2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Operational tolerance in kidney transplantation and associated biomarkers : Serendipitous tolerance in kidney recipients

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p id="d6329315e234">In the 1960s, our predecessors won a historical battle against acute rejection and ensured that transplantation became a common life‐saving treatment. In parallel with this success, or perhaps because of it, we lost the battle for long‐lived transplants, being overwhelmed with chronic immune insults and the toxicities of immunosuppression. It is likely that current powerful treatments block acute rejection, but at the same time condemn the few circulating donor cells that would have been able to elicit immunoregulatory host responses towards the allograft. Under these conditions, spontaneously tolerant kidney recipients – i.e. patients who maintain allograft function in the absence of immunosuppression – are merely accidents; they are scarce, mysterious and precious. Several teams pursue the goal of finding a biomarker that would guide us towards the 'just right’ level of immunosuppression that avoids rejection while leaving some space for donor immune cells. Some cellular assays are attractive because they are antigen‐specific, and provide a comprehensive view of immune responses toward the graft. These seem to closely follow patient regulatory capacities. However, these tests are cumbersome, and require abundant cellular material from both donor and recipient. The latest newcomers, non‐antigen‐specific recipient blood transcriptomic biomarkers, offer the promise that a practicable and simple signature may be found that overcomes the complexity of a system in which an infinite number of individual cell combinations can lead possibly to graft acceptance. Biomarker studies are as much an objective – identifying tolerant patients, enabling tolerance trials – as a means to deciphering the underlying mechanisms of one of the most important current issues in transplantation. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references118

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Natural versus adaptive regulatory T cells.

          The regulation of immune responses to self-antigens is a complex process that involves maintaining self-tolerance while retaining the capacity to mount robust immune responses against invading microorganisms. Over the past few years, many new insights into this process have been gained, leading to the re-emergence of the idea that regulatory T (T(Reg)) cells are a central mechanism of immune regulation. These insights have raised fundamental questions concerning what constitutes a T(Reg) cell, where they develop and what signals maintain T(Reg)-cell populations in a functional state. Here, we propose the existence of two subsets of CD4+ T(Reg) cells--natural and adaptive--that differ in terms of their development, specificity, mechanism of action and dependence on T-cell receptor and co-stimulatory signalling.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Single-cell analysis of normal and FOXP3-mutant human T cells: FOXP3 expression without regulatory T cell development.

            Forkhead winged-helix transcription factor Foxp3 serves as the dedicated mediator of the genetic program governing CD25+CD4+ regulatory T cell (T(R)) development and function in mice. In humans, its role in mediating T(R) development has been controversial. Furthermore, the fate of T(R) precursors in FOXP3 deficiency has yet to be described. Making use of flow cytometric detection of human FOXP3, we have addressed the relationship between FOXP3 expression and human T(R) development. Unlike murine Foxp3- T cells, a small subset of human CD4+ and CD8+ T cells transiently up-regulated FOXP3 upon in vitro stimulation. Induced FOXP3, however, did not alter cell-surface phenotype or suppress T helper 1 cytokine expression. Furthermore, only ex vivo FOXP3+ T(R) cells persisted after prolonged culture, suggesting that induced FOXP3 did not activate a T(r) developmental program in a significant number of cells. FOXP3 flow cytometry was also used to further characterize several patients exhibiting symptoms of immune dysregulation, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, X-linked syndrome (IPEX) with or without FOXP3 mutations. Most patients lacked FOXP3-expressing cells, further solidifying the association between FOXP3 deficiency and immune dysregulation, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, X-linked syndrome. Interestingly, one patient bearing a FOXP3 mutation enabling expression of stable FOXP3(mut) protein exhibited FOXP3(mut)-expressing cells among a subset of highly activated CD4+ T cells. This observation raises the possibility that the severe autoimmunity in FOXP3 deficiency can be attributed, in part, to aggressive T helper cells that have developed from T(R) precursors.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Regulatory T cells in transplantation tolerance.

              The identification and characterization of regulatory T (T(Reg)) cells that can control immune responsiveness to alloantigens have opened up exciting opportunities for new therapies in transplantation. After exposure to alloantigens in vivo, alloantigen-specific immunoregulatory activity is enriched in a population of CD4+ T cells that express high levels of CD25. In vivo, common mechanisms seem to underpin the activity of CD4+CD25+ T(Reg) cells in both naive and manipulated hosts. However, the origin, allorecognition properties and molecular basis for the suppressive activity of CD4+CD25+ T(Reg) cells, as well as their relationship to other populations of regulatory cells that exist after transplantation, remain a matter of debate..
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clinical & Experimental Immunology
                Clin Exp Immunol
                Wiley
                00099104
                August 2017
                August 2017
                May 29 2017
                : 189
                : 2
                : 138-157
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Nephrology, Dialysis, and Transplantation; CUB Hôpital Erasme and Institute of Interdisciplinary Research in Molecular and Human Biology (IRIBHM), Université Libre de Bruxelles; Brussels Belgium
                [2 ]Department of Nephrology; Centre Hospitalier EpiCURA; Baudour Belgium
                [3 ]Department of Human Genetics; CUB Hôpital Erasme and Institute of Interdisciplinary Research in Molecular and Human Biology (IRIBHM), Université Libre de Bruxelles; Brussels Belgium
                [4 ]Department of Nephrology; Universitair Ziekenhuis Antwerpen and Antwerp University; Antwerp Belgium
                Article
                10.1111/cei.12981
                5508347
                28449211
                e31fff89-0f55-42f9-ad70-a661b31f7139
                © 2017

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article