Characterization and quantification of clonal heterogeneity among hematopoietic stem cells: a model-based approach by Ingo Roeder, Katrin Horn, Hans-Bernd.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Unique patterns of surface receptors, cytokine secretion, and immune functions distinguish T cells in the bone marrow from those in the periphery: impact.
Advertisements

Volume 15, Issue 1, Pages (July 2014)
Selective expansion of polyfunctional pathogen-specific CD4+ T cells in HIV-1–infected patients with immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome by Yolanda.
Methodologic Considerations in the Application of Next-Generation Sequencing of Human TRB Repertoires for Clinical Use  Liwen Xu, Xiaoqing You, PingPing.
Continuous in vivo infusion of interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) enhances engraftment of syngeneic wild-type cells in Fanca–/– and Fancg–/– mice by Yue Si, Samantha.
Complete allogeneic hematopoietic chimerism achieved by a combined strategy of in utero hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and postnatal donor lymphocyte.
Francesca Ficara, Mark J. Murphy, Min Lin, Michael L. Cleary 
Jacob Andrade, Shundi Ge, Goar Symbatyan, Michael S. Rosol, Arthur J
Lipopolysaccharide binding protein promoter variants influence the risk for Gram-negative bacteremia and mortality after allogeneic hematopoietic cell.
Spontaneous Synchronization of Coupled Circadian Oscillators
Nat. Rev. Nephrol. doi: /nrneph
Definitive Hematopoiesis Is Autonomously Initiated by the AGM Region
Clonal analysis of thymus-repopulating cells presents direct evidence for self-renewal division of human hematopoietic stem cells by Takashi Yahata, Shizu.
Clinical Nutrition Experimental
Low c-Kit Expression Level Induced by Stem Cell Factor Does Not Compromise Transplantation of Hematopoietic Stem Cells  Chia-Ling Chen, Katerina Faltusova,
Volume 17, Issue 9, Pages (September 2009)
Thrombopoietin responsiveness reflects the number of doublings undergone by megakaryocyte progenitors by Jean-Michel Paulus, Najet Debili, Frédéric Larbret,
Volume 5, Issue 6, Pages (December 2013)
Jacob Andrade, Shundi Ge, Goar Symbatyan, Michael S. Rosol, Arthur J
Volume 3, Issue 5, Pages (November 2014)
Volume 8, Issue 6, Pages (June 2017)
Phase Transitions in Biological Systems with Many Components
Volume 4, Issue 1, Pages (January 2015)
Clinical Utility of Quantitative PCR for Chimerism and Engraftment Monitoring after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation for Hematologic Malignancies 
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages (February 2014)
Volume 23, Issue 4, Pages (April 2018)
Yuki Hara, Akatsuki Kimura  Current Biology 
Volume 111, Issue 2, Pages (July 2016)
HOXB4-Induced Expansion of Adult Hematopoietic Stem Cells Ex Vivo
Visualizing hematopoiesis as a stochastic process
Volume 34, Issue 5, Pages (September 2015)
Volume 25, Issue 1, Pages 1-9 (January 2015)
Volume 4, Issue 1, Pages (January 2015)
Volume 22, Issue 4, Pages e4 (April 2018)
FGF-2 signaling mediates expansion of HSPCs
Volume 88, Issue 3, Pages (November 2015)
Quantifying Biomolecule Diffusivity Using an Optimal Bayesian Method
Peter A. Savage, Mark M. Davis  Immunity 
Volume 14, Issue 12, Pages (March 2016)
SHIP is required for a functional hematopoietic stem cell niche
Erratum Experimental Hematology
Engraftment of chronic myelomonocytic leukemia cells in immunocompromised mice supports disease dependency on cytokines by Yanyan Zhang, Liang He, Dorothée.
CapTCR-seq: hybrid capture for T-cell receptor repertoire profiling
Volume 6, Issue 3, Pages (March 2016)
M1 and M2 macrophages differentially regulate hematopoietic stem cell self-renewal and ex vivo expansion by Yi Luo, Lijian Shao, Jianhui Chang, Wei Feng,
Volume 10, Issue 5, Pages (May 2012)
Volume 99, Issue 8, Pages (October 2010)
Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages e12 (September 2018)
Kevin G. Haworth, Christina Ironside, Zachary K. Norgaard, Willimark M
Volume 6, Issue 3, Pages (March 2010)
Inferring Tumor Phylogenies from Multi-region Sequencing
Functional analysis of clinical response to low-dose IL-2 in patients with refractory chronic graft-versus-host disease by Jennifer S. Whangbo, Haesook.
Hematopoietic Dysfunction in a Mouse Model for Fanconi Anemia Group D1
Human hematopoietic stem cell maintenance and myeloid cell development in next-generation humanized mouse models by Trisha R. Sippel, Stefan Radtke, Tayla.
Statistical evaluation of CD56+ NK cell subset data.
Casey Brewer, Elizabeth Chu, Mike Chin, Rong Lu  Cell Reports 
Volume 1, Issue 2, Pages (August 2007)
Tobias Maetzig, Jens Ruschmann, Lea Sanchez Milde, Courteney K
Clonotypic heterogeneity in cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (mycosis fungoides) revealed by comprehensive whole-exome sequencing by Aishwarya Iyer, Dylan Hennessey,
Heterogeneous leukemia stem cells in myeloid blast phase chronic myeloid leukemia by Ross Kinstrie, Dimitris Karamitros, Nicolas Goardon, Heather Morrison,
Changes throughout time in the lineage content of clones regenerated in secondary mice. Changes throughout time in the lineage content of clones regenerated.
Kinetics of clone appearance, size, persistence, and lineage content.
Volume 8, Issue 6, Pages (June 2017)
Volume 2, Issue 3, Pages (March 2008)
All Hematopoietic Stem Cells Engraft in Submyeloablatively Irradiated Mice  Katarina Forgacova, Filipp Savvulidi, Ludek Sefc, Jana Linhartova, Emanuel.
Peptides identified on monocyte-derived dendritic cells: a marker for clinical immunogenicity to FVIII products by Wojciech Jankowski, Yara Park, Joseph.
Selective elimination of alloreactive donor T cells attenuates graft-versus-host disease and enhances T-cell reconstitution  Maria Gendelman, Maryam Yassai,
Volume 7, Issue 6, Pages (June 2014)
Reward associations do not explain transitive inference performance in monkeys by Greg Jensen, Yelda Alkan, Vincent P. Ferrera, and Herbert S. Terrace.
Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor mobilizes dormant hematopoietic stem cells without proliferation in mice by Jeffrey M. Bernitz, Michael G. Daniel,
Presentation transcript:

Characterization and quantification of clonal heterogeneity among hematopoietic stem cells: a model-based approach by Ingo Roeder, Katrin Horn, Hans-Bernd Sieburg, Rebecca Cho, Christa Muller-Sieburg, and Markus Loeffler Blood Volume 112(13):4874-4883 December 15, 2008 ©2008 by American Society of Hematology

Experimentally observed and simulated engraftment kinetics in primary and secondary recipients. Experimentally observed and simulated engraftment kinetics in primary and secondary recipients. (A) The graphic illustrates experimentally observed engraftment kinetics, as determined in the peripheral blood (PB), generated by different, clonally derived transplants in primary hosts (different colors indicate different clones). At month 7, HSCs from these primary hosts were transplanted into secondary hosts. (B) Experimentally observed engraftment kinetics in the PB of secondary hosts. Corresponding colors were used to indicate the relationship of primary HSCs and its clonal progeny revealed in multiple secondary hosts. Data in panels A and B are taken from Muller-Sieburg et al.16 (C,D) Representative examples of simulated engraftment kinetics in primary (C) and secondary (D) host assuming no predetermined differences of individual clones. Identical color codes indicate identical clonal origin in primary and secondary recipients. Gray lines give more examples of primary kinetics to better illustrate the distribution. They are not shown in secondary hosts. (E,F) See panels C and D, but this time assuming small differences between individual HSCs with respect to parameter d. d has been randomly sampled from a normal distribution with mean 1.07 (reference value) and standard deviation 0.01. The particular d values for the given example realizations are 1.06052 (black), 1.06501 (red), 1.06624 (yellow), 1.06708 (green), and 1.07337 (blue). (G,H) See panels C and D but with large differences in parameter d. d has been randomly sampled from the 2 intervals [1.038, 1.049] and [1.091, 1.102], which relate to deviations of plus or minus 2% to 3% from the reference value 1.07. The particular d values for the given example realizations are 1.04705 (black), 1.04392 (red), 1.09377 (green), 1.02802 (blue), and 1.04761 (light blue). To facilitate the comparison with the experimental data, simulated engraftment levels are shown on a bimonthly scale, although they were actually simulated using a 1-hourly scale. Ingo Roeder et al. Blood 2008;112:4874-4883 ©2008 by American Society of Hematology

Experimentally and simulated distributions of engraftment levels and trends. Experimentally and simulated distributions of engraftment levels and trends. (A) Distributions of engraftment levels at 7 months after transplantation in primary hosts. (B,C) Distributions of engraftment trends (ie, differences in engraftment levels between month 3 and month 7 after transplantation) in primary (B) and secondary (C) hosts. According to the number of experimentally determined engraftment kinetics, we simulated the repopulation of n = 87 primary host and 8 pairs (n = 16) of secondary hosts. Boxplots show the median (black line), the interquartile range (box), and the total range (whiskers, or circles in case of “outliers,” ie, data points that deviate from the median more than 1.5 times the box range). P values are given for the Bartlett test of equality of variances. Ingo Roeder et al. Blood 2008;112:4874-4883 ©2008 by American Society of Hematology

Qualitative classification of individual engraftment kinetics. Qualitative classification of individual engraftment kinetics. (A) Shown are 87 previously published18 repopulation kinetics of mice transplanted with clonally derived HSC grafts obtained by in vitro or in vivo limiting dilution. Shaded areas illustrate early (light) and late (dark) repopulation phases. Whereas +/− indicate an increase or decrease in the engraftment levels of more than 10% between the first and the last measurement in the given period, π refers to a constant (ie, change of less than 10%) time progression. (B) Shown are 87 representative simulated engraftment kinetics according to the given classification scheme. Underlying model parameters d and fα(Ñ) are randomly sampled from the best-fit region shown in Figure 4B. Ingo Roeder et al. Blood 2008;112:4874-4883 ©2008 by American Society of Hematology

In silico engraftment kinetics depending on model parameters of donor HSCs. (A) Graphic representation of the qualitative differences of simulated engraftment kinetics depending on the choice of model parameters d and fα(Ñ). In silico engraftment kinetics depending on model parameters of donor HSCs. (A) Graphic representation of the qualitative differences of simulated engraftment kinetics depending on the choice of model parameters d and fα(Ñ). Each individual color dot illustrates the qualitative pattern of the engraftment kinetic observed in a simulation using the particular parameter combination. In total, 55 074 different parameter combinations are shown in the figure. Simulations were initiated with one donor cell with the particular d and fα(Ñ) values (according to the position in the diagram) and 4 competing host cells with reference parameters d = 1.07 and fa(Ñ) = 0.01. All other parameters had been fixed to B6 reference values, identically for donor and host cells. (B) Parameter region (depicted as white square in panel A; comprising 11 682 simulation runs) that yields the best fit of the simulated to the experimentally observed distribution of engraftment kinetics (compare with Figure S2). The 2 black lines indicate the reference values for d and fa(Ñ) used for the competing host cells. Color coding for engraftment kinetics (identical in panels A and B): maroon [+, +], red [+, π], pink [π, +], dark green [−, −], medium green [−, π], light green [π, −], purple [π,π], blue [+, −], yellow [−, +], and black (no donor engraftment). Ingo Roeder et al. Blood 2008;112:4874-4883 ©2008 by American Society of Hematology

Simulation results and experimental data on individual clone competition. Simulation results and experimental data on individual clone competition. (A,B) Simulated primary host engraftments of 2 clones with slightly differing parameters: (A) d = 1.0655, fα(Ñ) = 0.0075; (B) d = 1.0665, fα(Ñ) = 0.008. (C,E) 2 representative examples of secondary engraftments of the clone shown in panel A (ie, in silico transplantation of 50 ×p1 primary HSCs together with 4 residual secondary host HSCs). p is denoting the proportion of primary engraftment level, which is p1 = 0.85 in this particular example. (D,F) See panels C and E, but for the clone shown in panel B, p2 = 0.75. (G-K) A total of 4 representative examples of in silico cotransplantation of 50 × p1 cells of the clone shown in panel A plus 50 × p2 cells of the clone shown in panel B together with 4 residual secondary host cells. Further simulation examples of these settings can be found in Figure S4. (L,M) Experimentally observed engraftment kinetics (twice-monthly measurements) of 2 clonally repopulated mice. (N-Q) Engraftment kinetics for the transplantation of 5 × 106 BM cells of either one or the other clone (shown in panels L and M, respectively) in 2 lethally irradiated secondary B6 hosts. (R-U) Engraftment kinetics for cotransplantation of 2 × (5 × 106) BM cells from both primary hosts into 4 lethally irradiated secondary B6 hosts (Cho et al34). Color (black/gray) always illustrates relationship to primary host. Ingo Roeder et al. Blood 2008;112:4874-4883 ©2008 by American Society of Hematology

Simulation results on clonal conversion during aging. Simulation results on clonal conversion during aging. Given is the clone distribution (characterized by clone specific d / fα(Ñ) values) within a model system starting from the initial situation (A) at different time points: 6 months (B), 12 months (C), and 24 months (C). The system had been initiated with 1000 clonally distinguishable HSCs. Each dot in the graphs (A-D) represents one particular clone. The corresponding frequency tables show the distributions of engraftment patterns obtained from 10 000 simulations, each initiated by the transplantation of 1 randomly chosen cell from the given stem cell pool in competition with 4 host cells. Ingo Roeder et al. Blood 2008;112:4874-4883 ©2008 by American Society of Hematology