4.8 Article

CD4+ T help promotes influenza virus-specific CD8+ T cell memory by limiting metabolic dysfunction

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1808849116

关键词

CD8(+) T cell; immunological memory; CD4 T cell; influenza; metabolism

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [5671222, APP1003131]
  2. Australian Research Council Future Fellowship
  3. National Health and Medical Research Council Principal Research fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is continued interest in developing novel vaccine strategies that induce establish optimal CD8(+) cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) memory for pathogens like the influenza A viruses (IAVs), where the recall of IAV-specific T cell immunity is able to protect against serologically distinct IAV infection. While it is well established that CD4(+) T cell help is required for optimal CTL responses and the establishment of memory, when and how CD4(+) T cell help contributes to determining the ideal memory phenotype remains unclear. We assessed the quality of IAV-specific CD8(+) T cell memory established in the presence or absence of a concurrent CD4(+) T cell response. We demonstrate that CD4(+) T cell help appears to be required at the initial priming phase of infection for the maintenance of IAV-specific CTL memory, with unhelped memory CTL exhibiting intrinsic dysfunction. High-throughput RNA-sequencing established that distinct transcriptional signatures characterize the helped vs. unhelped IAV-specific memory CTL phenotype, with the unhelped set showing a more exhausted T cell transcriptional profile. Moreover, we identify that unhelped memory CTLs exhibit defects in a variety of energetic pathways, leading to diminished spare respiratory capacity and diminished capacity to engage glycolysis upon reactivation. Hence, CD4(+) T help at the time of initial priming promotes molecular pathways that limit exhaustion by channeling metabolic processes essential for the rapid recall of memory CD8(+) T cells.

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

4.8
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