4.6 Article

Programmed Death-1 Impairs Secondary Effector Lung CD8+ T Cells during Respiratory Virus Reinfection

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 193, 期 10, 页码 5108-5117

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1302208

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [AI085062]
  2. National Institutes of Health/National Institute of General Medical Sciences [GM007347]
  3. Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center [P30 CA68485]
  4. Vanderbilt Digestive Disease Research Center [DK058404]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reinfections with respiratory viruses are common and cause significant clinical illness, yet precise mechanisms governing this susceptibility are ill defined. Lung Ag-specific CD8(+) T cells (T-CD8) are impaired during acute viral lower respiratory infection by the inhibitory receptor programmed death-1 (PD-1). To determine whether PD-1 contributes to recurrent infection, we first established a model of reinfection by challenging B cell-deficient mice with human metapneumovirus (HMPV) several weeks after primary infection, and found that HMPV replicated to high titers in the lungs. A robust secondary effector lung T-CD8 response was generated during reinfection, but these cells were more impaired and more highly expressed the inhibitory receptors PD-1, LAG-3, and 2B4 than primary T-CD8. In vitro blockade demonstrated that PD-1 was the dominant inhibitory receptor early after reinfection. In vivo therapeutic PD-1 blockade during HMPV reinfection restored lung T-CD8 effector functions (i.e., degranulation and cytokine production) and enhanced viral clearance. PD-1 also limited the protective efficacy of HMPV epitope-specific peptide vaccination and impaired lung T-CD8 during heterotypic influenza virus challenge infection. Our results indicate that PD-1 signaling may contribute to respiratory virus reinfection and evasion of vaccine-elicited immune responses. These results have important implications for the design of effective vaccines against respiratory viruses.

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