survival and engraftment in hypoxic and ischemic conditions which has been demonstrated before (Jankowski and Huard, 2004; Urish et al., 2005). Indeed, MDSCs great survival in hypoxic conditions and their resistance to oxidative stress makes them a very attractive candidate for cell therapy in muscle loss injury patients (Qu-Petersen et al., 2002).

    • Endoscopic injection of skeletal muscle-derived cells augments gut smooth muscle sphincter function: implications for a novel therapeutic approach

      2009, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
      Citation Excerpt :

      Both rat and dog cultures contained >60% desmin-expressing cells. Additional evaluation of myogenic proteins expressed by rat MDCs has been performed and described previously.5 Rat-derived MDCs were labeled with CM-DiI (Invitrogen Co, Carlsbad, Calif) to allow for the identification of grafted cells in the host tissue.

    • Initial Failure in Myoblast Transplantation Therapy Has Led the Way Toward the Isolation of Muscle Stem Cells: Potential for Tissue Regeneration

      2005, Current Topics in Developmental Biology
      Citation Excerpt :

      These phenotypic characteristics are important across multiple animal models. Cell proliferation and differentiation correlate with skeletal muscle regeneration in vivo not only in mice after injection of mouse myogenic cells but also in rats after injection of rat myogenic cells (Jankowski and Huard, 2004). Some populations of MDSCs have a CD34‐positive phenotype that is associated with a superior ability to regenerate muscle fibers.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text