Different target specificities of haptoglobin and hemopexin define a sequential protection system against vascular hemoglobin toxicity

Abstract

Free hemoglobin (Hb) triggered vascular damage occurs in many hemolytic diseases, such as sickle cell disease, with an unmet need for specific therapeutic interventions. Based on clinical observations the Hb and heme scavenger proteins haptoglobin (Hp) and hemopexin (Hx) have been characterized as a sequential defense system with Hp as the primary protector and Hx as a backup when all Hp is depleted during more severe intravascular hemolysis. In this study we present a mechanistic rationale for this paradigm based on a combined biochemical and cell biological approach directed at understanding the unique roles of Hp and Hx in Hb detoxification. Using a novel in vitro model of Hb triggered endothelial damage, which recapitulates the well-characterized pathophysiologic sequence of oxyHb(Fe2+) transformation to ferric Hb(Fe3+), free heme transfer from ferric Hb(Fe3+) to lipoprotein and subsequent oxidative reactions in the lipophilic phase. The accumulation of toxic lipid peroxidation products liberated during oxidation reactions ultimately lead to endothelial damage characterized by a specific gene expression pattern with reduced cellular ATP and monolayer disintegration. Quantitative analysis of key chemical and biological parameters allowed us to precisely define the mechanisms and concentrations required for Hp and Hx to prevent this toxicity. In the case of Hp we defined an exponential relationship between Hp availability relative to oxyHb(Fe2+) and related protective activity. This exponential relationship demonstrates that large Hp quantities are required to prevent Hb toxicity. In contrast, the linear relationship between Hx concentration and protection defines a highly efficient backup scavenger system during conditions of large excess of free oxyHb(Fe2+) that occurs when all Hp is consumed. The diverse protective function of Hp and Hx in this model can be explained by the different target specificities of the two proteins.