4.7 Article

Early T cell infiltration is modulated by programed cell death-1 protein and its ligand (PD-1/PD-L1) interactions in murine kidney transplants

期刊

KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL
卷 98, 期 4, 页码 897-905

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.kint.2020.03.037

关键词

acute kidney injury; acute rejection; inflammation; lymphocytes; renal pathology; transplantation

资金

  1. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (National Institutes of Health) [PO1 AI087586]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Allogeneic transplants elicit dynamic T cell responses that are modulated by positive and negative co-stimulatory receptors. Understanding mechanisms that intrinsically modulate the immune responses to transplants is vital to develop rational treatment for rejection. Here, we have investigated the impact of programed cell death-1 (PD-1) protein, a negative co-stimulatory receptor, on the rejection of MHC incompatible kidney transplants in mice. T cells were found to rapidly infiltrate the kidneys of A/J mice transplanted to C57BL/6 mice, which peaked at six days and decline by day 14. The T cells primarily encircled tubules with limited infiltration of the tubular epithelium. Lipocalin 2 (LCN2), a marker of tubular injury, also peaked in the urine at day six and then declined. Notably, flow cytometry demonstrated that most of the T cells expressed PD-1 (over 90% of CD8 and about 75% of CD4 cells) at day six. Administration of blocking antibody to PD-L1, the ligand for PD-1, before day six increased T cell infiltrates and urinary LCN2, causing terminal acute rejection. In contrast, blocking PD-1/PD-L1 interactions after day six caused only a transient increase in urinary LCN2. Depleting CD4 and CD8 T cells virtually eliminated LCN2 in the urine in support of T cells injuring tubules. Thus, our data indicate that PD-1/PD-L1 interactions are not just related to chronic antigenic stimulation of T cells but are critical for the regulation of acute T cell responses to renal transplants.

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