4.8 Article

T cells in peripheral blood after gluten challenge in coeliac disease

期刊

GUT
卷 54, 期 9, 页码 1217-1223

出版社

B M J PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/gut.2004.059998

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Current understanding of T cell epitopes in coeliac disease (CD) largely derives from intestinal T cell clones in vitro. T cell clones allow identification of gluten peptides that stimulate T cells but do not quantify their contribution to the overall gluten specific T cell response in individuals with CD when exposed to gluten in vivo. Aims: To determine the contribution of a putative dominant T cell epitope to the overall gliadin T cell response in HLA-DQ2 CD in vivo. Patients: HLA-DQ2+ individuals with CD and healthy controls. Methods: Subjects consumed 20 g of gluten daily for three days. Interferon gamma (IFN-gamma) ELISPOT was performed using peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) to enumerate and characterise peptide and gliadin specific T cells before and after gluten challenge. Results: In 50/59 CD subjects, irrespective of homo- or heterozygosity for HLA-DQ2, IFN-gamma ELISPOT responses for an optimal concentration of A-gliadin 57 - 73 Q-E65 were between 10 and 1500 per million PBMC, equivalent to a median 51% of the response for a near optimal'' concentration of deamidated gliadin. Whole deamidated gliadin and gliadin epitope specific T cells induced in peripheral blood expressed an intestinal homing integrin (alpha 4 beta 7) and were HLA-DQ2 restricted. Peripheral blood T cells specific for A- gliadin 57 - 73 Q-E65 are rare in untreated CD but can be predictably induced two weeks after gluten exclusion. Conclusion: In vivo gluten challenge is a simple safe method that allows relevant T cells to be analysed and quantified in peripheral blood by ELISPOT, and should permit comprehensive high throughput mapping of gluten T cell epitopes in large numbers of individuals with CD.

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

4.8
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