4.6 Article

Zwitterionic polysaccharides stimulate T cells by MHC class II-dependent interactions

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 169, 期 11, 页码 6149-6153

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.169.11.6149

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [AI 39576, AI 34073] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polysaccharides of pathogenic extracellular bacteria commonly have negatively charged groups or no charged groups at all. These molecules have been considered classic T cell-independent Ags that do not elicit cell-mediated immune responses in mice. However, bacterial polysaccharides with a zwitterionic charge motif (ZPSs), such as the capsular polysaccharides of many strains of Bacteroides fragilis, Staphylococcus aureus, and Streptococcus pneumoniae type 1 elicit potent CD4(+) T cell responses in vivo and in vitro. The cell-mediated response to ZPS depends on the presence of both positively charged and negatively charged groups on each repeating unit of the polysaccharide. In this study, we define some of the requirements for the presentation of ZPS to CD4(+) T cells. We provide evidence that direct interactions of T cells with APCs are essential for T cell activation by ZPS. Monocytes, dendritic cells, and B cells are all able to serve as APCs for ZPS-mediated T cell activation. APCs lacking MHC class II molecules do not support this activity. Furthermore, mAb to HLA-DR specifically blocks ZPS-mediated T cell activation, while mAbs to other MHC class II and class I molecules do not. Immunoprecipitation of lysates of MHC class II-expressing cells following incubation with ZPS shows binding of ZPS and HLA-DR. Electron microscopy reveals colocalization of ZPS with HLA-DR on the cell surface and in compartments of the endocytic pathway. These results indicate that MHC class II molecules expressing HLA-DR on professional APCs are required for ZPS-induced T cell activation. The implication is that binding of ZPS to HLA-DR may be required for T cell activation.

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