Mary E Petro

Blocking ion channel KCNN4 alleviates the symptoms of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis in mice

The KCNN4 potassium‐ion channel has been reported to play an important role in regulating antigen‐induced T cell effector functions in vitro. This study presents the first evidence that a selective KCNN4 blocker, TRAM‐34, confers protection against experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) in the mouse model. Treatment with the KCNN4 blocker did not prevent infiltration of T cells in the spinal cord, but resulted in the reduction of both the protein and the message levels of TNF‐α and IFN‐γ as well as the message levels of several other pro‐inflammatory molecules in the spinal cord. Plasma concentrations of TRAM‐34 within a 24‐h period were between the in vitro IC50 and IC90 values for the KCNN4 channel. The effect of TRAM‐34 was reversible, as indicated by the development of clinical EAE symptoms within 48 h after withdrawal of treatment. In summary, our data support the idea that KCNN4 channels play a critical role in the immune response during the development of MOG‐induced EAE in C57BL/6 mice.

Pharmacological characterization of the chemokine receptor, hCCR1 in a stable transfectant and differentiated HL-60 cells: antagonism of hCCR1 activation by MIP-1β

C‐C chemokine receptor‐1 (CCR1) has been implicated in mediating a variety of inflammatory conditions including multiple sclerosis and organ rejection. Although originally referred to as the MIP‐1α/RANTES receptor, CCR1 is quite promiscuous and can be activated by numerous chemokines. We used radioligand binding and [35S]‐GTPγS exchange assays in membranes from a cell line transfected to express CCR1 (Ba/F3‐hCCR1) to characterize a panel of chemokines (HCC‐1, MIP‐1α, MIP‐1β, MIP‐1δ, MPIF‐1, MCP‐2, MCP‐3, and RANTES) as CCR1 ligands. In this recombinant model, these chemokines displaced 125I‐MIP‐1α with a wide range of potencies and, with the exception of MCP‐2, acted as full agonists in stimulating [35S]‐GTPγS exchange. We then assessed the utility of HL‐60 cells cultured with known differentiating agents (PMA, DMSO, dibutyryl‐cAMP or retinoic acid) for investigating CCR1 pharmacology. In [35S]‐GTPγS exchange assays, membranes from cells cultured with retinoic acid (4–6 days) were the most responsive to activation by MIP‐1α and MPIF‐1. FACS analysis and comparative pharmacology confirmed that these activities were mediated by CCR1. Using [35S]‐GTPγS exchange assays, intracellular calcium flux and/or whole cell chemotaxis assays in HL‐60(Rx) cells, we validated that MIP‐1α was the most potent CCR1 ligand (MIP‐1α>MPIF‐1>RANTESMIP‐1β) although the ligands differed in their efficacy as agonists. MPIF‐1 was the more efficacious (MPIF‐1>RANTES=MIP‐1α>>MIP‐1β). 125I‐MIP‐1β binding in Ba/F3‐hCCR1 and HL‐60(Rx) membranes was competitively displaced by MIP‐1α, MPIF‐1 and MIP‐1β. The binding Ki for these chemokines with 125I‐MIP‐1β were essentially identical in the two membrane systems. Lastly, MIP‐1β antagonized [35S]‐GTPγS exchange, Ca2+ flux and chemotaxis in HL‐60(Rx) cells in response to robust agonists such as MIP‐1α, RANTES and MPIF‐1. Based on our results, we propose that MIP‐1β could function as an endogenous inhibitor of CCR1 function.