4.6 Article

The classical complement pathway in transplantation: Unanticipated protective effects of C1q and role in inductive antibody therapy

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 8, Issue 8, Pages 1622-1630

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2008.02295.x

Keywords

antibodies; complement; transplantation

Funding

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [R01 HL56086, R01 HL056086, R01 HL070613-06, R01 HL070613, R01 HL052886, R01 HL056086-13, R01 HL52886, R01 HL052886-13] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI061469-04, R01 AI061469] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Though complement (C) deposition within the transplant is associated with allograft rejection, the pathways employed have not been established. In addition, evidence suggests that C-mediated cytolysis may be necessary for the tolerance-inducing activities of mAb therapies. Hence, we assessed the role of the classical C pathway in acute allograft rejection and its requirement for experimental mAb therapies. C1q-deficient (C1q-/-) recipients rejected allografts at a faster rate than wild-type (WT) recipients. This rejection was associated with exacerbated graft pathology but not with enhanced T-cell responses in C1q-/- recipients. However, the humoral response to donor alloantigens was accelerated in C1q-/- mice, as an early IgG response and IgG deposition within the graft were observed. Furthermore, deposition of C3d, but not C4d was observed in grafts isolated from C1q-/- recipients. To assess the role of the classical C pathway in inductive mAb therapies, C1q-/- recipients were treated with anti-CD4 or anti-CD40L mAb. The protective effects of anti-CD4 mAb were reduced in C1q-/- recipients, however, this effect did not correlate with ineffective depletion of CD4+ cells. In contrast, the protective effects of anti-CD40L mAb were less compromised in C1q-/- recipients. Hence, this study reveals unanticipated roles for C1q in the rejection process.

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