4.7 Article

Adjuvant facilitates tolerance induction to factor VIII in hemophilic mice through a Foxp3-independent mechanism that relies on IL-10

期刊

BLOOD
卷 121, 期 19, 页码 3936-3945

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2012-09-457135

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia Portugal [PTDC/SAU-OSM/108267/2008, PTDC/SAU-TOX/114424/2009]
  2. Bayer Global Hemophilia Award
  3. CSL-Behring Professor Heimburger Award
  4. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [PTDC/SAU-OSM/108267/2008, PTDC/SAU-TOX/114424/2009] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Current treatment of hemophilia consists of the administration of recombinant clotting factors, such as factor VIII (FVIII). However, patients with severe hemophilia can mount immune responses targeting therapeutically administered FVIII through inhibitory immunoglobulins that limit treatment efficacy. Induction of immune tolerance to FVIII in hemophilia has been extensively studied but remains an unmet need. We found that nondepleting anti-CD4 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are effective in inducing long-term tolerance to FVIII in different strains of hemophilic mice. Tolerance induction was facilitated when anti-CD4 mAbs were administered together with FVIII adsorbed in an adjuvant (alum). The observed state of tolerance was antigen specific, with mice remaining immune competent to respond to different antigens. Importantly, we found that following immunization with FVIII, the primed cells remained susceptible to tolerance induction. Studies with Foxp3-deficient and interleukin 10 (IL-10)-deficient mice demonstrated that the underlying tolerance mechanism is Foxp3 independent but requires IL-10. Our data show that an adjuvant, when administered together with a tolerizing agent such as nondepleting anti-CD4, can facilitate the induction of long-term tolerance to recombinant proteins, possibly not only in hemophilia but also in other diseases that are treated with potentially immunogenic therapeutics.

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