4.5 Article

Disruption of the homeostatic balance between autoaggressive (CD4+ CD40+) and regulatory (CD4+ CD25+ FoxP3+) T cells promotes diabetes

期刊

JOURNAL OF LEUKOCYTE BIOLOGY
卷 84, 期 2, 页码 431-439

出版社

FEDERATION AMER SOC EXP BIOL
DOI: 10.1189/jlb.1207857

关键词

autoimmunity; homeostasis; Treg; tolerance; diabetes

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK-07501, R01 DK075013] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although regulatory T cells (Tregs) are well described, identifying autoaggressive effector T cells has proven more difficult. However, we identified CD4(lo)CD40(+) (Th40) cells as being necessary and sufficient for diabetes in the NOD mouse model. Importantly, these cells are present in pancreata of prediabetic and diabetic NOD mice, and Th40 cells but not CD4(+) CD40(-) T cells transfer progressive insulitis and diabetes to NOD. scid recipients. Nonobese-resistant (NOR) mice have the identical T cell developmental background as NOD mice, yet they are diabetes-resistant. The seminal issue is how NOR mice remain tolerant to diabetogenic self-antigens. We show here that autoaggressive T cells develop in NOR mice and are confined to the Th40 subset. However, NOR mice maintain Treg numbers equivalent to their Th40 numbers. NOD mice have statistically equal numbers of CD4(+) CD25(+) forkhead box P3(+) intrinsic Tregs compared with NOR or nonautoimmune BALB/c mice, and NOD Tregs are equally as suppressive as NOR Tregs. A critical difference is that NOD mice develop expanded numbers of Th40 cells. We suggest that a determinant factor for autoimmunity includes the Th40: Treg ratio. Mechanistically, NOD Th40 cells have low susceptibility to Fas-induced cell death and unlike cells from NOR and BALB/c mice, have predominantly low Fas expression. CD40 engagement of Th40 cells induces Fas expression but further confers resistance to Fas-mediated cell death in NOD mice. A second fundamental difference is that NOD Th40 cells undergo much more rapid homeostatic expansion than Th40 cells from NOR mice.

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

4.5
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