4.6 Article

Ex-Th17 (Nonclassical Th1) Cells Are Functionally Distinct from Classical Th1 and Th17 Cells and Are Not Constrained by Regulatory T Cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 198, 期 6, 页码 2249-2259

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1600737

关键词

-

资金

  1. Science Foundation Ireland Starting Investigator [BI593]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Th17 cells are an important therapeutic target in autoimmunity. However, it is known that Th17 cells exhibit considerable plasticity, particularly at sites of autoimmune inflammation. Th17 cells can switch to become ex-Th17 cells that no longer produce IL-17 but produce IFN-g. These ex-Th17 cells are also called nonclassical Th1 cells because of their ability to produce IFN-g, similar to Th1 cells; however, it is unclear whether they resemble Th1 or Th17 cells in terms of their function and regulation, and whether they have a pathogenic role in autoimmunity. We compared the phenotypic and functional features of human Th17, Th1, and ex-Th17 cell populations. Our data showed that despite their loss of IL-17 expression, ex-Th17 cells were more polyfunctional in terms of cytokine production than either Th1 or bona fide Th17 cells, and produced increased amounts of proinflammatory cytokines. The proliferative brake on Th17 cells appeared to be lifted because ex-Th17 cells proliferated more than Th17 cells after stimulation. In contrast with Th1 and Th17 cells, ex-Th17 cells were highly resistant to suppression of proliferation and cytokines by regulatory T cells. Finally, we showed that ex-Th17 cells accumulated in the joints of rheumatoid arthritis patients. Taken together, these data indicate that human ex-Th17 cells are functionally distinct from Th1 and Th17 cells, and suggest that they may play a pathogenic role at sites of autoimmunity, such as the rheumatoid arthritis joint where they accumulate. These findings have implications for therapeutic strategies that target IL-17, because these may not inhibit pathogenic ex-Th17 cells.

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