Recent evidence has demonstrated that remote responses in the brain, as well as local responses in the injured spinal cord, can be induced after spinal cord injury (SCI). Intravenous infusion of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) has been shown to provide functional improvements in SCI through local therapeutic mechanisms that provide neuroprotection, stabilization of the blood–spinal cord barrier, remyelination, and axonal sprouting. In the present study, we examined the brain response that might be associated with the functional improvements induced by the infused MSCs after SCI. Genome-wide RNA profiling was performed in the motor cortex of SCI rats at 3 days post-MSC or vehicle infusion. Then, quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) data revealed that the “behaviorally-associated differentially expressed genes (DEGs)” were identified by the Pearson's correlation analysis with the behavioral function, suggesting that the “behaviorally-associated DEGs” may be related to the functional recovery after systemic infusion of MSCs in SCI. These results suggested that the infused MSCs alter the gene expression signature in the brain and that these expression changes may contribute to the improved function in SCI.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ThompsonK., DiBonaV., DubeyA., CrockettD., and RasinM.-R. (2010). Acute adaptive responses of central sensorimotor neurons after spinal cord injury, in: Translational Neuroscience, De Gruyter, Warsaw, Poland: pps. 268.
2.
BaekA., ChoS.R., and KimS.H. (2017). Elucidation of gene expression patterns in the brain after spinal cord injury. Cell Transplant. 26, 1286–1300.
3.
JaerveA., KruseF., MalikK., HartungH.P., and MullerH.W. (2012). Age-dependent modulation of cortical transcriptomes in spinal cord injury and repair. PLoS One, 7, e49812.
4.
EndoT., SpengerC., TominagaT., BreneS., and OlsonL. (2007). Cortical sensory map rearrangement after spinal cord injury: fMRI responses linked to Nogo signalling. Brain, 130, 2951–2961.
5.
AguilarJ., Humanes-ValeraD., Alonso-CalvinoE., YagueJ.G., MoxonK.A., OlivieroA., and FoffaniG. (2010). Spinal cord injury immediately changes the state of the brain. J. Neurosci., 30, 7528–7537.
6.
KimB.G., DaiH.N., McAteeM., ViciniS., and BregmanB.S. (2006). Remodeling of synaptic structures in the motor cortex following spinal cord injury. Exp. Neurol., 198, 401–415.
7.
BrockJ.H., RosenzweigE.S., BleschA., MoseankoR., HavtonL.A., EdgertonV.R., and TuszynskiM.H. (2010). Local and remote growth factor effects after primate spinal cord injury. J. Neurosci., 30, 9728–9737.
8.
FalnikarA., StrattonJ., LinR., AndrewsC.E., TyburskiA., TrovillionV.A., GottschalkC., GhoshB., IacovittiL., ElliottM.B., and LeporeA.C. (2018). Differential response in novel stem cell niches of the brain following cervical spinal cord injury and traumatic brain injury. J. Neurotrauma [Epub ahead of print; DOI: 10.1089/neu.2017.5487].
9.
WuB., and RenX. (2009). Promoting axonal myelination for improving neurological recovery in spinal cord injury. J. Neurotrauma, 26, 1847–1856.
10.
FawcettJ.W. (2006). Overcoming inhibition in the damaged spinal cord. J. Neurotrauma, 23, 371–383.
11.
SiddiquiA.M., KhazaeiM., and FehlingsM.G. (2015). Translating mechanisms of neuroprotection, regeneration, and repair to treatment of spinal cord injury. Prog. Brain Res., 218, 15–54.
12.
IsaT. (2017). The brain is needed to cure spinal cord injury. Trends Neurosci. 40, 625–636.
13.
NishimuraY., OnoeH., MorichikaY., PerfilievS., TsukadaH., and IsaT. (2007). Time-dependent central compensatory mechanisms of finger dexterity after spinal cord injury. Science, 318, 1150–1155.
14.
HawasliA.H., RutlinJ., RolandJ.L., MurphyR.K.J., SongS.-K., LeuthardtE.C., ShimonyJ.S., and RayW.Z. (2017). Spinal cord injury disrupts resting-state networks in the human brain. J. Neurotrauma, 35, 864–873.
15.
QuertainmontR., CantinieauxD., BotmanO., SidS., SchoenenJ., and FranzenR. (2012). Mesenchymal stem cell graft improves recovery after spinal cord injury in adult rats through neurotrophic and pro-angiogenic actions. PLoS One, 7, e39500.
16.
OsakaM., HonmouO., MurakamiT., NonakaT., HoukinK., HamadaH., and KocsisJ. (2010). Intravenous administration of mesenchymal stem cells derived from bone marrow after contusive spinal cord injury improves functional outcome. Brain Res. 1343, 226–235.
17.
MoritaT., SasakiM., Kataoka-SasakiY., NakazakiM., NagahamaH., OkaS., OshigiriT., TakebayashiT., YamashitaT., KocsisJ.D., and HonmouO. (2016). Intravenous infusion of mesenchymal stem cells promotes functional recovery in a model of chronic spinal cord injury. Neuroscience, 335, 221–231.
18.
Torres-EspinA., HernandezJ., and NavarroX. (2013). Gene expression changes in the injured spinal cord following transplantation of mesenchymal stem cells or olfactory ensheathing cells. PLoS One, 8, e76141.
19.
NakajimaH., UchidaK., GuerreroA.R., WatanabeS., SugitaD., TakeuraN., YoshidaA., LongG., WrightK.T., JohnsonW.E., and BabaH. (2012). Transplantation of mesenchymal stem cells promotes an alternative pathway of macrophage activation and functional recovery after spinal cord injury. J. Neurotrauma, 29, 1614–1625.
20.
MatsushitaT., LankfordK.L., ArroyoE.J., SasakiM., NeyaziM., RadtkeC., and KocsisJ.D. (2015). Diffuse and persistent blood–spinal cord barrier disruption after contusive spinal cord injury rapidly recovers following intravenous infusion of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells. Exp. Neurol., 267, 152–164.
21.
SasakiM., RadtkeC., TanA., ZhaoP., HamadaH., HoukinK., HonmouO., and KocsisJ. (2009). BDNF-hypersecreting human mesenchymal stem cells promote functional recovery, axonal sprouting, and protection of corticospinal neurons after spinal cord injury. J. Neurosci., 29, 14, 932–14,941.
22.
KimS., HonmouO., KatoK., NonakaT., HoukinK., HamadaH., and KocsisJ. (2006). Neural differentiation potential of peripheral blood- and bone-marrow-derived precursor cells. Brain Res. 1123, 27–33.
23.
CaoQ., ZhangY.P., IannottiC., DeVriesW.H., XuX.M., ShieldsC.B. and WhittemoreS.R. (2005). Functional and electrophysiological changes after graded traumatic spinal cord injury in adult rat. Exp. Neurol., 191, Suppl. 1, S3–S16.
24.
BassoD.M., BeattieM.S., and BresnahanJ.C. (1995). A sensitive and reliable locomotor rating scale for open field testing in rats. J. Neurotrauma, 12, 1–21.
25.
DaviesS.J., ShihC.H., NobleM., Mayer-ProschelM., DaviesJ.E., and ProschelC. (2011). Transplantation of specific human astrocytes promotes functional recovery after spinal cord injury. PLoS One, 6, e17328.
26.
Hashimoto-ToriiK., KawasawaY.I., KuhnA., and RakicP. (2011). Combined transcriptome analysis of fetal human and mouse cerebral cortex exposed to alcohol. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 108, 4212–4217.
27.
SchmittgenT.D., and LivakK.J. (2008). Analyzing real-time PCR data by the comparative C(T) method. Nat. Protoc., 3, 1101–1108.
28.
SubramanianA., TamayoP., MoothaV.K., MukherjeeS., EbertB.L., GilletteM.A., PaulovichA., PomeroyS.L., GolubT.R., LanderE.S., and MesirovJ.P. (2005). Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 102, 15, 545–15,550.
29.
NishimuraY., and IsaT. (2009). Compensatory changes at the cerebral cortical level after spinal cord injury. Neuroscientist, 15, 436–444.
30.
BrauerA.U., SavaskanN.E., KuhnH., PrehnS., NinnemannO., and NitschR. (2003). A new phospholipid phosphatase, PRG-1, is involved in axon growth and regenerative sprouting. Nat. Neurosci., 6, 572–578.
31.
Bass-ZubekA.E., HobbsR.P., AmargoE.V., GarciaN.J., HsiehS.N., ChenX., WahlJ.K.3rd, DenningM.F., and GreenK.J. (2008). Plakophilin 2: a critical scaffold for PKC alpha that regulates intercellular junction assembly. J. Cell Biol., 181, 605–613.
32.
HaynesL.P., McCueH.V., and BurgoyneR.D. (2012). Evolution and functional diversity of the calcium binding proteins (CaBPs). Front. Mol. Neurosci., 5, 9.
33.
LarssonJ., ForsbergM., BrannvallK., ZhangX.Q., EnarssonM., HedborgF., and Forsberg-NilssonK. (2008). Nuclear receptor binding protein 2 is induced during neural progenitor differentiation and affects cell survival. Mol. Cell Neurosci., 39, 32–39.
34.
YangY., LiY., LvY., ZhangS., ChenL., BaiC., NanX., YueW., and PeiX. (2008). NRSF silencing induces neuronal differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells. Exp. Cell Res., 314, 2257–2265.
35.
LiH.T., JiangF.X., ShiP., ZhangT., LiuX.Y., LinX.W., and PangX.N. (2012). In vitro reprogramming of rat bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells into insulin-producing cells by genetically manipulating negative and positive regulators. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 420, 793–798.
36.
IshiiT., HashimotoE., UkaiW., TatenoM., YoshinagaT., SaitoS., SohmaH., and SaitoT. (2008). Lithium-induced suppression of transcription repressor NRSF/REST: effects on the dysfunction of neuronal differentiation by ethanol. Eur. J. Pharmacol., 593, 36–43.
37.
ZhaoY., ZhuM., YuY., QiuL., ZhangY., HeL., and ZhangJ. (2017). Brain REST/NRSF Is not only a silent repressor but also an active protector. Mol. Neurobiol., 54, 541–550.
38.
BallasN., GrunseichC., LuD.D., SpehJ.C., and MandelG. (2005). REST and its corepressors mediate plasticity of neuronal gene chromatin throughout neurogenesis. Cell, 121, 645–657.
39.
AitkenS., MagiS., AlhendiA.M., ItohM., KawajiH., LassmannT., DaubC.O., ArnerE., CarninciP., ForrestA.R., HayashizakiY., KhachigianL.M., Okada-HatakeyamaM., and SempleC.A. (2015). Transcriptional dynamics reveal critical roles for non-coding RNAs in the immediate-early response. PLoS Comput. Biol., 11, e1004217.
40.
CarmelJ.B., KakinohanaO., MestrilR., YoungW., MarsalaM., and HartR.P. (2004). Mediators of ischemic preconditioning identified by microarray analysis of rat spinal cord. Exp. Neurol., 185, 81–96.
41.
LapointeN.P., UngR.V., and GuertinP.A. (2007). Plasticity in sublesionally located neurons following spinal cord injury. J. Neurophysiol., 98, 2497–2500.
42.
KalitaK., KharebavaG., ZhengJ.J., and HetmanM. (2006). Role of megakaryoblastic acute leukemia-1 in ERK1/2-dependent stimulation of serum response factor-driven transcription by BDNF or increased synaptic activity. J. Neurosci., 26, 10, 020–10,032.
43.
HoritaH., WadaK., RivasM.V., HaraE., and JarvisE.D. (2010). The dusp1 immediate early gene is regulated by natural stimuli predominantly in sensory input neurons. J. Comp. Neurol., 518, 2873–2901.
44.
WangK.R., NemotoT., and YokotaY. (2007). RFX1 mediates the serum-induced immediate early response of Id2 gene expression. J. Biol. Chem., 282, 26167–26177.
45.
RegardJ.B., ScheekS., BorbievT., LanahanA.A., SchneiderA., DemetriadesA.M., HiemischH., BarnesC.A., VerinA.D., and WorleyP.F. (2004). Verge: a novel vascular early response gene. J. Neurosci., 24, 4092–4103.
46.
BahramiS. and DrablosF. (2016). Gene regulation in the immediate-early response process. Adv. Biol. Regul., 62, 37–49.
47.
Voulgari-KokotaA., FairlessR., KaramitaM., KyrargyriV., TsevelekiV., EvangelidouM., DelormeB., CharbordP., DiemR., and ProbertL. (2012). Mesenchymal stem cells protect CNS neurons against glutamate excitotoxicity by inhibiting glutamate receptor expression and function. Exp. Neurol., 236, 161–170.
48.
HonmouO., OnoderaR., SasakiM., WaxmanS.G., and KocsisJ.D. (2012). Mesenchymal stem cells: therapeutic outlook for stroke. Trends Mol. Med., 18, 292–297.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
