4.8 Article

Peripheral host T cells survive hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and promote graft-versus-host disease

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 130, 期 9, 页码 4624-4636

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI129965

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [DP5OD023091, T32AR007098, R01AR065807, R01AI127654, R01CA203721, P30AR069625]
  2. Dermatology Foundation Physician-Scientist Career Development Award
  3. South Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority
  4. Research Council of Norway through its Centres of Excellence funding scheme [179573/V40]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Donor T cells are key mediators in pathogenesis, but a contribution from host T cells has riot been explored, as conditioning regimens are believed to deplete host T cells, To evaluate a potential role for host T cells in GVHD, the origin of skin and blood T cells was assessed prospectively in patients after HSCT in the absence of GVHD. While blood contained primarily donor-derived T cells, most T cells in the skin were host derived. We next examined patient skin, colon, and blood during acute GVHD. Host T cells were present in all skin and colon acute GVHD specimens studied, yet were largely absent in blood. We observed acute skin GVHD in the presence of 100% host T cells. Analysis demonstrated that a subset of host T cells in peripheral tissues were proliferating (Ki67(+)) and producing the proinflammatory cytokines IFN-gamma and IL-17 in situ. Comparatively, the majority of antigen-presenting cells (APCs) in tissue in acute GVHD were donor derived, and donor-derived APCs were observed directly adjacent to host T cells. A humanized mouse model demonstrated that host skin-resident T cells could be activated by donor monocytes to generate a GVHD-like dermatitis. Thus, host tissue-resident T cells may play a previously unappreciated pathogenic role in acute GVHD.

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