4.6 Review

Lineage stability and phenotypic plasticity of Foxp3+ regulatory T cells

期刊

IMMUNOLOGICAL REVIEWS
卷 259, 期 1, 页码 159-172

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/imr.12175

关键词

cell fate determination; Foxp3; phenotypic plasticity; regulatory T cells; epigenetic memory; heterogeneity

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan [23390123, 25118733]
  2. Mitsubishi Foundation
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23390123, 25118733] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Regulatory T (Treg) cells expressing the transcription factor forkhead box protein 3 (Foxp3) constitute a unique T-cell lineage committed to suppressive functions. While their differentiation state is remarkably stable in the face of various perturbations from the extracellular environment, they are able to adapt to diverse and fluctuating tissue environments by changing their phenotype. The lineage stability and phenotypic plasticity of Treg cells thus ensure the robustness of self-tolerance and tissue homeostasis. Recent studies have suggested, however, that Treg cells may retain lineage plasticity, the ability to switch their cell fate to various effector T-cell types under certain circumstances such as inflammation, a notion that remains highly contentious. While accumulating evidence indicates that some Treg cells can downregulate Foxp3 expression and/or acquire effector T-helper cell-like phenotypes, results from my laboratory have shown that Treg cells retain epigenetic memory of, and thus remain committed to, Foxp3 expression and suppressive functions despite such phenotypic plasticity. It has also become evident that Foxp3 can be promiscuously and transiently expressed in activated T cells. Here, I argue that the current controversy stems partly from the lack of the lineage specificity of Foxp3 expression and also from the confusion between phenotypic plasticity and lineage plasticity, and discuss implications of our findings in Treg cell fate determination and maintenance.

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

4.6
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