4.7 Article

TIM-3 Does Not Act as a Receptor for Galectin-9

期刊

PLOS PATHOGENS
卷 9, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1003253

关键词

-

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund [21964-B20]
  2. Austrian Society for Dermatology and Venereology
  3. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P 21964] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

T cell immunoglobulin and mucin protein 3 (TIM-3) is a type I cell surface protein that was originally identified as a marker for murine T helper type 1 cells. TIM-3 was found to negatively regulate murine T cell responses and galectin-9 was described as a binding partner that mediates T cell inhibitory effects of TIM-3. Moreover, it was reported that like PD-1 the classical exhaustion marker, TIM-3 is up-regulated in exhausted murine and human T cells and TIM-3 blockade was described to restore the function of these T cells. Here we show that the activation of human T cells is not affected by the presence of galectin-9 or antibodies to TIM-3. Furthermore, extensive studies on the interaction of galectin-9 with human and murine TIM-3 did not yield evidence for specific binding between these molecules. Moreover, profound differences were observed when analysing the expression of TIM-3 and PD-1 on T cells of HIV-1-infected individuals: TIM-3 was expressed on fewer cells and also at much lower levels. Furthermore, whereas PD-1 was preferentially expressed on CD45RA(-)CD8 T cells, the majority of TIM-3-expressing CD8 T cells were CD45RA(+). Importantly, we found that TIM-3 antibodies were ineffective in increasing anti-HIV-1 T cell responses in vitro, whereas PD-L antibodies potently reverted the dysfunctional state of exhausted CD8 T cells. Taken together, our results are not in support of an interaction between TIM-3 and galectin-9 and yield no evidence for a functional role of TIM-3 in human T cell activation. Moreover, our data indicate that PD-1, but not TIM-3, is a promising target to ameliorate T cell exhaustion.

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

4.7
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