4.6 Article

Lipopolysaccharide Potentiates Effector T Cell Accumulation into Nonlymphoid Tissues through TRIF

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 182, 期 9, 页码 5322-5330

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.0803616

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01-AI42858, R01-A152108]
  2. [T32-AI07080]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

LPS is a natural adjuvant that potentiates Ag-specific T cell survival and Th1 differentiation by stimulating MyD88 and Toll/IL-1R domain-containing adaptor-inducing IFN-beta (TRIF) signaling pathways. In this study, we reveal the TRIF pathway is critical for amplifying murine effector T cell accumulation into nonlymphoid tissues following immunization with Ag plus LPS. Although LPS increased the accumulation of splenic T cells in TRIF-deficient mice, markedly fewer T cells were recovered from liver and lung in comparison to wild type. Most of the T cells primed in TRIF-deficient mice failed to up-regulate CXCR3 and had an overall reduced capacity to produce IFN-gamma, demonstrating effector T cell differentiation was linked to their migration. To investigate the role of TRIF-dependent cytokines, neutralization studies were performed in wild type mice. Although TNF neutralization reduced T cell numbers, its coneutralization with IL-10 unexpectedly restored the T cells, suggesting the balance between pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines influences T cell survival rather than their magnitude. To investigate a role for costimulatory molecules, we tested whether the T cell defect in TRIF-deficient mice could be corrected with enforced costimulation. Boosting with a CD40 agonist in addition to LPS restored the effector CD8 T cell response in livers of TRIF-deficient mice while only partially restoring CD4 T cells, suggesting that LPS primes CD8 and CD4 T cell immunity through different mechanisms. Overall, our data support targeting TRIF for vaccines aimed to direct immune responses to nonlymphoid tissues. The Journal of Immunology, 2009, 182: 5322-5330.

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