4.6 Article

Lack of PD-L1 Expression by iNKT Cells Improves the Course of Influenza A Infection

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 8, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0059599

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01 AI066020]
  2. Senior Research Training Fellowship from the American Lung Association

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is evidence indicating that invariant Natural Killer T (iNKT) cells play an important role in defense against influenza A virus (IAV). However, the effect of inhibitory receptor, programmed death-1 (PD-1), and its ligands, programmed death ligand (PD-L) 1 and 2 on iNKT cells in protection against IAV remains to be elucidated. Here we investigated the effects of these co-stimulatory molecules on iNKT cells in the response to influenza. We discovered that compare to the wild type, PD-L1 deficient mice show reduced sensitivity to IAV infection as evident by reduced weight loss, decreased pulmonary inflammation and cellular infiltration. In contrast, PD-L2 deficient mice showed augmented weight loss, pulmonary inflammation and cellular infiltration compare to the wild type mice after influenza infection. Adoptive transfer of iNKT cells from wild type, PD-L1 or PD-L2 deficient mice into iNKT cell deficient mice recapitulated these findings. Interestingly, in our transfer system PD-L1(-/-)-derived iNKT cells produced high levels of interferon-gamma whereas PD-L2(-/-)-derived iNKT cells produced high amounts of interleukin-4 and 13 suggesting a role for these cytokines in sensitivity to influenza. We identified that PD-L1 negatively regulates the frequency of iNKT cell subsets in the lungs of IAV infected mice. Altogether, these results demonstrate that lack of PD-L1 expression by iNKT cells reduces the sensitivity to IAV and that the presence of PD-L2 is important for dampening the deleterious inflammatory responses after IAV infection. Our findings potentially have clinical implications for developing new therapies for influenza.

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