4.2 Article

Selective developmental defects of cord blood antigen-presenting cell subsets

Journal

HUMAN IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 65, Issue 11, Pages 1356-1369

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.humimm.2004.09.011

Keywords

antigen-presenting cells; dendritic cells; monocytes; cord blood; cytokines

Categories

Funding

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [5 T32 AI07290, AI 48212] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NICHD NIH HHS [T35-HD0744-11] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Defective antigen-presenting cell (APC) function has been hypothesized to contribute to increased infection susceptibility in newborns. We used multiparameter flow cytometry to characterize APC subsets in adult peripheral blood (APB) and cord blood (CB). APB had a higher proportion of CD11c+ dendritic cells (DC), whereas CB mainly contained CD123+ DC. APB was enriched in CD16+CD11c+ DC subset, whereas CD34+CD11c-CD123lo cells were prominent in CB. Lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha production was dampened in myeloid DC and monocytes from CB, whereas IL-1alpha production was not different. The reduction in TNF-alpha response did not appear to result from reduced surface detection of LPS, because CD14, toll-like receptor (TLR)-4 and TLR-2 levels were not reduced in CB APC compared with APB cells. Also, there was no correlation between TLR-2 or TLR-4 levels and TNF-alpha. production in myeloid DC and monocytes. CB monocytes had lower surface HLA-DR immediately ex vivo. Both APB and CB monocytes upregulated HLA-DR after incubation, but an additional LPS-induced increase in HLA-DR was suggested only in APB monocytes. APB monocytes also showed a greater LPS-induced increase in CD40 expression. Together, our data show significant, selective differences in circulating APC between neonates and adults. Human Immunology (C) American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics, 2004. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available