The RNA Binding Protein IMP1 Promotes Survival and Alters Mucus Maturation Enzyme <i>Qsox1</i> in a Mouse Model of Necrotizing Enterocolitis
Background: In the United States over 10% of all neonates are born premature (less than 37 weeks gestational age) and many face complications, such as necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). NEC is the most deadly gastrointestinal disease in preterm neonates with up to 50% mortality. Survivors face life-long complications. NEC is a multifactorial disease caused by 1) intestinal immaturity, including a poorly developed physical barrier between luminal contents and the rest of the body; 2) an exaggerated immune response; and 3) intestinal dysbiosis, which together can result in irreparable damage to the intestine. Since there is no cure for NEC, prevention is the best strategy. Enhancing our understanding of intestinal epithelial cell (IEC) barrier regulation during early development will provide novel therapeutic targets to prevent NEC. Published evidence indicates roles for the RNA-binding protein insulin-like growth factor 2 mRNA binding protein 1 (IMP1) in intestinal development, barrier function, and intestinal repair. Sequencing data from the inflamed tissue of a NEC patient indicates that IMP1 is down-regulated relative to uninflamed tissue. Notably, roles for IMP1 in NEC are not defined. Emerging evidence suggests that mucus complexity, governed by enzymes such as Qsox1, impacts intestinal barrier function and inflammation susceptibility. This study aimed to define the role of IMP1 in NEC pathogenesis using a model of NEC-like intestinal injury in mice with IEC-specific Imp1 overexpression or Imp1 loss. Hypothesis: IMP1 expression is protective in a mouse model of NEC-like intestinal injury. Methods: All studies are OHSU IACUC-approved. This study used: wild-type (WT, control), Imp1 IEC-knockout ( VillinCre;Imp1 fl/fl ; Imp1 Δ IEC ), and Imp1 IEC-overexpression ( VillinCre;lslFLAG-Imp1 OE ; Imp1 IEC-OE ) mice. At post-natal day 4 mice of both sexes were randomly assigned to control or NEC groups. The control mice remained with the dam. NEC was induced with the well-established experimental NEC-like intestinal injury model. Mice were separated from the dam and maintained for 72 hours in an incubator. Pups were gavage-fed NEC formula (mixture of infant formula, puppy replacer, 1:10 dilution of bacteria derived from a premature infant with NEC, and 2.5 ug/g body weight of lipopolysaccharide) every 3 hours from 7am-10pm. Twice daily the pups were exposed to hypoxia (5% oxygen). After 72 hours, tissue was collected for histology, gene, and protein expression analyses. Survival was assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves. Total RNA sequencing was performed using the NovaSeq S4. The mucus and tissue barrier were evaluated by immunofluorescence staining for mucin 2, mucus lectins, occludin, and E-cadherin. Statistical analyses were performed using 2-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test for multiple comparisons and the Mantel-Cox log-rank test for survival analysis. Results: The NEC model induces pneumatosis, histological damage, and a significant up-regulation of inflammatory cytokine gene expression Lcn2 and Il1 b in all three genotypes, p <0.05, n=5-15. Despite damage, Imp1 IEC-OE mice survive 2-times better than WT or Imp1 Δ IEC mice (survival for WT: 27.8%, n=36; Imp1 Δ IEC : 31.6%, n=19; Imp1 IEC-OE : 60%, n=10 mice, p<0.05). RNA-sequencing data indicates that Imp1 IEC-OE mice significantly up-regulate expression of the disulfide catalyst Qsox1 (In NEC: WT: 1077 ± 94.6, Imp1 Δ IEC : 1017 ± 12.75, Imp1 IEC-OE : 1446 ± 45.73, p=0.003 vs WT and p=0.002 vs Imp1 Δ IEC ). Conclusion: Our data suggest that Imp1 expression enhances survival in a mouse model of NEC and promotes expression of a disulfide catalyst Qsox1, which may promote mucus maturation and protect the neonatal small intestine. NIH K01DK129401, R01HD097367, the Gerber Foundation, the OHSU Knight Cancer Institute This abstract was presented at the American Physiology Summit 2025 and is only available in HTML format. There is no downloadable file or PDF version. The Physiology editorial board was not involved in the peer review process.
Read more