Osteoclast Fusion is Based on Heterogeneity Between Fusion Partners

Bone-resorbing osteoclasts are formed through fusion of mononucleated precursors. Their choice of partners during the fusion process remains unclear. We hypothesized that osteoclasts are selective in their choice of fusion partner and that this selectivity is based on heterogeneity among the cells with respect to their maturation stage and their expression and cellular organization of fusion factors. Support for this hypothesis was found from immunofluorescence staining of the osteoclast fusion factors CD47, dendritic cell-specific transmembrane protein (DC-STAMP), and syncytin-1. These stainings revealed heterogeneous localization patterns of all three factors within a given culture of osteoclasts. CD47 was found to be localized primarily in small osteoclasts and preosteoclasts, which were also positive for DC-STAMP but negative for cathepsin K expression. A role of CD47 in the early osteoclast fusion steps was also suggested from experiments with a CD47 blocking antibody, which resulted in an inhibition of the fusion of small osteoclasts. Conversely, blocking of connexin 43 affected the fusion of larger osteoclasts with four or more nuclei. The suggestion that different fusion factors function at different stages of osteoclast fusion supports the idea of heterogeneity in the osteoclast population; our results suggest that osteoclast fusion is indeed based on heterogeneity. Considering the in vivo environment in which osteoclasts develop and fuse, our findings seem very applicable and provide novel, important insight into key issues in bone and fusion research

Efficient generation of osteoclasts from human induced pluripotent stem cells and functional investigations of lethal CLCN7‐related osteopetrosis

Human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) hold great potential for modeling human diseases and the development of innovative therapeutic approaches. Here, we report on a novel, simplified differentiation method for forming functional osteoclasts from hiPSCs. The three-step protocol starts with embryoid body formation, followed by hematopoietic specification, and finally osteoclast differentiation. We observed continuous production of monocyte-like cells over a period of up to 9 weeks, generating sufficient material for several osteoclast differentiations. The analysis of stage-specific gene and surface marker expression proved mesodermal priming, the presence of monocyte-like cells, and of terminally differentiated multinucleated osteoclasts, able to form resorption pits and trenches on bone and dentine in vitro. In comparison to peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC)-derived osteoclasts hiPSC-derived osteoclasts were larger and contained a higher number of nuclei. Detailed functional studies on the resorption behavior of hiPSC-osteoclasts indicated a trend towards forming more trenches than pits and an increase in pseudoresorption. We used hiPSCs from an autosomal recessive osteopetrosis (ARO) patient (BIHi002-A, ARO hiPSCs) with compound heterozygous missense mutations p.(G292E) and p.(R403Q) in CLCN7, coding for the Cl-/H+-exchanger ClC-7, for functional investigations. The patient's leading clinical feature was a brain malformation due to defective neuronal migration. Mutant ClC-7 displayed residual expression and retained lysosomal co-localization with OSTM1, the gene coding for the osteopetrosis-associated transmembrane protein 1, but only ClC-7 harboring the mutation p.(R403Q) gave strongly reduced ion currents. An increased autophagic flux in spite of unchanged lysosomal pH was evident in undifferentiated ARO hiPSCs. ARO hiPSC-derived osteoclasts showed an increased size compared to hiPSCs of healthy donors. They were not able to resorb bone, underlining a loss-of-function effect of the mutations. In summary, we developed a highly reproducible, straightforward hiPSC-osteoclast differentiation protocol. We demonstrated that osteoclasts differentiated from ARO hiPSCs can be used as a disease model for ARO and potentially also other osteoclast-related diseases. (c) 2021 The Authors. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR)

Potential of Resveratrol Analogues as Antagonists of Osteoclasts and Promoters of Osteoblasts

The plant phytoalexin resveratrol was previously demonstrated to inhibit the differentiation and bone resorbing activity of osteoclasts, to promote the formation of osteoblasts from mesenchymal precursors in cultures, and inhibit myeloma cell proliferation, when used at high concentrations. In the current study, we screened five structurally modified resveratrol analogues for their ability to modify the differentiation of osteoclasts and osteoblasts and proliferation of myeloma cells. Compared to resveratrol, analogues showed an up to 5,000-fold increased potency to inhibit osteoclast differentiation. To a lesser extent, resveratrol analogues also promoted osteoblast maturation. However, they did not antagonize the proliferation of myeloma cells. The potency of the best-performing candidate in vitro was tested in vivo in an ovariectomy-induced model of osteoporosis, but an effect on bone loss could not be detected. Based on their powerful antiresorptive activity in vitro, resveratrol analogues might be attractive modulators of bone remodeling. However, further studies are required to establish their efficacy in vivo

Osteoclast Fusion: Physiological Regulation of Multinucleation through Heterogeneity—Potential Implications for Drug Sensitivity

Classically, osteoclast fusion consists of four basic steps: (1) attraction/migration, (2) recognition, (3) cell–cell adhesion, and (4) membrane fusion. In theory, this sounds like a straightforward simple linear process. However, it is not. Osteoclast fusion has to take place in a well-coordinated manner—something that is not simple. In vivo, the complex regulation of osteoclast formation takes place within the bone marrow—in time and space. The present review will focus on considering osteoclast fusion in the context of physiology and pathology. Special attention is given to: (1) regulation of osteoclast fusion in vivo, (2) heterogeneity of osteoclast fusion partners, (3) regulation of multi-nucleation, (4) implications for physiology and pathology, and (5) implications for drug sensitivity and side effects. The review will emphasize that more attention should be given to the human in vivo reality when interpreting the impact of in vitro and animal studies. This should be done in order to improve our understanding of human physiology and pathology, as well as to improve anti-resorptive treatment and reduce side effects