4.5 Article

Activation drives PD-1 expression during vaccine-specific proliferation and following lentiviral infection in macaques

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 38, 期 5, 页码 1435-1445

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/eji.200737857

关键词

exhaustion; HIV; PD-1; SIV; vaccine

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [2 T32 AI 007632-06, T32 AI007632] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [5 R01 AG 021521, R01 AG021521, R01 AG021521-08] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIGMS NIH HHS [T32 GM007229, T32 GM 07229] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent data supports that increased expression of PD-1, a negative regulator of immune function, is associated with T cell exhaustion during chronic viral infection. However, PD-1 expression during acute infection and vaccination has not been studied in great detail in primates. Here, we examine PD-1 expression on CD3(+) T cells following DNA vaccination or lentiviral infection of macaques. Ex vivo peptide stimulation of PBMC from DNA-vaccinated uninfected macaques revealed a temporal increase in PD-1 expression in proliferating antigen-specific CD8(+) T-cells. Following the initial increase, PD-1 expression steadily declined as proliferation continued, with a concomitant increase in IFN-gamma secretion. Subsequent examination of PD-1 expression on T cells from uninfected and lentivirus-infected non-vaccinated macaques revealed a significant increase in PD-1 expression with lentiviral infection, consistent with previous reports. PD-1 expression was highest on cells with activated memory and effector phenotypes. Despite their decreased telomere length, PD-1(hi) T cell populations do not appear to have statistically significant uncapped telomeres, typically indicative of proliferative exhaustion, suggesting a different mechanistic regulation of proliferation by PD-1. Our data indicate that PD-1 expression is increased as a result of T cell activation during a primary immune response as well as during persistent immune activation in macaques.

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

4.5
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