4.6 Review

Generation of memory B cells and their reactivation

Journal

IMMUNOLOGICAL REVIEWS
Volume 283, Issue 1, Pages 138-149

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/imr.12640

Keywords

broadly reactive BCR; germinal center; memory B cell; memory Tfh cell; vaccines; virus infection

Categories

Funding

  1. Secom Science and Technology Foundation
  2. NHMRC [1124681, 1139865]
  3. Australian Postgraduate Award
  4. Mochida Memorial Foundation for Medical and Pharmaceutical Research
  5. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology in Japan
  6. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology in Japan [JP17K08882, JP17K08856, JP26221306]
  7. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [1124681, 1139865] Funding Source: NHMRC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The successful establishment of humoral memory response depends on at least two layers of defense. Pre-existing protective antibodies secreted by long-lived plasma cells act as a first line of defense against reinfection (constitutive humoral memory). Previously, a second line of defense in which pathogen-experienced memory B cells are rapidly reactivated to produce antibodies (reactive humoral memory), was considered as simply a back-up system for the first line (particularly for re-infection with homologous viruses). However, in the case of re-infection with similar but different strains of viruses, or in response to viral escape mutants, the reactive humoral memory plays a crucial role. Here, we review recent progress in our understanding of how memory B cells are generated in the pre-GC stage and during the GC reaction, and how these memory B cells are robustly reactivated with the help of memory Tfh cells to generate the secondary antibody response. In addition, we discuss how these advances may be relevant to the quest for a vaccine that can induce broadly reactive antibodies against influenza and HIV.

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