4.7 Article

Natural Protection From Type 1 Diabetes in NOD Mice Is Characterized by a Unique Pancreatic Islet Phenotype

期刊

DIABETES
卷 70, 期 4, 页码 955-965

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/db20-0945

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical Research Council (U.K.) [MR/K021141/1]
  2. MRC [MR/K021141/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Naturally protected NOD mice exhibit unique characteristics in their pancreatic islet morphology and immune infiltrate, with features such as increased frequency of insulin-containing, smaller-sized islets and regulatory T and B cell phenotypes. Despite being diabetes free, they still have significant immune infiltrate, indicating a distinct islet signature and providing new insights into regulatory mechanisms in pancreatic islets.
The NOD mouse develops spontaneous type 1 diabetes, with some features of disease that are very similar to the human disease. However, a proportion of NOD mice are naturally protected from developing diabetes, and currently, studies characterizing this cohort are very limited. Here, using both immunofluorescence and multiparameter flow cytometry, we focus on the pancreatic islet morphology and immune infiltrate observed in naturally protected NOD mice. We show that naturally protected NOD mice are characterized by an increased frequency of insulin-containing, smaller-sized, pancreatic islets. Although mice remain diabetes free, florid immune infiltrate remains. However, this immune infiltrate is skewed toward a regulatory phenotype in both T- and B-cell compartments. Pancreatic islets have an increased frequency of IL-10-producing B cells and associated cell surface markers. Resident memory CD69(+)CD8(+) T cells show a significant shift toward reduced CD103 expression, while CD4(+) T cells have increased FoxP3(+)CTLA4(+) expression. These data indicate that naturally protected NOD mice have a unique islet signature and provide new insight into regulatory mechanisms within pancreatic islets.

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