Spatial SASP gradients define distinct p16- and p21-senescent microenvironments driving tissue‑specific fibrosis and regeneration

Hypothesis

Core idea: Senescent cells expressing p16 and p21 generate spatially segregated SASP gradients that decay with distance and exert opposing effects on tissue remodeling: p16‑SASP promotes a pro‑fibrotic niche enriched in TGF‑β1, Pdgfa, and Ctgf, whereas p21‑SASP drives a regenerative niche characterized by Jun‑dependent matrix metalloproteinases and Igfbp6. The balance of these gradients determines whether aged tissue progresses to fibrosis or retains regenerative capacity.

Mechanistic rationale: Recent scRNA‑seq work shows p16+ and p21+ senotypes are transcriptionally distinct, share few SASP factors, and do not interconvert [Distinct senotypes in p16- and p21-positive cells]. Spatial transcriptomics in IPF lung reveals fibrosis‑associated niches with elevated senescence scores but lacks quantitative distance‑decay metrics [Spatial transcriptomic characterization of pathologic niches in IPF]. Platform comparisons indicate Xenium provides low background for immune subtypes while VisiumHD captures finer hypoxia zonation [A technical comparison of spatial transcriptomics platforms]. Combining these insights, we hypothesize that the molecular identity of senescent cells dictates the shape and potency of SASP gradients, which can be measured as fold‑change decay curves from senescent clusters.

Testable predictions:

• In naturally aged mouse liver, p16+ clusters will be surrounded by a steep gradient of TGF‑β1, Pdgfa, and Ctgf that falls to baseline within ~50 µm, whereas p21+ clusters will show a broader Jun‑Mmp9‑Igfbp6 gradient extending ~150 µm.
• The ratio of the area under the p16‑SASP curve to the p21‑SASP curve will correlate positively with histological fibrosis scores across liver, lung, and kidney.
• Genetic ablation of p16+ senocytes will flatten the TGF‑β1 gradient and reduce collagen deposition without affecting Jun‑Mmp9 levels; conversely, p21+ depletion will diminish Jun‑Mmp9 signaling and impair matrix turnover.
• Pharmacological blockade of TGF‑β signaling will selectively attenuate the p16‑SASP gradient, while Jun inhibition will shrink the p21‑SASP field, confirming pathway‑specific gradient control.

Experimental design:

• Generate double‑reporter mice (p16‑3MR‑tdTomato; p21‑GFP) to label senescent subpopulations in aged (24 mo) and young (3 mo) tissues.
• Perform Xenium or VisiumHD spatial transcriptomics on 10 µm sections, targeting a focused panel of SASP genes (Tgfb1, Pdgfa, Ctgf, Jun, Mmp9, Igfbp6, Cxcl16, Plaur) plus housekeeping markers.
• Use cell2location or RCTD to deconvolute p16+ and p21+ contributions per spot, then compute radial average expression of each SASP factor increasing outward from identified senescent centroids.
• Fit exponential decay models to extract length‑scale (λ) and amplitude (A) parameters for each factor and senotype.
• Validate protein gradients by multiplexed immunofluorescence (CODEX or CyCIF) for TGF‑β1, p‑SMAD2, Jun, MMP9.
• Correlate λ and A values with histology (Sirius Red, hydroxyproline) and functional assays (serum ALT, lung compliance).
• Apply senolytic or genetic clearance strategies (p16‑ATTAC, p21‑DAPT) to test causality.

Potential outcomes and falsification:

• If p16+ and p21+ SASP gradients show indistinguishable decay constants and amplitudes, the hypothesis of distinct microenvironmental signaling is falsified.
• If gradients exist but do not predict fibrosis or regenerative outcomes, the link between gradient metrics and tissue phenotype is unsupported.
• Observing interconversion between p16+ and p21+ states in situ would contradict the reported independence of senotypes and require model revision.

Impact: Quantifying SASP gradient architecture will provide a mechanistic bridge between single‑cell senotype definitions and tissue‑level aging phenotypes, guiding spatially targeted senotherapies that modulate specific niche signals rather than indiscriminate senocyte removal.