| Literature DB >> 25836261 |
Kai Timrott1, Florian W R Vondran1, Hueseyin Bektas1, Jürgen Klempnauer1, Mark D Jäger1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Application of bone marrow cells (BMC) is a promising strategy for tolerance induction, but usually requires strong depletion of the host immune system. This study evaluates the ability of immunosuppressants to evolve tolerogenic properties of BMC in view of residual alloreactivity.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25836261 PMCID: PMC4383565 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0119950
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Donor-derived fractions of MHC class IIhigh cells in the thymus of BMT recipients at day 100.
| treatment group | 1H1A+ cells (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| CD45+ / MCH IIhigh | CD103+ / MHC IIhigh | |
| 6 Gy BMT | 0.2 +/- 0.1 | n.d. |
| 6 Gy BMT CsA 14 | 0.2 +/- 0.1 | n.d. |
| 6 Gy BMT CsA 28 | 1.4 +/- 0.5 | 1.1 +/- 0.5 |
| 6 Gy BMT Srl 14 | 0.3 +/- 0.1 | n.d. |
| 6 Gy BMT Srl 28 | 49.0 +/- 8.1 | 42.7 +/- 15.3 |
| 10 Gy BMT | 83.0 +/- 7.2 | 94.2 +/- 3.4 |
Three animals per group were analyzed by flow cytometry. Mean percentages of donor-derived fractions (1H1A+) from MHC class II highly expressing cells within CD45+ leukocytes and within dendritic cells (CD103+) are given. Reliable, high-grade chimerism in blood was present only in the 10 Gy BMT and the 6 Gy BMT Srl 28 groups. All other groups did not show any reliable chimerism (n.d. = not done).
MHC (RT1) immunogenetics of strain combinations used for heart transplantation to BMT recipients.
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| RT1B/D | RT1C/E | ||
| recipient | LEW.1AR2 | a | a | u |
| BM donor | LEW.1AR1 | a | u | u |
| heart donor | LEW.1WR1 | u | u | a |
Heart graft donor strain (LEW.1WR1) shares the u haplotype in the RT1B/D region with BMC donor strain (LEW.1AR1). It is disparate to BMC donor strain in the MHC class I encoding regions RT1A and RT1C/E. To the recipient strain (LEW1AR2) it is disparate in all MHC antigen complex encoding regions.
Survival of heart grafts transplanted to irradiated BMT recipients at day 16 after BMT (during T cell recovery of recipients).
| treatment group | % chimerism | heart graft survival (days) | MST | p value vs. 6 Gy | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| day 14 | day 100 | ||||
| 6 Gy | 10, 15, 28, 30 x2, >100 | 28 | |||
| 6 Gy BMT | 2 +/- 1 | 0 | 11, 14 x2, 16 | 14 | n.s. |
| 6 Gy CsA | 18, 21, 23 x2, 34 | 23 | n.s. | ||
| 6 Gy BMT CsA | 32 +/- 8 | 0 | 14, 15, 23, 26, 29 | 23 | n.s.* |
| 6 Gy Srl | 30, 35, 40 x2, >100 | 40 | n.s. | ||
| 6 Gy BMT Srl | 62 +/- 22 | 0 | > 100 x6 | >100 | < 0.005 # |
Setting of experiments and strain combinations are based on the Table 3. Groups are named according the pre-treatment by TBI, BMT and application of immunosuppression for 14 days starting at BMT. The degree of chimerism in blood of heart graft recipients is given for day 14 and day 100. Survival of each single heart graft transplanted at day 16 and mean survival times (MST) are given. The statistical significance was appointed at p < 0.05. P values of each group are compared to the 6 Gy TBI control group (n.s. = not significant). Additional statistical tests showed that * the immunosuppressive coverage by CsA did not prolong heart graft acceptance with BMT (6 Gy BMT CsA vs. 6 Gy BMT; p = 0.06) nor without BMT (6 Gy CsA vs. 6 Gy; p = 0.42). # Immunosuppressive coverage by Srl significantly prolonged heart graft acceptance after BMC application (6 Gy BMT Srl vs. 6 Gy BMT; p < 0.001), but not without BMC application (6 Gy Srl vs. 6 Gy; p = 0.48).
Survival of heart grafts transplanted to irradiated BMT recipients at day 100 after BMT (after T cell regeneration of recipients).
| treatment group | % chimerism | heart graft survival (days) | MST | p value vs. 6 Gy | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| day 14 | day 100 | ||||
| naïve control (MHC I + II) | 7, 8 x2, 9, 10 | 8 | n.s. | ||
| naïve control (MHC I) | 54, 73, 88, > 100 x2 | 88 | |||
| 6 Gy | 8, 10 x2, 12, 14 | 10 | |||
| 6 Gy BMT | 2 +/- 1 | 0 | 8, 9 x2, 10 x2 | 9 | n.s. |
| 6 Gy BMT CsA (14 days) | 26 +/- 9 | 0 | 8, 11, 13, 14, 15 | 13 | n.s. |
| 6 Gy BMT CsA (28 days) | 23 +/- 7 | 0 | 9, 13 x2, 17, 20 | 13 | n.s. |
| 6 Gy BMT Srl (14 days) | 64 +/- 18 | 0 | 10, 12, 18, 19, 27, 32, 40 | 19 | < 0.05 * |
| 6 Gy BMT Srl (28 days) | 71 +/- 8 | 63 +/- 11 | > 100 x5 | >100 | < 0.001# |
| 10 Gy BMT | 84 +/- 9 | 98 +/- 2 | > 100 x5 | >100 | < 0.001 |
The experimental groups are named according to the pre-treatment. Heart graft donors differed in all MHC antigens from recipients and in MHC class I antigens from the BMC donors. Control groups consist of naïve recipients receiving completely MHC disparate grafts (MHC I + II) or solely MHC class I disparate grafts (MHC I). Mean percentages of chimerism in blood are given at day 14 and day 100 after BMT. Survival of each single heart graft and mean survival times for each group (MST) are given. Statistical analyses were performed using two-sided, unpaired student´s t-test. Each group was compared with the 6 Gy control group (n.s. = not significant). Additional statistical tests showed that * transient chimeras treated with Srl (6 Gy BMT Srl (14 days)) accepted heart grafts significantly longer than transient chimeras treates with CsA (6 Gy BMT CsA (14 days)) (p = 0.047). # Prolonged Srl application resulted in significantly longer heart graft acceptance (6 Gy BMT Srl (28 days) vs. 6 Gy BMT Srl (14 days) (p < 0.001).