4.7 Article

Maintenance of immune tolerance by Foxp3(+) regulatory T cells requires CD69 expression

期刊

JOURNAL OF AUTOIMMUNITY
卷 55, 期 -, 页码 51-62

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaut.2014.05.007

关键词

Regulatory T cells; Immune tolerance; FoxP3; CD69

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [SAF2011-27330, SAF2010-15106, SAF2011-25834]
  2. Comunidad de Madrid [INDISNET (S2010/BMD-2332)]
  3. RETICS Enfermedades Cardiovasculares from Instituto de Salud Carlos III [RD12/0042/0056]
  4. CNIC post-doctoral fellowship
  5. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness
  6. Pro CNIC Foundation
  7. [ERC-2011-AdG294340-GENTRIS]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although FoxP3(+) regulatory T cells are key players in the maintenance of immune tolerance and autoimmunity, the lack of specific markers constitute an obstacle to their use for immunotherapy protocols. In this study, we have investigated the role of the C-type lectin receptor CD69 in the suppressor function of Tregs and maintenance of immune tolerance towards harmless inhaled antigens. We identified a novel FoxP3(+)CD69(+) Treg subset capable to maintain immune tolerance and protect to developing inflammation. Although CD69(+) and CD69(-)FoxP3(+) Tregs exist in homeostasis, only CD69-expressing Tregs express high levels of CTLA-4, ICOS, CD38 and GITR suppression-associated markers, secrete high amounts of TGFO and have potent suppressor activity. This activity is regulated by STAT5 and ERK signaling pathways and is impaired by antibody-mediated down-regulation of CD69 expression. Moreover, immunotherapy with FoxP3(+)CD69(+) Tregs restores the homeostasis in Cd69(-/-) mice, that fail to induce tolerance, and is also highly proficient in the prevention of inflammation. The identification of the FoxP3(+)CD69(+) Treg subset paves the way toward the development of new therapeutic strategies to control immune homeostasis and autoimmunity. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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