4.7 Article

Regulatory dendritic cells program generation of interleukin-4-producing alternative memory CD4 T cells with suppressive activity

期刊

BLOOD
卷 117, 期 4, 页码 1218-1227

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2010-05-285494

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Key Basic Research Program of China [2009CB521902, 2007CB512403]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30721091, 30771963, 30872303]
  3. National Key Project for Hepatitis B Research [2008ZX10002-008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The heterogeneity and mechanisms for the generation of CD4 memory T (CD4 Tm) cells remain elusive. Distinct subsets of dendritic cells (DCs) have been found to regulate a distinct T-helper (Th)-cell subset differentiation by influencing cytokine cues around CD4 T cells; however, whether and how the regulatory DC subset can regulate Tm-cell differentiation remains unknown. Further, there is no ideal in vitro experimental system with which to mimic the 3 phases of the CD4 T-cell immune response (expansion, con-traction, memory generation) and/or to culture CD4 Tm cells for more than a month. By analyzing CD4 T cells programmed by long-term coculture with regulatory DCs, we identified a population of long-lived CD4 T cells with a CD44(hi)CD62L(-)CCR7(-) effector memory phenotype and rapid, preferential secretion of the Th2 cytokines interleukin-4 (IL-4), IL-5, IL-10, and IL-13 after antigenic stimulation. These regulatory DC-programmed Tm cells suppress CD4 T-cell activation and proliferation in vitro via IL-10 and inhibit the delayed-type hypersensitivity response once infused in vivo. We also identify their natural counterpart, which is up-regulated by regulatory DC transfusion and negatively regulates the recall response in vivo. Different from interferon-gamma-producing conventional Tm cells, these IL-4-producing CD4 Tm cells act as alternative Tm cells with a regulatory function, suggesting a new way of negative immune regulation by memory T cells. (Blood. 2011;117(4):1218-1227)

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