4.7 Article

Functional plasticity of human respiratory tract dendritic cells:: GM-CSF enhances TH2 development

期刊

JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY
卷 116, 期 5, 页码 1136-1143

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2005.08.002

关键词

human respiratory tract; dendritic cells; GM-CSF; T(H)1/T(H)2

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Dendritic cells within the human respiratory mucosa (RTDCs) are proposed to initiate immune responses to foreign antigens. Their capacity to polarize T-cell responses, however, has not been investigated. Objective: To compare RTDCs with peripheral blood dendritic cells (PBDCs) with regard to phenotype, cytokine production, capacity to polarize T-cell responses, and effects of exposure to the pleiotropic cytokine, GM-CSE. Methods: CD1a(+) RTDCs and CD1c(+) PBDCs were purified from nasal turbinates of patients with nonatopic rhinitis and peripheral blood of healthy individuals, respectively. In some experiments, matched CD1c(+) RTDCs and PBDCs from patients with rhinitis were compared. The phenotype of DC was examined by flow cytometry and cytokine production by cytometric bead array. DCs were cocultured with allogeneic naive CD4(+) T cells, and cytokine production was determined by immunophenotyping, cytometric bead array, and ELISA. Results: Both RTDCs and PBDCs exhibited an immature phenotype, but RTDCs expressed lower levels of MHC class II antigen. Cross-linking of CD40 on PBDCs, but not RTDCs, induced production of IL-12p70. In mixed lymphocyte cultures, RTDCs induced a T(H)1/T(H)2 profile, whereas PBDCs induced a T(H)1 profile. Exposure of RTDCs to GM-CSF induced a T(H)2 pattern of response in the mixed lymphocyte cultures. In contrast, exposure of PBDCs to GM-CSF promoted a T(H)1 response. Conclusion: This report emphasizes the importance of studying tissue-derived primary DCs, demonstrates functional plasticity of RTDCs, and implicates GM-CSF in amplifying the potential of RTDCs to initiate T(H)2 responses in the airways.

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