4.6 Article

Langerin expressing cells promote skin immune responses under defined conditions

Journal

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 180, Issue 7, Pages 4722-4727

Publisher

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.180.7.4722

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [U01 AI070380, P01 AI 35296] Funding Source: Medline
  2. PHS HHS [U01 70380] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There are conflicting data in the literature regarding the role of epidermal Langerhans cells (LC) in promoting skin immune responses. On one hand, LC can be extremely potent APCs in vitro, and are thought to be involved in contact hypersensitivity (CHS). On the other hand, it seems counterintuitive that a cell type continually exposed to pathogens at the organism's barrier surfaces should readily trigger potent T cell responses. Indeed, LC depletion in one model led to enhanced contact hypersensitivity, suggesting they play a negative regulatory role. However, apparently similar LC depletion models did not show enhanced CHS, and in one case showed reduced CHS. In this study we found that acute depletion of mouse LC reduced CHS, but the timing of toxin administration was critical: toxin administration 3 days before priming did not impair CHS, whereas toxin administration 1 day before priming did. We also show that LC elimination reduced the T cell response to epicutaneous immunization with OVA protein Ag. However, this reduction was only observed when OVA was applied on the flank skin, and not on the ear. Additionally, peptide immunization was not blocked by depletion, regardless of the site. Finally we show that conditions which eliminate epidermal LC but spare other Langerin(+) DC do not impair the epicutaneous immunization response to OVA. Overall, our results reconcile previous conflicting data in the literature, and suggest that Langerin(+) cells do promote T cell responses to skin Ags, but only under defined conditions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available