4.8 Article

IL-21 is pivotal in determining age-dependent effectiveness of immune responses in a mouse model of human hepatitis B

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
Volume 121, Issue 3, Pages 1154-1162

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI44198

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIH NIAID [RO1AI068090]
  2. UCSF Liver Center [P30DK026743]
  3. Cancer Research Institute
  4. Burroughs Wellcome Fund
  5. Ibrahim El-Hefni Technical Training Foundation
  6. National Research Service Award [T32DK060414]
  7. A.P. Gianinni Foundation
  8. Division of Intramural Research, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute

Ask authors/readers for more resources

HBV is a noncytopathic hepadnavirus and major human pathogen that causes immune-mediated acute and chronic hepatitis. The immune response to HBV antigens is age dependent: viral clearance occurs in most adults, while neonates and children usually develop chronic infection and liver disease. Here, we characterize an animal model for HBV infection that recapitulates the key differences in viral clearance between early life and adulthood and find that IL-21 may be part of an effective primary hepatic immune response to HBV. In our model, adult mice showed higher HBV-dependent IL-21 production in liver, compared with that of young mice. Conversely, absence of the IL-21 receptor in adult mice resulted in antigen persistence akin to that of young mice. In humans, levels of IL-21 transcripts were greatly increased in blood samples from acutely infected adults who clear the virus. These observations suggest a different model for the dichotomous, age-dependent outcome of HBV infection in humans, in which decreased IL-21 production in younger patients may hinder generation of crucial CD8(+) T and B cell responses. These findings carry implications for therapeutic augmentation of immune responses to HBV and potentially other persistent liver viruses.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available