4.6 Article

Two human immunodeficiency virus vaccinal lipopeptides follow different cross-presentation pathways in human dendritic cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 77, 期 2, 页码 1564-1570

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.77.2.1564-1570.2003

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An efficient vaccine against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) must induce good cellular immune responses. To do this, it must be processed and presented by dendritic cells, which are required for primary T-lymphocyte stimulation. We have previously shown that a model lipopeptide containing a short epitopic peptide from HIV-1 was endocytosed and presented in association with major histocompatibility complex class I molecules by human dendritic cells to specific CD8(+) T lymphocytes, but the cross-presentation pathway needed to be precisely determined. We have studied a longer lipopeptide (Pol(461-484)) and another lipopeptide (Nef(66-97)) currently being used in vaccine trials. Like the shorter lipopeptide, the rhodamine-labeled Pol(461-484) lipopeptide was internalized by endocytosis, as assessed by confocal microscopy. The lipopeptides were processed by dendritic cells and presented to CD8(+) T cells specific for the HLA-A*0201-restricted Pol(476-484) and the HLA-A*0301-restricted Nef(73-82) epitope, respectively. Presentation of both lipopeptides was inhibited by brefeldin A. Presentation of the Pol lipopeptide was inhibited by epoxomycin, a proteasome-specific inhibitor, but not by monensin. This shows that it gained access to the cytosol to be digested by the proteasome. In contrast, presentation of the Nef lipopeptide was not inhibited by epoxomycin but was inhibited by monensin, a classical inhibitor of acid-dependent endosomal enzyme activity, indicating an endocytic processing pathway yielding to major histocompatibility complex class I-restricted presentation. Therefore, the two lipopeptides followed different cross-presentation pathways, both resulting in efficient presentation to CD8(+) T lymphocytes.

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