4.8 Article

Short Lifespans of Memory T-cells in Bone Marrow, Blood, and Lymph Nodes Suggest That T-cell Memory Is Maintained by Continuous Self-Renewal of Recirculating Cells

Journal

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.02054

Keywords

bone marrow; memory T-cells; lymphocyte turnover; lifespan; stable isotope labeling; deuterium; mathematical modeling

Categories

Funding

  1. European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) through Marie-Curie Action Quantitative T cell Immunology Initial Training Network [FP7-PEOPLE-2012-ITN 317040-QuanTI]
  2. Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality [WOT-01-002-002.02]
  3. Dutch Public-Private Partnership Small Ruminants program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Memory T-cells are essential to maintain long-term immunological memory. It is widely thought that the bone marrow (BM) plays an important role in the long-term maintenance of memory T-cells. There is controversy however on the longevity and recirculating kinetics of BM memory T-cells. While some have proposed that the BM is a reservoir for long-lived, non-circulating memory T-cells, it has also been suggested to be the preferential site for memory T-cell self-renewal. In this study, we used in vivo deuterium labeling in goats to simultaneously quantify the average turnover rates-and thereby expected lifespans-of memory T-cells from BM, blood and lymph nodes (LN). While the fraction of Ki-67 positive cells, a snapshot marker for recent cell division, was higher in memory T-cells from blood compared to BM and LN, in vivo deuterium labeling revealed no substantial differences in the expected lifespans of memory T-cells between these compartments. Our results support the view that the majority of memory T-cells in the BM are self-renewing as fast as those in the periphery, and are continuously recirculating between the blood, BM, and LN.

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