4.6 Article

CD4+ regulatory T cells are spared from deletion by antilymphocyte serum, a polyclonal anti-T cell antibody

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 176, 期 7, 页码 4125-4132

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.176.7.4125

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK60721] Funding Source: Medline
  2. PHS HHS [AII4551] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Broad T cell depletion has been used as an integral part of treatment in transplantation and autoimmune diseases. Following depletion, residual T cells undergo homeostatic proliferation and convert to memory-like T cells. In this study, we investigated the effect of T cell depletion by antilymphocyte serum (ALS), a polyclonal anti-T cell Ab, on CD4(+) regulatory T cells. After ALS treatment, CD4(+)CD25(+) T cells underwent proliferation and expressed a memory T cell marker, CD44. One week after ALS treatment, both CD25(+) and CD25(-) T cells exhibited increased suppression of alloresponses in vitro, which waned thereafter to the levels mediated by naive CD25(+) and CD25(-) T cells. By real-time PCR analyses, ALS treatment of CD4-deficient mice adoptively transferred with Thy1.2(+)CD4(+)CD25(+)Foxp(3+) and Thy1.1(+)CD4(+)CD25(-)Foxp3(-) T cells resulted in the appearance of Thy1.2(+)CD4(+)CD25(-)Foxp(3+) and Thy1.1(+)CD4(+)CD25(+)Foxp3(+) T cells, suggesting the conversion between CD25(+) and CD25(-) T cells. Naive CD25(+) T cells expressed a higher level of intracellular Bcl-x(L) than CD25(-) T cells. Up-regulation of the Bcl-x(L) molecule during ALS-induced homeostatic expansion further promoted survival of CD25(+) and, to a lessor degree, CD25(-) cells. These results indicate that CD25(+) T cells are spared from ALS-mediated deletion, with some CD25(+) T cells converting to CD25(-) T cells, and continue to exhibit regulatory activity. The concomitant presence of T cell deletion and continuous regulatory T cell activity may underlie the therapeutic effect of ALS, particularly in treatment of autoimmune diseases.

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