How Does the Ureteric Bud Branch?

Transcription

1 How Does the Ureteric Bud Branch? Sanjay K. Nigam* and Mita M. Shah Departments of *Pediatrics, Medicine, and Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, California ABSTRACT Many genes that modulate kidney development have been identified; however, the molecular interactions that direct arborization of the ureteric bud (UB) remain incompletely understood. This article discusses how systems approaches may shed light on the structure of the gene network during UB branching morphogenesis and the mechanisms involved in the formation of a branched collecting system from a straight epithelial tube in the context of a stage model. In vitro and genetic studies suggest that the stages seem to be governed by a conserved network of genes that establish a tip-stalk generator ; these genes sustain iterative UB branching tubulogenesis through minimal alterations in the network architecture as a budding system shifts to one that autocatalytically branches through budding. The differential expression of stage-specific positive and inhibitory factors in the mesenchyme, likely presented in the context of heparan sulfate proteoglycans, and effector molecules in the epithelium seems to regulate advancement between stages; similar principles may apply to other branching epithelia such as the lung, salivary gland, pancreas, mammary gland, and prostate. Active mesenchymal interactions with the UB seem to govern vectorial arborization and tapering of the collecting system and its terminal differentiation. Cessation of branching correlates with induction of mesenchyme as well as local extracellular matrix changes. Perturbations of these mechanisms and/or single-nucleotide polymorphisms in genes regulating UB branching may predispose to a variety of renal diseases (e.g., hypertension and chronic kidney disease) by altering nephron number. Decentralization of the gene protein interaction network may explain the relative paucity of branching phenotypes in mutant mice and in human disease. J Am Soc Nephrol 20: , doi: /ASN Ureteric bud (UB) branching morphogenesis is fundamental to establishing the architecture of the kidney and is a key determinant of nephron number. This process is important not only for normal renal function but also from the standpoint of disease. Although it is clear that kidney malformations such as renal agenesis and dysplasia are caused by defective morphogenesis of the UB, emerging data suggest that the predisposition to several common diseases such as hypertension and chronic kidney disease have similar developmental origins. The renal architecture primarily arises through the growth and morphogenesis of two progenitor tissues, the UB and metanephric mesenchyme (MM). Through a process of mutual induction between these tissues, the UB is formed through an outpouching of the Wolffian duct (WD) and undergoes a number of iterative dichotomous branching events to form the urinary collecting system while the MM is induced to undergo a mesenchymal-to-epithelial transformation to form the nephron, from the epithelial glomerulus to the distal tubule (Figure 1A). A comprehensive discussion regarding the many factors that have been discovered to modulate UB branching and mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition is beyond the scope of this article and has been the subject of excellent reviews. 1 3 Here we discuss the general principles that lead to the formation of a branched ureteric tree; such principles may apply to other branching epithelia as well. CREATION OF TIPS AND STALKS In vitro and genetic approaches have helped to identify many promoters and inhibitors of UB branching (reviewed in 1,2 ), but the fundamental mechanism of how a straight epithelial tube gives rise to a branched tree remains obscure. Before the advent of systems specifically designed to study the UB, branching morphogenesis of the UB was described through the analysis of branching in renal cell lines such as Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) and UB cells 4 6 ; however, recent data suggest that UB branching proceeds through a fundamentally different mechanism of outpouching of wedge-shaped cells that are created through an apical cytoskeletal purse-string mechanism (Figure 2A). 7 Published online ahead of print. Publication date available at. Correspondence: Dr. Sanjay K. Nigam, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA Phone: ; Fax: ; snigam@ucsd.edu Copyright 2009 by the American Society of Nephrology J Am Soc Nephrol 20: , 2009 ISSN : /

2 Figure 1. (A) The kidney originates from two mesenchymally derived components: The Wolffian duct (WD) and the metanephric mesenchyme (MM). The initiating step in kidney development is outpouching of the uteric bud (UB) from the WD, an event directed by inductive signals emanating from the MM. After formation of the UB, reciprocal induction between the UB and thee MM leads to multiple iterations of branching and elongation of the UB to form the collecting system, while the mesenchyme is induced to condense and epithelialize around the branched tips and undergo a mesenchymal-to-epithelial transformation. These mesenchymal aggregates then proceed through several morphologic stages, including comma- and S-shaped bodies, forming metanephric tubules that eventually mature into the nephron (proximal and distal tubules, as well as the epithelial glomerulus). In vitro analyses, combined with global patterns of gene expression during kidney development, suggest that UB branching can be conceptualized in terms of developmental stages: (1) Outgrowth of the UB from the WD; (2) early branching in which the UB undergoes rapid, iterative branching; (3) later UB branching characterized by deceleration of branching with accompanied differentiation of the metanephric mesenchyme; and (4) cessation of branching and completion of mesenchymal differentiation. These stages can be recapitulated in in vitro modules that can be reconstituted into engineered kidney tissue. The modest changes in gene expression that occur between the formation of the UB and multiple rounds of branching suggest that a budding and branching network exists. Thus, iterative branching can occur through minimal alterations in the expression of a small set of genes (represented by the multicolored circles) such that an autocatalytic network, or tip-stalk generator, is established. Such alterations may occur through the capture of nodes and/or the tightness of links between nodes (represented by the varying thickness of the connections between the multicolored circles). (B) General schematic of the principles that are hypothesized to contribute to vectorial branching and the formation of UB tips and stalks. Patterning of the ureteric tree via vectorial branching and tubule spacing likely occurs through the formation of morphogen gradients. Bud-promoting factors (represented as orange circles) differentially binding to heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPG) located on the cell surface UB cells may be an important mechanism for gradient formation (GF) along the ureteric epithelium. New UB branches are created through a budding-out process via the formation of wedge-shaped cells through an apical actin cytoskeletal purse-string mechanism (yellow). The branching through budding model implies that cells destined to become new UB tips have differential localization of growth factor receptors, extracellular matrix (ECM) components, matrix-degrading enzymes, and possibly differences in local basement membrane composition, such as various molecular weight hyaluronic acid chains at UB tips versus stalk regions. The branching through budding model implies that the remodeling of the contiguous epithelial tube occurs through the creation of a secretory epithelium via differential localization of growth factor receptors and matrix-degrading enzymes to UB tips relative to stalks that initiate new branch formation, a concept supported by cell lineage studies, 8 and microarray analysis of differential gene expression in UB tip versus stalk cells. 9 Thus, this challenges the traditional notion that the epithelial tube is composed of homogeneous cells and suggests that microenvironments within the UB, possibly in the form of gradients, are key to vectorial branching morphogenesis and the generation of new tips KIDNEY DEVELOPMENT IS A STAGED PROCESS In addition to the creation of tips and stalks, branching morphogenesis underpins the basic architecture of the kidney. Global patterns of gene expression during kidney organogenesis, together with in vitro and genetic data and morphologic analyses, suggest that branching morphogenesis of the UB is an iterative yet simultaneously vectorial process that can be broadly conceptualized in terms of developmental stages: (1) Outgrowth of the UB from the WD; (2) rapid, iterative branching of the UB; (3) deceleration of UB branching accompanied by differentiation of the metanephric mesenchyme; and (4) termination of branching and completion of mesenchymal differentiation (Figure 1A). 11,13,14 These stages are separable into in vitro modules that have been used to reconstitute engineered kidney tissue that is capable of early vascularization and rudimentary tubular function. 15 Each stage is typified by various sets of heparin-binding growth factors, receptor tyrosine kinases, signaling pathways involving intracellular kinases, and effectors that mediate cell adhesion and basement membrane remodeling (reviewed in 2,16 18 ). Although disruption of certain pathways produces catastrophic effects (i.e., renal agenesis), numerous instances in which mutation 1466 Journal of the American Society of Nephrology J Am Soc Nephrol 20: , 2009

3 SCIENCE IN RENAL MEDICINE of key molecules has minimal apparent phenotypic consequences exist, suggesting that each of these stages is characterized by a distinct network structure of gene and protein interactions that confer varying resilience to mutation. 19,24,25 UB OUTGROWTH The initiating step in metanephric development is emergence of the UB from the WD; failure of this critical step leads to renal agenesis, whereas incorrect positioning of the UB leads to a variety of urinary tract anomalies ranging from mega-ureter to vesicoureteral reflux. A multitude of positive and negative regulatory factors, converging on glial cell line derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) signaling, play key roles in this stage (reviewed in 16 ). Genetic deletion of GDNF or its receptor, Ret, most often results in renal agenesis, although rudimentary kidneys form in up to 50% of these mice, suggesting that GDNF-dependent budding of the WD may be bypassed through activation of other signaling pathways. This concept has been validated through in vitro studies in which the combined effect of stimulatory (fibroblast growth factor 7 [FGF7]) and blockade of inhibitory (activin) molecules is able to induce bud formation in isolated WDs. 23 The existence of such a bypass pathway may be sufficient to explain the relative infrequency of renal agenesis despite the seeming dependence of UB outgrowth on GDNF signaling; therefore, it may be that a second hit is necessary to manifest the phenotype. EARLY UB BRANCHING The next conceptualized stage of collecting system development, rapid iterative UB branching, depends on reciprocal epithelial mesenchymal interactions. A common theme emerging from the study of diverse branching systems is the existence of both positive and negative feedback loops in the complex interplay among epithelium and mesenchyme. 24 Like UB outgrowth (and subsequent stages), a combination of stimulatory (e.g., FGFs, pleiotrophin, heregulin) and inhibitory (e.g., TGF- 1, bone morphogenic protein 4, activin) molecules have been shown to modulate the extent of ureteric branching, but, in general, positive feedback mechanisms seem to predominate. 14 The iterative, or feed-forward, nature of the branching tree suggests that the expression of a particular set of proteins becomes stable and self-maintaining such that an autocatalytic network, or tip-stalk generator, is established (Figure 1A) 25 ; therefore, only a minimal alteration in the expression of a small set of genes may be required for the impressive morphologic changes that occur between the stages of UB branching. Such a consensus set of conserved signaling molecules can also be found among a number of organs, and it is the relative weight of certain pathways (along with those guiding final differentiation) that may be organ specific. 26 Thus, it may be the structure of the branching network through the capture of nodes and the tightness of the links between nodes that determines epithelial cell fate. 25 Such self-organization has been proposed in gene regulatory networks in origin of life scenarios. 27 The question remains, then, how is the complex patterning of the nephron achieved? To explain patterning during embryogenesis, the concept of gradient morphogens was proposed more than a century ago. 28 Secreted proteins of the WNT; hedgehog; and members of the EGF, FGF, and TGF- families, all of which have been found to be important in kidney morphogenesis, have been recognized as candidate substances to provide positional information (reviewed in 12,29,30 ). That TGF- may be an arbiter of tubule spacing has been explored in other branching systems in which TGF- repulses epithelial cell processes to space out the branches of the epithelial tree. 12,31,32 It is interesting to note that most of the secreted proteins involved in UB branching are heparin binding. Heparan sulfate proteoglycans are known to modulate cell surface localization of ligands and thus are ideal candidates as positive and negative regulators of signaling by morphogen gradients (Figure 1B). 33 In this context, heparan sulfate proteoglycan diversity has been proposed to be a key (although largely unexplored) driving mechanism of stage-specific regulation of UB morphogenesis. 34 LATE UB BRANCHING As organogenesis comes to completion, branching slows down, presumably owing to negative feedback. In the kidney and other branching systems, it seems that members of the TGF- superfamily are the primary molecules involved in branching inhibition, but there is mounting evidence that negative feedback signals may also arise from mesenchyme cell surface molecules. 5,14 This is anatomically suggested in the kidney as fusion between a lateral ureteric branch, and metanephric tubule effectively removes the ureteric branch from further divisions; however, signals to slow branching may be present even earlier during MM-derived tubule formation, where it has been noted that branch-inhibitory factors are expressed in comma and S-shaped bodies and thus may regulate the extent and pattern of branching (reviewed in 26 ). Mutations in the pathways that regulate early and late UB branching usually do not result in significant branching defects. 11 The phenotypes that are manifest are generally quantitative leading to a decrease in nephron number. There is evidence that low nephron number in humans predisposes to hypertension and chronic kidney disease 35,36 ; although it is unlikely that essential hypertension is due to a loss-of-function mutation in a single gene, it is conceivable that variant alleles, identified by single-nucleotide polymorphisms, that interact differently with modifiers, suppressors, and enhancers are sufficient to cause subtle changes in nephron number that eventually lead to disease. 11 BRANCHING CESSATION The events that signal the termination of branching remain enigmatic. Miscues in J Am Soc Nephrol 20: , 2009 How Does the Ureteric Bud Branch? 1467

4 the cessation of kidney development can lead to a variety of renal disorders ranging from reduced nephron number to cystic kidney disease, which can be considered a disorder of tubule maintenance. 11 In vitro studies suggest soluble factors produced by the differentiating MM modulate the expression of specific subsets of matrix proteases that can modify the extracellular matrix and influence branch termination. 12 For example, release of endostatin at UB tips modulates UB branching and specific sizes and concentrations of the basement membrane component hyaluronic acid seems to independently regulate UB branching and promote tubular maturation. 37,38 Thus, extracellular matrix components may act as a potential switch for ending branching morphogenesis, as well as initiating nephron differentiation. Stop/maturation signals also seem to be correlated with the differentiation of the MM. 39 UB-derived soluble factors that promote mesenchymal epithelialization, such as leukemia inhibitory factor, inhibits branching of the isolated UB. 14,40 In mice, loss of nephrogenic mesenchyme (as a result of conversion into nephrons) at the time of birth leads to the disruption of dichotomous branching. 41 Such environmental cues seem to play a large role in the determination of the extent of UB branching, especially in the case of maternal nutrient restriction, which seems to affect both nephron number and differentiation. 42,43 Recombination of the MM with the UB cultured in isolation suggests that it is able to regulate branch tapering and luminal caliber, raising the possibility that a second hit within the MM plays a key modulating role in the range of cystic or renal disease phenotypes. It becomes clear from the concepts discussed here that UB branching is a very complex process, yet from the systems, or nephrome, perspective, UB branching can be viewed as elegantly efficient: Using a basic set of molecular building blocks to fashion the complex three-dimensional structure of the ureteric tree out of a single bud from the WD. These dramatic changes can potentially occur through small alterations in the signaling network, resulting in a branching module. It seems likely that this branching module is conserved among multiple branching organs, 26 and although it seems plausible to hypothesize a unifying theory of epithelial branching through the establishment of an autocatalytic network, there are undoubtedly pathways that are stage and organ specific. It will be through elucidation of those pathways that we will understand what makes a kidney a kidney and why perturbation of specific pathways results in renal disease. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS S.K.N. is supported by National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases grants RO1-DK57286 and RO1-DK M.M.S. is supported by a Research Career Award from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K08- DK069324). DISCLOSURES None. REFERENCES 1. Costantini F: Renal branching morphogenesis: Concepts, questions, and recent advances. Differentiation 74: , Dressler GR: The cellular basis of kidney development. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 22: , Vainio S, Lin Y: Coordinating early kidney development: Lessons from gene targeting. Nat Rev Genet 3: , Pollack AL, Runyan RB, Mostov KE: Morphogenetic mechanisms of epithelial tubulogenesis: MDCK cell polarity is transiently rearranged without loss of cell-cell contact during scatter factor/hepatocyte growth factor-induced tubulogenesis. Dev Biol 204: 64 79, Santos OF, Nigam SK: HGF-induced tubulogenesis and branching of epithelial cells is modulated by extracellular matrix and TGFbeta. Dev Biol 160: , Sakurai H, Barros EJ, Tsukamoto T, Barasch J, Nigam SK: An in vitro tubulogenesis system using cell lines derived from the embryonic kidney shows dependence on multiple soluble growth factors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA94: , Meyer TN, Schwesinger C, Bush KT, Stuart RO, Rose DW, Shah MM, Vaughn DA, Steer DL, Nigam SK: Spatiotemporal regulation of morphogenetic molecules during in vitro branching of the isolated ureteric bud: Toward a model of branching through budding in the developing kidney. Dev Biol 275: 44 67, Shakya R, Watanabe T, Costantini F: The role of GDNF/Ret signaling in ureteric bud cell fate and branching morphogenesis. Dev Cell 8: 65 74, Schmidt-Ott KM, Yang J, Chen X, Wang H, Paragas N, Mori K, Li JY, Lu B, Costantini F, Schiffer M, Bottinger E, Barasch J: Novel regulators of kidney development from the tips of the ureteric bud. J Am Soc Nephrol 16: , Stuart RO, Barros EJ, Ribeiro E, Nigam SK: Epithelial tubulogenesis through branching morphogenesis: Relevance to collecting system development. J Am Soc Nephrol 6: , Shah MM, Sampogna RV, Sakurai H, Bush KT, Nigam SK: Branching morphogenesis and kidney disease. Development 131: , Nigam SK: Determinants of branching tubulogenesis. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 4: , Stuart RO, Bush KT, Nigam SK: Changes in global gene expression patterns during development and maturation of the rat kidney. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98: , Bush KT, Sakurai H, Steer DL, Leonard MO, Sampogna RV, Meyer TN, Schwesinger C, Qiao J, Nigam SK: TGF-beta superfamily members modulate growth, branching, shaping, and patterning of the ureteric bud. Dev Biol 266: , Rosines E, Sampogna RV, Johkura K, Vaughn DA, Choi Y, Sakurai H, Shah MM, Nigam SK: Staged in vitro reconstitution and implantation of engineered rat kidney tissue. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104: , Costantini F, Shakya R: GDNF/Ret signaling and the development of the kidney. Bioessays 28: , Kanwar YS, Wada J, Lin S, Danesh FR, Chugh SS, Yang Q, Banerjee T, Lomasney JW: Update of extracellular matrix, its receptors, and cell adhesion molecules in mammalian nephrogenesis. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 286: F202 F215, Pohl M, Stuart RO, Sakurai H, Nigam SK: Branching morphogenesis during kidney development. Annu Rev Physiol 62: , Nigam SK: From the ureteric bud to the penome. Kidney Int 64: , Pichel JG, Shen L, Sheng HZ, Granholm AC, Drago J, Grinberg A, Lee EJ, Huang SP, 1468 Journal of the American Society of Nephrology J Am Soc Nephrol 20: , 2009

5 SCIENCE IN RENAL MEDICINE Saarma M, Hoffer BJ, Sariola H, Westphal H:Defects in enteric innervation and kidney development in mice lacking GDNF. Nature 382: 73 76, Sanchez MP, Silos-Santiago I, Frisen J, He B, Lira SA, Barbacid M: Renal agenesis and the absence of enteric neurons in mice lacking GDNF. Nature 382: 70 73, Schuchardt A, D Agati V, Larsson-Blomberg L, Costantini F, Pachnis V: Defects in the kidney and enteric nervous system of mice lacking the tyrosine kinase receptor Ret. Nature 367: , Maeshima A, Sakurai H, Choi Y, Kitamura S, Vaughn DA, Tee JB, Nigam SK: Glial cell derived neurotrophic factor independent ureteric bud outgrowth from the Wolffian duct. J Am Soc Nephrol 18: , Lu P, Sternlicht MD, Werb Z: Comparative mechanisms of branching morphogenesis in diverse systems. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 11: , Monte JC, Sakurai H, Bush KT, Nigam SK: The developmental nephrome: Systems biology in the developing kidney. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 16: 3 9, Davies JA: Do different branching epithelia use a conserved developmental mechanism? Bioessays 24: , Kauffman SA: Autocatalytic sets of proteins. J Theor Biol 119: 1 24, Turing A: The chemical basis of morphogenesis. Philos Trans R Soc 237: 37 72, Vainio SJ: Nephrogenesis regulated by Wnt signaling. J Nephrol 16: , Ashe HL, Briscoe J: The interpretation of morphogen gradients. Development 133: , Nelson CM, Vanduijn MM, Inman JL, Fletcher DA, Bissell MJ: Tissue geometry determines sites of mammary branching morphogenesis in organotypic cultures. Science 314: , Sakurai H, Nigam SK: Transforming growth factor-beta selectively inhibits branching morphogenesis but not tubulogenesis. Am J Physiol 272: F139 F146, Guimond S, Turnbull JE: Proteoglycans make the grade-ient. Mol Cell 16: , Steer DL, Shah MM, Bush KT, Stuart RO, Sampogna RV, Meyer TN, Schwesinger C, Bai X, Esko JD, Nigam SK: Regulation of ureteric bud branching morphogenesis by sulfated proteoglycans in the developing kidney. Dev Biol 272: , Zandi-Nejad K, Luyckx VA, Brenner BM: Adult hypertension and kidney disease: The role of fetal programming. Hypertension 47: , Keller G, Zimmer G, Mall G, Ritz E, Amann K: Nephron number in patients with primary hypertension. N Engl J Med 348: 101, Karihaloo A, Karumanchi SA, Barasch J, Jha V, Nickel CH, Yang J, Grisaru S, Bush KT, Nigam S, Rosenblum ND, Sukhatme VP, Cantley LG: Endostatin regulates branching morphogenesis of renal epithelial cells and ureteric bud. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98: , Rosines E, Schmidt HJ, Nigam SK: The effect of hyaluronic acid size and concentration on branching morphogenesis and tubule differentiation in developing kidney culture systems: Potential applications to engineering of renal tissues. Biomaterials 28: , Sariola H: Nephron induction revisited: From caps to condensates. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens 11: 17 21, Schmidt-Ott KM, Lan D, Hirsh BJ, Barasch J: Dissecting stages of mesenchymal-toepithelial conversion during kidney development. Nephron Physiol 104: 56 60, Hartman HA, Lai HL, Patterson LT: Cessation of renal morphogenesis in mice. Dev Biol 310: , Gilbert JS, Lang AL, Grant AR, Nijland MJ: Maternal nutrient restriction in sheep: Hypertension and decreased nephron number in offspring at 9 months of age. J Physiol 565: , Cox LA, Nijland MJ, Gilbert JS, Schlabritz- Loutsevitch NE, Hubbard GB, McDonald TJ, Shade RE, Nathanielsz PW: Effect of 30 per cent maternal nutrient restriction from 0.16 to 0.5 gestation on fetal baboon kidney gene expression. J Physiol 572: 67 85, Sampogna RV, Nigam SK: Implications of gene networks for understanding resilience and vulnerability in the kidney branching program. Physiology 19: , Lee VC, Davies JA: Epithelial branching: the power of self-loathing. Bioessays 29(3): , 2007 J Am Soc Nephrol 20: , 2009 How Does the Ureteric Bud Branch? 1469