4.7 Article

The receptor repertoire and functional profile of follicular T cells in HIV-infected lymph nodes

期刊

SCIENCE IMMUNOLOGY
卷 3, 期 22, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/sciimmunol.aan8884

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical Research Grant from W.W. Smith Charitable Trust Foundation
  2. Penn Center for AIDS Research Pilot and Feasibility grant [P30-AI045008]
  3. Veterans Affairs Merit Award [IMMA-020-15F]
  4. NIH National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [R01AI134879]
  5. NIH [R00AG040149, S10OD020072]
  6. Welch Foundation [F1785]
  7. Thrust 2000-George Sawyer Endowed Graduate Fellowship in Engineering

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Follicular helper CD4(+)T cells (T-FH) play an integral role in promoting B cell differentiation and affinity maturation. Whereas T-FH cell frequencies are increased in lymph nodes (LNs) from individuals infected with HIV, humoral immunity remains impaired during chronic HIV infection. Whether HIV inhibits T-FH responses in LNs remains unclear. Advances in this area have been limited by the difficulty of accessing human lymphoid tissues. Here, we combined high-dimensional mass cytometry with T cell receptor repertoire sequencing to interrogate the composition of T-FH cells in primary human LNs. We found evidence for intact antigen-driven clonal expansion of T-FH cells and selective utilization of specific complementarity-determining region 3 (CDR3) motifs during chronic HIV infection, but the resulting T-FH cells acquired an activation-related T-FH cell signature characterized by interleukin-21 (IL-21) dominance. These IL-21(+) T-FH cells contained an oligoclonal HIV-reactive population that preferentially accumulated in patients with severe HIV infection and was associated with aberrant B cell distribution in the same LN. These data indicate that T-FH cells remain capable of responding to HIV antigens during chronic HIV infection but become functionally skewed and oligoclonally restricted under persistent antigen stimulation.

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