4.4 Article

Schistosome infection stimulates host CD4+ T helper cell and B-cell responses against a novel egg antigen, thioredoxin peroxidase

期刊

INFECTION AND IMMUNITY
卷 69, 期 2, 页码 1134-1141

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/IAI.69.2.1134-1141.2001

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI018919, N01-AI-55270, R03 AI055270, AI-18919, AI-041197] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Egg granuloma formation during schistosome infections is mediated by CD4(+) T helper (Th) cells sensitized to egg antigens; however, most of the relevant sensitizing egg antigens are still unknown, Here we show that schistosome thioredoxin peroxidase (TPx)-1 is a novel T- and B-cell egg antigen in schistosome-infected mice. CD4(+) Th cell responses to fractionated egg components identified a significant response against a 26-kDa antigen; a partial amino acid sequence of this antigen was found to be identical to that of Schistosoma mansoni TPx-1, The native TPx-1 elicited significant proliferative responses as well as gamma interferon (IFN-gamma), interleukin-2 (IL-2), IL-4, and IL-5 secretion in CD4(+) cells from 8.5-week-infected CBA and C57BL/6 mice. By comparison, recombinant TPx-1 elicited a smaller, more type I-polarized response, with significant production of IFN-gamma and IL-2, less IL-5, and essentially no IL-4. In C57BL/6 mice the responses to TPx-1 were relatively more prominent than that directed against the major egg antigen, Sm-p40, whereas in CBA mice the reverse was true. B-cell responses were also monitored in infected C57BL/6, C3H, CBA, and BALB/c mice. All strains had significant antibody levels against the TPx-1 protein, but the most significant antibody production ensued following parasite oviposition, TPx-1 was localized in eggs and shown to be secreted by eggs, The identification of egg antigens is important to understand the specific basis of granuloma formation in schistosome infections and may prove to be useful in strategies to ameliorate pathological responses.

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

4.4
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