4.2 Article

Human dendritic cells pulsed with specific lipopeptides stimulate autologous antigen-specific T cells without the addition of exogenous maturation factors

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIRAL HEPATITIS
卷 15, 期 10, 页码 761-772

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2893.2008.01003.x

关键词

closed system; dendritic cells; free medium; hapatitis C virus; lipopeptides; serum

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, USA [R01 A1054459]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Serum-free culture conditions to generate immature human monocyte-derived DC (Mo-DC) were optimized, and the parameters that influence their maturation after exposure to lipopeptides containing CD4(+) and CD8(+) T-cell epitopes were examined. The lipopeptides contained a single CD4(+) helper T-cell epitopes, one of a number of human leucocyte antigen (HLA)-A2-restricted cytotoxic T-cell epitope and the lipid Pam2Cys. To ensure complete maturation of the Mo-DC, we examined (i) the optimal lipopeptide concentration, (ii) the optimal Mo-DC density and (iii) the appropriate period of exposure of the Mo-DC to the lipopeptides. The results showed that a high dose of lipopeptide (30 mu M) was no more efficient at upregulating maturation markers on Mo-DC than a low dose (6 mu M). There was an inverse relationship between Mo-DC concentration and the mean fluorescence intensity of maturation markers. In addition, at the higher cell concentrations, the chemotactic capacity of the Mo-DC towards a cognate ligand, CCL21, was reduced. Thus, high cell concentrations during lipopeptide exposure were detrimental to Mo-DC maturation and function. The duration of exposure of Mo-DC to the lipopeptides had little effect on phenotype, although Mo-DC exposed to lipopeptides for 48 rather than 4 h showed an increased ability to stimulate autologous peripheral blood mononuclear cells to release interferon-gamma in the absence of exogenous maturation factors. These findings reveal conditions for generating mature antigen-loaded DC suitable for targeted immunotherapy.

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

4.2
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