4.6 Article

Anti-CD3 Therapy Promotes Tolerance by Selectively Depleting Pathogenic Cells while Preserving Regulatory T Cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 187, 期 4, 页码 2015-2022

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1100713

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R37 AI46643, P30 DK63720]
  2. National Institute of General Medical Sciences [1 R25 GM56847]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Monoclonal anti-CD3 Abs have been used clinically for two decades to reverse steroid-resistant acute graft rejection. In autoimmune diabetes, short course treatment with FcR-nonbinding (FNB) anti-CD3 mAb in mice with recent onset of diabetes induces long-term disease remission. Induction of tolerogenic regulatory T cells (Tregs) has been implicated to be one of the mechanisms of action by FNB anti-CD3 mAb in these settings. In this study, we examined the effect of FNB anti-CD3 mAb treatment on the homeostasis of naive, effector, and regulatory T cells in vivo. Anti-CD3 treatment induced a transient systemic rise in the percentage but not absolute number of CD4(+)Foxp3(+) Tregs due to selective depletion of CD4(+)Foxp3(-) conventional T cells. T cell depletion induced by FNB anti-CD3 mAb was independent of the proapoptotic proteins Fas, caspase-3, and Bim and was not inhibited by overexpression of the anti-apoptotic protein, Bcl-2. Tregs were not preferentially expanded and we found no evidence of conversion of conventional T cells into Tregs, suggesting that the pre-existing Tregs are resistant to anti-CD3-induced cell death. Interestingly, expression of the transcription factor Helios, which is expressed by thymus-derived natural Tregs, was increased in Tregs after FNB anti-CD3 mAb treatment, suggesting that the anti-CD3 treatment can alter, and potentially stabilize, Treg function. Taken together, the results suggest that FNB anti-CD3 therapy promotes tolerance by restoring the balance between pathogenic and regulatory T cells. The Journal of Immunology, 2011, 187: 2015-2022.

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