4.7 Article

Synchronization of mothers and offspring promotes tolerance and limits allergy

期刊

JCI INSIGHT
卷 5, 期 15, 页码 -

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/jci.insight.137943

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [P30 DK052574, P30AR048335]
  2. NCI Cancer Center Support Grant [P30 CA91842]
  3. March of Dimes Foundation [5-FY17-79]
  4. Children's Discovery Institute [MI-FR-2017-596, MD-II-2018-725]
  5. [DK097317]
  6. [AI131342]
  7. [AI140755]
  8. [AI136515]
  9. [AI112626]
  10. [DK071176]
  11. [DK052574]
  12. [DK125606]
  13. [DK109006]
  14. [AI095542]
  15. [K08DK101608]
  16. [R03DK111473]
  17. [R01DK118568]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Allergic disorders, characterized by Th2 immune responses to environmental substances, are increasingly common in children in Western societies. Multiple studies indicate that breastfeeding, early complementary introduction of food allergens, and antibiotic avoidance in the first year of life reduces allergic outcomes in at-risk children. Why the benefit of these practices is restricted to early life is largely unknown. We identified a preweaning interval during which dietary antigens are assimilated by the colonic immune system. This interval is under maternal control via temporal changes in breast milk, coincides with an influx of naive T cells into the colon, and is followed by the development of a long-lived population of colonic peripherally derived Tregs (pTregs) that can be specific for dietary antigens encountered during this interval. Desynchronization of mothers and offspring produced durable deficits in these pTregs, impaired tolerance to dietary antigens introduced during and after this preweaning interval, and resulted in spontaneous Th2 responses. These effects could be rescued by pTregs from the periweaning colon or by Tregs generated in vitro using periweaning colonic antigen-presenting cells. These findings demonstrate that mothers and their offspring are synchronized for the development of a balanced immune system.

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