Skip to main content
Download PDF

Hyperfunction of CD4 CD25 regulatory T cells in de novo acute myeloid leukemia

BMC Cancer volume 20, Article number: 472 (2020) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a common hematopoietic malignancy that has a high relapse rate, and the number of regulatory T cells (Tregs) in AML patients is significantly increased. The aim of this study was to clarify the role of Tregs in the immune escape of acute myeloid leukemia.

Methods

The frequencies of Tregs and the expression of PD-1, CXCR4 and CXCR7 were examined by flow cytometry. The expression of CTLA-4 and GITR was tested by MFI. Chemotaxis assays were performed to evaluate Treg migration. The concentrations of SDF-1α, IFN-γ and TNF-α were examined by ELISA. Coculture and crisscross coculture experiments were performed to examine Treg proliferation and apoptosis and the effect of regulatory B cells (Breg) conversion.

Results

The frequencies of Tregs in peripheral blood and bone marrow in AML patients were increased compared with those in healthy participants. AML Tregs had robust migration towards bone marrow due to increased expression of CXCR4. AML Treg-mediated immunosuppression of T cells was achieved through proliferation inhibition, apoptosis promotion and suppression of IFN-γ production in CD4+CD25− T cells. AML Bregs induced the conversion of CD4+CD25−T cells to Tregs.

Conclusion

In AML patients, the Breg conversion effect and robust CXCR4-induced migration led to Treg enrichment in bone marrow. AML Tregs downregulated the function of CD4+CD25− T cells, contributing to immune escape.

Peer Review reports

Background

Regulatory T cells (Tregs), which were originally identified as CD4+CD25+ T cells, are critical for maintaining immunological self-tolerance in healthy individuals by actively suppressing self-reactive lymphocytes [1]. However, in tumor immunity, Tregs are considered pivotal regulators of immune escape, as they suppress the proliferation and function of immune cells through cell-to-cell contact and inhibitory cytokine production [2]. Previous studies demonstrated that Tregs are increased in many solid tumors [3,4,5,6], as well as hematopoietic malignancies [7,8,9]. In addition, an increased Treg frequency is related to poor prognosis [6, 10, 11].

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a hematopoietic malignancy driven by a sequence of somatic mutations in multipotential primitive cells or progenitor cells. Currently, although most AML patients achieve complete remission (CR) after induction chemotherapy, approximately 60% of patients who receive subsequent consolidation chemotherapy still cannot achieve long survival. As immunotherapy is a promising new therapeutic option for hematologic malignancies [12], Tregs can be a novel target. However, little is known regarding the role of Tregs in the immune escape of AML and the possible upstream mechanisms.

As cell-to-cell contact plays an essential role in the immunosuppression of Tregs [13], the accumulation of Tregs in bone marrow (BM) is crucial for AML progression. A previous study indicated that stromal cell-derived factor (SDF)-1α/chemokine (C-X-C motif) receptor (CXCR) 4 signaling plays an important role in regulating Treg levels in BM and peripheral blood (PB) [14]. Blockade of the SDF-1α/CXCR4 axis alone, which is crucial for Treg migration, reduces ovarian tumor growth and peritoneal dissemination and selectively reduces intratumoral Tregs [15]. Therefore, we hypothesize that excessive chemotaxis of Tregs from PB to BM is the reason for Treg enrichment. In addition, regulatory B cells (Bregs) are another negative regulator that supports immunological tolerance by producing interleukin-10 (IL-10), IL-35, and transforming growth factor β (TGF-β), as well as influencing the expansion of T cells [16]. Olkhanud et al. indicated that tumor-evoked Bregs promoted breast cancer metastasis by converting CD4+ T cells into Tregs using a mouse 4 T1 breast cancer model [17]. Accordingly, Bregs may play a similar role in inducing Treg conversion in AML immune escape.

To provide an in-depth understanding of Tregs in AML, in the present study, we investigated the proliferation, cytokine production and migration capacity of Tregs in newly diagnosed untreated AML patients.

Methods

Cell samples

EDTA anticoagulated bone marrow aspirates and peripheral blood samples were collected from 45 (24 male and 21 female) de novo AML patients with a median age of 36 years (range, 18–68 years) and 29 healthy donors (17 male and 12 female; age range, 21–56 years) from the Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from March 2015 to April 2017.

Antibodies and other agents

Manufacturer names are included in supplementary materials.

Cell isolation and flow cytometry

Mononuclear cells from BM and PB were isolated by density gradient centrifugation (Ficoll, TBDscience). EDTA was used as an anticoagulant.

For surface markers, cells were stained with monoclonal PD1-APC/Cy7, CTLA4-PE, GITR-PE, CXCR4-PE or CXCR7-PE antibodies simultaneously with CD4-FITC, CD25-Pacific Blue and CD127-APC antibodies.

For intracellular FOXP3 expression, cells were fixed and permeabilized with FOXP3 fixation/permeabilization solution (Ebioscience) after staining with CD4-FITC, CD25-Pacific Blue and CD127-APC and were then stained with FOXP3-PE antibody.

For intracellular cytokine expression, cells were measured after stimulation with phorbol myristate acetate (PMA, 0.05 μg/ml; Sigma-Aldrich) and ionomycin (1 μg/ml, Sigma-Aldrich) in the presence of brefeldin A (BFA 0.01 μg/ml, BD Biosciences) at 37 °C for 5 h. After staining with CD19-FITC, CD24-PE and CD38-APC antibodies, the cells were fixed and permeabilized, followed by intracellular staining with IL-10-PE/Cy7 and TGF-β-PerCP/Cy5.5 antibodies according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

The concentration of antibodies was determined as recommended by the manufacturer. Isotype controls were used to set correct gating for both extracellular and intracellular markers. Gating strategies are presented in the supplementary materials. Data acquisition was performed on a Canto II flow cytometer (BD Biosciences) and analyzed by FlowJo software (Version 7.6; TreeStar).

Purification of lymphocyte subpopulations

Three T cell subpopulations, including CD4+CD25− T cells, CD8+ T cells, and CD4+CD25+ Tregs, were purified using a commercial CD3-positive selection magnetic activated cell sorting (MACS) isolation kit (Miltenyi Biotec), a CD8-positive selection isolation kit (Miltenyi Biotec) and a CD4+CD25+ human Treg isolation kit (Miltenyi Biotec) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. To verify the phenotype of Tregs, some sorted CD4+CD25+ Tregs were stained with CD4-FITC, CD25-Pacific Blue and CD127-APC antibodies and analyzed on a Canto II flow cytometer (BD Biosciences). Flow cytometry results showed that the purity of CD4+CD25+CD127low/− Tregs was > 95%. For CD19+CD24+ Breg isolation, BM mononuclear cells were stained with CD19-FITC and CD24-PE antibodies and sorted on an Aria III flow cytometer (BD Biosciences) according to the manufacturer’s instructions, and the purity of isolated Bregs was > 95%.

Chemotaxis assay

Purified PB Tregs were subjected to a migratory assay with SDF-1 or BM fluid as chemotactic media. Purified PB Tregs (1 × 105 cells/well) were induced to migrate towards either SDF-1 (100 ng/mL; R&D Systems) or BM fluid diluted in RPMI 1640 with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) in a 24-well plate containing 5-μm pore polycarbonate filters (Costar Corporation). After incubation at 37 °C for 3 h, migrating cells were harvested from the lower compartment. The harvested cells were enumerated using a hemocytometer. The percentage of migrating cells was calculated by determining the ratio of the number of cells harvested from the lower compartment to the total number of cells loaded in the upper compartment. CXCR4 neutralization experiments were performed by incubating the cells with AMD3100 (100 ng/mL; Sigma-Aldrich) for 30 min before adding the cells to the top chamber.

Proliferation assays for T cells

To assess the proliferation of T cells, freshly purified CD4+CD25− T cells or CD8+ T cells were stained with 5 mmol/L carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl ester (CFSE) (Invitrogen) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The stained cells were then cultured in a 24-well plate alone or with Tregs at a ratio of 4:1 at 37 °C with 5% CO2 in X-VIVO™15 medium (Lonza) supplemented with 5% FBS and recombinant interleukin-2 (100 units/ml; R&D systems) and stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 beads (Miltenyi Biotec) at a ratio of 1:1. After 5 days, proliferating CD4+CD25− T cells or CD8+ T cells were identified as CFSE-diluted subsets. The control group consisted of CD4+CD25− T cells that were not cocultured with Tregs but were stained with CFSE.

Apoptosis assays for T cells

To assess the apoptosis of T cells, freshly purified CD4+CD25− T cells or CD8+ T cells were cultured in a 24-well plate alone or with Tregs at a ratio of 4:1 at 37 °C with 5% CO2 in X-VIVO™15 medium (Lonza) supplemented with 5% FBS and recombinant Interleukin-2 (100 units/ml; R&D Systems) and were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 beads (Miltenyi Biotec). After 3 days, apoptotic CD4+CD25− T cells or CD8+ T cells were assayed by an Annexin v/PI apoptosis kit (BD Biosciences) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

Detection of IFN-γ, TNF-α and SDF-1 levels

Culture supernatants obtained from the apoptosis assays were analyzed for IFN-γ and TNF-α by ELISA (Pepro Tech). SDF-1 was also detected in BM fluid and serum by ELISA (Pepro Tech). The detection range of all three kits was 0–10 ng/ml according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

Conversion of CD4+CD25−T cells to CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs

To assess the efficiency of Breg-mediated conversion of Tregs, freshly purified CD4+CD25− T cells were cultured in a 24-well plate alone or with Bregs at a ratio of 1:1 at 37 °C with 5% CO2 in X-VIVO™15 medium (Lonza) supplemented with 5% FBS and recombinant Interleukin-2 (100 units/ml; R&D Systems) and were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 beads (Miltenyi Biotec). After 5 days, the cells were analyzed for the expression of CD4, CD25 and Foxp3 on a Canto II flow cytometer (BD Biosciences).

Statistical analysis

The data are shown as the mean ± SEM or median (P25, P75). The data were tested for normality, assuming the test result was P > 0.10. Statistical significance of differences between groups was determined by Student’s t tests. Nonnormally distributed data were analyzed by the Mann-Whitney U test. A value of P < 0.05 was determined to be statistically significant. Analyses were carried out with SPSS 16.0 software (SPSS Science).

Results

Increased frequencies of Tregs in AML patients

We used CD4+CD25+CD127low/− as the immunophenotype of Tregs and verified this subgroup by FoxP3 expression. Flow cytometry analysis showed that CD4+CD25+CD127low/− T cells and CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ T cells belonged to the same group (Fig. 1). Compared with those of healthy participants, the frequencies of CD4+CD25+CD127low/− Tregs in the BM of AML patients were significantly increased (3.60% [range: 2.00 to 5.20%] vs 1.50% [range: 1.10 to 2.13%], P = 0.0062), as were CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs (2.70% [range: 0.90 to 3.70%] vs 1.00% [range: 0.68 to 1.65%], P = 0.0239) (Fig. 2a-b). However, the expression of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) on the surface of Tregs in AML patients was not significantly different from that in healthy participants (P > 0.05) (Fig. 2c). Tregs with cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA4) and glucocorticoid-induced tumor necrosis factor receptor (GITR) were undetectable in the analyzed samples.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow cytometry analysis of CD4+CD25+CD127low/- and CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs in BM from newly diagnosed AML patients

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Increased frequencies of Tregs in AML patients. a. Frequencies of CD4+CD25+CD127low/- Tregs in BM of AML patients (n=27) and healthy controls (n=10). b. Frequencies of CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs in BM of AML patients (n=27) and healthy controls (n=10). c. Frequencies of PD-1 on the surface of Tregs in AML patients (n=9) and healthy controls (n=20)

Full size image

Enhanced migratory capacity of Tregs due to increased expression of CXCR4

The ability of Tregs to suppress immune cells through contact-dependent mechanisms depends on their migratory capacity to the primary target tissue [18]. Therefore, excessive migration of Tregs to the BM could be the reason for Treg enrichment in the BM of AML patients. As SDF-1α/CXCR4 is crucial for Treg migration to BM and an alternate SDF-1α receptor, CXCR7, still needs to be investigated [14, 19], we first designed a chemotaxis assay to exclude the effect of other soluble chemoattractants in BM fluid from AML patients on Treg migration. SDF-1α, BM fluid from healthy participants and BM fluid from AML patients were used individually as chemotactic media. The results showed that PB Tregs from AML patients had stronger migration to all three media than normal Tregs (SDF-1α: 27.69 ± 1.84% vs. 11.73 ± 0.27%, P = 0.0010; normal BM: 12.20 ± 0.55% vs. 7.37 ± 0.75%, P = 0.0007; AML BM: 13.73 ± 0.47% vs. 7.67 ± 0.67%, P = 0.0018, respectively). Moreover, the same PB Tregs showed similar migratory capacities to normal BM fluid and AML BM fluid. After adding the CXCR4 blocker, the migration of PB Tregs from AML patients and controls was significantly decreased, with no significant differences (P > 0.05) (Fig. 3a-d).

Fig. 3
figure 3

The enhancement of migratory capacity of Tregs due to higher expression of CXCR4 in AML. a-c. PB Tregs from AML patients (n = 3) had higher migratory capacity towards (a) SDF-1α, (b) normal BM, and (c) AML BM than those in controls (n = 3). CXCR4 blockade resulted in significantly reduced migratory capacity of Tregs in controls and AML, with no significant differences. d. The same PB Tregs showed similar migratory capacities to normal BM fluid or AML BM fluid. e-f. The level of SDF-1α in BM fluid from patients (n =1 1) and controls (n = 14) was similar (P = 0.1380). BM fluid had increased level of SDF-1 compared with serum in AML patients (n = 11). Data were expressed as mean ± SEM. ns P > 0.05, **P < 0.01. g-h. The expression of CXCR4 and CXCR7 on the surface of Tregs. There was significantly higher expression of CXCR4 on PB Tregs from AML patients (n = 8) compared with controls (n = 5) (P = 0.0310), while there was no significant difference in CXCR7 expression on PB Tregs between the 2 groups (AML patients n = 7; controls n = 6). Data were expressed as Median (P25, P75)

Full size image

The levels of SDF-1α in BM fluid from patients and controls were similar (1844 ± 300.2 ng/mL vs. 1374 ± 134.8 ng/mL, P = 0.1380) (Fig. 3e). In addition, BM fluid from AML patients had increased levels of SDF-1 compared with that of serum (1844 ± 300.2 ng/mL vs. 1123 ± 168.9 ng/mL, P = 0.0494) (Fig. 3f). To further investigate the factors influencing the migration of PB Tregs, flow cytometry was performed to detect the expression of CXCR4 and CXCR7 on Tregs. The results showed that the expression of CXCR4 on AML Tregs was significantly higher than that of the controls (44.15% [range: 19.78 to 71.78%] vs 5.20% [range: 3.10 to 25.75%], P = 0.0190), while the expression of CXCR7 showed no significant differences between the two groups (3.40% [range: 2.10 to 4.10%] vs 2.50% [range; 1.88 to 4.85%], P = 0.8861) (Fig. 3g-h).

AML Treg-mediated immunosuppression of immune T cells

To study the immunosuppressive effects of Tregs on T cells, coculture and crisscross coculture experiments of Tregs with CD4+CD25− T cells were performed. The results showed that Tregs from controls or AML patients promoted the apoptosis of normal CD4+CD25− T cells compared with that of CD4+CD25− T cells cultured alone (17.03 ± 1.97% vs. 34.40 ± 2.10%, P = 0.0038; 17.03 ± 1.97% vs. 55.27 ± 3.47%, P = 0.007). A similar trend was also found in AML CD4+CD25− T cells (20.40 ± 1.69% vs. 32.47 ± 2.83%, P = 0.0215; 20.40 ± 1.69% vs. 68.93 ± 2.10%, P < 0.0001, respectively). Compared with normal Tregs, AML Tregs significantly promoted the apoptosis of both normal and AML CD4+CD25− T cells (34.40 ± 2.10% vs. 55.27 ± 3.47%, P = 0.0068; 32.47 ± 2.83% vs. 68.93 ± 2.10%, P = 0.0005, respectively). In particular, AML Tregs had the most significant proapoptotic effect on AML CD4+CD25− T cells (Fig. 4a). Tregs also promoted the apoptosis of CD8+ T cells (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences when separately comparing the different stages of apoptosis (Supplemental Figure 4A-D). However, the proapoptotic effect on CD8+ T cells seemed less different between normal and AML Tregs (P > 0.05) (Fig. 4b).

Fig. 4
figure 4

AML Treg-mediated immunosuppression for immune T cells. a. Both normal Tregs (n = 3) and AML Tregs (n = 3) resulted in increased apoptosis of T cells compared with CD4+CD25- T cells cultured alone, particularly AML Tregs. b. Compared with normal Tregs (n = 3), AML Tregs (n = 3) had the same trend of progression of CD8+ T cells, however the differences remained not statistically significant (P > 0.05). c. AML Tregs inhibited the proliferation of CD4+CD25- T cells (AML patients n = 3; controls n = 3). d. AML Tregs could not inhibit the proliferation of CD8+ T cells (AML patients n = 3; controls n = 3). e. The levels of IFN-γ showed that T cells from both normal controls and AML patients cocultured with AML Tregs had significantly lower levels of IFN-γ production than those of controls. CD8+ T cells showed the same trend, but the differences were not statistically significant. (AML patients n = 7; controls n = 6). f. The inhibitory effect was not observed for TNF-α (P > 0.05). (AML patients n = 7; controls n = 6). Data were expressed as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001

Full size image

In addition, Tregs from AML patients inhibited the proliferation of both normal CD4+CD25− T cells (proliferation of CD4+CD25− T cells decreased from 91.8 to 50.1%) and AML CD4+CD25− T cells (proliferation of CD4+CD25− T cells decreased from 86.2 to 42.1%) compared with that of Tregs in the controls (Fig. 4c). However, no proliferation inhibition was observed for CD8+ T cells (proliferation of CD8+ T cells was approximately 90%) (Fig. 4d).

Interferon-γ (IFN-γ) is an important Th1-type cytokine [20]. Coculture supernatants obtained from the apoptosis assays were analyzed for IFN-γ, and the data revealed that Tregs from AML patients suppressed the secretion of IFN-γ by both normal and AML CD4+CD25− T cells (P = 0.0065 and P = 0.0004, respectively), especially for autologous CD4+CD25− T cells (the level of IFN-γ decreased from baseline value of 635.0 ± 24.7 pg/ml to 170.5 ± 35.3 pg/ml) (Fig. 4e). The same trend was observed for CD8+ T cells, but the differences were not statistically significant. In contrast, an inhibitory effect was not observed for the cytokine tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) (P > 0.05) (Fig. 4f).

AML Breg-induced conversion of CD4+CD25− T cells to CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs

Previous studies confirmed that in breast cancer, tumor-induced Bregs promote tumor metastasis by converting dormant CD4+CD25− T cells into CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs, while in the absence of tumor-induced Bregs, the conversion of Tregs was significantly reduced and tumor metastasis was blocked [17]. To further address the role of Bregs in the conversion of Tregs, we first detected the frequencies of CD19+CD24highCD38high Bregs in BM from newly diagnosed AML patients by flow cytometry (Fig. 5a). The percentage of CD19+CD24highCD38high Bregs in BM CD19+ B cells from AML patients was significantly increased compared with those from healthy participants (7.50% [range: 5.20 to 12.65%] vs 4.80% [range: 2.05 to 6.95%], P = 0.0255) (Fig. 5b). We also detected intracellular cytokine expression, such as IL-10 and TGF-β, in Bregs from AML patients or healthy controls and found no significant differences between the two groups (P > 0.05) (Fig. 5c). Therefore, we considered whether this conversion was achieved through cell-to-cell contact by Bregs in AML patients. We cocultured Bregs with CD4+CD25− T cells for 5 days in vitro, analyzed the expression of CD4, CD25 and Foxp3 by flow cytometry and found that normal Bregs cannot convert CD4+CD25− T cells into CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs. Interestingly, the conversion of CD4+CD25− T cells to CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs was significantly increased when normal or AML CD4+CD25− T cells were cocultured with AML Bregs (2.31 ± 0.27% vs. 7.53 ± 0.65%, P = 0.0018; 1.89 ± 0.32% vs. 12.77 ± 1.63%, P = 0.0028). The conversion effect was most significant for autologous CD4+CD25− T cells (Treg ratio increased from baseline value of 1.67 ± 0.34% to 12.77 ± 1.63%) (Fig. 5d).

Fig. 5
figure 5

AML Breg-induced conversion of CD4+CD25- T cells to CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs. a. Flow cytometry analysis of CD19+CD24highCD38high Bregs in BM from newly diagnosed AML patients (n = 13). b. The percentage of CD19+CD24highCD38high Bregs in BM from AML patients (n = 13) was increased compared with those from healthy controls (n = 10). c. The expression of IL-10 and TGF-β in BM Bregs cells had no significant differences between AML patients (n = 3) and controls (n = 4). Data were expressed as Median (P25, P75). d. Normal Bregs could not convert CD4+CD25- T cells into CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs whether from AML patients (n = 3) or controls (n = 4). AML Bregs could result in higher conversion of CD4+CD25- T cells to CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs, especially for autologous CD4+CD25- T cells. Data were expressed as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01

Full size image

Discussion

AML accounts for more than 25% of adult leukemia cases [21]. In addition to the well-known cytogenetic and molecular genetic abnormalities in the pathogenesis of AML, immune escape also plays a significant role. Tregs are considered pivotal regulators of immune escape. As Tregs suppress the proliferation and function of immune cells through cell-to-cell contact [13], the enrichment of Tregs in tumor sites is crucial. In addition, using CD25-specific monoclonal antibodies to deplete Tregs in a variety of different mouse strains promoted the rejection of murine tumor cell lines, including melanoma and leukemia [22,23,24]. Previous studies have shown that compared to the frequencies in healthy individuals, the frequencies of Tregs in both PB and BM of AML patients are increased [25, 26]. Nevertheless, little is known about the mechanism of Tregs in the immune escape of AML.

FoxP3 is critical and specific for Treg identification. However, as FoxP3 is expressed intracellularly, and cells to be fixed and ruptured during staining, FoxP3 cannot be used to separate human Tregs for functional studies or in vivo expansion. In addition, CD127 is downregulated in Tregs and is negatively correlated with Foxp3 expression [27]. Therefore, we used CD4+CD25+CD127low/− cells as the immunophenotype of Tregs and found that the frequencies of CD4+CD25+CD127low/− Tregs in BM and PB were increased in AML patients. We deduced that excessive chemotaxis of Tregs from PB to BM is the reason for this enrichment. The homing of Tregs from PB to BM, which is the target tissue in AML, is crucial for their immunosuppressive function via direct contact with immune cells. The SDF-1α/CXCR4 signaling pathway is critical for Treg trafficking from PB to BM [14]. Moreover, the mechanism of CXCR7, another receptor of SDF-1α, still needs further investigation [19]. Our study demonstrated that the enrichment of Tregs in AML patients was due to excessive migration caused by increased expression of CXCR4 rather than abnormal expression of CXCR7 on Tregs or abnormal secretion of SDF-1α by the hematopoietic microenvironment.

Checkpoint inhibition was taken into consideration as contributing to the immunosuppressive effect of Tregs in AML. A series of inhibitory membrane proteins on the surface of Tregs can exert their immunosuppressive function through cell-to-cell contact [28]. However, in our experiments, differences in the expression of PD-1 on the surface of Tregs [10, 29], were not significantly different between AML and healthy participants, which was consistent with several solid cancers [30,31,32]. Therefore, we inferred that the immunosuppressive function of Tregs in AML patients does not rely on the overexpression of PD-1.

In addition, to further investigate the effects of Tregs on other immune cells, we designed in vitro coculture and crisscross coculture experiments. Our study revealed that compared to normal Tregs, AML Tregs were more capable of inhibiting proliferation, promoting apoptosis and suppressing the production of IFN-γ in both normal and AML CD4+CD25− T cells. In particular, Tregs from AML patients had the most significant effect on autologous CD4+CD25− T cells. Interestingly, the inhibitory effect on CD8+ T cells was not significantly different from that of controls. Although IFN- γ production by CD8+ T cells showed a similar decreasing trend, the difference was not obvious enough (P > 0.05). In ovarian cancer, a decreased ratio of CD8+ T cells to Tregs in tumors is related to poor prognosis, indicating suppression of effector CD8+ T cells by Tregs [1]. The effect of Tregs on CD8+ T cells in AML could be due to other mechanisms than cell-to-cell contact. Inhibitory cytokines such as TGF-β suppress CD8+ T cell proliferation [33], and cytokines could be the manner by which Tregs influence CD8+ T cells. In addition, as the function of CD8+ T cells relies on the help from CD4+ T cells, the immunosuppressive effect could be indirect via CD4+CD25− T cells. Crisscross coculture experiments further ruled out the possibility that T cells had decreased resistance to Tregs. Therefore, we suggest that in AML, Treg-mediated immunosuppression of CD4+CD25− T cells increases, leading to reduced proliferation, increased apoptosis and impaired secretion of IFN-γ; instead, the resistance of immune T cells to Tregs decreases, which eventually causes immune escape of AML cells.

The in-depth study of AML Tregs raised the question of the possible upstream factors in the initiation of AML Treg abnormalities. Mizoguchi et al. [34]. found a B cell subgroup that secreted IL-10 and inhibited the progression of inflammatory bowel disease, formally suggesting the concept of Bregs. Bregs are involved in the development of various diseases, including autoimmune diseases, infections and tumors. These cells are involved in the regulation of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), mainly through the secretion of IL-10, TGF-β and other cytokines [35], regulation of T cells, amplification of Tregs [36,37,38] and other means of participating in immune regulation. A study showed that the number of Bregs in the PB of liver cancer patients was higher than that in healthy individuals [39]. Olkhanud et al. discovered that Bregs could convert dormant CD4+CD25− T cells into CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs in breast cancer [17]. In our study, the percentage of CD19+CD24highCD38high Bregs in BM was significantly increased. A coculture experiment proved that AML-induced Bregs robustly converted CD4+CD25− T cells to CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs, while normal Bregs did not. However, as secretion of IL-10 and TGF-β did not show obvious differences between AML and normal Bregs, we deduced that IL-10 and TGF-β were not the reason for the conversion. Little research has been conducted on the impact of Bregs on Tregs. In breast cancer, PD-1+ Bregs increase the conversion [40]. Although that study did not use PD-1− Bregs or anti-PD-1 antibodies for comparison, checkpoint inhibitors are still a good entry point for Breg investigations. The conversion effect was most significant when AML Bregs were cocultured with AML CD4+CD25− T cells. Therefore, tumor-induced CD4+CD25− T cells were more prone to conversion.

Conclusion

In AML bone marrow, the frequencies of Bregs increase and induce the conversion of CD4+CD25−T cells to CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ Tregs. On the other hand, more PB Tregs home to the BM, which also causes the enrichment of Tregs in the BM. Treg-mediated immunosuppression in immune cells increases, leading to reduced proliferation and increased apoptosis and secretion of IFN-γ, especially for CD4+CD25−T cells.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analyzed during the present study are included in this published article. The authors declare that materials described in the manuscript, including all relevant raw data, will be freely available to any scientist wishing to use them for non-commercial purposes, without breaching participant confidentiality.

Abbreviations

AML:

Acute myeloid leukemia

Tregs:

Regulatory T cells

Bregs:

Regulatory B cells

CR:

Complete remission

BM:

Bone marrow

SDF-1α:

Stromal cell-derived factor 1α

CXCR4:

Chemokine (C-X-C motif) receptor 4

PB:

Peripheral blood

IL-10:

Interleukin-10

TGF-β:

Transforming growth factor β

PMA:

Phorbol myristate acetate

BFA:

Brefeldin A

MACS:

Magnetic activated cell sorting

FBS:

Fetal bovine serum

CFSE:

Carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl ester

PD-1:

Programmed cell death protein-1

CTLA4:

Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4

GITR:

Glucocorticoid-induced TNFR family–related protein

IFN-γ:

Interferon-γ

TNF-α:

Tumor necrosis factor α

GVHD:

Graft-versus-host disease

HLA:

Human leukocyte antigen

TCR:

T cell receptor

References

  1. Takeuchi Y, Nishikawa H. Roles of regulatory T cells in cancer immunity. Int Immunol. 2016;28(8):401–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Facciabene A, Motz GT, Coukos G. T-regulatory cells: key players in tumor immune escape and angiogenesis. Cancer Res. 2012;72(9):2162–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sasada T, Kimura M, Yoshida Y, Kanai M, Takabayashi A. CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies: possible involvement of regulatory T cells in disease progression. Cancer. 2003;98(5):1089–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Viguier M, Lemaître F, Verola O, Cho M-S, Gorochov G, Dubertret L, Bachelez H, Kourilsky P, Ferradini L. Foxp3 expressing CD4+CD25(high) regulatory T cells are overrepresented in human metastatic melanoma lymph nodes and inhibit the function of infiltrating T cells. J Immunol. 2004;173(2):1444–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bates GJ, Fox SB, Han C, Leek RD, Garcia JF, Harris AL, Banham AH. Quantification of regulatory T cells enables the identification of high-risk breast cancer patients and those at risk of late relapse. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(34):5373–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wang Q, Xiang Q, Yu L, Hu T, Chen Y, Wang J, Nie X, Cheng J. Changes in tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and vascular normalization in breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and their correlations with DFS. Front Oncol. 2020;9:1545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Braga WMT, da Silva BR, de Carvalho AC, Maekawa YH, Bortoluzzo AB, Rizzatti EG, Atanackovic D, Colleoni GWB. FOXP3 and CTLA4 overexpression in multiple myeloma bone marrow as a sign of accumulation of CD4(+) T regulatory cells. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2014;63(11):1189–97.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Idris S-Z, Hassan N, Lee L-J, Md Noor S, Osman R, Abdul-Jalil M, Nordin A-J, Abdullah M. Increased regulatory T cells in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia patients. Hematology. 2016;21(4):206–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Cader FZ, Schackmann RCJ, Hu X, Wienand K, Redd R, Chapuy B, Ouyang J, Paul N, Gjini E, Lipschitz M, et al. Mass cytometry of Hodgkin lymphoma reveals a CD4(+) regulatory T-cell-rich and exhausted T-effector microenvironment. Blood. 2018;132(8):825–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Beyer M, Schultze JL. Regulatory T cells in cancer. Blood. 2006;108(3):804–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Cheng H, Luo G, Jin K, Fan Z, Huang Q, Gong Y, Xu J, Yu X, Liu C. Kras mutation correlating with circulating regulatory T cells predicts the prognosis of advanced pancreatic cancer patients. Cancer Med. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam1004.2895.

  12. Liu Y, Bewersdorf JP, Stahl M, Zeidan AM. Immunotherapy in acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes: the dawn of a new era? Blood Rev. 2019;34:67–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang HY, Lee DA, Peng G, Guo Z, Li Y, Kiniwa Y, Shevach EM, Wang RF. Tumor-specific human CD4+ regulatory T cells and their ligands: implications for immunotherapy. Immunity. 2004;20(1):107–18.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Zou L, Barnett B, Safah H, Larussa VF, Evdemon-Hogan M, Mottram P, Wei S, David O, Curiel TJ, Zou W. Bone marrow is a reservoir for CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells that traffic through CXCL12/CXCR4 signals. Cancer Res. 2004;64(22):8451–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Righi E, Kashiwagi S, Yuan J, Santosuosso M, Leblanc P, Ingraham R, Forbes B, Edelblute B, Collette B, Xing D, et al. CXCL12/CXCR4 blockade induces multimodal antitumor effects that prolong survival in an immunocompetent mouse model of ovarian cancer. Cancer Res. 2011;71(16):5522–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Rosser EC, Mauri C. Regulatory B cells: origin, phenotype, and function. Immunity. 2015;42(4):607–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Olkhanud PB, Damdinsuren B, Bodogai M, Gress RE, Sen R, Wejksza K, Malchinkhuu E, Wersto RP, Biragyn A. Tumor-evoked regulatory B cells promote breast cancer metastasis by converting resting CD4+ T cells to T-regulatory cells. Cancer Res. 2011;71(10):3505–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Sather BD, Treuting P, Perdue N, Miazgowicz M, Fontenot JD, Rudensky AY, Campbell DJ. Altering the distribution of Foxp3(+) regulatory T cells results in tissue-specific inflammatory disease. J Exp Med. 2007;204(6):1335–47.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Burns JM, Summers BC, Wang Y, Melikian A, Berahovich R, Miao Z, Penfold MET, Sunshine MJ, Littman DR, Kuo CJ, et al. A novel chemokine receptor for SDF-1 and I-TAC involved in cell survival, cell adhesion, and tumor development. J Exp Med. 2006;203(9):2201–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Bach EA, Aguet M, Schreiber RD. The IFN gamma receptor: a paradigm for cytokine receptor signaling. Annu Rev Immunol. 1997;15:563–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Arber DA, Orazi A, Hasserjian R, Thiele J, Borowitz MJ, Le Beau MM, Bloomfield CD, Cazzola M, Vardiman JW. The 2016 revision to the World Health Organization classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia. Blood. 2016;127(20):2391–405.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Onizuka S, Tawara I, Shimizu J, Sakaguchi S, Fujita T, Nakayama E. Tumor rejection by in vivo administration of anti-CD25 (interleukin-2 receptor alpha) monoclonal antibody. Cancer Res. 1999;59(13):3128–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sutmuller RP, van Duivenvoorde LM, van Elsas A, Schumacher TN, Wildenberg ME, Allison JP, Toes RE, Offringa R, Melief CJ. Synergism of cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 blockade and depletion of CD25(+) regulatory T cells in antitumor therapy reveals alternative pathways for suppression of autoreactive cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses. J Exp Med. 2001;194(6):823–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Jones E, Dahm-Vicker M, Simon AK, Green A, Powrie F, Cerundolo V, Gallimore A. Depletion of CD25+ regulatory cells results in suppression of melanoma growth and induction of autoreactivity in mice. Cancer Immun. 2002;2:1–1.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Szczepanski MJ, Szajnik M, Czystowska M, Mandapathil M, Strauss L, Welsh A, Foon KA, Whiteside TL, Boyiadzis M. Increased frequency and suppression by regulatory T cells in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15(10):3325–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Shenghui Z, Yixiang H, Jianbo W, Kang Y, Laixi B, Yan Z, Xi X. Elevated frequencies of CD4+ CD25+ CD127lo regulatory T cells is associated to poor prognosis in patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Int J Cancer. 2011;129(6):1373–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Liu W, Putnam AL, Xu-Yu Z, Szot GL, Lee MR, Zhu S, Gottlieb PA, Kapranov P, Gingeras TR, Fazekas de St Groth B, et al. CD127 expression inversely correlates with FoxP3 and suppressive function of human CD4+ T reg cells. J Exp Med. 2006;203(7):1701–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Sakaguchi S, Wing K, Onishi Y, Prieto-Martin P, Yamaguchi T. Regulatory T cells: how do they suppress immune responses? Int Immunol. 2009;21(10):1105–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Randolph DA, Fathman CG. Cd4+Cd25+ regulatory T cells and their therapeutic potential. Annu Rev Med. 2006;57:381–402.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Syed Khaja AS, Toor SM, El Salhat H, Ali BR, Elkord E. Intratumoral FoxP3(+)Helios(+) regulatory T cells upregulating immunosuppressive molecules are expanded in human colorectal cancer. Front Immunol. 2017;8:619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Syed Khaja AS, Toor SM, El Salhat H, Faour I, Ul Haq N, Ali BR, Elkord E. Preferential accumulation of regulatory T cells with highly immunosuppressive characteristics in breast tumor microenvironment. Oncotarget. 2017;8(20):33159–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Langhans B, Nischalke HD, Krämer B, Dold L, Lutz P, Mohr R, Vogt A, Toma M, Eis-Hübinger AM, Nattermann J, et al. Role of regulatory T cells and checkpoint inhibition in hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2019;68(12):2055–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Koehler H, Kofler D, Hombach A, Abken H. CD28 costimulation overcomes transforming growth factor-beta-mediated repression of proliferation of redirected human CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in an antitumor cell attack. Cancer Res. 2007;67(5):2265–73.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Mizoguchi A, Mizoguchi E, Takedatsu H, Blumberg RS, Bhan AK. Chronic intestinal inflammatory condition generates IL-10-producing regulatory B cell subset characterized by CD1d upregulation. Immunity. 2002;16(2):219–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Lee JH, Noh J, Noh G, Choi WS, Cho S, Lee SS. Allergen-specific transforming growth factor-beta-producing CD19+CD5+ regulatory B-cell (Br3) responses in human late eczematous allergic reactions to cow's milk. J Interferon Cytokine Res. 2011;31(5):441–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Kessel A, Haj T, Peri R, Snir A, Melamed D, Sabo E, Toubi E. Human CD19(+)CD25(high) B regulatory cells suppress proliferation of CD4(+) T cells and enhance Foxp3 and CTLA-4 expression in T-regulatory cells. Autoimmun Rev. 2012;11(9):670–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Ray A, Basu S, Williams CB, Salzman NH, Dittel BN. A novel IL-10-independent regulatory role for B cells in suppressing autoimmunity by maintenance of regulatory T cells via GITR ligand. J Immunol (Baltimore, Md: 1950). 2012;188(7):3188–98.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Amu S, Saunders SP, Kronenberg M, Mangan NE, Atzberger A, Fallon PG. Regulatory B cells prevent and reverse allergic airway inflammation via FoxP3-positive T regulatory cells in a murine model. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010;125(5):1114–1124.e1118.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Chen T, Song D, Min Z, Wang X, Gu Y, Wei B, Yao J, Chen K, Jiang Z, Xie H, et al. Perioperative dynamic alterations in peripheral regulatory T and B cells in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. J Transl Med. 2012;10:14.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Guan H, Wan Y, Lan J, Wang Q, Wang Z, Li Y, Zheng J, Zhang X, Wang Z, Shen Y, et al. PD-L1 is a critical mediator of regulatory B cells and T cells in invasive breast cancer. Sci Rep. 2016;6:35651.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

This work was financially supported by National Natural Science Foundation (Grant no. 81400136), National Natural Science Foundation (Grant no. 81670159), National Natural Science Foundation of China (81830005), CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (Grant no. CIFMS 2016-I2M-3-004, CIFMS 2016-I2M-1-001), The National Key Research and Development Program for Precision Medicine (Grant no. 2017YFC0909800). The funds mentioned were used for reagents and consumable materials purchasing and language editing of the manuscript. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis or decision to publish of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, No. 288, Nanjing Road, Tianjin, 300020, China

    Yuling Wan, Congxiao Zhang, Yingxi Xu, Min Wang, Qing Rao, Haiyan Xing, Zheng Tian, Kejing Tang, Yingchang Mi, Ying Wang & Jianxiang Wang

Authors
  1. Yuling Wan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Congxiao Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yingxi Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Min Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Qing Rao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Haiyan Xing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Zheng Tian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Kejing Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Yingchang Mi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Ying Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Jianxiang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

YW and JW designed the study, YLW and YX performed the research, YLW, CZ, YX, MW, QR, HX, ZT, KT, YM, YW and JW analysed the data. YLW, CZ and YW wrote the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ying Wang or Jianxiang Wang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The protocol of the present study, involving human clinical samples, was approved by the Ethics Committee of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Institute of Hematology and Blood Diseases Hospital. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Additional file 1:

Manufacturer names of agents.

Additional file 2:

Supplemental figures.

Additional file 3:

Diagnostic information of participants.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wan, Y., Zhang, C., Xu, Y. et al. Hyperfunction of CD4 CD25 regulatory T cells in de novo acute myeloid leukemia. BMC Cancer 20, 472 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-06961-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-06961-8

Keywords

BMC Cancer

ISSN: 1471-2407

Contact us