4.8 Article

Foxp3+ regulatory T cells protect the liver from immune damage and compromise virus control during acute experimental hepatitis B virus infection in mice

期刊

HEPATOLOGY
卷 56, 期 3, 页码 873-883

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/hep.25765

关键词

-

资金

  1. Helmholtz Alliance for Immunotherapy [HA-202]
  2. German Research Foundation [SFB 670, 704]
  3. Friedrich-Naumann foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The strength of antiviral T cell responses correlates with clearance of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, but the immunological mechanisms mitigating or suppressing HBV-specific T cells are still poorly understood. In this study, we examined the role of CD4+ Foxp3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs) in a mouse model of acute HBV infection. We initiated HBV infection via an adenoviral vector transferring a 1.3-fold overlength HBV genome (AdHBV) into transgenic DEREG mice, where Tregs can be transiently but selectively depleted by injection of diphtheria toxin. The effect of Treg depletion on the outcome of HBV infection was characterized by detailed virological, immunological, and histopathological analysis. Numbers of Tregs increase in the liver rapidly after initiation of HBV replication. Initial depletion of Tregs revealed their complex regulatory function during acute infection. Tregs mitigated immunomediated liver damage by down-regulating the antiviral activity of effector T cells by limiting cytokine production and cytotoxicity, but did not influence development of HBV-specific CD8 T cells or development of memory T cells. Furthermore, Tregs controlled the recruitment of innate immune cells such as macrophages and dendritic cells to the infected liver. As a consequence, Tregs significantly delayed clearance of HBV from blood and infected hepatocytes. Conclusion: Tregs limit immunomediated liver damage early after an acute infection of the liver, thereby contributing to conservation of tissue integrity and organ function at the cost of prolonging virus clearance. (HEPATOLOGY 2012;56:873883)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据