Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) were recently shown to migrate to injured tissues when transplanted systemically. The mechanisms underlying the migration and homing of these cells is, however, unclear. In this study, we examine the role of CD44 and its major ligand, hyaluronic acid, in the trafficking of intravenously injected MSC in the glycerol-induced mouse model of acute renal failure (ARF). In vitro, hyaluronic acid promoted a dose-dependent migration of the stem cells that was inhibited by an anti-CD44 blocking monoclonal antibody. In vivo, stem cells injected into mice with ARF migrated to the injured kidney where hyaluronic acid expression was increased. Their presence correlated with morphological and functional recovery. Renal localization of the MSC was blocked by pre-incubation with the CD44 blocking antibody or by soluble hyaluronic acid. Stem cells derived from CD44 knockout mice did not localize to the injured kidney and did not accelerate morphological or functional recovery. Reconstitution by transfection of CD44 knockout stem cells with cDNA encoding wild-type CD44, but not a loss of function CD44 unable to bind hyaluronic acid, restored in vitro migration and in vivo localization of the cells to injured kidneys. We suggest that CD44 and hyaluronic acid interactions recruit exogenous MSC to injured renal tissue and enhance renal regeneration. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) were recently shown to migrate to injured tissues when transplanted systemically. The mechanisms underlying the migration and homing of these cells is, however, unclear. In this study, we examine the role of CD44 and its major ligand, hyaluronic acid, in the trafficking of intravenously injected MSC in the glycerol-induced mouse model of acute renal failure (ARF). In vitro, hyaluronic acid promoted a dose-dependent migration of the stem cells that was inhibited by an anti-CD44 blocking monoclonal antibody. In vivo, stem cells injected into mice with ARF migrated to the injured kidney where hyaluronic acid expression was increased. Their presence correlated with morphological and functional recovery. Renal localization of the MSC was blocked by pre-incubation with the CD44 blocking antibody or by soluble hyaluronic acid. Stem cells derived from CD44 knockout mice did not localize to the injured kidney and did not accelerate morphological or functional recovery. Reconstitution by transfection of CD44 knockout stem cells with cDNA encoding wild-type CD44, but not a loss of function CD44 unable to bind hyaluronic acid, restored in vitro migration and in vivo localization of the cells to injured kidneys. We suggest that CD44 and hyaluronic acid interactions recruit exogenous MSC to injured renal tissue and enhance renal regeneration. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) are multipotent cells present in bone marrow that can differentiate in vitro into adipocytic, chondrocytic, and osteocytic lineages.1Pittenger M.F. Mackay A.M. Beck S.C. et al.Multilineage potential of adult human mesenchymal stem cells.Science. 1999; 284: 143-147Crossref PubMed Scopus (17040) Google ScholarIn vivo MSC have been observed not only to regenerate tissues of mesenchymal lineages2Crevensten G. Walsh A.J. Ananthakrishnan D. et al.Intervertebral disc cell therapy for regeneration: mesenchymal stem cell implantation in rat intervertebral discs.Ann Biomed Eng. 2004; 32: 430-434Crossref PubMed Scopus (271) Google Scholar, 3Chamberlain J.R. Schwarze U. Wang P.R. et al.Gene targeting in stem cells from individuals with osteogenesis imperfecta.Science. 2004; 303: 1198-1201Crossref PubMed Scopus (243) Google Scholar, 4Grinnemo K.H. Mansson A. Dellgren G. et al.Xenoreactivity and engraftment of human mesenchymal stem cells transplanted into infarcted rat myocardium.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004; 127: 1293-1300Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (241) Google Scholar but also to differentiate into neurons5Sugaya K. Potential use of stem cells in neuroreplacement therapies for neurodegenerative diseases.Int Rev Cytol. 2003; 228: 1-30Crossref PubMed Scopus (53) Google Scholar and epithelial cells.6Chapel A. Bertho J.M. Bensidhoum M. et al.Mesenchymal stem cells home to injured tissues when co-infused with hematopoietic cells to treat a radiation-induced multi-organ failure syndrome.J Gene Med. 2003; 5: 1028-1038Crossref PubMed Scopus (349) Google Scholar, 7Ortiz L.A. Gambelli F. McBride C. et al.Mesenchymal stem cell engraftment in lung is enhanced in response to bleomycin exposure and ameliorates its fibrotic effects.Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003; 100: 8407-8411Crossref PubMed Scopus (1145) Google Scholar, 8Herrera M.B. Bussolati B. Bruno S. et al.Mesenchymal stem cells contribute to the renal repair of acute tubular epithelial injury.Int J Mol Med. 2004; 14: 1035-1041PubMed Google Scholar, 9Morigi M. Imberti B. Zoja C. et al.Mesenchymal stem cells are renotropic, helping to repair the kidney and improve function in acute renal failure.J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004; 15: 1794-1804Crossref PubMed Scopus (637) Google Scholar Acute renal failure (ARF) associated with nephrotoxic and ischemic injury is most often the consequence of acute tubular necrosis.10Thadhani R. Pascual M. Bonventre J.V. et al.Acute renal failure.N Engl J Med. 1996; 334: 1448-1460Crossref PubMed Scopus (1433) Google Scholar The recovery of renal function following ARF depends on appropriate replacement of necrotic tubular cells with functional tubular epithelium. Key players in kidney regeneration include not only mature proliferating renal cells but also, according to recent reports, stem cells from local pools as well as from the circulation.11Bussolati B. Bruno S. Grange C. et al.Isolation of renal progenitor cells from adult human kidney.Am J Pathol. 2005; 166: 545-555Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (499) Google Scholar, 12Gupta S. Verfaillie C. Chmielewski D. et al.A role for extrarenal cells in the regeneration following acute renal failure.Kidney Int. 2002; 62: 1285-1290Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar, 13Poulsom R. Alison M.R. Cook T. et al.Bone marrow stem cells contribute to healing of the kidney.J Am Soc Nephrol. 2003; 14: S48-54Crossref PubMed Google Scholar Recent studies in mouse models of ARF have demonstrated that MSC display the ability to localize in damaged kidney promoting both morphological and functional recovery.8Herrera M.B. Bussolati B. Bruno S. et al.Mesenchymal stem cells contribute to the renal repair of acute tubular epithelial injury.Int J Mol Med. 2004; 14: 1035-1041PubMed Google Scholar,9Morigi M. Imberti B. Zoja C. et al.Mesenchymal stem cells are renotropic, helping to repair the kidney and improve function in acute renal failure.J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004; 15: 1794-1804Crossref PubMed Scopus (637) Google Scholar However, to date, mechanisms that underlie MSC homing to injured kidney have not been elucidated. Tissue injury and inflammation are accompanied by increased stromal production of the glycosaminoglycan hyaluronan (HA), which in addition to other functions, helps to create a low resistance highly hydrated extracellular matrix that may facilitate local cellular trafficking.14Hallgren R. Gerdin B. Tufveson G. et al.Hyaluronic acid accumulation and redistribution in rejecting rat kidney graft. Relationship to the transplantation edema.J Exp Med. 1990; 171: 2063-2076Crossref PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar HA is also abundantly produced in the bone marrow by both stroma and hematopoietic cells15Minguell J.J. Tavassoli M. Proteoglycan synthesis by hematopoietic progenitor cells.Blood. 1989; 73: 1821-1827Crossref PubMed Google Scholar,16Wight T.N. Kinsella M.G. Keating A. et al.Proteoglycans in human long-term bone marrow cultures: biochemical and ultrastructural analyses.Blood. 1986; 67: 1333-1343Crossref PubMed Google Scholar and it is implicated in the regulation of cell–cell and cell–matrix adhesion as well as in cell proliferation and survival.17Fraser J.R. Laurent T.C. Laurent U.B. et al.Hyaluronan: its nature, distribution, functions and turnover.J Intern Med. 1997; 242: 27-33Crossref PubMed Scopus (1321) Google Scholar,18Toole B.P. Wight T.N. Tammi M.I. Hyaluronan-cell interactions in cancer and vascular disease.J Biol Chem. 2002; 277: 4593-4596Crossref PubMed Scopus (414) Google Scholar The proteoglycan CD44 is the principal cell surface receptor for HA.19Aruffo A. Stamenkovic I. Melnick M. et al.CD44 is the principal cell surface receptor for hyaluronate.Cell. 1990; 61: 1303-1313Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2071) Google Scholar,20Naor D. Nedvetzki S. Golan I. et al.CD44 in cancer.Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2002; 39: 527-579Crossref PubMed Scopus (414) Google Scholar CD44 is a multifunctional receptor, whose standard isoform is expressed in hematopoietic stem cells21Stamenkovic I. Aruffo A. Amiot M. et al.The hematopoietic and epithelial forms of CD44 are distinct polypeptides with different adhesion potentials for hyaluronate-bearing cells.EMBO J. 1991; 10: 343-348Crossref PubMed Scopus (513) Google Scholar and MSC.22Conget P.A. Minguell J.J. Phenotypical and functional properties of human bone marrow mesenchymal progenitor cells.J Cell Physiol. 1999; 181: 67-73Crossref PubMed Scopus (655) Google Scholar CD44 has numerous functions, including the regulation of cell proliferation, differentiation, survival, migration into tissues,20Naor D. Nedvetzki S. Golan I. et al.CD44 in cancer.Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2002; 39: 527-579Crossref PubMed Scopus (414) Google Scholar,21Stamenkovic I. Aruffo A. Amiot M. et al.The hematopoietic and epithelial forms of CD44 are distinct polypeptides with different adhesion potentials for hyaluronate-bearing cells.EMBO J. 1991; 10: 343-348Crossref PubMed Scopus (513) Google Scholar and hematopoietic progenitor trafficking to the bone marrow and spleen.23Avigdor A. Goichberg P. Shivtiel S. et al.CD44 and hyaluronic acid cooperate with SDF-1 in the trafficking of human CD34+ stem/progenitor cells to bone marrow.Blood. 2004; 103: 2981-2989Crossref PubMed Scopus (424) Google Scholar, 24Vermeulen M. Le Pesteur F. Gagnerault M.C. et al.Role of adhesion molecules in the homing and mobilization of murine hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells.Blood. 1998; 92: 894-900Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 25Khaldoyanidi S. Denzel A. Zoller M. Requirement for CD44 in proliferation and homing of hematopoietic precursor cells.J Leukoc Biol. 1996; 60: 579-592PubMed Google Scholar Based on these observations, we addressed the role of CD44 receptor and its ligand HA in the recruitment of injected MSC in a mouse model of glycerol-induced ARF. MSC, purified from murine bone marrow, express CD44 (Figure 1a). Therefore, we addressed the possibility that the CD44 ligand HA might have a chemotactic effect on MSC and promote their migration in vitro. Consistent with this notion, addition of soluble HA to the lower compartment of a transwell stimulated migration of MSC through polycarbonate filters toward HA (Figure 1b–d). To discriminate between the chemotactic and the chemokinetic effect of HA on MSC migration, studies were performed in the presence of HA on both sides of the Boyden chamber (Table 1). The migratory effect of HA was related to its gradient, suggesting chemotaxis rather than chemokinesis. Preincubation of MSC with a blocking anti-CD44 monoclonal antibody (mAb) (clone KM114) significantly inhibited HA-induced MSC migration (Figure 1b and e).Table 1Gradient-dependent analysis of HA-induced migrationUpper chamberLower chamberVehicle20 μg/ml HA200 μg/ml HAVehicle13.3±1.5322.7±11.5912.3±2.5220 μg/ml HA42.3±1.7824±4.3610.7±2.08200 μg/ml HA44.3±3.7921.3±1.5313.7±2.52Migration of MSC was performed in Boyden chambers by adding HA in the upper and/or lower compartments to establish positive, negative, absent gradient across the filter barrier. Open table in a new tab Migration of MSC was performed in Boyden chambers by adding HA in the upper and/or lower compartments to establish positive, negative, absent gradient across the filter barrier. Previous work has shown that in normal renal tissue, HA is detectable predominantly in the medulla and hardly if at all in the cortex.26Girard N. Delpech A. Delpech B. Characterization of hyaluronic acid on tissue sections with hyalurectin.Histochem Cytochem. 1986; 34: 539-541Crossref PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar We therefore assessed HA expression in injured renal tissue following glycerol-induced ARF. Intramuscular (i.m.) injection of glycerol induces myolysis and hemolysis causing toxic and ischemic tubular injury.8Herrera M.B. Bussolati B. Bruno S. et al.Mesenchymal stem cells contribute to the renal repair of acute tubular epithelial injury.Int J Mol Med. 2004; 14: 1035-1041PubMed Google Scholar Three days after glycerol injection, we observed marked tubular epithelial injury, whereas control mice injected with saline alone displayed no obvious histological change.8Herrera M.B. Bussolati B. Bruno S. et al.Mesenchymal stem cells contribute to the renal repair of acute tubular epithelial injury.Int J Mol Med. 2004; 14: 1035-1041PubMed Google Scholar The lesions observed in mice with ARF included tubular hyaline cast formation, vacuolization, and widespread necrosis of proximal and distal tubular epithelium. Proximal tubules showed cytoplasmic vacuolization, swelling and disorganization of mitochondria, and loss of the brush border. The injured cortical renal tissue contained abundant HA deposits along the tubular basement membrane, whereas no HA was detectable in normal controls (Figure 2a and b). In this study, we investigated whether CD44/HA interaction is instrumental in the localization of exogenous MSC in the injured kidneys. For this purpose, we obtained and purified MSC from the bone marrow of CD44-/- and CD44+ mice. CD44-/--MSC (at the fourth passage) expressed the common mesenchymal markers CD105, CD29, CD73 (not shown) similarly to CD44+-MSC, but not CD44 (Figure 2c and d), as assessed by cytofluorimetric analysis. In addition, MSC from CD44-/- and CD44+ mice expressed the stem cell marker Thy1 (CD90), but not the leukocyte marker CD45 and CD14 or KDR, a marker of circulating endothelial progenitor cells (data not shown). Absence of CD34 expression indicated that no contaminating hematopoietic stem cells were present. No functional differences between CD44-/- and CD44+-MSC were observed in terms of their differentiation potential toward adipocytic (Figure 2e and f) and osteogenic lineages (Figure 2g and h). However, the growth rate of CD44-/- cells was approximately half of that of wild-type CD44+-MSC (data not shown), consistently with the reported role of CD44 in cell proliferation.27Lakshman M. Subramaniam V. Jothy S. CD44 negatively regulates apoptosis in murine colonic epithelium via the mitochondrial pathway.Exp Mol Pathol. 2004; 76: 196-204Crossref PubMed Scopus (37) Google Scholar In the glycerol-induced model of acute renal injury, CD44+ or CD44-/--MSC were injected 3 days after glycerol administration. Twenty-four hours after injection, CD44+-MSC were detected within the renal cortex of mice with ARF by immunoperoxidase staining of carboxy-fluorescein diacetate, succinimidyl ester (CFSE)-labelled MSC, by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) detection of Y chromosome and by iron detection in iron-dextran-labelled MSC (Figures 3, 4 and 5). The labelled cells were observed within peritubular capillaries and the interstitial space (Figures 3c and d, 4b and c and 5b–d). Few cells were also detected in the glomeruli (Figures 4a and 5a). Very few labelled cells were observed within tubular epithelium (Figure 4d and 5e). No cells were detected in control mice without ARF injected with CD44+-MSC (Figure 3a and b). In mice with ARF injected with CD44-/--MSC, only rare cells could be detected within the renal cortex (Figure 3e and f, 4e and f, and 5f). The typical iron inclusions observed by electron microscopy (Figure 5b and c, insets) were absent in control ARF mice, suggesting that they were not due to uptake of iron due to hemolysis. Minimal localization of MSC was observed in the renal medulla (not shown), despite the constitutive presence of HA, suggesting that release of HA fragments by inflammation and of other factors produced by the injured tissue are required for MSC recruitment.Figure 4MSC detection by light microscopy in mice with glycerol-induced ARF by iron-dextran labelling 24 h after their injection. (a–d) Representative micrographs showing localization of CD44+-MSC in renal sections of a mouse with ARF. (a) The presence of iron-dextran-labelled CD44+-MSC in a glomerulus (g; arrow) and in peritubular capillaries (arrowheads). (b and c) The concentration of iron-dextran-labelled CD44+-MSC around severely damaged tubules containing protein casts. (c) Is a particular of panel (b) clearly showing the interstitial localization of labelled MSC. (e) Presence of an isolated iron-dextran-labelled CD44+-MSC (arrow) within a proximal tubule. (e and f) Absence or presence of a rare iron-dextran-labelled CD44-/--MSC (arrow) in renal sections of a mouse with ARF. The sections were stained with Prussian blue. Original magnification (a, d and e) × 400; (c) × 600; (b); and (f) × 250.View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload (PPT)Figure 5MSC detection by electron microscopy in mice with glycerol-induced ARF by iron-dextran labelling 24 h after their injection. (a–e) Representative micrographs showing localization of iron-dextran-labelled CD44+-MSC in renal ultrathin sections of a mouse with ARF observed by transmission electron microscopy. (a) shows the presence of a MSC within the lumen of a glomerular capillary. The arrow indicates the iron-dextran inclusion. (b–d) show the presence of iron-dextran-labelled CD44+-MSC in the peritubular capillaries (b and c) and in the interstitium. In (c), a cell adherent to the endothelial layer and a cell infiltrated in the subendothelial space are shown. Arrows indicate the iron inclusions. The insets in (b and c) show high magnification of the iron-dextran inclusions. (e) A cell containing iron-dextran inclusions (arrow) infiltrating a proximal tubule. (f) The absence of iron-dextran-labelled CD44-/--MSC in a renal section of a mouse with ARF. Original magnification × 6000; insets × 25 000.View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload (PPT) To further confirm the role of HA binding by CD44 in the early localization of MSC in the injured kidney, we performed reconstitution experiments by transfection of CD44-/--MSC with cDNAs encoding either functional wild-type CD44 or the CD44R41A mutant, that lacks the ability to bind the HA (CD44HMut)28Peach R.J. Hollenbaugh D. Stamenkovic I. et al.Identification of hyaluronic acid binding sites in the extracellular domain of CD44.J Cell Biol. 1993; 122: 257-264Crossref PubMed Scopus (314) Google Scholar (Figure 6). As expected, fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-labelled HA bound CD44+-MSC but not CD44-/--MSC (Figure 6a and b). Transfection of CD44-/--MSC with full-length CD44H (CD44H MSC) restored their ability to bind HA, whereas expression of CD44Hmut (CD44HMut MSC) failed to do so (Figure 6f and g), despite CD44 antigen expression, as assessed by immunofluorescence (Figure 6c–e). Migration assay showed that transfection with full-length CD44H, but not with CD44Hmut, restored chemotaxis to HA (Figure 6h), suggesting a functional reconstitution of CD44. As shown in Figure 7, the percentage of labelled MSC detected in the renal cortex 24 h after injection was significantly different in mice injected with CD44-/--MSC in respect to CD44+-MSC. Moreover, CD44H MSC but not CD44HMut MSC significantly localized in the injured kidneys (Figure 7a), suggesting that the binding of CD44 to HA is critical for MSC homing. The role of CD44 in MSC localization was further confirmed by the inhibition of MSC localization when pre-incubated with either an anti-CD44 blocking mAb or soluble HA (Figure 7b). Eight days after damage (5 days after MSC injection), an extensive recovery with regeneration of tubular epithelial cells and of the cell brush border was observed in mice injected with CD44+-MSC (Figure 8a). In contrast, mice injected with CD44-/--MSC displayed persistence of diffuse necrotic proximal and distal tubule injury (Figure 8c). At day 8, only scattered CD44+-MSC were present within the renal interstitium, whereas the CFSE-labelled and chromosome Y-labelled cells were mainly detectable within the proximal tubules (Figure 8b). The number of CFSE-positive MSC counted in immunoperoxidase-stained sections was 2.2±0.4% in respect to the total number of counted nuclei. No CD44-/--MSC were detectable at day 8 (Figure 8d). The morphologic recovery induced by administration of CD44+-MSC was accompanied by recovery of the renal function. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels that peaked at day 3 following ARF induction were significantly reduced at day 8 in the animals that had received CD44+-MSC (Figure 9a). In contrast, CD44-/--MSC injection did not significantly affect the BUN levels, that persisted elevated at day 8 as in the untreated mice (Figure 9a). To evaluate whether the expression of CD44 affects the severity and the recovery of glycerol-induced ARF, we compared wild-type and CD44-/- mice. As shown by BUN levels, the severity of ARF was significantly lower in CD44-/-. However, the increased BUN persisted at day 8, suggesting that the absence of recruitment of inflammatory cells in CD44-/- mice protected mice from glycerol-induced ARF (Figure 9b), as previously described for ischemic injury.29Rouschop K.M.A. Roelofs J.J.T.H. Claessen N. et al.Protection against renal ischemia reperfusion injury by CD44 disruption.J Am Soc Nephrol. 2005; 16: 2034-2043Crossref PubMed Scopus (93) Google Scholar However, in these animals, a significant recovery from day 3 to day 8 was not observed as also inferred by histological analysis (not shown).Figure 9Evaluation of renal function in wild-type mice injected with CD44+ or CD44-/--MSC, and in CD44-/- mice 3 and 8 days after glycerol-induced ARF. (a) Evaluation of BUN in CD44+-MSC, CD44-/--MSC, and MSC untreated mice before, 3 and 8 days after glycerol injection. MSC (arrows) were injected at day 3. Injection of CD44+-MSC but not of CD44-/--MSC enhanced the recovery of the renal function. Each group consisted of 12 mice. Data are expressed as mean±s.d. and ANOVA with Newmann–Keuls' multicomparison test was performed: *P<0.05 ARF+ CD44+-MSC vs ARF+ CD44-/--MSC. (b) Comparison of the BUN levels in wild-type (wt) or CD44-/- mice before, 3 and 8 days after glycerol injection. The increase of BUN in CD44-/- mice was significantly lower then in wild-type mice at day 3. At day 8, the spontaneous recovery was significant in wild-type mice but not in CD44-/- mice. Each group consisted of 12 mice. Data are expressed as mean±s.d. and ANOVA with Newmann–Keuls' multicomparison test was performed: *P<0.05 ARF CD44-/- mice vs ARF wt mice; #P<0.05 day 8 vs day 3.View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload (PPT) To evaluate whether MSC may differentiate into epithelial cells, the presence of CFSE-labelled CD44+-MSC expressing epithelial markers was detected by fluorescence-activated cell sorter (FACS) analysis in cells obtained from disaggregated tubular component of renal tissue of ARF mice at day 8. As shown in Figure 10a, the population of fluorescent CFSE-positive cells observed in CD44+MSC-treated animals amounted to 2.3±0.2% of five experiments. No auto-fluorescent cell population was detected in control mice without or with ARF that had not been injected with MSC (Figure 10a). Co-staining with CFSE and the epithelial tubular markers, lens culinaris agglutinin, megalin, and cytokeratin, showed that at least a fraction (respectively, 26.2%±9.65, 21.0%±6.08, 64.2%±17.28 of five experiments) of CFSE-positive cells recovered from the kidney expressed epithelial differentiation markers (Figure 10b). Before injection, MSC did not express any of these epithelial markers (Figure 10b). When CFSE-labelled CD44-/--MSC were injected in ARF mice, only very few fluorescent cells were detected (Figure 10a). To evaluate whether MSC fused with epithelial cells in the kidney, we studied the DNA content of the CFSE-positive population by FACS analysis. As shown in Figure 10c, the CFSE-positive cells showed a ploidy of 2N, rather than 4N, indicating that a significant fusion did not occur. Migration towards sites of tissue injury is the first step of stem cell-mediated tissue regeneration. Homing of MSC into injured tissues relies upon their ability to migrate to and interact with the local microenvironment in a manner that secures their anchorage at sites where their effector functions are required. We have shown here that expression of cell surface CD44 is involved in the localization of exogenous MSC to injured renal tissue based on the observations that loss of CD44 expression by MSC or expression of a CD44 loss-of-function mutant results in ineffective MSC localization to injured tissue and inhibition of renal repair. Several studies suggest that MSC may contribute to the recovery of acute tubular injury.8Herrera M.B. Bussolati B. Bruno S. et al.Mesenchymal stem cells contribute to the renal repair of acute tubular epithelial injury.Int J Mol Med. 2004; 14: 1035-1041PubMed Google Scholar, 9Morigi M. Imberti B. Zoja C. et al.Mesenchymal stem cells are renotropic, helping to repair the kidney and improve function in acute renal failure.J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004; 15: 1794-1804Crossref PubMed Scopus (637) Google Scholar, 30Lange C. Togel F. Ittrich H. et al.Administered mesenchymal stem cells enhance recovery from ischemia/reperfusion-induced acute renal failure in rats.Kidney Int. 2005; 68: 1613-1617Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (352) Google Scholar It remains however uncertain whether bone marrow-derived stem cells may be a source of regenerating tubular cells or rather contribute to tubular recovery by a mechanism of protection.31Cantley L.G. Adult stem cells in the repair of the injured renal tubule.Nat Clin Pract Nephrol. 2005; 1: 22-32Crossref PubMed Scopus (106) Google Scholar Independently from the mechanism involved in renal repair, the local recruitment of MSC is a condition necessary for their beneficial effect.31Cantley L.G. Adult stem cells in the repair of the injured renal tubule.Nat Clin Pract Nephrol. 2005; 1: 22-32Crossref PubMed Scopus (106) Google Scholar Currently, little is known about the molecular mechanisms that underlie MSC recruitment. Recent studies suggest that triggering of the chemokine receptor CXCR4 by its ligand stromal derived factor may play an important role in the migration of transplanted MSC to sites of injury in the brain,32Ji J.F. He B.P. Dheen S.T. et al.Interactions of chemokines and chemokine receptors mediate the migration of mesenchymal stem cells to the impaired site in the brain after hypoglossal nerve injury.Stem Cells. 2004; 22: 415-427Crossref PubMed Scopus (389) Google Scholar even though CXCR4 appears to be expressed at a low level on the surface of MSC.33Wynn R.F. Hart C.A. Corradi-Perini C. et al.A small proportion of mesenchymal stem cells strongly expresses functionally active CXCR4 receptor capable of promoting migration to bone marrow.Blood. 2004; 104: 2643-2645Crossref PubMed Scopus (598) Google Scholar Although it is likely that several mechanisms, including chemokine–chemokine receptor interactions and possibly several adhesion receptor-ligand pairs, participate in MSC homing, CD44–HA interaction may provide a dominant force in guiding MSC to appropriate repair/regeneration sites. The importance of CD44-mediated cell interaction with HA for the regulation of cell migration has been shown in several biological processes, including inflammation and tumor metastasis.34DeGrendele H.C. Estess P. Siegelman M.H. Requirement for CD44 in activated T cell extravasation into an inflammatory site.Science. 1997; 278: 672-675Crossref PubMed Scopus (463) Google Scholar, 35Gadhoum Z. Leibovitch M.P. Qi J. et al.CD44: a new means to inhibit acute myeloid leukemia cell proliferation via P27Kip1.Blood. 2004; 103: 1059-1068Crossref PubMed Scopus (60) Google Scholar, 36Thomas L. Byers H.R. Vink J. et al.CD44H regulates tumor cell migration on hyaluronate-coated substrate.J Cell Biol. 1992; 118: 971-977Crossref PubMed Scopus (294) Google Scholar, 37Zhu H. Mitsuhashi N. Klein A. et al.The role of the hyaluronan receptor CD44 in MSC migration in the extracellular matrix.Stem cells. 2006; 24: 928-935Crossref PubMed Scopus (305) Google Scholar, 38Sy M.S. Guo Y.J. Stamenkovic I. Inhibition of tumor growth in vivo with a soluble CD44-immunoglobulin fusion protein.J Exp Med. 1992; 176: 623-627Crossref PubMed Scopus (119) Google Scholar, 39Wallach-Dayan S.B. Grabovsky V. Moll J. et al.CD44-dependent lymphoma cell dissemination: a cell surface CD44 variant, rather than standard CD44, supports in vitro lymphoma cell rolling on hyaluronic acid substrate and its in vivo accumulation in the peripheral lymph nodes.J Cell Sci. 2001; 114: 3463-3477Crossref PubMed Google Scholar Recently, it has been shown that CD44–HA interaction is involved in MSC migratory capacity.37Zhu H. Mitsuhashi N. Klein A. et al.The role of the hyaluronan receptor CD44 in MSC migration in the extracellular matrix.Stem cells. 2006; 24: 928-935Crossref PubMed Scopus (305) Google Scholar In line with this study, we found that HA-mediated in vitro migration of MSC is prevented by preincubation with an anti-CD44 blocking Ab or soluble HA. HA, the principal CD44 ligand,19Aruffo A. Stamenkovi