$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Strong evidence has arisen from in vivo studies attesting to the therapeutic efficacy of the transplantation of somatic neural stem/precursor cells (NPCs) in animal models of CNS disorders1-8. Nevertheless, a number of issues relating to the delivery of stem cells into the host require careful consideration before these experimental results can be translated into clinical applications. A particularly substantial hurdle towards the development of (nonhematopoietic) restorative stem cell therapies for multifocal, chronic inflammatory brain diseases is the identification of the ideal route of NPC injection. A firm understanding of the pathophysiology of the targeted disease (focal or multifocal; primary inflammatory or primary degenerative), and a cautious analysis of feasibility and risk issues associated with the delivery techniques are in identifying the optimal protocol for stem cell delivery.
While the focal (e.g. into the nervous system parenchyma) stem cell transplantation is a logical approach to the treatment of CNS diseases characterized by spatially confined areas of damage (e.g. Parkinson's and Huntington's disease, brain and spinal cord traumatic injuries, and stroke), the very same approach may prove to be practically not feasible in conditions such as MS, where a multifocal, chronic, and spatially disseminated CNS damage accumulates over time. In this latter case, targeting focal cell injections to individual lesions is also hindered by the limited capacity of transplanted NPCs to migrate over long distances within the CNS parenchyma, thus prompting the identification of alternative, more suitable methods of CNS targeting with less invasive NPC transplants.
Great promise emerged from the observations that NPCs target an intracranial tumor (e.g. glioma) in mice when injected intravascularly outside the CNS9. Following this seminal in vivo evidence of the stem cell pathotrophism10, extensive data have been accumulated pertaining to the feasibility and therapeutic efficacy of the systemic transplantation of NPCs in laboratory animals with experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), as a model of inflammatory CNS damage, via either intravenous (i.v.) or intracerebroventricular (i.c.v.) NPC injection1,2,5,6,8.. We have first shown that this is dependent on the capability of transplanted NPCs to target and enter the inflamed CNS, and to subsequently engage multiple intercellular communications programs within specific microenvironments in vivo11. In order to specifically target the CNS, NPCs are delivered directly into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) circulation by i.c.v. injection, or into the bloodstream via i.v. injection. Once entering either the bloodstream or CSF, transplanted NPCs actively interact with the blood brain (BBB) or blood cerebrospinal fluid (BCSFB) barriers and enter the CNS parenchyma. This interaction between the NPC graft and the BBB (or BCSFB) is regulated by specific set of NPC surface cell adhesion molecules (CAMs) and facilitated by the expression of high levels of CAM counter-ligands on activated endothelial/ependymal cells12-14. Examples of these CAMs include the receptor for hyaluronate, CD44, and the intercellular adhesion molecule (ICAM)-1 ligand very late antigen (VLA)-45,15,16 (that, in leukocytes, are responsible of the interaction with activated ependymal and endothelial cells), and to a much lower extent Lymphocyte function-associated antigen (LFA)-1 and P-selectin glycoprotein ligand (PSGL)-1. NPCs also express a wide range of chemokine receptors, including CCR1, CCR2, CCR5, CXCR3, and CXCR4 (but do not express CCR3 and CCR7), which are functionally active, both in vitro and in vivo5,16. Thus, systemically injected NPCs use these CAMs, along with G-protein coupled receptor (GPCRs), to accumulate at the level of the inflamed CNS. Conversely, NPCs injected systemically into healthy mice do not enter the CNS via vascular or cerebrospinal fluid space routes2. CNS inflammation, or endothelial/ependymal cell activation following systemic cytokine or lypopolisaccharide (LPS) injection as a model of chemically induced encephalitis, is therefore necessary for the accumulation of systemically injected NPCs into the brain and spinal cord2. Thus, successful targeting of the CNS with systemic NPC therapies is dependent on the identification of a disease specific window of Opportunity (WoO) in which the brain and spinal cord environment are conducive to the accumulation and transendothelial migration of NPCs. Such conditions generally arise in the context of acute and subacute inflammation17. Once having entered the CNS, transplanted undifferentiated NPCs have been shown to ameliorate the clinico-pathological features of mice as well as larger, nonhuman primates with EAE. This has been described to be dependent from minimal cell replacement2 and remarkable secretion of immune regulatory and neuroprotective paracrine factors within perivascular CNS2,5,6,18 vs non-CNS inflamed areas19,20 (e.g. lymph nodes) in response to the inflammatory cell signaling elicited by infiltrating immune cells5.
Herein we describe the key methodological aspects of the systemic injection of somatic NPCs into a mouse model of chronic EAE. More specifically, we define the protocols that we have established to (i) derive, expand and prepare for transplantation somatic NPCs from the subventricular zone (SVZ) of adult C57BL/6 mice; (ii) induce chronic EAE in such mice and (iii) perform therapeutically efficacious systemic (i.v. or i.c.v) NPC transplantation into EAE mice.