4.4 Article

Inhibition of T Cells Provides Protection against Early Invasive Pneumococcal Disease

期刊

INFECTION AND IMMUNITY
卷 78, 期 12, 页码 5287-5294

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/IAI.00431-10

关键词

-

资金

  1. Children's Infection Defense Center
  2. American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Infections caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae are major causes of morbidity and mortality, which are in part mediated by immune cell-dependent mechanisms. Yet, the specific contributions of individual cell types to immunopathology are only partially understood. T cells are well characterized with respect to their function in protective humoral immune responses; however, their roles during early stages of infection and invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) are less well defined. Using a mouse model of pneumococcal sepsis, we found that CD4(+) T cells were recruited to the lung as early as 12 h after intranasal infection. Recruitment was accompanied by upregulation of CD69 and B7-H1, reflecting T-cell activation. Unexpectedly, major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II-deficient mice, which lack CD4(+) T cells, displayed an increased survival despite comparable bacterial titers in the blood, spleen, and lung. The higher survival correlated with a lower cytokine and chemokine response upon S. pneumoniae challenge in MHC class II-deficient mice, suggesting that inflammation may contribute to the mortality of IPD. Comparable to the case for MHC class II-deficient mice, antibody-mediated depletion of CD4(+) T cells and drug-induced inhibition of T-cell function with cyclosporine, or interference with T-cell activation using CTLA4-immunoglobulin (Abatacept), led to significant increases in survival during IPD. Our results reveal an important and adverse role of CD4(+) T cells in the pathogenesis of IPD and suggest that modulation of T-cell activation during early phases of S. pneumoniae invasive infection may provide a therapeutic option.

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

4.4
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