4.6 Article

IL-7 Receptor Drives Early T Lineage Progenitor Expansion

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 209, 期 10, 页码 1942-1949

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.2101046

关键词

-

资金

  1. Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciencia
  2. Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation
  3. Portuguese National Research Council (Fundacao para a Cienciae Tecnologia Grants) [PTDC/BIA-BID/30925/2017, PTDC/MED-IMU/3649/2021]
  4. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia Contract [CEECIND/03106/2018]
  5. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia Ph.D. Fellowships [D/BD/114341/2016, PD/BD/139190/2018]
  6. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia [LISBOA-01-0145-FEDER-022170, PPBI-POCI-01-0145-FEDER-022122]
  7. Lisboa2020, under PORTUGAL2020 agreement (European Regional Development Fund)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

IL-7/IL-7R is necessary for T lymphocyte differentiation by promoting proliferation and survival of the most immature thymocytes, leading to a significant decrease in the number of early T lineage progenitor cells.
IL-7 and IL-7R are essential for T lymphocyte differentiation by driving proliferation and survival of specific developmental stages. Although early T lineage progenitors (ETPs), the most immature thymocyte population known, have a history of IL-7R expression, it is unclear whether IL-7R is required at this stage. In this study, we show that mice lacking IL-7 or IL-7R have a marked loss of ETPs that results mostly from a cell-autonomous defect in proliferation and survival, although no changes were detected in Bcl2 protein levels. Furthermore, a fraction of ETPs responded to IL-7 stimulation ex vivo by phosphorylating Stat5, and IL-7R was enriched in the most immature Flt3(+)Ccr9(+) ETPs. Consistently, IL-7 promoted the expansion of Flt3(+) but not Flt3(-) ETPs on OP9-DLL4 cocultures, without affecting differentiation at either stage. Taken together, our data show that IL-7/IL-7R is necessary following thymus seeding by promoting proliferation and survival of the most immature thymocytes.

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

4.6
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