BACKGROUND: Controversy exists about the conditions effecting the development of forkhead/winghead helix transcription factor P3 (FOXP3) expressing T cells and their relevance in transplant recipients. METHODS: We generated carboxy-fluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester-labeled CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells in mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLRs) ("the Treg MLR"), with varying human leukocyte antigen (HLA) disparities and cell components. Five color flow cytometry and H-thymidine uptakes were the readouts. RESULTS: (1) Despite lower stimulation indices (SIs) than two DR-mismatched MLRs, 2 DR-matched MLRs generated more than twofold higher percentages when gating on proliferating CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells; (2) Even with low numbers of proliferating cells, autologous and HLA identical MLRs generated the highest FOXP3+:FOXP3- cell ratios; (3) Elimination of either non-CD3+ responding cells (resulting in "direct presentation" only) or responding CD25+ (Treg generating) cells increased the SI but inhibited proliferating CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cell development; (4) MLR-generated CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells added as third components specifically inhibited the same freshly set MLR SI and caused recruitment of new CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells. As an example of the "Treg MLR" immune monitoring potential, addition of third component peripheral blood mononuclear cell containing high percentages of CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells from an HLA identical kidney transplant recipient (in a tolerance protocol) caused donor-specific Treg MLR inhibition or recruitment. This was similar to the third component MLR Tregs generated entirely in vitro. CONCLUSION: In the Treg MLR, the generation of CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells is more pronounced in the context of self-recognition (HLA matching, indirect presentation). These cells can be assayed for MLR inhibitory and Treg recruitment functions, so as to immunologically monitor the allospecific regulation after transplantation.
BACKGROUND: Controversy exists about the conditions effecting the development of forkhead/winghead helix transcription factor P3 (FOXP3) expressing T cells and their relevance in transplant recipients. METHODS: We generated carboxy-fluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester-labeled CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells in mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLRs) ("the Treg MLR"), with varying human leukocyte antigen (HLA) disparities and cell components. Five color flow cytometry and H-thymidine uptakes were the readouts. RESULTS: (1) Despite lower stimulation indices (SIs) than two DR-mismatched MLRs, 2 DR-matched MLRs generated more than twofold higher percentages when gating on proliferating CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells; (2) Even with low numbers of proliferating cells, autologous and HLA identical MLRs generated the highest FOXP3+:FOXP3- cell ratios; (3) Elimination of either non-CD3+ responding cells (resulting in "direct presentation" only) or responding CD25+ (Treg generating) cells increased the SI but inhibited proliferating CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cell development; (4) MLR-generated CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells added as third components specifically inhibited the same freshly set MLR SI and caused recruitment of new CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells. As an example of the "Treg MLR" immune monitoring potential, addition of third component peripheral blood mononuclear cell containing high percentages of CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells from an HLA identical kidney transplant recipient (in a tolerance protocol) caused donor-specific Treg MLR inhibition or recruitment. This was similar to the third component MLR Tregs generated entirely in vitro. CONCLUSION: In the Treg MLR, the generation of CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells is more pronounced in the context of self-recognition (HLA matching, indirect presentation). These cells can be assayed for MLR inhibitory and Treg recruitment functions, so as to immunologically monitor the allospecific regulation after transplantation.
Authors: I Esmé Dijke; Kadir Caliskan; Sander S Korevaar; Alex P W M Maat; Pieter E Zondervan; Aggie H M M Balk; Willem Weimar; Carla C Baan Journal: Transpl Immunol Date: 2007-08-31 Impact factor: 1.708
Authors: Ana Hernandez; Melissa Burger; Bonnie B Blomberg; William A Ross; Jeffrey J Gaynor; Inna Lindner; Robert Cirocco; James M Mathew; Manuel Carreno; Yidi Jin; Kelvin P Lee; Violet Esquenazi; Joshua Miller Journal: Hum Immunol Date: 2007-07-02 Impact factor: 2.850
Authors: V A L Huurman; C R van der Torren; P Gillard; R Hilbrands; E P M W van der Meer-Prins; G Duinkerken; F K Gorus; F H J Claas; B Keymeulen; D L Roelen; D G Pipeleers; B O Roep Journal: Clin Exp Immunol Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Joseph R Leventhal; Joshua Miller; James M Mathew; Sunil Kurian; Anat R Tambur; John Friedewald; Jane Charrette; Michael M Abecassis Journal: Hum Immunol Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 2.850
Authors: Josh Levitsky; Lorenzo Gallon; Joshua Miller; Anat R Tambur; Joseph Leventhal; Catherine Flaa; Xuemei Huang; Bara Sarraj; Edward Wang; James M Mathew Journal: Transplantation Date: 2011-01-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Reid A Roberts; Timothy K Eitas; James D Byrne; Brandon M Johnson; Patrick J Short; Karen P McKinnon; Shannon Reisdorf; J Christopher Luft; Joseph M DeSimone; Jenny P Ting Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2015-08-20 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: J R Leventhal; J M Mathew; D R Salomon; S M Kurian; J J Friedewald; L Gallon; I Konieczna; A R Tambur; J Charette; J Levitsky; C Jie; Y S Kanwar; M M Abecassis; J Miller Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2015-07-30 Impact factor: 8.086