LAUSR

Decidual macrophages account for 10–20% of decidual immune cells during early human pregnancy and have been reported to play roles in tissue remodeling, debris clearance, and parturition. Investigators consistently consider decidual macrophages a homogenous population in studies. By using CCR2 and CD11c, we divided decidual macrophages into three distinct subsets during early human pregnancy. CCR2-CD11cLO macrophages were the most abundant (~80%) macrophage subset and were evenly distributed in the decidua. CCR2+ CD11cHI macrophages (10–15%) were proinflammatory and mainly distributed proximal to extravillous trophoblast cells (EVTs). Remarkably, a novel decidual macrophage population, the heme oxygenase-1 positive (HMOX1+) macrophage subset (CCR2-CD11cHI), which was the lowest (~5%) of the three populations studied, was identified and found to be localized strictly proximal to EVTs. Here, we first report our experimental progress on decidual macrophage subsets and then discuss important studies related to the two CD11cHI macrophage subsets located proximal to EVTs. The three macrophage subsets not only expressed different levels of CCR2 and CD11c but also exhibited different expression levels of CD45 and CD14 by flow cytometry analysis (Fig. 1a). The expression levels of CD45 and CD14 paralleled each other from low to high levels in CCR2-CD11cLO macrophages. The CCR2CD11cHI macrophage subset had the highest expression levels of CD45 and CD14. The expression level of CD45 in CCR2+ CD11cHI macrophages was close to that in CCR2-CD11cHI macrophages, but this subset had the lowest expression level of CD14 (Fig. 1a). These findings further demonstrated that the three decidual macrophage subsets were truly different from each other and reflected the different roles of these subsets in T-cell activation and the innate immune response. The concepts of M1 and M2 macrophages have been well known in the field of macrophage research. Thus, we sought to elucidate the relationships between these three subsets of decidual macrophages and in vitro-induced M1 or M2 macrophages. M1 and M2 genes were defined based on highly expressed genes that showed at least a two-fold difference between M1 and M2 macrophages (Table S1) according to published RNA-Seq data (GSE36952). Based on the unsupervised clustering results, we found that CCR2+ CD11cHI macrophages expressed many more M1 macrophage genes and expressed these genes at higher levels than the other two decidual macrophage subsets (Fig. 1b). Furthermore, this CCR2+ macrophage subset clustered with M1 macrophages (Fig. 1c). Considering the proinflammatory properties of this subset, we suggest CCR2+ CD11cHI to be M1-like macrophages in vivo. The two CCR2− macrophage subsets always clustered together, regardless of whether M1 or M2 genes were used for evaluation (Fig. 1b–e), suggesting that the CCR2-CD11cLO and CCR2CD11cHI macrophage subsets share more commonalities with each other than with the CCR2+ CD11cHI subset. Additionally, the expression levels and expression scale of M2 genes were much higher and much more extensive in these two CCR2macrophage subsets than those of M1 genes (Fig. 1b, d). Therefore, we suggest that the CCR2-CD11cLO and CCR2CD11cHI macrophage subsets are inclined to be antiinflammatory M2-like macrophages; however, these two CCR2subsets did not cluster with M2 macrophages. This might be explained by the discrepancy between the in vitro-induced macrophage type and the in vivo decidual macrophages, and it seemed unlikely that a particular in vivo macrophage population would be fully matched with the in vitro-induced M1 or M2 subtype. We suggest that because of the high percentage (>80%) of M2-like CCR2-CD11cLO macrophages at the maternalfetal interface, decidual macrophages are usually considered the M2 type. Additionally, with the discovery of the three decidual macrophage subsets, investigators could easily detect the percentages of M1and M2-like macrophages at the maternalfetal interface, which may contribute to the investigation of gestational diseases that correlate with inflammatory factors. HMOX1 can degrade toxic free heme to execute its antiinflammatory function. With the discovery of HMOX1+ macrophages, the precise functions of this subset and how effectively HMOX1+ macrophages can protect pregnancies from the inflammatory milieu at the maternal-fetal interface are our next focuses. The discovery of HMOX1+ macrophages could also provide insights for many other HMOX1-related studies. In areas where malaria is endemic, sickle hemoglobin helps patients infected by plasmodia survive. Some studies indicate that sickle hemoglobin easily releases free heme, which could further induce HMOX1 expression in bone marrowand peripheral bloodderived cells to make an antioxidant and anti-inflammatory milieu to combat plasmodia. Nonetheless, the precise immune cell types or subsets have not been clarified, and we suggest that HMOX1+ macrophages in other organs may play some role in plasmodia tolerance. HMOX1 can also mediate the therapeutic effects of molecules such as IL-10, which is an anti-inflammatory cytokine, rapamycin and aspirin, functioning as a “therapeutic funnel”. We propose that HMOX1+ macrophages play roles in the course of medical treatment. Although HMOX1 has been reported to be expressed in human trophoblast cells and plays significant roles during pregnancy, we have not detected evident and extensive expression of HMOX1 in human trophoblast cells at the maternal-fetal interface. Therefore, we