$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Macrophages, first identified by Metchnikoff for their phagocytic ability, are ancient cells fundamental to Metazoan life. Found ubiquitously in adult mammals, they exhibit remarkable anatomical and functional diversity. As part of the mononuclear phagocytic system, alongside dendritic cells and monocytes, macrophages play crucial roles in various biological processes, from development and homeostasis to immune responses against pathogens1,2. Resident macrophages, specialized for their tissue microenvironments, act as sentinels, monitoring tissue health and responding to physiological changes and external threats. Their limited plasticity is thought to be an evolutionary adaptation to maintain tissue homeostasis. In contrast, recruited monocytes are more flexible and can differentiate into diverse macrophage phenotypes during inflammation. This dual influence of inflammation and tissue niche shapes the functional diversity of macrophages3. Thus, depending on the local tissue milieu, monocyte-derived macrophages (M-DM) can differentiate into many subtypes. The local metabolites, growth factors, cytokines, and cell-cell interaction4,5,6 outline their phenotypes and functions. Furthermore, macrophages are key producers of factors that dampen inflammation and drive re-vascularization and tissue repair7,8.
Given that at least three main arms control polarization (extrinsic, intrinsic, and tissue environment conditions), macrophage polarization should be viewed as multidimensional2. The main obstacles and pitfalls in describing macrophage differentiation and polarization are the heterogeneous experimental conditions across the literature and the lack of consensus on defining macrophage terms in in vitro and in vivo experiments9. Nonetheless, some unification of experimental standards has started for diverse experimental scenarios.
To better understand the human macrophage field, we need standardized and well-defined in-vitro models of M-DM to link, differentiation, polarization, phenotype, and re-programming, as well as specific functions. Our goal was to set a standardized in-vitro model of human nonpolarized M-DM M0 and cytokine-polarized macrophages to study skewing reprogramming of M-DM by flow cytometry and real-time PCR. Although macrophage polarization is a dynamic process because their highly plasticity and ability of integrating multiple signals from their environment, we characterized here the nonpolarized M-DM (M0) and some in-vitro polarization states, as the classical pro-inflammatory, commonly recognized also as M1, induced with IFNγ and LPS. Similarly, the tissue repair and regulatory M2 macrophages can be defined as M2a when induced with IL-4 and M2c when stimulated with dexamethasone or IL-10. These polarizing states capture a snapshot of the wide M-DM milieu spectrum in time and space but give us some cardinal points to set the analytic map where to locate the testing conditions.
Despite the complex and dynamic combination of surface markers and transcriptional programs, when analyzing in vitro M-DM, we have set that CD64, CD206, CD163, CD14, and MERTK can separate unpolarized M0 condition, from IFNγ/LPS-induced M1, IL-4-induced M2a, and IL-10 or dexamethasone-induced by flow cytometry. Furthermore, IRF1 and CXCL10 gene expression was defined as specific for IFNγ/LPS-induced M1; IRF4-, CCL22-, and TGM2-specific transcripts for IL-4-derived M2a; and MERTK gene for dexamethasone-derived M2c, setting additional cardinal points to compare the skewing reprogramming of M-DM challenged with different stimuli or even co-cultured with another cell types.