4.7 Article

α-1-Antitrypsin (AAT)-modified donor cells suppress GVHD but enhance the GVL effect: a role for mitochondrial bioenergetics

期刊

BLOOD
卷 124, 期 18, 页码 2881-2891

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2014-04-570440

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) [K08 DK085156, HL036444]
  2. German Center for Lung Research
  3. Hannover Medical School
  4. National Institutes of Health [AI 15614, ES020819-03, P50 CA 138293-03]
  5. Histogenetics, Ossining, NY

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hematopoietic cell transplantation is curative in many patients. However, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), triggered by alloreactive donor cells, has remained a major complication. Here, we show an inverse correlation between plasma alpha-1-antitrypsin (AAT) levels in human donors and the development of acute GVHD in the recipients (n=111; P=.0006). In murine models, treatment of transplant donors with human AAT resulted in an increase in interleukin-10 messenger RNA and CD8(+)CD11c(+)CD205(+) major histocompatibility complex class II+ dendritic cells (DCs), and the prevention or attenuation of acute GVHD in the recipients. Ablation of DCs (in AAT-treated CD11c-DTR donors) decreased CD4(+)CD25(+) FoxP3(+) regulatory T cells to one-third and abrogated the anti-GVHD effect. The graft-versus-leukemia (GVL) effect of donor cells (against A20 tumor cells) was maintained or even enhanced with AAT treatment of the donor, mediated by an expanded population of NK1.1(+), CD49B(+), CD122(+), CD335(+) NKG2D-expressing natural killer (NK) cells. Blockade of NKG2D significantly suppressed the GVL effect. Metabolic analysis showed a high glycolysis-high oxidative phosphorylation profile for NK1.1(+) cells, CD4(+)CD25(+)FoxP3(+) T cells, and CD11c(+) DCs but not for effector T cells, suggesting a cell type-specific effect of AAT. Thus, via altered metabolism, AAT exerts effective GVHD protection while enhancing GVL effects.

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