Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Differential expression of alarmins—S100A9, IL-33, HMGB1 and HIF-1α in supraspinatus tendinopathy before and after treatment
  1. Michael J Mosca,
  2. Andrew J Carr,
  3. Sarah J B Snelling,
  4. Kim Wheway,
  5. Bridget Watkins,
  6. Stephanie G Dakin
  1. Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, Botnar Research Centre, Oxford, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Stephanie G Dakin; stephanie.dakin{at}ndorms.ox.ac.uk

Abstract

Background Alarmins, endogenous molecules released on tissue damage have been shown to play an important role in inflammatory musculoskeletal conditions including fracture repair andrheumatoid arthritis. However, the contribution of alarmins to the pathogenesis of tendon disease is not fully understood.

Methods We investigated expression of alarmin proteins (S100A9, high-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) and interleukin-33 (IL-33) and hypoxia-inducible factor 1α (HIF-1α), a subunit of an oxygen sensitive transcription factor, in three cohorts of human supraspinatus tissues: healthy (n=6), painful diseased (n=13) and post-treatment pain-free tendon samples (n=5). Tissue samples were collected during shoulder stabilisation surgery (healthy) or by biopsy needle (diseased/treated). Immunohistochemistry was used to investigate the protein expression of these factors in these healthy, diseased and treated tendons. Kruskal-Wallis with pairwise post hoc Mann-Whitney U tests were used to test for differences in immunopositive staining between these tissue cohorts. Additionally, costaining was performed to identify the cell types expressing HIF-1α, S100A9, IL-33 and HMGB1 in diseased tendons.

Results Immunostaining showed HIF-1α and S100A9 were increased in diseased compared with healthy and post-treatment pain-free tendons (p<0.05). IL-33 was reduced in diseased compared with healthy tendons (p=0.0006). HMGB1 was increased in post-treatment pain-free compared with healthy and diseased tendons (p<0.01). Costaining of diseased tendon samples revealed that HIF-1α, S100A9 and IL-33 were expressed by CD68+ and CD68− cells, whereas HMGB1 was predominantly expressed by CD68− cells.

Conclusions This study provides insight into the pathways contributing to the progressionand resolution of tendon disease. We found potential pro-inflammatory and pathogenic roles for HIF-1α and S100A9, a protective role fornuclear IL-33 and a potentially reparative function for HMGB1 in diseased supraspinatus tendons.

  • Alarmins
  • Tendinopathy
  • Tendon
  • Inflammation
  • S100A9
  • HMGB1
  • IL-33
  • HIF-1

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors Study concept and design: MJM, SGD, AJC, SJBJ.

    Acquisition of data: MJM, SGD.

    Analysis and interpretation of data: MJM, SGD, SJBS, AJC.

    Drafting of the manuscript: all authors.

    Critical revision of the manuscript and approval of final version: all authors.

    Statistical analysis: MJM, SGD.

    Obtained funding: AJC.

    Administrative, technical or material support: KW, BW.

  • Funding MJM acknowledges the Harvard University Francis H Burr, Class of 1909 Prize Fund and the National Collegiate Athletic Association for financial support. SGD and SJBS are funded by Arthritis Research UK grants 20 506 and 20 087, respectively. We also acknowledge the Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Unit.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethics approval Ethical approval for this study was granted by the local research ethics committee, Oxfordshire REC B references 10/H0402/24, 09/H0605/111, and South Central Oxford B reference 14/SC/0222.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed