Our results support the relevance of Nf1 inactivation in a Dhh expressing precursor cell to development in mice of manifestations characteristic of NF1 patients. Inactivation of the Nf1 gene in dorsal root ganglion-derived cells in vitro at embryonic day 12.5 + 1 results in colony formation, while inactivation of Nf1 in neural crest cells or in mature Schwann cells does not. In vivo, inactivation of the Nf1 gene by the DhhCre driver beginning at E12.5 elicits plexiform neurofibromas, dermal neurofibromas, and pigmentation.
Nf1 inactivation in the neural crest is apparently not required for neurofibroma formation.
In vitro, colony formation of neural crest cells does not occur following acute loss of
Nf1, and the
DhhCre driver is not expressed in neural crest cells
in vivo. Neural crest drivers
Mpz-Cre (E9.5 – E10.5 in the region of the presumptive DRG),
Pax3-Cre (E10.5 in dorsal neural tube and the region of the presumptive DRG), and
Wnt1-
Cre (E9.5 in migrating neural crest), also did not elicit neurofibroma formation in
Nf1 flox/flox mice (
Gitler et al., 2003).
What is the post-neural crest target cell in which Nf1 inactivation causes plexiform neurofibroma formation in vivo? The paraspinal region contains nerve roots, the dorsal root ganglion, and the proximal part of the peripheral nerve, and is the site of most plexiform GEM-neurofibromas in the Nf1 flox/flox; DhhCre model (). The neural crest derived glial cells in this region are boundary cap cells and embryonic Schwann cells. The DRG also contains satellite cells derived from neural crest and boundary cap cells, which we tentatively exclude. Although cells within the DRG expressed DhhCre as assessed by EGFP expression, cells with the morphology of satellite cells (apposed to neuronal somata) did not. Rather, the few DRG cells expressing EGFP expressed the Schwann cell marker S100β, not expressed by satellite cells, and had the morphology of Schwann cells with linear processes apposed to nerve axons. However, until a specific satellite cell marker is available for mouse we cannot formally exclude this cell type as a target for DhhCre mediated Nf1 recombination.
A possible target cell population is boundary cap cells in the spinal roots of the mouse trunk, present by day E10.75. Boundary cap cells develop into dorsal root glial (Schwann-like) cells, some DRG neurons and satellite cells and proximal Schwann cells of peripheral nerve based on expression of
Egr2/Krox20 (
Maro et al., 2004), consistent with our finding of tumors in these locations. It is not yet known whether some distal nerve Schwann cells derive from boundary cap cells. Like Schwann cell progenitors, with neuregulin-induced differentiation
in vitro boundary cap cells become Schwann cells (S100β +; Mbp+) capable of myelination (
Aquino et al., 2006). The hypothesis that boundary cap cells are a target for tumorigenesis is consistent with the observation that plexiform neurofibromas form, albeit in an
Nf1+/− genetic background, when the
Krox20Cre driver is used to ablate
Nf1 (
Zhu et al., 2002). A detailed comparison of the
Nf1 flox/flox; Krox20Cre and
Nf1 flox/flox; DhhCre models is shown in
Supplemental Table 1.
Embryonic and immature Schwann cells also express
Dhh (
Bitgood and McMahon, 1995;
Jessen and Mirsky, 2005;
Parmantier et al., 1999). While defined in sciatic nerve, similar cells are likely to exist in all peripheral and cranial nerves. The relevance of these cells to neurofibroma formation is consistent with the placement of some neurofibromas distal to the DRG in the
Nf1 flox/flox; DhhCre model. Schwann cell precursors are present in mouse sciatic nerve beginning at E12.5 and have been referred to as neural crest stem cells because
in vitro and when transplanted into avian host they can develop into neurons, Schwann cells and SMA+ fibroblasts (
Morrison et al., 1999;
White and Anderson, 1999;
White et al., 2001). However,
in vivo they are restricted to Schwann cell or endoneurial fibroblast lineages as shown by fate-mapping
in vivo (
Joseph et al., 2004). We use the term Schwann cell precursor here to distinguish them from BC cells and migrating neural crest cells. Supporting Schwann cell precursors as a target for tumorigenesis, in the
Nf1 flox/flox; DhhCre model nerves containing Schwann cells derived from Schwann cell precursors are hypertrophied throughout their lengths, show elevated proliferation, and disrupted organization including mast cell recruitment and loss of axon-glial interaction. However, tumors do not form in nerves. The environment surrounding the DRG may facilitate tumor formation, or boundary cap cells may be the only cells with tumorigenic potential.
We defined the neurofibroma-initiating cell using markers of Schwann cell precursors and their progeny (
Jessen and Mirsky, 2005). Markers for stages in boundary cap cell development have not been delineated. Our analysis places the neurofibroma initiating cell at the Schwann cell precursor/immature Schwann cell boundary based on a) tumor formation subsequent to
DhhCre expression; b) Blpb, S100β, and Gfap expression concomitant with absence of β III-tubulin expression in EGFP-expressing cells in peripheral nerves; and c) the ability of E12.5+1 D.I.V cells
in vitro to form colonies and the evidence that they are biopotent (). While we cannot completely exclude the relevance of a progenitor with wide potential in the
Nf1 flox/flox; DhhCre model, our inability to detect
Nf1 recombination
in vivo in p75-negative cells, which should include endoneurial fibroblasts (
Joseph et al., 2004) is consistent with a more restricted progenitor (see below).
Neurofibromas formed under the skin in association with small nerves in 48% of Nf1 flox/flox; DhhCre mice. In humans cutaneous and subcutaneous neurofibromas, some of which are called dermal neurofibromas, form mainly beginning at puberty. In the Nf1 flox/flox; DhhCre mice visible dermal tumors developed in only adults. Another difference from human NF1 patients is that the mouse dermal tumors rarely raised the skin. This likely reflects the presence of the panniculus carnosus muscle under the epidermis in mouse but not human. We designate these Nf1 flox/flox; DhhCre tumors GEM-dermal neurofibromas to distinguish from GEM-plexiform neurofibromas, but recognize their position is not precisely identical to any one category of human neurofibroma.
The progenitor cell for dermal GEM-neurofibroma may be the hair follicle neural crest-derived cells with stem cell features, recently shown to express
Dhh (
Fernandes et al., 2004;
Sieber-Blum et al., 2004;
Wong et al., 2006). The normal role of these cells is postulated to be replenishing neural crest derived melanocytes in skin. We often observed melanocytes near tumors in the
Nf1 flox/flox; DhhCre mice, and grafting E12.5
Nf1−/− DRG-derived cells into nerve generated pigmented melanocytes (
Rizvi et al., 2002). Some data support the existence of a post neural crest bi-potential glial-melanocyte progenitor cell (
Le Douarin and Dupin, 2003). A study of a patient who was somatic mosaic for NF1 mutation in whom café-au-lait macule melanocytes and neurofibroma Schwann cells shared identical biallelic NF1 mutations supports a role for such a progenitor in human NF1(
Maertens et al., 2007).
Inactivation of
Nf1 using
DhhCre enables tumor formation in the absence of an
Nf1+/− background. In a previous study plexiform neurofibromas were detected in an
Nf1-driven mouse model, but only in the presence of an
Nf1+/− genetic background (
Zhu et al., 2002). In some but not all instances an
Nf1+/− environment may contribute to neurofibroma formation. Another alternative, which we favor, is that because the
Krox20-Cre driver is expressed in developing boundary cap cells beginning at E10.5 and is not expressed in embryonic Schwann cells (
Maro et al., 2004) this driver does not cause
Nf1 loss in a sufficiently large pool of glial cell progenitors, so that an
Nf1+/− genetic background enhances the target cell pool. In either case
Nf1+/− perineurial cells,
Nf1+/− mast cells, and
Nf1+/− endothelial cells are not always required for neurofibroma formation.
A model in which mice routinely develop GEM-neurofibroma allowed us to study the histology of nerves prior to tumor formation. We found that interactions between Schwann cells and axons in Remak bundles are dramatically perturbed. The finding that neurofibromas in NF1 patients more frequently form on sensory roots with many Remak bundles as compared to motor nerve roots is consistent with a pronounced effect on non-myelin forming Schwann cells. Furthermore, Schwann cell proliferation, normally very low in postnatal nerves is transiently increased in the first postnatal weeks in the
Nf1 flox/flox; DhhCre mice. Transient proliferation was also reported in a mouse in which the EGFR was expressed in Schwann cells (
Ling et al., 2005;
Wu et al., 2006). Nerves from NF1 patients have not been analyzed, precluding direct comparison between the species. The relationship between proliferating cells in GEM-neurofibromas and proliferating cells within nerves also remains to be determined.
In conclusion, our results indicate that biallelic Nf1 mutations in post neural crest cells expressing Dhh can cause neurofibroma formation, and provide a model to study neurofibroma formation and test therapies.