4.7 Article

Kidney-infiltrating CD4+ T-cell clones promote nephritis in lupus-prone mice

期刊

KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL
卷 82, 期 9, 页码 969-979

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ki.2012.242

关键词

glomerulonephritis; immunology and pathology; lupus nephritis

资金

  1. Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
  3. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [24390252] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In systemic lupus erythematosus, CD4(+) T cells play key roles in the initiation and promotion of autoantigen-specific humoral immunity, and indirect evidence suggests that T cells are pathogenic effectors in lupus nephritis. The contribution of kidney-infiltrating T cells to nephritis, however, has not been verified because of the difficulty in directly analyzing organ-infiltrating T cells. Here, we examined the pathogenic roles of autoreactive cytokine-expressing CD4(+) T cells from the kidneys of early nephritic MRL/lpr mice. Interferon (IFN)-gamma-secreting cells were enriched among CD5(high)CD4(+) T cells found in the inflamed kidneys. Using single-cell analysis of the T-cell receptor (TCR)(high)CD5(high)CD4(+) T cells from the kidneys of early nephritic MRL/lpr mice, two IFN-gamma-expressing CD4(+) T cell clones, MLK2 and MLK3, were identified. CD4(+) T cells transduced with the T-cell receptor genes from each clone responded to splenic dendritic cells in an MHC class II -dependent manner, but not to B cells or macrophages. MLK3-transduced CD4(+) T cells proliferated in the spleens of prenephritic mice, promoted nephritis progression upon adoptive transfer, and enhanced the deposition of C3 without promoting anti-double-stranded DNA antibody production. Thus, CD4(+) T cells in the inflamed kidneys of MRL/lpr mice contribute to nephritis progression. Kidney International (2012) 82, 969-979; doi:10.1038/ki.2012.242; published online 4 July 2012

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