|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
First published online February 22, 2008
doi: 10.1242/10.1242/dev.005439
Review |
Department of Pathology, University of Cambridge, Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1QP, UK.
* Author for correspondence (e-mail: cjw53{at}cam.ac.uk)
SUMMARY
Mammary gland development occurs through distinctive stages throughout embryonic and pubertal development and reproductive life. At each stage, different signals are required to induce changes in both the epithelium and the surrounding mesenchyme/stroma. Recent studies have provided new insights into the origin, specification and fate of mammary stem and progenitor cells and into how the differentiated lineages that comprise the functional mammary gland are determined. The development of new tools and culture techniques has also enabled the factors that influence branching morphogenesis in the embryonic and pubertal gland to be identified. A surprising recent discovery has been that mammary epithelial cells commit to differentiated lineages using the same signalling pathways that regulate lineage determination in T helper cells.
Introduction
Mammary glands are epidermal appendages that possibly evolved from ancient
apocrine glands that were associated with the skin
(Oftedal, 2002
). The primary
function of the mammary gland is to provide nutrition for the young in the
form of milk protein and fat. However, there are other benefits that are
provided by lactation, such as the provision of immune factors that are
secreted into the milk, which provide protection from infection, and also the
close contact that occurs between mother and infant during nursing, which
might have developmental benefits (Peaker et al., 2002). The mammary gland is
a complex secretory organ that consists of a number of different cell types:
epithelial cells that form the ductal network of the gland; adipocytes, which
constitute the fat pad and in which the ductal network is embedded; vascular
endothelial cells, which make up the blood vessels; stromal cells, including
fibroblasts; and a variety of immune cells. There are two main types of
epithelium in the mammary gland: luminal and basal. The luminal epithelium
forms the ducts and the secretory alveoli, whereas the basal epithelium
consists essentially of myoepithelial cells. These two types of epithelium
form a bi-layered structure of simple epithelium that is embedded within the
fatty stroma.
There are three main stages of mammary gland development both in rodents
and humans: embryonic, pubertal and adult. Hormones and growth factors play a
role in these different stages of mammary development and are also implicated
in breast cancer. The mammary gland is an ideal tissue in which to study a
range of developmental processes, as discussed below. In the embryo, the
signals that induce the formation of mammary placodes from the skin are
beginning to be elucidated. Similar processes are involved in the formation of
other appendages, such as teeth and feathers
(Wu et al., 2004). After
birth, mammary development is arrested until puberty, when extensive
elongation of the ducts, accompanied by secondary branching, takes place, thus
providing a readily accessible system in which to study branching
morphogenesis. The hallmarks of development during pregnancy are the formation
of tertiary branches, which terminate in alveolar buds, and the rapid
proliferation of the luminal epithelium accompanied by differentiation and
commitment to the secretory alveolar lineage. A lactogenic switch occurs
during late pregnancy that is accompanied by the expression of the milk
proteins, whey acidic protein (WAP) and 
-lactalbumin, and by the
formation of lipid droplets. Finally, following lactation, removal of the now
surplus alveolar cells is accomplished by cell death (apoptosis).
Post-lactational regression, or involution, is the most dramatic example of
physiologically regulated apoptosis in an adult tissue. In a tightly
coordinated series of events, 
80% of the epithelium is removed within a
few days. The mouse mammary gland provides, therefore, a model that can be
genetically manipulated to provide insights into a variety of normal
developmental processes. Mouse models have also been used extensively to study
the development of breast cancer.
In this review, we discuss recent studies in mice on the morphogenesis and lineage commitment events that occur during all three stages of mouse mammary gland development. Important new insights have been obtained from these studies, including the unanticipated involvement of signalling pathways previously associated with T lymphocyte lineage decisions, in mammary epithelial lineage choice. Tools have been developed that allow the enrichment of mammary stem cells from the adult gland, and it can be only a matter of time before we can prospectively identify mammary stem cells and the factors required for their self renewal. Importantly, this will allow the hierarchy of progenitors and their inter-relationship to be determined. This will be a major step forward, not just for developmental biology, but also for breast cancer research. The ability to genetically modify the mouse has made it the model of choice and this review therefore focuses on studies in the mouse. Although there are some differences in the architecture and hormonal control of mammary glands between mice and other rodents and between mice and humans, similar developmental processes are shared between them.
Embryonic mammary gland development
Mammary development is not evident in the mouse until mid-gestation. The first distinct feature is the formation of the milk lines from overlying ectoderm (as discussed in more detail below), followed by the formation of five pairs of placodes that invaginate to form buds (see Fig. 1A,B). These induce the formation of the mammary mesenchyme. The buds then sprout and branch to form a rudimentary structure that has approximately five ductules that embed in the subdermal fat pad (see Fig. 1C). Development is arrested from embryonic day (E) 18 until puberty. Mammary development in the male differs between mouse and man with regression of the rudimentary tissue in mice being induced in response to androgens, whereas human males retain a connection to the nipple.
Patterning and placode formation
Mammary gland development in the mouse is first observed on E10.5 with the
appearance of the mammary lines (milk lines) in both male and female embryos.
These are two ridges of multilayered ectoderm that arise from the embryonic
skin and run in an anteroposterior (AP) direction from the fore- to the
hindlimb buds on the ventral surface of the embryo. The mammary line can be
observed by in situ staining for the wingless gene Wnt10b
(Veltmaat et al., 2004). In
the TOP-Gal Wnt reporter transgenic line, β-galactosidase expression is
detected as a thin line between fore- and hindlimb buds
(Chu et al., 2004). It has been
proposed that ectodermal cells migrate along the mammary line and coalesce to
form epithelial placodes (Veltmaat et al.,
2004). Parathyroid hormone-related protein (PTHrP; also known as
PTHLH - Mouse Genome Informatics) is expressed by E11.0 and the growth
factors, fibroblast growth factor 10 (FGF10) and bone morphogenetic protein 4
(BMP4) are also expressed in the placodes. Recently, the expression of a
lacZ reporter from a Bmp4 promoter has shown that BMP4 is
expressed in both mammary epithelium and mesenchyme between E11.5 and E14.5
(Hens et al., 2007). An
interaction between BMP4 and T-box 3 (Tbx3; a gene associated with
ulnar-mammary syndrome, which is characterised by deficiencies in the ulnar
ray in the upper limb and hypoplasia of the mammary glands) has been proposed
to determine the dorsoventral (DV) boundary of the body, where the formation
of mammary buds is initiated (Cho et al.,
2006).
|
).
Similarly, loss of TBX3 in humans produces mammary hypoplasia and
nipple loss, whereas mice lacking Tbx3 lose all mammary buds,
although they occasionally retain pair number 2
(Eblaghie et al., 2004). By
contrast, Lef1-null mice (LEF1 is a nuclear target of the canonical
Wnt signalling pathway) form small mammary placodes that degenerate, although
bud-pair 4 is sometimes retained (van
Genderen et al., 1994), whereas mice that lack Fgf10, or
its receptor Fgfr2b, have only bud-pair 4
(Mailleux et al., 2002). In
contrast to bud loss, supernumerary glands have been observed in mice and
humans (Grossl, 2000). The
scaramanga (ska) locus is associated with aberrant bud formation in
mice and results in absent (frequently loss of placode 3), supernumerary or
misplaced buds (Howard and Gusterson,
2000). The ska gene was later identified as that which
encodes neuregulin 3 (NRG3), a ligand for the tyrosine kinase receptor ERBB4
(HER4). In mouse embryo explant culture, NRG3-soaked beads induce the
expression of LEF1 and bud formation
(Howard et al., 2005).
A component of the hedgehog (Hh) signalling pathway, GLI3, has recently
been shown to regulate bud formation
(Hatsell and Cowin, 2006).
GLI3 is one of three homologues of the Drosophila melanogaster gene
cubitus interruptus (ci), which encodes a microtubule-bound
transcription factor that can be phosphorylated to generate a transcriptional
activator (CiA), or proteolytically cleaved to generate a repressor
(CiR). The Hh signalling network regulates pattern formation and
stem/progenitor cell fate in many organs
(Ingham and McMahon, 2001).
Complex interactions exist between the various components of the mammalian Hh
pathway that can result in positive or negative signalling via one of three
secreted ligands [sonic hedgehog (SHH), Indian hedgehog (IHH) and desert
hedgehog (DHH)], which bind to either of two patched-family Hh receptors
(PTCH1 and PTCH2), inducing target gene transcription via activator forms of
the Gli family members GLI1, GLI2 and GLI3. In the absence of ligand, PTCH1
interacts with a transmembrane effector protein called smoothened (SMO);
binding of Hh to PTCH1 releases its inhibition of SMO and induces Hh target
genes via the activator forms of the Gli factors
(Hooper and Scott, 2005).
|
) examined the expression of Gli1, Gli2
and Gli3 using a combination of lacZ reporter expression and
in situ hybridisation. Since GLI1 is a direct transcriptional target of
positive Hh signalling, Gli1-lacZ expression in transgenic mice
reports Hh pathway activity. lacZ expression is absent in mammary
buds (although it is present in hair follicles), indicating that positive Hh
signalling is not required for mammary development. Furthermore, embryos null
for either Gli1 or Gli2 have no obvious defects in mammary
bud formation. However, removal of Gli3 abrogates TOP-Gal expression
in the mammary line in the region of placode 3, and results in the loss or
misplacement of bud-pairs 3 and 5. Replacing GLI2 with GLI1 in
Gli3-heterozygous mice, by driving expression of the constitutive
Gli1 activator under the control of the Gli2 promoter, also
results in loss of buds 3 and 5. This suggests that GLI3 is required to
suppress Hh target genes that are involved in patterning and bud formation.
Overall, this study shows that the GliA/GliR ratio (Gli
activator forms to Gli repressor forms) provides a crucial developmental
signal threshold for buds 3 and 5, further emphasizing the susceptibility of
different placodes to different developmental signals.
In E11 Gli3xt/xt (extratoes mutant) mice, the lack of
expression of the Wnt signalling reporter TOP-Gal in the central region of the
mammary line demonstrates that the GLI3-mediated repression of the Hh pathway
is required prior to the early patterning events that precede mammary placode
formation (Hatsell and Cowin,
2006). Thus, although the Hh pathway is active in epidermal
appendages, such as in hair follicles, it is either inactive or repressed
throughout embryonic mammary development. Interestingly, GLI3 is also involved
in FGF10 signalling because recombinant FGF10 can rescue mammogenesis in
Gli3xt/xt mutants
(Veltmaat et al., 2006). It
has been suggested that the intra-somitic FGF10 gradient, in concert with the
ventral elongation of the somites (as suggested by the phenotype of
Pax3-deficient mouse mutants), determines the correct DV position of
the mammary epithelium (Veltmaat et al.,
2006). As there is no evidence for positive Hh signalling in the
embryonic mammary gland (Hatsell and
Cowin, 2006), this function of GLI3 must be mediated by another
mechanism.
Another signalling pathway has recently been implicated in early embryonic
mammary gland development. GATA3 is a transcription factor that controls the
differentiation of T lymphocytes in response to parasitic infections. In
transgenic mice in which a modified β-galactosidase gene was knocked-into
the Gata3 locus, blue staining was observed as early as E12.5 in
mammary buds (Asselin-Labat et al.,
2007). Moreover, the conditional deletion of Gata3 in
mammary placodes using the keratin 14 (Krt14) promoter-driven
expression of Cre recombinase resulted in a variable loss of placodes and a
failure to develop the nipple sheath
(Asselin-Labat et al.,
2007).
By E13.5, morphologically distinct epithelial buds can be distinguished in
mouse embryos, and by E14.5 these buds have sunk into the underlying dermis.
Expression of dickkopf 1, an inhibitor of Wnt signalling, under the control of
the Krt14 promoter can abolish bud formation
(Chu et al., 2004). In male
mouse embryos, the activation of androgen receptors causes the buds to
degenerate and disappear by E15.5. At this stage in female embryos, each bud
begins to elongate to form a so-called mammary sprout that invades the
precursor of the fat pad, into which the sprout will grow after birth. PTHrP
signals to the mesenchyme to initiate the formation of mammary-specific dense
mesenchyme (Hens et al.,
2007), which is essential for determining epithelial cell fate. A
hollow lumen is then formed that opens onto the surface of the skin and gives
rise to the nipple (see Fig.
1C). PTHrP is important also for the development of the nipple
sheath, and the overexpression of PTHrP in basal keratinocytes converts dermis
to mammary mesenchyme and suppresses hair follicle formation
(Foley et al., 2001).
Branching morphogenesis and ductal elongation
Around E16, mammary sprouts begin to ramify into a small number of
ductules, and by E18.5 they have developed into small tree-like glands that
bear between 10 and 15 small branches. The branching morphogenesis of the
mammary sprout requires soluble factors that are supplied by the mammary fat
pad precursor. Recently, elegant work from John Wysolmerski's laboratory, in
which embryonic mouse mammary buds were explanted and cultured, has shown that
PTHrP, which is secreted by mammary epithelial cells, sensitises mammary
mesenchymal cells (which develop around E13.5) to BMP signalling by
upregulating the expression of BMP receptor 1A (BMPR1A) in the mammary
mesenchyme but not the epithelium (Hens et
al., 2007) (see Fig.
2). Importantly, the addition of BMP4 to cultures of dissected
embryonic mammary buds from Pthrp-null mice rescued the phenotype
(lack of sprouting from the buds and branching morphogenesis) seen in the
absence of exogenous BMP4. Conversely, the addition of the secreted BMP
inhibitor noggin to wild-type buds reduced bud sprouting by 50%. These data
indicate that BMP4 is downstream of PTHrP in its role as a regulator of
embryonic mammary ductal branching morphogenesis. Hens et al. hypothesised
that MSX2, a homeodomain transcription factor, could mediate the signals from
PTHrP and BMP4, as Msx2-null mice have been reported to have a
similar arrested bud development phenotype to Pthrp-deficient mice
(Satokata et al., 2000). This
hypothesis is supported by results obtained by culturing mouse C3H10T1/2
mesenchymal cells, which show that PTHrP and BMP4 synergistically induce
Msx2 expression, and by the fact that loss of Msx2 can
rescue the loss of hair follicles seen in KRT14-PTHrP overexpressing mice
(Hens and Wysolmerski, 2006). Taken together, these results demonstrate that
PTHrP and BMP4 induce the expression of MSX2 in mammary mesenchyme to mediate
the PTHrP-regulated suppression of hair follicle formation around the bud and
nipple (Fig. 2). Use of
embryonic bud organ culture should enable further insights into the factors
produced by the epithelium and/or mesenchyme that promote the outgrowth of the
mammary bud.
|
It is also interesting that hair follicle formation is suppressed in favour
of mammary gland development. It was demonstrated recently in mice that the
ablation of epithelial SHH signalling results in the transformation of some
hair follicles to a strikingly mammary-gland-like fate
(Gritli-Linde et al., 2007).
It is also worth noting that in the absence of white adipose tissue (WAT),
which starts to accumulate around the developing mammary ductal system at
E18.0 (Sakakura, 1987),
branching is arrested at this stage and that only 3-4 ducts develop by birth
in mice genetically modified to lack all WAT
(Couldrey et al., 2002). It is
not known whether this is owing to a defect in paracrine signalling or altered
physical interactions.
The mammary gland is unusual in that development arrests at E18.5 and does not commence again until puberty, when much of its development takes place. Thus, we now turn to the events that occur during adult mammary gland development and to the recent discoveries that have shed light on this process.
Adult mammary development
The major events that occur during adult mammary gland development, including the developmental cycle of pregnancy, lactation and involution are depicted in Fig. 3.
Mammary development at puberty
At birth, the mouse mammary gland is competent to produce milk (as it is in
humans, in whom it is sometimes referred to as witch's milk). In the first few
weeks after birth, growth of the mammary tree is commensurate with body growth
(allometric growth) (Fig. 3A).
Terminal end buds (TEBs), which are club-shaped structures comprising an outer
layer of cap cells and a multilayered inner core of cells called body cells,
appear at the tips of the ducts and start to invade the fat pad. Allometric
growth ceases when serum levels of estrogen start to rise at puberty.
Proliferation within the TEBs results in ductal elongation, and clefting of
the TEBs results in bifurcation of the ducts to generate branches
(Fig. 3B). Apoptosis has been
detected in the body cells and could be the mechanism for lumen formation
(Humphreys et al., 1996). By
10-12 weeks of age, the TEBs have disappeared, the limits of the fat pad
are reached and growth ceases. The appearance of TEBs is not observed in
A-ZIP/F-1 mutant mice that lack WAT and in which ductal development is
severely disrupted (Couldrey et al.,
2002) (A-ZIP/F-1 is a dominant-negative protein that inhibits the
DNA-binding and function of B-ZIP proteins in both the C/EBP and AP1 families
of transcription factors), implicating the fat pad in TEB formation and ductal
elongation, either physically or as a source of secreted factors. It is worth
noting that cycles of side-branching followed by apoptosis occur with each
oestrus cycle and that, in some mouse strains, this branching can be
extensive. Thus, cell death is a crucial homeostatic event in the mature
virgin mammary gland, although this has received little attention until
recently.
The expression of Gata3 in the body cells (but not the cap cells)
of TEBs has hinted at a role in post-natal ductal branching and elongation, as
have experiments in which MMTV-Cre has been used to delete Gata3 in
luminal epithelium. In the absence of Gata3, TEBs fail to develop and
a drastic reduction in ductal outgrowth occurs. This reduced outgrowth was
even seen in heterozygous Gata3 mice in one study
(Asselin-Labat et al., 2007),
but not another (Kouros-Mehr et al.,
2006) (this discrepancy might reflect the use of different
MMTV-Cre transgenic lines in the two studies). Loss of Gata3 is
associated with a decrease in the proportion of cells positive for estrogen
receptor (ER; also known as ESR1 - Mouse Genome Informatics),
suggesting that GATA3 is involved in either the expression of ER or the
commitment to the ER-expressing lineage. Using a bioinformatics
approach, Kouros-Mehr et al. (Kouros-Mehr
et al., 2006) identified FOXA1 as a possible component of the
GATA3 regulatory network. The correlation between Gata3 and
Foxa1 expression, the presence of a GATA3-binding site in the
Foxa1 promoter, and the role of FOXA1 in estrogen signalling and the
binding of ER to chromatin, led these authors to suggest that FOXA1 mediates
cross-talk between GATA3 and ER signalling, as discussed further in the
following section.
Branching morphogenesis
Branching morphogenesis is a complex process that is regulated by a wide
range of factors expressed in the epithelium or stroma, including hormones and
growth factors, extracellular matrix molecules and matrix metalloproteases,
morphogens and immune cells (Sternlicht et
al., 2006). These factors provide both global and positional cues.
However, the question remains as to the mechanism by which the initiation and
formation of secondary ductal branches is determined.
A crucial regulator of branching in the virgin gland is estrogen, which has
two receptors, ER and ERβ, with ER being the more important
for development. The original knockout model of ER (the ERKO mouse)
established that estrogen is important for pubertal development
(Bocchinfuso et al., 2000).
However, this phenotype is partly due to reduced prolactin (PRL) levels. A
complete knockout of ER subsequently showed that TEBs are absent in the
mammary glands of Er-null mice and that the ducts failed to
invade the fat pad (Mallepell et al.,
2006). A more refined version of this knockout has recently been
developed with the aim of removing ER only in the epithelium, at
different stages of development. By conditionally deleting ER, Feng et
al. (Feng et al., 2007) have
shown that ER is required for both prepubertal development and during
late pregnancy for alveologenesis and lactation.
Recently, Mina Bissell's laboratory has utilised a novel mammary cell
culture system to address the role of tissue geometry and morphogenetic
gradients in mammary gland branching morphogenesis
(Nelson et al., 2006). Using
mouse mammary epithelial cells and a three-dimensional micropatterned collagen
gel assay to control the geometry of the initially formed tubules, these
researchers demonstrated that the addition of epidermal growth factor (EGF) or
hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) to this culture system induced the formation of
multicellular branches from the central tubule that invaded the surrounding
collagen. Using real-time imaging of the expression of green fluorescent
protein (GFP) under the control of the vimentin mesenchymal gene promoter,
branches were found to form at locations of previous GFP expression,
supporting the idea that an epithelial-mesenchymal transition-like event is
required at branch points for branching to occur. Branching, but not the
expression of vimentin/GFP, could be blocked by inhibiting the activity of the
growth factor epimorphin (also known as syntaxin 2 - Mouse Genome
Informatics), which has previously been shown to be important for branching
during puberty. Furthermore, changing the geometry of the tubule to either a
curved or a bifurcated structure changed the position of the branches. This
suggests that locally secreted inhibitory morphogens, such as transforming
growth factor (TGF) β1, could influence branching. The researchers then
tested this hypothesis by constructing 3D computer-generated models of
diffusion gradients of morphogens that correctly predicted the sites of
branching. Thus, their findings suggest that the geometry of ducts and their
position relative to neighbouring ducts can control the sites of branching.
This interesting study lays the foundation for further work that could
incorporate other components of the mammary gland, such as adipocytes and
isolated TEBs. Using a different 3D culture model (organoids in Matrigel
culture), the Bissell laboratory have also shown that TGF is sufficient
to induce branching morphogenesis and that the duration of an active ERK1/2
(also known as MAPK3/1 - Mouse Genome Informatics) signal is crucial to this
process (Fata et al., 2007).
Thus, signal intensity and duration are also of crucial importance for
morphogenesis.
The secreted protein, milk fat globule-EGF factor 8 (MFGE8), which is
composed of two EGF repeats and two discoidin domains, is required for the
efficient removal of apoptotic mammary epithelial cells during
post-lactational regression. A role for MFGE8 in branching morphogenesis has
now recently been suggested because of the severely reduced branching and
thin, poorly developed TEBs that are observed in Mfge8-null mice
(Ensslin and Shur, 2007).
Interestingly, MFGE8 is expressed by both luminal and myoepithelial cells.
Lumen formation
Lumen formation is an essential process in embryogenesis. It is first
required for blastocyst formation and subsequently for ductal and tubule
development in a variety of organs, including the kidney and lung. A hollow
lumen can be formed in several ways. In the blastocyst, for example, cells die
to produce the luminal space. A similar mechanism has been proposed to produce
the ductal lumen during ductal morphogenesis of the mammary gland, as there is
evidence that apoptosis occurs within the body cells of the TEB
(Humphreys et al., 1996). The
apoptosis of these cells can be reduced by the overexpression of the
pro-survival BCL2 factor. More recently, studies using mice null for
Bim (also known as Bcl2l11), a BH3-only-domain regulator of
apoptosis, have revealed that BIM is essential for the removal of the surplus
epithelium in the duct (Mailleux et al.,
2007). In the absence of BIM-mediated cell death, these cells
switch to a more squamous cell type and subsequently die via a
caspase-3-independent mechanism. It will be interesting to determine whether
cell death and lumen formation is a caspase-regulated process or whether
alternative cell death mechanisms are utilised.
The occlusion of the mammary duct lumen occurs in mice deficient in the
axonal guidance molecules ROBO1 and SLIT2
(Strickland et al., 2006).
TEBs in Slit2-/- or Robo1-/- mice
display spaces between the cap and luminal/body cell layers, a phenotype
similar to that seen in netrin 1 (Ntn1)-null mice. Mammary glands in
Slit2-/-; Ntn1-/- mutant mice show not
only defects in TEB structure, but also severe ductal abnormalities that
suggest a peeling apart has occurred of the luminal epithelial and
myoepithelial cell layers. This notion is supported by in vitro assays that
show that Slit2-/-; Ntn1-/-
double-deficient mammary cells are severely compromised in their ability to
form bi-layered organoids. Furthermore, this deficiency is rescued by the
addition of purified SLIT2. These axonal guidance molecules might thus be of
crucial importance during the rapid growth and morphogenesis that occur during
puberty to maintain the integrity of the bi-layer.
The size of the lumen can also be affected by a variety of factors,
including the transcription factor CCAAT/enhancer binding protein (C/EBP)
β (also known as CEBPβ) because Cebpb-null virgin mice
exhibit cystic, enlarged mammary ducts with decreased secondary branching
(Seagroves et al., 1998).
These studies highlight the importance of using sophisticated genetically engineered models to address the role of growth/signalling factors in specific cell types and at specific developmental stages during mammary development. TEB structure is important also for mammary gland morphogenesis, a process that is also controlled by morphogenetic gradients of secreted factors.
|
During pregnancy, the mammary gland has to undergo further development and
morphological change to prepare for lactation
(Fig. 3D-F). Lactation requires
the production of specific cells that can synthesize and secrete copious
amounts of milk. The hormone progesterone (P) induces extensive side-branching
and alveologenesis and, in combination with PRL, promotes the differentiation
of the alveoli, which are the structures that synthesize and secrete milk
during lactation. In the absence of the P receptor (PR; also known as PGR -
Mouse Genome Informatics), side-branches and alveoli do not form
(Brisken et al., 1998). The PRL
receptor is also essential for alveolar differentiation
(Ormandy et al., 1997). The
alveolar luminal cells, together with the surrounding myoepithelial cells,
probably arise from bi-potent ductal progenitors, although there is evidence
that distinct duct-limited and lobule-limited progenitor cells exist in both
mouse and rat (Smith and Boulanger,
2003). There are at least two populations of slowly dividing
(label-retaining) cells in the ductal epithelium, which are either ER-positive
or ER-negative (Booth and Smith,
2006). In normal mammary glands of both mice and women,
ER-positive cells are not normally proliferative, but this association
is lost in breast cancer. It is likely that there are discrete factors that
specify and maintain differentiated alveolar cells during pregnancy.
Recent studies into mammary gland development have provided new insights into the signals that are necessary for progenitor cells to commit to the luminal lineage and for the maintenance of the differentiated state of luminal cells. By analogy with the differentiation paradigm of T helper (Th) cells, these findings have led to a model in which uncommitted transit-amplifying (TA) or progenitor cells are directed down either of two lineages based on the expression and response to Th1 or Th2 cell cytokines (as discussed in more detail below).
Progenitor cell regulation and lineage commitment during pregnancy
PR function is mediated through several factors, including the Wnt pathway.
Canonical Wnt signalling requires β-catenin and the suppression of this
pathway results in impaired alveolar development, suggesting that the
cross-talk that occurs between these pathways is important for mammary gland
development during pregnancy. This hypothesis was tested recently by crossing
a transgenic mouse model of constitutive β-catenin activity onto a
background of PR deficiency (Hiremath et
al., 2007). Surprising results were obtained from this study that
suggest that cells at the tips of ducts respond differently to the absence of
PR than do cells along the ducts. Precocious development of alveoli at the
ends of ducts was observed in response to constitutive β-catenin
expression in the complete absence of PR. However, in mice heterozygous for
Pr, precocious development was also seen along the lateral borders of
the ducts. The authors concluded that although PR signalling is required for
β-catenin responsiveness in the ducts, it is not required at the ductal
tips.
The prevailing paradigm, that steroid hormones and PRL are the principal
temporal regulators of mammary gland differentiation
(Hennighausen and Robinson,
2005), has been given an added perspective with the publication of
several papers demonstrating that signalling pathways that are normally
associated with lineage commitment in Th cells
(Khaled et al., 2007;
Asselin-Labat et al., 2007;
Kouros-Mehr et al., 2006) also
function in mammary lineage commitment.
|
|
).
Th2 cells are required for the response to parasitic infections, and once Th2
cells have been generated, commitment to this lineage is reinforced by the
secretion of the type-2 cytokines IL4, IL5 and IL13. This is associated with
changes in chromatin structure and with the transcriptional upregulation of
the Th2 transcription factors GATA3 and c-MAF. Conversely, Th1 cells are
produced in response to viral infections, and these cells secrete the type-1
cytokines IFN
and TNF, again reinforcing commitment to this lineage and
inducing the expression of the transcription factor T-Bet (also known as TBX21
- Mouse Genome Informatics) (Fig.
4).
A role for STAT6 and its upstream cytokines IL4 and IL13 in the expansion
of the luminal lineage has recently been demonstrated in mice deficient for
these pathway components (Khaled et al.,
2007). STAT6 phosphorylation in wild-type mice increases by day 5
of gestation, and this increase correlates with the expression of IL4R
and GATA3 in the epithelium followed by c-MAF induction later in pregnancy. In
the absence of STAT6, a 70% decrease in the number of alveoli is seen at day 5
of gestation and correlates with diminished epithelial cell proliferation.
Similar phenotypic results are seen in
Il4-/-/Il13-/- double-mutant mice
(Khaled et al., 2007), whereas
deletion of SOCS5, a negative regulator of STAT6, results in precocious
alveolar development. Importantly, mammary epithelial cells in culture secrete
the type-1 cytokines IL12a, IFN and TNF in the undifferentiated state,
but when induced to differentiate by a lactogenic hormone cocktail (PRL,
dexamethasone and insulin), they switch to secreting type-2 cytokines (IL4,
IL13, IL5). This unexpected discovery demonstrates a role for these immune
cell cytokines in epithelial cell fate and raises interesting questions about
the evolutionary origins of mammary and immune cells and the role of T cell
cytokines in the regulation of mammary progenitor cells.
The role for Th2 signalling factors in mammary development is further
highlighted in two similar studies in which Gata3 was conditionally
deleted at different stages of mammary development
(Asselin-Labat et al., 2007;
Kouros-Mehr et al., 2006).
Deletion of Gata3 in alveolar cells during pregnancy using the
Wap promoter to drive Cre expression in the epithelium during
pregnancy revealed that Gata3 deficiency leads to a block in alveolar
differentiation and to failed lactogenesis
(Asselin-Labat et al., 2007).
Similar results were obtained using a doxycycline-inducible Cre line
WAP-rtTA-Cre (Kouros-Mehr et al.,
2006), which allows Gata3 to be deleted at specific times
in the epithelium from late pregnancy onwards. The observation that the
apparently Gata3-null outgrowths contain a non-deleted Gata3
allele indicates that a selective pressure retains a functional Gata3
allele in the surviving outgrowths. The long-term administration of
doxycycline (14 days) results in additional defects in the luminal epithelium,
including the disruption of the ductal architecture and a marked detachment of
cells into the lumen that is associated with cell death.
Gata3 deficiency also results in the expansion of undifferentiated mammary epithelial cells, as revealed by immunostaining. This suggests that GATA3 might be required to maintain the quiescent state of differentiated luminal cells. This idea is supported by the observation that levels of GATA3 and proliferative behaviour are inversely correlated. Alternatively, it could be that GATA3 is required primarily to maintain the differentiated state and thus is not directly involved in cell cycle control.
Using FACS to isolate an epithelial subpopulation of cells
(CD29lo CD24+ CD61+), it was shown that this
luminal progenitor pool increases significantly in size in
Gata3-deficient mice, further supporting the notion that loss of
GATA3 blocks the differentiation of luminal progenitors
(Asselin-Labat et al., 2007).
The subsequent overexpression of GATA3 in these cells showed that expression
of the milk proteins β-casein and WAP could be induced even in the
absence of lactogenic hormone stimulation. This indicates that GATA3 promotes
the differentiation of lineage-restricted progenitor cells. Interestingly,
haploinsufficiency of Gata3 suggests that absolute levels of protein
are important for mammary gland development; indeed, humans with only one
functional copy of GATA3 have reduced levels of GATA3 protein and
deficiencies in Th2 responses, serum IgE levels, and often abnormalities of
the kidneys, thyroid gland and in hearing.
In Th2 cells, Gata3 is required for the continued expression of
Il4, Il5 and Il13, as their promoters have GATA3-binding
sites. It is interesting that phosphorylated STAT5 levels are reduced in
STAT6-deficient mammary glands, perhaps suggesting that levels of IL5, which
is known to activate STAT5, are reduced in the absence of STAT6. A hierarchy
of signalling from IL4/IL13 through STAT6 and GATA3 is thus an important
constituent of commitment to the alveolar luminal lineage (see
Fig. 5). The cytokine signals
that lie upstream of GATA3 in embryonic and pubertal mammary gland are yet to
be determined. It will also be important to identify and compare the signals
that lie downstream of GATA3 at different stages of mammary gland development,
as these findings could have important implications for breast cancer, not
least because GATA3 is highly expressed in breast cancers of the luminal A
subtype, which also express ER
(Sorlie et al., 2003).
An interesting counterpoint to the STAT6 and GATA3 stories is the role of
Notch signalling in lineage commitment. The Notch pathway is crucial also in
Th1/Th2 determination (Ansel et al.,
2006). Notch signalling is mediated by the DNA-binding protein
RBPJ
(in the absence of Notch, RBPJ represses Notch target genes
through the recruitment of a co-repressor complex). The binding of the Notch
intracellular domain (NICD) to RBPJ displaces these co-repressors from
RBPJ, resulting in the derepression of promoters that contain
RBPJ-binding sites. NICD then recruits several coactivators, including
mastermind-like protein (MAML) and CBP/p300 (CREBBP), and results in the
transcription of target genes, such as Hey1. The conditional deletion
of Rbpjk in mouse mammary epithelium during pregnancy results in the
expression and accumulation of p63 (also known as TRP63 - Mouse Genome
Informatics) in luminal cells, suppressing their luminal characteristics and
inducing more basal-like features, including the expression of keratin 5
(Buono et al., 2006). This
phenotype was also associated with increased proliferation rates, but growth
of the virgin mammary gland was not affected. Interestingly, there was a
transient amplification of keratin 6-positive luminal cells in these mice that
could reflect either a block in differentiation or a slower progression
through the lineage to fully differentiated luminal cells. Thus, the canonical
Notch pathway is required for the maintenance, but not for the establishment,
of luminal cells and is particularly important for the proliferation of these
cells during pregnancy. These studies provide new insights into the signals
necessary for the commitment to, and maintenance/differentiation of, the
luminal lineage, and are summarised in Fig.
6.
Finally, a role for both the Hh and Wnt pathways in stem cell
self-renewal/maintenance has been suggested by two recent studies. Using the
MMTV promoter to overexpress a constitutively active form of SMO (MMTV-SmoM2)
in limiting-dilution transplantation studies (in which a maximum of one stem
cell is transplanted per gland), Moraes et al. showed that there is a decrease
in the frequency of regenerative stem cells in MMTV-SmoM2 epithelium compared
with wild-type (Moraes et al.,
2007). In a similar limiting-dilution study, and based on the
expression of the putative stem cell markers keratin 6 and p21 (also known as
CDKN1A - Mouse Genome Informatics), ductal cells from mice deficient for the
Wnt co-receptor LRP5 have also been shown to exhibit little to no stem cell
activity (Lindvall et al.,
2006), suggesting that LRP5-mediated canonical signalling is
required for mammary stem cell activity.
Concluding remarks
This is an exciting time for mammary gland biologists. The identification of novel signalling pathways that regulate lineage commitment, the refinement of genetically modified mouse models, the development of stem cell enrichment procedures, and the ability to culture embryonic mammary glands and follow stem cells as they commit to different lineages will bring important new insights. The development of improved humanised mouse models and three-dimensional culture models will be important for future work.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
C.J.W. is supported by a BBSRC Research Development Fellowship and W.T.K. is funded by a BBSRC project grant.
REFERENCES
Ansel, K. M., Djuretic, I., Tanasa, B. and Rao, A. (2006). Regulation of Th2 differentiation and Il4 Locus accessibility. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 24,607 -656.[CrossRef][Medline]
Asselin-Labat, M. L., Sutherland, K. D., Barker, H., Thomas, R., Shackleton, M., Forrest, N. C., Hartley, L., Robb, L., Grosveld, F. G., van der Wees, J. et al. (2007). Gata-3 is an essential regulator of mammary-gland morphogenesis and luminal-cell differentiation. Nat. Cell Biol. 9,201 -209.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bocchinfuso, W. P., Lindzey, J. K., Hewitt, S. C., Clark, J. A.,
Myers, P. H., Cooper, R. and Korach, K. S. (2000). Induction
of mammary gland development in estrogen receptor- knockout mice.
Endocrinology 141,2982
-2994.
Booth, B. W. and Smith, G. H. (2006). Estrogen receptor-alpha and progesterone receptor are expressed in label-retaining mammary epithelial cells that divide asymmetrically and retain their template DNA strands. Breast Cancer Res. 8, R49.[CrossRef][Medline]
Brisken, C., Park, S., Vass, T., Lydon, J. P., O'Malley, B. W.
and Weinberg, R. A. (1998). A paracrine role for the
epithelial progesterone receptor in mammary gland development.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95,5076
-5081.
Buono, K. D., Robinson, G. W., Martin, C., Shi, S., Stanley, P., Tanigaki, K., Honjo, T. and Hennighausen, L. (2006). The canonical Notch/RBP-J signaling pathway controls the balance of cell lineages in mammary epithelium during pregnancy. Dev. Biol. 293,565 -580.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cho, K. W., Kim, J.-Y., Song, S.-J., Farrell, E., Eblaghie, M.
C., Kim, H.-J., Tickle, C. and Jung, H.-S. (2006). Molecular
interactions between Tbx3 and Bmp4 and a model for dorsoventral positioning of
mammary gland development. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
103,16788
-16793.
Chu, E. Y., Hens, J., Andl, T., Kairo, A., Yamaguchi, T. P.,
Brisken, C., Glick, A., Wysolmerski, J. J. and Millar, S. E.
(2004). Canonical WNT signaling promotes mammary placode
development and is essential for the initiation of mammary gland
morphogenesis. Development
131,4819
-4829.
Couldrey, C., Moitra, J., Vinson, C., Anver, M., Nagashima, K. and Green, J. (2002). Adipose tissue: a vital role in mammary gland development but not differentiation. Dev. Dyn. 223,459 -468.[CrossRef][Medline]
Eblaghie, M. C., Song, S. J., Kim, J. Y., Akita, K., Tickle, C. and Jung, H. S. (2004). Interactions between FGF and Wnt signals and Tbx3 gene expression in mammary gland initiation in mouse embryos. J. Anat. 205,1 -13.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ensslin, M. A. and Shur, B. D. (2007). The EGF
repeat and discoidin domain protein, SED1/MFG-E8, is required for mammary
gland branching morphogenesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA 104,2715
-2720.
Fata, J. E., Mori, H., Ewald, A. J., Zhang, H., Yao, E., Werb, Z. and Bissell, M. J. (2007). The MAPK(ERK-1,2) pathway integrates distinct and antagonistic signals from TGFalpha and FGF7 in morphogenesis of mouse mammary epithelium. Dev. Biol. 306,193 -207.[CrossRef][Medline]
Feng, Y., Mancha, D., Wagner, K.-U. and Khan, S. A.
(2007). Estrogen receptor-{alpha} expression in the mammary
epithelium is required for ductal and alveolar morphogenesis in mice.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
104,14718
-14723.
Foley, J., Dann, P., Hong, J., Cosgrove, J., Dreyer, B., Rimm, D., Dunbar, M., Philbrick, W. and Wysolmerski, J. (2001). Parathyroid hormone-related protein maintains mammary epithelial fate and triggers nipple skin differentiation during embryonic breast development. Development 128,513 -525.[Abstract]
Gritli-Linde, A., Hallberg, K., Harfe, B. D., Reyahi, A., Kannius-Janson, M., Nilsson, J., Cobourne, M. T., Sharpe, P. T., McMahon, A. P. and Linde, A. (2007). Abnormal hair development and apparent follicular transformation to mammary gland in the absence of Hedgehog signaling. Dev. Cell 12,99 -112.[CrossRef][Medline]
Grossl, N. A. (2000). Supernumerary breast tissue: historical perspectives and clinical features. South Med. J. 93,29 -32.[Medline]
Hatsell, S. J. and Cowin, P. (2006).
Gli3-mediated repression of hedgehog targets is required for normal mammary
gland development. Development
133,3661
-3670.
Hennighausen, L. and Robinson, G. W. (2005). Information networks in the mammary gland. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 6,715 -725.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hens, J. R. and Wysolmerski, J. J. (2005). Key stages of mammary gland development: molecular mechanisms involved in the formation of the embryonic mammary gland. Breast Cancer Res. 7,220 -224.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hens, J. R., Dann, P., Zhang, J. P., Harris, S., Robinson, G. W.
and Wysolmerski, J. (2007). BMP4 and PTHrP interact to
stimulate ductal outgrowth during embryonic mammary development and to inhibit
hair follicle induction. Development
134,1221
-1230.
Hiremath, M., Lydon, J. P. and Cowin, P.
(2007). The pattern of β-catenin responsiveness within the
mammary gland is regulated by progesterone receptor.
Development 134,3703
-3712.
Hooper, J. E. and Scott, M. P. (2005). Communicating with Hedgehogs. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 6,306 -317.[CrossRef][Medline]
Howard, B. A. and Gusterson, B. (2000). The characterization of a mouse mutant that displays abnormal mammary gland development. Mamm. Genome 11,234 -237.[CrossRef][Medline]
Howard, B., Panchal, H., McCarthy, A. and Ashworth, A.
(2005). Identification of the scaramanga gene implicates
Neuregulin3 in mammary gland specification. Genes Dev.
19,2078
-2090.
Humphreys, R. C., Krajewska, M., Krnacik, S., Jaeger, R., Weiher, H., Krajewski, S., Reed, J. C. and Rosen, J. M. (1996). Apoptosis in the terminal endbud of the murine mammary gland: a mechanism of ductal morphogenesis. Development 122,4013 -4022.[Abstract]
Ingham, P. W. and McMahon, A. P. (2001).
Hedgehog signaling in animal development: paradigms and principles.
Genes Dev. 15,3059
-3087.
Khaled, W. T., Read, E. K. C., Nicholson, S. E., Baxter, F. O.,
Brennan, A. J., Came, P. J., Sprigg, N., McKenzie, A. N. J. and Watson, C.
J. (2007). The IL-4/IL-13/Stat6 signalling pathway promotes
luminal mammary epithelial cell development.
Development 134,2739
-2750.
Kouros-Mehr, H., Slorach, E. M., Sternlicht, M. D. and Werb, Z. (2006). GATA-3 maintains the differentiation of the luminal cell fate in the mammary gland. Cell 127,1041 -1055.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lindvall, C., Evans, N. C., Zylstra, C. R., Li, Y., Alexander,
C. M. and Williams, B. O. (2006). The Wnt signaling receptor
Lrp5 is required for mammary ductal stem cell activity and Wnt1-induced
tumorigenesis. J. Biol. Chem.
281,35081
-35087.
Mailleux, A. A., Spencer-Dene, B., Dillon, C., Ndiaye, D.,
Savona-Baron, C., Itoh, N., Kato, S., Dickson, C., Thiery, J. P. and Bellusci,
S. (2002). Role of FGF10/FGFR2b signaling during mammary
gland development in the mouse embryo. Development
129, 53-60.
Mailleux, A. A., Overholtzer, M., Schmelzle, T., Bouillet, P., Strasser, A. and Brugge, J. S. (2007). BIM regulates apoptosis during mammary ductal morphogenesis, and its absence reveals alternative cell death mechanisms. Dev. Cell 12,221 -234.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mallepell, S., Krust, A., Chambon, P. and Brisken, C.
(2006). Paracrine signaling through the epithelial estrogen
receptor is required for proliferation and morphogenesis in the mammary gland.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
103,2196
-2201.
Moraes, R. C., Zhang, X., Harrington, N., Fung, J. Y., Wu, M.
F., Hilsenbeck, S. G., Allred, D. C. and Lewis, M. T. (2007).
Constitutive activation of smoothened (SMO) in mammary glands of transgenic
mice leads to increased proliferation, altered differentiation and ductal
dysplasia. Development
134,1231
-1242.
Nelson, C. M., VanDuijn, M. M., Inman, J. L., Fletcher, D. A.
and Bissell, M. J. (2006). Tissue geometry determines sites
of mammary branching morphogenesis in organotypic cultures.
Science 314,298
-300.
Oftedal, O. T. (2002). The origin of lactation as a water source for parchment-shelled eggs. J. Mammary Gland Biol. Neoplasia 7,253 -266.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ormandy, C. J., Camus, A., Barra, J., Damotte, D., Lucas, B.,
Buteau, H., Edery, M., Brousse, N., Babinet, C., Binart, N. et al.
(1997). Null mutation of the prolactin receptor gene produces
multiple reproductive defects in the mouse. Genes Dev.
11,167
-178.
Peaker, M. (2002). The mammary gland in mammalian evolution: a brief commentary on some of the concepts. J. Mammary Gland Biol. Neoplasia 3,347 -353.
Sakakura, T., Kusano, I., Kusakabe, M., Inaguma, Y. and Nishizuka, Y. (1987). Biology of mammary fat pad in fetal mouse: capacity to support development of various fetal epithelia in vivo. Development 100,421 -430.[Abstract]
Satokata, I., Ma, L., Ohshima, H., Bei, M., Woo, I., Nishizawa, K., Maeda, T., Takano, Y., Uchiyama, M., Heaney, S. et al. (2000). Msx2 deficiency in mice causes pleiotropic defects in bone growth and ectodermal organ formation. Nat. Genet. 24,391 -395.[CrossRef][Medline]
Seagroves, T. N., Krnacik, S., Raught, B., Gay, J.,
Burgess-Beusse, B., Darlington, G. J. and Rosen, J. M.
(1998). C/EBPbeta, but not C/EBPalpha, is essential for ductal
morphogenesis, lobuloalveolar proliferation, and functional differentiation in
the mouse mammary gland. Genes Dev.
12,1917
-1928.
Smith, G. H. and Boulanger, C. A. (2003). Mammary epithelial stem cells: transplantation and self-renewal analysis. Cell Prolif. 36,Suppl. 1 , 3-15.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sorlie, T., Tibshirani, R., Parker, J., Hastie, T., Marron, J.
S., Nobel, A., Deng, S., Johnsen, H., Pesich, R., Geisler, S. et al.
(2003). Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in
independent gene expression data sets. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA 100,8418
-8423.
Sternlicht, M. D., Kouros-Mehr, H., Lu, P. and Werb, Z. (2006). Hormonal and local control of mammary branching morphogenesis. Differentiation 74,365 -381.[CrossRef][Medline]
Strickland, P., Shin, G. C., Plump, A., Tessier-Lavigne, M. and
Hinck, L. (2006). Slit2 and netrin 1 act synergistically as
adhesive cues to generate tubular bi-layers during ductal morphogenesis.
Development 133,823
-832.
van Genderen, C., Okamura, R. M., Farinas, I., Quo, R. G.,
Parslow, T. G., Bruhn, L. and Grosschedl, R. (1994).
Development of several organs that require inductive epithelial-mesenchymal
interactions is impaired in LEF-1-deficient mice. Genes
Dev. 8,2691
-2703.
Veltmaat, J. M., Mailleua, A. A., Thiery, J. P. and Bellusci, S. (2003). Mouse embryonic mammogenesis as a model for the molecular regulation of pattern formation. Differentiation 71,1 -17.[CrossRef][Medline]
Veltmaat, J. M., Van Veelen, W., Thiery, J. P. and Bellusci, S. (2004). Identification of the mammary line in mouse by Wnt10b expression. Dev. Dyn. 229,349 -356.[CrossRef][Medline]
Veltmaat, J. M., Veltmaat, J. M., Relaix, F., Le, L. T.,
Kratochwil, K., Sala, F. G., van Veelen, W., Rice, R., Spencer-Dene, B.,
Mailleux, A. A. et al. (2006). Gli3-mediated somitic Fgf10
expression gradients are required for the induction and patterning of mammary
epithelium along the embryonic axes. Development
133,2325
-2335.
Wu, P., Hou, L., Plikus, M., Hughes, M., Scehnet, J., Suksaweang, S., Widelitz, R., Jiang, T. X. and Chuong, C. M. (2004). Evo-Devo of amniote integuments and appendages. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 48,249 -270.[CrossRef][Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  H. L. LaMarca and J. M. Rosen Hormones and Mammary Cell Fate--What Will I Become When I Grow Up? Endocrinology, September 1, 2008; 149(9): 4317 - 4321. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
