1- Department of Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
2- Natural and Medical Sciences Research Center, University of Nizwa, P.O. Box 33, PC 616, Birkat Al Mauz, Nizwa, Sultanate of Oman; Golestan Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Jorjani Clinical Sciences Research Institute, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
3- Laboratory Sciences Research Center, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan Iran ,yazdani@goums.ac.ir
2- Natural and Medical Sciences Research Center, University of Nizwa, P.O. Box 33, PC 616, Birkat Al Mauz, Nizwa, Sultanate of Oman; Golestan Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Jorjani Clinical Sciences Research Institute, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
3- Laboratory Sciences Research Center, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan Iran ,
Abstract: (2278 Views)
Background: Macrophages are central effectors of innate immunity and exhibit remarkable functional plasticity in response to environmental stimuli. The aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) is a ligand-activated transcription factor that plays a critical role in regulating macrophage function, immune homeostasis, and xenobiotic metabolism. Two well-characterized AhR ligands, indole-3-carbinol (I3C), a dietary phytochemical derived from cruciferous vegetables, and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD), a persistent environmental pollutant, exert divergent biological effects despite engaging the same receptor. However, their differential cytotoxic impact on macrophages and the extent to which they activate downstream AhR target genes remain poorly characterized. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the cytotoxic effects of I3C and TCDD on THP-1-derived macrophages and to assess the consequent transcriptional regulation of three canonical AhR target genes: CYP1A1, CYP1B1, and AhRR.
Methods: THP-1 human monocytic cells were differentiated into macrophages using phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA) and 2-mercaptoethanol (2-ME). Differentiated macrophages were treated with I3C (10 ng/µL) or TCDD (100 nM), each dissolved separately in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), for 24 and 48 hours. Lipopolysaccharide (LPS; 100 ng/mL) was used as a positive control. Cell viability was assessed using the MTT colorimetric assay. Gene expression of CYP1A1, CYP1B1, and AhRR was quantified by real-time quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) using SYBR Green chemistry, with GAPDH as the reference gene. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test; significance was set at p < 0.05.
Results: TCDD demonstrated pronounced cytotoxicity, reducing cell viability by 25% at 24 hours (P-Value < 0.05) and by 40% at 48 hours (P-Value < 0.01) compared to untreated controls. I3C induced significantly milder cytotoxicity, with viability reductions of 10% and 15% at 24 and 48 hours, respectively (P-Value < 0.05). DMSO vehicle control did not significantly affect cell viability. Real-time qRT-PCR analysis revealed that both ligands significantly upregulated CYP1A1, CYP1B1, and AhRR. TCDD induced greater upregulation of CYP1A1 (5.5-fold at 48 h) and CYP1B1 (4.8-fold at 48 h) compared to I3C (3.2-fold and 2.7-fold, respectively; P-Value < 0.05 for all between-group comparisons). AhRR was upregulated to a similar extent by both ligands (~2.1-fold).
Conclusion: TCDD exhibited markedly higher cytotoxicity than I3C in THP-1-derived macrophages, consistent with potent and sustained AhR activation. I3C induced comparatively milder cytotoxic and transcriptional responses, suggesting more controlled AhR engagement. These results provide mechanistic insights into ligand-dependent AhR signaling in macrophages and underscore the immunotoxicological risks of TCDD exposure, while highlighting I3C as a candidate for future anti-inflammatory research.
Methods: THP-1 human monocytic cells were differentiated into macrophages using phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA) and 2-mercaptoethanol (2-ME). Differentiated macrophages were treated with I3C (10 ng/µL) or TCDD (100 nM), each dissolved separately in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), for 24 and 48 hours. Lipopolysaccharide (LPS; 100 ng/mL) was used as a positive control. Cell viability was assessed using the MTT colorimetric assay. Gene expression of CYP1A1, CYP1B1, and AhRR was quantified by real-time quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) using SYBR Green chemistry, with GAPDH as the reference gene. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-hoc test; significance was set at p < 0.05.
Results: TCDD demonstrated pronounced cytotoxicity, reducing cell viability by 25% at 24 hours (P-Value < 0.05) and by 40% at 48 hours (P-Value < 0.01) compared to untreated controls. I3C induced significantly milder cytotoxicity, with viability reductions of 10% and 15% at 24 and 48 hours, respectively (P-Value < 0.05). DMSO vehicle control did not significantly affect cell viability. Real-time qRT-PCR analysis revealed that both ligands significantly upregulated CYP1A1, CYP1B1, and AhRR. TCDD induced greater upregulation of CYP1A1 (5.5-fold at 48 h) and CYP1B1 (4.8-fold at 48 h) compared to I3C (3.2-fold and 2.7-fold, respectively; P-Value < 0.05 for all between-group comparisons). AhRR was upregulated to a similar extent by both ligands (~2.1-fold).
Conclusion: TCDD exhibited markedly higher cytotoxicity than I3C in THP-1-derived macrophages, consistent with potent and sustained AhR activation. I3C induced comparatively milder cytotoxic and transcriptional responses, suggesting more controlled AhR engagement. These results provide mechanistic insights into ligand-dependent AhR signaling in macrophages and underscore the immunotoxicological risks of TCDD exposure, while highlighting I3C as a candidate for future anti-inflammatory research.
Keywords: Receptors, Aryl Hydrocarbon (AhR), Indole-3-Carbinol (I3C), TCDD (Polychlorinated Dibenzodioxins), CYP1B1( Cytochrome P-450 CYP1B1), AhRR (AHRR protein, human [Supplementary Concept]), THP-1 (THP-1 Cells), Macrophage Cytotoxicity, CYP1A1, Immune Modulation
Editorial: Original article |
Subject:
Basic Medical Sciences
Received: 2024/12/2 | Accepted: 2025/06/20
Received: 2024/12/2 | Accepted: 2025/06/20
References
1. Mahdianipur S, Mohammadi S, Jaefari A, Davoodi H. Effect of phenelzine and serotonin on RAW264.7 macrophage cell viability. J Basic Res Med Sci. 2024;12(1):14-7. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
2. Yang S, Zhao M, Jia S. Macrophage: key player in the pathogenesis of autoimmune diseases. Front Immunol. 2023;14:1080310. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
3. Mohammadi S. Hypoxia and macrophage polarization defects via AhR perturbation. J Basic Res Med Sci. 2019;7(4):1-3. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
4. Hao N, Whitelaw ML. The emerging roles of AhR in physiology and immunity. Biochem Pharmacol. 2013;86(5):561-70. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
5. Aggarwal BB, Ichikawa H. Molecular targets and anticancer potential of indole-3-carbinol and its derivatives. Cell Cycle. 2005;4(9):1201-15. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
6. Li X, Li N, Han Y, Rao K, Ji X, Ma M. 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)-induced suppression of immunity in THP-1-derived macrophages and the possible mechanisms. Environ Pollut. 2021;287:117302. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
7. Mohammadi S, Seyedhoseini FS, Asadi J, Yazdani Y. Effects of berberine on the secretion of cytokines and expression of genes involved in cell cycle regulation in THP-1 monocytic cell line. Int J Basic Med Sci. 2017;20(5):530-7. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
8. Ebrahim SM, Jafari SM. A review of potential anti-cancer effect of sesquiterpene lactones in breast cancer. J Basic Res Med Sci. 2022;10(4):48-59. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
9. Mohammadi S, Seyedhosseini FS, Behnampour N, Yazdani Y. Indole-3-carbinol induces G1 cell cycle arrest and apoptosis through aryl hydrocarbon receptor in THP-1 monocytic cell line. J Recept Signal Transduct Res. 2017;37(5):506-14. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
10. Jiang J, Kang TB, Shim DW, Oh NH, Kim TJ, Lee KH. Indole-3-carbinol inhibits LPS-induced inflammatory response by blocking TRIF-dependent signaling pathway in macrophages. Food Chem Toxicol. 2013;57:256-61. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
11. Segner H, Bailey C, Tafalla C, Bo J. Immunotoxicity of xenobiotics in fish: a role for the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR)? Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(17):9460. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
12. Bahman F, Choudhry K, Al-Rashed F, Al-Mulla F, Sindhu S, Ahmad R. Aryl hydrocarbon receptor: current perspectives on key signaling partners and immunoregulatory role in inflammatory diseases. Front Immunol. 2024;15:1421346. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
13. Karimabad MN, Mohamadi M, Torabizadeh SA, Hassanshahi G. Indole-3-carbinol (I3C) as leukemia therapeutic agent. Mini Rev Med Chem. 2023;23(2):150-8. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
14. Busbee PB, Nagarkatti M, Nagarkatti PS. Natural indoles, indole-3-carbinol and 3,3′-diindolylmethane, counteract the effects of staphylococcal enterotoxin B-induced inflammation through epigenetic regulation involving HDAC expression. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2014;274(1):7-16. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
15. Ociepa-Zawal M, Rubiś B, Łaciński M, Trzeciak WH. The effect of indole-3-carbinol on the expression of CYP1A1, CYP1B1 and AhR genes and proliferation of MCF-7 cells. Acta Biochim Pol. 2007;54(1):113-7. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
16. Jacob A, Hartz AM, Potin S, Coumoul X, Yousif S, Scherrmann JM, et al. Aryl hydrocarbon receptor-dependent upregulation of Cyp1b1 by TCDD and diesel exhaust particles in rat brain microvessels. Fluids Barriers CNS. 2011:8:23. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
17. Vogel CF, Haarmann-Stemmann T. The aryl hydrocarbon receptor repressor-more than a simple feedback inhibitor of AhR signaling: clues for its role in inflammation and cancer. Curr Opin Toxicol. 2017;2:109-19. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
18. Schanz O, Chijiiwa R, Cengiz SC, Majlesain Y, Weighardt H, Takeyama H, et al. Dietary AhR ligands regulate AhRR expression in intestinal immune cells and intestinal microbiota composition. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(9):3189. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
19. Zhu L, Zhao Q, Yang T, Ding W, Zhao Y. Cellular metabolism and macrophage functional polarization. Int Rev Immunol. 2015;34(1):82-100. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
20. Cassetta L, Cassol E, Poli G. Macrophage polarization in health and disease. ScientificWorldJournal. 2011;11:2391-402. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
