4.8 Article

Treg cell-derived osteopontin promotes microglia-mediated white matter repair after ischemic stroke

期刊

IMMUNITY
卷 54, 期 7, 页码 1527-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2021.04.022

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) [NS094573]
  2. University of Pittsburgh
  3. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) grant [I01 BX003651]
  4. VA Senior Research Career Scientist Award
  5. Duquesne University
  6. NIH

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that after experimental stroke, Treg cells infiltrate the brain in mice and promote white matter repair and functional recovery. Treg cells enhance microglial reparative activity, promoting oligodendrogenesis and white matter repair. Increasing Treg cell numbers can improve white matter integrity and rescue neurological functions in the long term.
The precise mechanisms underlying the beneficial effects of regulatory T (Treg) cells on long-term tissue repair remain elusive. Here, using single-cell RNA sequencing and flow cytometry, we found that Treg cells infiltrated the brain 1 to 5 weeks after experimental stroke in mice. Selective depletion of Treg cells diminished oligodendrogenesis, white matter repair, and functional recovery after stroke. Transcriptomic analyses revealed potent immunomodulatory effects of brain-infiltrating Treg cells on other immune cells, including monocyte-lineage cells. Microglia depletion, but not T cell lymphopenia, mitigated the beneficial effects of transferred Treg cells on white matter regeneration. Mechanistically, Treg cell-derived osteopontin acted through integrin receptors on microglia to enhance microglial reparative activity, consequently promoting oligodendrogenesis and white matter repair. Increasing Treg cell numbers by delivering IL-2:IL-2 antibody complexes after stroke improved white matter integrity and rescued neurological functions over the long term. These findings reveal Treg cells as a neurorestorative target for stroke recovery.

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