4.3 Article

Human cerebrospinal fluid contains CD4+ memory T cells expressing gut- or skin-specific trafficking determinants:: relevance for immunotherapy

Journal

BMC IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2172-7-14

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI046784] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [P01 NS38667, P01 NS038667] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Circulating memory T cells can be divided into tissue-specific subsets, which traffic through distinct tissue compartments during physiologic immune surveillance, based on their expression of adhesion molecules and chemokine receptors. We reasoned that a bias (either enrichment or depletion) of CSF T cell expression of known organ-specific trafficking determinants might suggest that homing of T cells to the subarachnoid space could be governed by a CNS-specific adhesion molecule or chemokine receptor. Results: The expression of cutaneous leukocyte antigen (CLA) and CC-chemokine receptor 4 (CCR4; associated with skin-homing) as well as the expression of integrin alpha 4 beta 7 and CCR9 (associated with gut-homing) was analyzed on CD4+ memory T cells in CSF from individuals with non-inflammatory neurological diseases using flow cytometry. CSF contained similar proportions of CD4+ memory T cells expressing CLA, CCR4, integrin alpha 4 beta 7 and CCR9 as paired blood samples. Conclusion: The results extend our previous findings that antigen-experienced CD4+ memory T cells traffic through the CSF in proportion to their abundance in the peripheral circulation. Furthermore, the ready access of skin- and gut-homing CD4+ memory T cells to the CNS compartment via CSF has implications for the mechanisms of action of immunotherapeutic strategies, such as oral tolerance or therapeutic immunization, where immunogens are administered using an oral or subcutaneous route.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available