4.5 Review

PD-1 coinhibitory signals: The link between pathogenesis and protection

期刊

SEMINARS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 25, 期 3, 页码 219-227

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.smim.2013.02.002

关键词

PD-1 coinhibitory signals

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [P01 AI076174] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDA NIH HHS [DP1 DA028871] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the majority of HIV-1 infected individuals, the adaptive immune response drives virus escape resulting in persistent viremia and a lack of immune-mediated control. The expression of negative regulatory molecules such as PD-1 during chronic HIV infection provides a useful marker to differentiate functional memory T cell subsets and the frequency of T cells with an exhausted phenotype. In addition, cell-based measurements of virus persistence equate with activation markers and the frequency of CD4 T cells expressing PD-1. High-level expression of PD-1 and its ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2 are found on hematopoietic and non-hematopoietic cells, and are upregulated by chronic antigen stimulation, Type 1 and Type II interferons (IFNs), and homeostatic cytokines. In HIV infected subjects, PD-1 levels on CD4 and CD8 T cells continue to remain high following combination anti-retroviral therapy (cART). System biology approaches have begun to elucidate signal transduction pathways regulated by PD-1 expression in CD4 and CD8 T cell subsets that become dysfunctional through chronic TCR activation and PD-1 signaling. In this review, we summarize our current understanding of transcriptional signatures and signal transduction pathways associated with immune exhaustion with a focus on recent work in our laboratory characterizing the role of PD-1 in T cell dysfunction and HIV pathogenesis. We also highlight the therapeutic potential of blocking PD-1-PD-L1 and other immune checkpoints for activating potent cellular immune responses against chronic viral infections and cancer. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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