The JI
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     
 

The Journal of Immunology, 2008, 180, 2284 -2293
Copyright © 2008 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Related articles in The JI
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vu, F.
Right arrow Articles by Gommerman, J. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vu, F.
Right arrow Articles by Gommerman, J. L.

ICOS, CD40, and Lymphotoxin β Receptors Signal Sequentially and Interdependently to Initiate a Germinal Center Reaction1

Frances Vu*, Umberto Dianzani§, Carl F. Ware, Tak Mak*,{dagger},{ddagger} and Jennifer L. Gommerman2,*

* Department of Immunology and {dagger} Department of Medical Biophysics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto; {ddagger} Campbell Family Institute for Breast Cancer Research, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; § Interdisciplinary Research Center of Autoimmune Diseases and Department of Medical Sciences, University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy; and Division of Molecular Immunology, La Jolla Institute of Allergy and Immunology, La Jolla, CA 92037


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Disclosures
 References
 
Germinal center (GC) responses to T-dependent Ags require effective collaboration between Th cells, activated B cells, and follicular dendritic cells within a highly organized microenvironment. Studies using gene-targeted mice have highlighted nonredundant molecules that are key for initiating and maintaining the GC niche, including the molecules of the ICOS, CD40, and lymphotoxin (LT) pathways. Signaling through ICOS has multiple consequences, including cytokine production, expression of CD40L on Th cells, and differentiation into CXCR5+ follicular Th cells, all of which are important in the GC reaction. We have therefore taken advantage of ICOS–/– mice to dissect which downstream elements are required to initiate the formation of GC. In the context of a T-dependent immune response, we found that GC B cells from ICOS–/– mice express lower levels of LT{alpha}β compared with wild-type GC B cells in vivo, and stimulation of ICOS on T cells induces LT{alpha}β on B cells in vitro. Administration of agonistic anti-LTβ receptor Ab was unable to restore the GC response in ICOS–/– mice, suggesting that additional input from another pathway is required for optimal GC generation. In contrast, treatment with agonistic anti-CD40 Ab in vivo recovered GC networks and restored LT{alpha}β expression on GC B cells in ICOS–/– mice, and this effect was dependent on LTβ receptor signaling. Collectively, these data demonstrate that ICOS activation is a prerequisite for the up-regulation of LT{alpha}β on GC B cells in vivo and provide a model for cooperation between ICOS, CD40, and LT pathways in the context of the GC response.


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Disclosures
 References
 
The germinal center (GC)3 is a dynamic microenvironment where Abs specific for pathogens are generated to protect the host. Within this complex microenvironment, Ag-specific B cells, Th cells, and follicular dendritic cells (FDCs) work together to induce, maintain, and regulate GC responses. Following immunization, Ag-specific B cells migrate to the edges of the T cell zone and form dynamic conjugates with primed CD4+ Th cells (1). Here, Ag-specific B cells receive CD40 ligand (CD40L) costimulation and cytokines from cognate Th cells, and this help is necessary for B cells to expand and colonize emerging GCs (2, 3). Once in this microenvironment, GC B cells undergo intense clonal proliferation, somatic hypermutation, and Ab class switching. As the GC response progresses, Ag-specific GC B cells can interact with FDC networks within the GC, and it is thought that FDCs will not only display Ag, but may themselves be a source of B cell survival factors (4). High-affinity B cell clones are eventually selected and differentiate into memory cells or plasma cells.

ICOS, an inducible costimulatory molecule, has been shown to be important for initiating a GC response. ICOS is a member of the CD28 family of costimulatory molecules that is expressed on T cells following TCR engagement and CD28 signaling (5, 6). Its ligand, B7RP-1 (also known as B7h, B7-H2, GL50, and LICOS), is constitutively expressed on resting B cells, macrophages, and dendritic cells (7, 8, 9, 10, 11). ICOS–/– and B7RP-1–/– mice develop poor IgG1 and IgE Ag-specific titers in response to immunization with T-dependent Ags (12, 13, 14, 15). In addition to these defects in T-dependent responses, the GC microenvironment itself is not sustained in immunized ICOS–/– mice, with GC niches being small and abortive (16). Although it is clear that ICOS stimulation has multiple downstream consequences such as cytokine production (12, 13, 14), the accumulation of follicular Th cells within the GC (17), and the expression of CD40L on Th cells (12, 13), all of which are required for optimal B cell activation and Ab class switching, the reasons for a defect in the architectural elements of the GC itself remain obscure. Because ICOS signaling is upstream of multiple pathways, we have therefore taken advantage of ICOS–/– mice to dissect which downstream elements are sequentially required to initiate the formation of GCs.

To do this, we first explored whether ICOS stimulation is required for optimal expression of members of the lymphotoxin (LT) pathway in the GC because mice deficient in LT{alpha}, LTβ, or LTβR all lack FDC networks and form GCs inefficiently, demonstrating an important role for the LT pathway in establishing and maintaining the GC microenvironment (18). Additionally, treatment with a competitive inhibitor of the LT pathway (LTβR-Ig) in adult mice results in rapid de-differentiation of FDCs and the collapse of GC structures (19, 20). LT{alpha}β is expressed on activated lymphocytes and a subset of resting B cells, whereas LTβR is expressed on stromal cells, FDCs, dendritic cells, macrophages, and high endothelial venules (21), suggesting that the pathway plays an important role in communication between activated lymphocytes and accessory cells. Studies using adoptively transferred bone marrow to immunodeficient hosts and cell-specific deletion of LTβ have shown that low levels of LT{alpha}β on naive follicular B cells is important for maintaining the integrity of the splenic microarchitecture and the development of FDCs in the primary follicle (22, 23, 24). Interestingly, GC B cells express particularly high levels of LT{alpha}β, underscoring the function of this TNF family member during GC responses (25), yet it is unclear how LT{alpha}β is regulated on GC B cells. Indeed, although CXCR5 signaling is required for LT{alpha}β expression on follicular B cells, this is not the case for GC B cells (25).

We herein show that following immunization with a T-dependent Ag, GC B cells from ICOS–/– mice express lower levels of LT{alpha}β compared with wild-type (WT) GC B cells, whereas nonactivated ICOS–/– follicular B cells expressed normal levels of LT{alpha}β, demonstrating a novel mechanism of local regulation of LT{alpha}β expression within the GC microenvironment. Injection of agonistic Ab to both the LTβR and CD40 pathways allowed us to identify which signals from these TNF family members precede GC formation. Indeed, we found that signals delivered by both CD40 and LTβR are required for restoration of GC in ICOS–/– mice. These results reveal a sequence of events for the local regulation of LT{alpha}β expression within the GC niche and provide an explanation for the GC defect observed in ICOS–/– mice.


   Materials and Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
Results
 Discussion
 Disclosures
 References
 
Mice

WT C57BL/6 mice were either bred in-house or obtained from The Jackson Laboratory. LTβ–/– mice were generated as previously described using C57BL/6 embryonic stem cells (26) and were provided by B&K Universal. ICOS–/– mice were a kind gift from Dr. Tak Mak and were backcrossed to the C57BL/6 background (n = 9) (13). CD40L–/– mice were obtained from The Jackson Laboratory. All mice were maintained in our animal facility in pathogen-free conditions and, in all cases, age-matched mice were used for comparative studies. All experiments were conducted according to University of Toronto approved animal use protocols.

In vivo immunization and treatments

Six- to 8-wk-old mice were immunized i.p. with of 100 µg of NP16-CGG ((4-hydroxy-3-nitrophenyl)acetyl chicken {gamma}-globulin; Biosearch Technologies) precipitated in a 1:1 volume of alum adjuvant (Pierce). In some experiments, at the time of immunization, mice were treated at days 0, 3, and 7 with 100 µg of either anti-LTβR (a gift from Dr. C. Ware, La Jolla Institute of Allergy and Immunology, La Jolla, CA), 50 µg of anti-CD40 (FGK45.1; a gift from Dr. R. Mittler, Emory University, Atlanta, GA), or 100 µg of LTβR-Ig (a gift from Jeff Browning, Biogen-Idec) at days –1 and 7. Rat anti-mouse or hamster IgG Ab (Jackson Immunoresearch) was used as a matched control. Blood was collected from the lateral vein of the leg before immunization and at various time points postimmunization (days 3, 6, 9, and 11). GC responses in treated/control mice were assayed at the peak of the response, that is, 12 days postimmunization.

Immunohistochemistry

Immunohistochemistry was performed as described (27). Briefly, fresh spleens were collected and embedded in OCT compound (Tissue-Tek, Sakura Finetek) and flash-frozen in an ice-cold bath of 2-methylbutane. Cryostat sections (5 µm) were obtained using a Leica 1035S cryostat, fixed in acetone for 7 min, stained with biotinylated peanut lectin (agglutinin) (PNA, Vector Laboratories), CD35, or GL7 (the latter two from BD Pharmingen), and counterstained with FITC-labeled B220. Sections were also stained with mAb FDC-M2 (ImmunoKontact) or FDC-M1 (BD Pharmingen) to label primary FDC networks or secondary GC-FDC networks, respectively. Secondary biotin-labeled anti-rat IgG (Jackson Immunoresearch) was used to detect FDC-M1 or FDC-M2. Sections were then stained with secondary anti-rat IgG biotin and then counterstained with FITC-labeled IgD (SouthernBiotech). All sections were stained with Abs conjugated to alkaline phosphatase (AP) (Roche) or HRP (Proenzyme). VECTOR NovaRED (HRP) and AP substrate kits were used for HRP and AP colormetric development (Vector Laboratories). Images of stained sections were obtained using a Leica DM-R digital fluorescence microscope and OpenLAB software.

In vitro restimulation

Single spleen-cell suspensions from LTβ–/–, wild-type, and ICOS–/– mice were prepared. Cells were plated in wells containing RPMI-1640 medium (Sigma-Aldrich), 10% FBS, 1% 2-ME, 1% L-glutamine, and 1% penicillin-streptavidin. To restimulate cells, 50 µg/ml NP-keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH) was added to plated cells. As a positive control, 0.5 ng/ml PMA and 0.5 ng/ml ionomycin were used to stimulate cells. Cell cultures were incubated overnight at 37°C, 5% CO2. For in vitro ICOS stimulation, 24-flat well plates were coated with 5 µg/ml anti-CD3 (145–2C11) and 5 µg/ml anti-ICOS (clone C398.4A) (28) or 5 µg/ml control whole rat IgG Ab overnight at 4°C. CD4+ and B220+ cells from single spleen-cell suspensions of LTβ–/–, WT, ICOS–/–, and CD40L–/– mice were purified and isolated using CD4+ T cell enrichment and B cell enrichment kits for RoboSep automated cell selection (StemCell Technologies). Flow cytometry analysis was performed to check for purity. A total of 5.0 x 105 purified CD4+ cells and 5.0 x 105 purified B220+ cells were cocultured together in media as described. Cells were analyzed by flow cytometry after 24, 48, and 72 h of incubation at 37°C. To sustain T cell survival and activation, 10 µg/ml IL-2 was added before incubation. Purified CD4+ T cells were also stimulated with 5 µg/ml anti-CD3 and 5 µg/ml anti-CD28 (clone 37.51, a gift from Dr. Watts), and, in other cases, a blocking anti-CD40L Ab (clone MR1, a gift from Dr. Watts) was added and B cells were analyzed at 48 h of incubation.

Abs and staining

Abs to B220, CD4, CD25, and CD95 (Fas), as well as all streptavidin fluorescent conjugates, were purchased from eBioscience. Ab to GL7 was purchased from BD Biosciences. PNA was purchased from Biomeda, and anti-IgD was obtained from Southern Biotech. LTβR-Ig fusion protein was used to detect surface LT{alpha}β and LIGHT (LT-like inducible protein that competes with glycoprotein D for binding herpesvirus mediator on T cells) (18), while anti-LTβ hamster mAb BBF6 was used to detect LT{alpha}β specifically (both were kind gifts from Dr. J. Browning). Ab to CD69 was a kind gift from Dr. T. Watts. Anti-ICOS agonistic Ab was provided by Dr. U. Dianzani (University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy), and anti-LTβR agonistic Ab was a kind gift from Dr. Carl Ware.

Analysis of ligand expression on in vitro restimulated cells was performed using anti-B220, anti-CD4, anti-CD69, anti-CD25, LTβR-Ig, and anti-LTβ BBF6. LTβR-Ig staining was detected using PE-conjugated anti-human Ig (Jackson Immunochemicals), and anti-LTβ BBF6 staining was detected using FITC-conjugated anti-hamster Ig (Jackson Immunochemicals). For ex vivo ligand expression, fresh splenocytes from immunized WT, LTβ–/–, and ICOS–/– mice were stained with PNA and Abs against CD4, CXCR5, B220, IgD, Fas, GL7, and LTβ (BBF6) or LTβR-Ig. Cell staining was assessed by flow cytometry on FACSCalibur (BD Biosciences) and analyzed using FlowJo software.

ELISA

Immunoplates (96-well round-bottom MaxiSorp, Nunc) were coated overnight with NP30-BSA to quantify the total anti-NP IgG1 response and with NP3-BSA to detect high-affinity anti-NP IgG1 response. BSA/TBS blocking solution (2%) was used to block nonspecific binding before adding serum in wells. Supernatants of P1–5 hybridoma were used as a standard (29). Anti-NP IgG1 in serum was detected using goat anti-mouse IgG1 conjugated to HRP (Southern Biotech) and 2,2'-amino-bis-3-ethylbenzthiazoline-6-sulfonic acid substrate (Sigma-Aldrich) with H2O2. OD was read at 405 nm using Multiskan Ascent ELISA reader and software (Thermo Scientific). Relative affinity of anti-NP-specific responses was determined by comparing relative units to the standard curve and calculating the relative unit ratio of NP3-BSA/NP30-BSA.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
Discussion
 Disclosures
 References
 
Defective germinal center formation in ICOS–/– and LTβ–/– mice in response to NP-CGG

ICOS–/– mice have morphological defects in GC formation that are similar to LTβ–/– mice (12, 13, 16). We first wanted to compare the surface phenotype of GC B cells and the location and size of GCs in both ICOS–/– and LTβ–/– mice with each strain being immunized with the same Ag and evaluated at the same time point. We therefore immunized ICOS–/–, LTβ–/–, and WT mice with 100 µg of NP16-CGG, a well-characterized thymus-dependent Ag (30). On day 12, at the peak of the GC response, we prepared splenocytes for flow cytometric (FACS) analysis. B220+ B cells were evaluated for their expression of GL7 and Fas, and double-positive cells were classified as GC B cells. As expected, a substantial increase in the percentage and numbers of GL7+Fas+ GC B cells was observed in immunized WT mice compared with mice that were not immunized (Fig. 1, A and Bi). In contrast, LTβ–/– and ICOS–/– mice had significantly reduced percentage and numbers of GL7+Fas+ GC B cells (p ≤ 0.02), although these cells were not completely absent, and there remained a small population within the GL7+Fas+ gate. Similar findings were observed when GC B cells were defined as PNA+IgD–, and GC B cells were found to be significantly reduced, although not completely absent, in both LTβ–/– and ICOS–/– mice (p ≤ 0.02) (Fig. 1, A and Bii). Interestingly, however, a large proportion of B cells in both LTβ–/– and ICOS–/– mice expressed GL7 but failed to up-regulate Fas (p ≤ 0.03) (Fig. 1, A and C), suggesting that GC B cell differentiation may be incomplete in the knock-out strains.


Figure 1
View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 1. Defective GC formation in ICOS–/– and LTβ–/– mice in response to NP-CGG. Mice were immunized with NP16-CGG precipitated in alum, and spleens were harvested on day 12 for analysis or left unimmunzed (indicated as Ctrl). A, FACS analysis of expression of GL7, Fas, IgD, and PNA on B220+ cells from unimmunized WT mice vs immunized WT, LTβ–/–, and ICOS–/– mice. Mean frequency of GL7+Fas+, PNA+IgD–, and GL7+Fas– cells among gated B220+ cells is indicated. The total cell numbers for each population are depicted in B (*, p ≤ 0.02) and C (*, p ≤ 0.03). D, Spleen sections from the same animals were stained with PNA (i–iii) and anti-GL7 (iv–vi) to detect GC structures (red), and anti-B220 (blue) to detect B cell follicles. Images were taken at a x10 magnification. Arrows indicate areas of PNA+ and GL7+ clusters. Data shown here are representative examples from a group of four mice, and the experiments were repeated three times with similar results.

 
Subsequent histological examination of spleen sections stained with either PNA or GL7 (red) to detect GC structures revealed defective GC formation in ICOS–/– and LTβ–/– mice with only few, small organized PNA+ and GL7+ cell clusters (red) observed within the splenic B cell follicles (blue) (Fig. 1D). These results confirm previous reports (16, 31) demonstrating that the GC response is impaired in ICOS–/– and LTβ–/– mice. Because GL7 is a marker of B cell activation (32), we postulate that the appearance of GL7+Fas– B cells may be the result of an accumulation of B cells initially activated via their BCR but failing to undergo subsequent negative selection mediated by an intact Ag-bearing FDC network within the GC niche.

Expression of LT{alpha}β on ICOS–/– T and B cells in vitro

Given the similar GC phenotypes observed in both ICOS–/– and LTβ–/– mice, we reasoned that the expression of LT{alpha}β, which is critical for the formation and maintenance of the GC niche, may be influenced by ICOS signaling. To investigate this possibility, we first examined whether expression of LT{alpha}β in vitro is dependent on ICOS signaling. To test this, we stimulated fresh splenocytes from naive ICOS–/– mice with PMA/ionomycin or anti-CD3 in culture overnight, and analyzed the surface expression of LT{alpha}β by FACS on activated CD4+ T cells and B220+ B cells. These conditions have been shown to promote LT{alpha}β expression on lymphocytes (33). Early activation markers CD25 and CD69 were used to identify activated cells (gating not shown) and, as expected, activated WT CD4+ T and B220+ B cells expressed elevated levels of LT{alpha}β using either the soluble LTβR (Fig. 2A) or a mAb (Fig. 2B) to detect LT{alpha}β. Subsequent analysis on activated ICOS–/– T and B cells revealed no significant difference in LT{alpha}β expression compared with activated WT T and B cells. The same results were seen with anti-CD3 stimulation on ICOS–/– T cells (Fig. 2C).


Figure 2
View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 2. ICOS–/– T and B cells can express LT{alpha}β in vitro. A, Splenocytes from naive WT, LTβ–/–, and ICOS–/– mice were stimulated overnight with PMA/ionomycin and analyzed for expression of LT{alpha}β on CD4+ and B220+ cells. Histogram FACS plots depict the expression of LT{alpha}β on stimulated T and B cells detected using a soluble receptor, LTβR-Ig (solid lines), against isotype controls (dashed histograms) and compared with unstimulated cells (shaded histograms). B, LT{alpha}β expression on T and B cells stimulated with PMA/ionomycin as detected using anti-LTβ Ab (BBF6) (solid lines) using the same controls as in A. C, Expression of LT{alpha}β on T cells stimulated with anti-CD3 compared with the same controls as in A. D, Splenocytes from WT, LTβ–/–, and ICOS–/– mice immunized with NP-KLH were obtained 12 days after immunization, restimulated with NP-KLH in culture overnight, and evaluated for LT{alpha}β expression (solid line) compared with the same controls as in A. Data shown here are representative examples from a group of four mice, and the experiments were performed twice with similar results.

 
We also examined LT{alpha}β expression in response to Ag. To do this, ICOS–/–, LTβ–/–, and WT mice were immunized with NP-KLH. At 12 days postimmunization, spleens were harvested and splenocytes were isolated and restimulated in culture with NP-KLH. After 24 h, FACS was performed to evaluate LT{alpha}β expression on activated KLH-specific CD4+ T cells and NP or KLH-specific B220+ B cells. From this in vitro recall experiment, small proportions of total CD4+ T cells and B220+ B cells were activated by NP-KLH restimulation in all groups of immunized (but not naive) mice based on the up-regulation of CD69 and CD25 (data not shown). Analysis of these activated CD4+ T cells and B220+ B cells revealed up-regulation of LT{alpha}β on both WT and ICOS–/– B and T cells; however, we did notice a trend toward decreased LT{alpha}β expression in the ICOS–/– B cells (Fig. 2D, statistically nonsignificant). Thus, ICOS–/– lymphocytes have no intrinsic defect in their ability to express LT{alpha}β in response to PMA/ionomycin, anti-CD3, or Ag stimulation in vitro.

Expression of LT{alpha}β on ICOS–/– lymphocytes in vivo

Although our in vitro experiments did not reveal a significant difference in LT{alpha}β expression, these experiments did not take into account that LT{alpha}β may be regulated differently on follicular vs GC B cells in an in vivo context. The mild reduction of LT{alpha}β levels on ICOS–/– Ag-stimulated B cells prompted us to examine a potential interaction between ICOS and the LT pathway during the GC response by evaluating LT{alpha}β expression on B cell subsets from ICOS–/– mice directly ex vivo. Previous studies have shown that follicular B cells express low levels of LT{alpha}β. This basal level of LT{alpha}β is essential for maintaining aspects of the splenic architecture, including the "primary" FDC network as well as the correct positioning of B cells within the follicle (25). We investigated whether there was abnormal expression of LT{alpha}β on ICOS–/– follicular B cells (B220+GL7–Fas–) and found no significant difference in expression levels of LT{alpha}β on WT vs ICOS–/– follicular B cells compared with staining on similarly gated LTβ–/– cells or isotype control stained cells (Fig. 3A). The same was true whether we gated on B220+IgD+PNA– follicular B cells (data not shown). Consistent with normal levels of LT{alpha}β on follicular B cells, the primary FDC network was found to be intact in ICOS–/– mice (Fig. 3B). Specifically, primary FDC networks in naive mice were identified with an Ab to CD35 (red), which is expressed at high levels on FDC, and spleen sections were counterstained with Ab to B220 (blue) to locate B cell follicles. We also examined the primary network using the FDC-M2 Ab (red), which recognizes complement C4 deposited on FDC (34), and FDC-M2 staining was likewise found to be normal in ICOS–/– mice (Fig. 3B). As expected, LTβ–/– spleens lacked FDC networks, which is evident by the absence of CD35 and FDC-M2 staining within B cell follicles (Fig. 3B). Taken together, expression of LT{alpha}β on ICOS–/– follicular B cells is normal, and the primary FDC network is intact.


Figure 3
View larger version (89K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 3. LT{alpha}β expression on ICOS–/– follicular B cells directly ex vivo. A, GL7–Fas– cells among gated B220+ cells were analyzed for surface expression of LT{alpha}β (solid line histogram). Dashed histograms represent gated cells stained with an isotype control. Data shown here are a representative sample from a total of eight WT, eight ICOS–/–, and four LTβ–/– mice from two independent experiments. B, Immunohistochemical analysis of primary FDC networks of WT, LTβ–/–, and ICOS–/– spleens. FDCs were identified by staining with anti-CD35 (red) or FDC-M2 (red) and counterstained with anti-B220 (blue) or IgD (blue). Histology samples were visualized using a x10 magnification. A representative example of five mice per group is shown here with arrows pointing to primary FDC networks.

 
We next investigated the level of LT{alpha}β expression on GC B cells from ICOS–/– mice. Following immunization with NP-CGG, we examined LT{alpha}β expression on PNA+IgD–B220+ or GL7+Fas+B220+ B cells, both of which we defined as GC B cells. Previous studies have shown that LT{alpha}β is expressed at higher levels on GC B cells compared with follicular B cells, suggesting the possibility of additional regulation of LT{alpha}β levels within the GC microenvironment itself (25). We detected LT{alpha}β on WT PNA+IgD– GC B cells when compared with similarly gated LTβ–/– cells or isotype control stained cells (Fig. 4A). Additionally, we observed that the level of LT{alpha}β is consistently greater on GC B cells compared with follicular B cells (PNA–IgD+) when we compared the staining on both populations from the same animal (Fig. 4, A overlay and Ci). As in Fig. 3, ICOS–/– follicular B cells (PNA–IgD+) also expressed detectable levels of LT{alpha}β compared with similarly gated LTβ–/– controls or isotype stained controls. However, when the small population of ICOS–/–PNA+IgD– GC B cells was assessed, these gated cells exhibited a statistically significant reduction in LT{alpha}β expression compared with WT controls (p ≤ 0.03) (Fig. 4A), and, indeed, the level of LT{alpha}β on ICOS–/–PNA+IgD– GC B cells was similar to what was found on ICOS–/– follicular B cells (Fig. 4, A overlay and Ci). Using a different staining mixture that included the LTβR-Ig reagent, we examined LT{alpha}β expression with respect to GL7 staining of B cells from each strain of mice and found that while WT vs ICOS–/– follicular (GL7–) B cells exhibited equivalent staining, ICOS–/– GL7+ B cells expressed significantly less LT{alpha}β than did similarly gated WT GL7+ B cells (Fig. 4, B overlay and Cii) (p ≤ 0.004). Although their frequency is low in ICOS–/– mice, we also assessed LT{alpha}β levels on the remaining GL7+Fas+ B cells and similarly found a statistically significant decrease in LT{alpha}β expression using this gating methodology (Fig. 4, B and Cii) (p ≤ 0.0004). Taken together, our results show that despite normal expression of LT{alpha}β on follicular B cells, there is a specific reduction in LT{alpha}β expression on IgD– B cells that express PNA, or B cells that express GL7 in ICOS–/– mice.


Figure 4
View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 4. Decreased LT{alpha}β expression on ICOS–/– GC B cells. WT, ICOS–/–, and LTβ–/– mice were immunized with NP-CGG in alum, and spleens were collected on day 12 postimmunization. GC B cells were identified by first gating on B220+ cells and then further stained with PNA and Ab against IgD or Abs against GL7 and Fas. Histograms depict LT{alpha}β expression on PNA+IgD– cells (A), total GL7+ cells, or GL7+Fas+ (B) in WT and ICOS–/– mice (solid lines). Shaded histograms depict the indicated negative control (LTβ–/– cells derived from the same gating procedures or isotype control staining). Expression of LT{alpha}β on follicular B cells (IgD+PNA–B220+ in A or GL7–B220+ in B) was found to be lower than what was observed on GC B cells in WT but not ICOS–/– mice (see overlays in A and B). C, Mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) corresponding to LT{alpha}β levels on follicular B cells (gray bars) vs GL7+ GC B cells (black bars) vs GL7+Fas+ GC B cells (hatched bars) as detected by (i) anti-LTβ Ab BBF6 (*, p = 0.03; **, p = 0.001) and (ii) LTβR-Ig (**, p = 0.004; ***, p = 0.0004). One of four independent experiments is shown here, and each individual experiment evaluated four mice per group.

 
ICOS crosslinking on T cells induces LT{alpha}β expression on B cells

To test whether ICOS signaling can condition T cells so that they promote LT{alpha}β expression on B cells, we designed an in vitro assay whereby we could manipulate signals delivered to T cells. To this end, we obtained purified CD4+ T cells and B220+ B cells from WT, ICOS–/–, and LTβ–/– mice and cocultured B and T cells in wells plated with anti-CD3, agonistic anti-ICOS, or control rat IgG to stimulate CD4+ T cells. To sustain T cell survival and activation in culture, IL-2 was added into wells. Cells were stimulated in culture for 24, 48, and 72 h, and expression of LT{alpha}β on the B cells was assessed by FACS analysis. For controls, we used either ICOS–/– T cells or LTβ–/– B cells, and in both of these scenarios, no specific staining for LT{alpha}β on the surface of the B cells was observed (Fig. 5A). However, in the case of coculture of WT B and T cells, stimulation of ICOS on CD4+ T cells was found to induce significant LT{alpha}β expression on the cocultured B cells. Expression of LT{alpha}β was specific to ICOS stimulation, as WT T cells stimulated with anti-CD3 and a rat IgG isotype control failed to express LT{alpha}β. Elevated LT{alpha}β expression was only seen after 48 h of coculture and was not evident at 24 h (Fig. 5B), presumably because ICOS expression is not constitutive but rather is induced on the surface of activated T cells (5). Moreover, LT{alpha}β expression on cocultured B cells at this 48 h time point could not be achieved using conventional anti-CD28 costimulation, but was rather specific to ICOS costimulation (Fig. 5A, 3rd panel), even though these conditions readily induced LT{alpha}β expression on T cells themselves (Fig. 5A, 4th panel). Therefore, these experiments demonstrate that ICOS signaling renders T cells capable of inducing the expression of LT{alpha}β on B cells in vitro.


Figure 5
View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 5. ICOS crosslinking on T cells results in the up-regulation of LT{alpha}β on B cells in vitro. A, T cells were purified from either WT or ICOS–/– mice, and B cells were separately purified from either WT or LTβ–/– mice. T cells and B cells were mixed at equal numbers and plated with IL-2 and either anti-CD3 alone or anti-CD3 + anti-ICOS (5 µg/ml), or anti-CD3 + rat IgG (5 µg/ml), or anti-CD3 + anti-CD28 (5 µg/ml). LT{alpha}β expression on B220+ cells was assessed after 48 h. Solid line histograms represent B cells cocultured with T cells stimulated with both anti-CD3 + anti-ICOS (first panel) or anti-CD3 + rat IgG (second panel) or anti-CD3 + anti-CD28 (third and fourth panels), with the final panel depicting LT{alpha}β levels on T cells themselves rather than B cells. Shaded histograms represent similarly gated isotype control stained samples. B, Fold increase in LT{alpha}β expression on B220+ cells was quantified by dividing MFI representing LT{alpha}β levels on cells stimulated with anti-CD3 and anti-ICOS over cells stimulated with anti-CD3 only. •, WT B and T cells; {circ}, WT B cells plus ICOS–/– T cells; {triangleup}, LTβ–/– B cells plus WT T cells; and {blacktriangleup}, WT B and T cells stimulated with control Ab. The experiment was performed four times with similar results.

 
Treatment of ICOS–/– mice with agonistic Abs to CD40 and LTβR

We next examined whether ICOS-induced LT{alpha}β expression on GC B cells is sufficient for GC formation. We evaluated this in vivo by injecting ICOS–/– mice with agonistic anti-LTβR Ab following immunization to bypass the reduced level of LT{alpha}β on GC B cells in these mice. On day 12 postimmunization, we analyzed treated animals for recovery of GC B cells and GC networks. FACS analysis of anti-LTβR-treated ICOS–/– mice showed that there was no significant recovery of GL7+Fas+ GC B cells compared with control-treated ICOS–/– mice (Fig. 6, A and B). Additionally, histological examinations of spleen sections from treated ICOS–/– mice revealed few, small GL7+ clusters that were similar in size and number to control-treated ICOS–/– mice, although the GL7+ clusters from the anti-LTβR treated mice did appear to be more tightly packed/organized (Fig. 6C, see arrow). Morphometric analysis of spleen sections from agonist-treated vs control-treated ICOS–/– mice revealed that there was no significant increase in the area of GL7+ clusters indexed over total area of the spleen in ICOS–/– mice treated with the agonistic Ab (Fig. 6D). Serum from individual mice was analyzed to determine whether agonist Ab treatment resulted in recovery of the high-affinity anti-NP IgG1 response in ICOS–/– mice, which is impaired (Fig. 6E). Comparing the ratio of high- to low-affinity anti-NP titers, we found no significant increase in high-affinity anti-NP IgG1 Ab titers in ICOS–/– mice treated with control vs anti-LTβR agonistic Ab (Fig. 6F). Collectively, our results show that restoration of LTβR signaling in the context of the GC response is not sufficient for rescue of the GC reaction in ICOS–/– mice.


Figure 6
View larger version (67K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 6. An agonistic Ab to LTβR induces some re-aggregation of GC networks but fails to restore the GC response in ICOS–/– mice. WT and ICOS–/– mice were immunized with NP-CGG and at days 0, 3, and 7 postimmunization, mice received a 100-µg injection of either anti-LTβR Ab or a control rat IgG1 Ab. A, Mice were harvested at day 12, and GC B cells were evaluated by FACS analysis to detect GL7+Fas+ GC B cells. Numbers indicate frequency of GL7+Fas+ cells among gated B220+ cells. Total numbers are depicted in B (**, p ≤ 0.005). C, GC networks were assessed by staining spleen sections with GL7 (red) and B220 (blue). Arrows depict GC structures. GC networks detected on stained spleen sections were analyzed using morphometric software, and they were scored and quantified as depicted; due to variability, the median is represented here rather than the mean (D). E and F, Sera from treated and control ICOS–/– mice were obtained 12 days after immunization, and anti-NP IgG1 titers were evaluated by ELISA. The ratio of OD (405 nm) for anti-NP3 vs anti-NP30 was calculated as a measure of the affinity of the anti-NP response. A total of 11 mice per group were analyzed for experiments with untreated mice (E) and 8 mice were used in treatment experiments (F).

 
One important caveat to these experiments is that follicular Th cells, which display CD40L on their surface, are significantly decreased in ICOS–/– mice (17). Indeed, optimal expression of CD40L on Th cells is enhanced (12) and is dependent (13) on ICOS triggering. Therefore, despite enforced LTβR signaling, delivery of CD40-mediated signals to GC B cells is still lacking. Because the LT pathway is not sufficient to restore the GC response in ICOS–/– mice, we assessed the cooperative function of CD40 signaling in this context by treating ICOS–/– mice with an agonistic anti-CD40 Ab on days 3 and 7 postimmunization to restore T cell help to B cells in ICOS–/– mice. Others have shown that anti-CD40 treatment of ICOS–/– mice results in a rescue of Ab class-switching (12), but the effects on the GC niche itself or on affinity maturation have not been measured. Accordingly, on day 12 postimmunization, we analyzed the spleens of anti-CD40-treated ICOS–/– mice and assessed the formation of GC structures. Our FACS analysis revealed that anti-CD40-treated ICOS–/– mice showed significant recovery of GL7+Fas+ GC B cells compared with control treated mice (p ≤ 0.001) (Fig. 7, A and B). Additionally, spleens from treated ICOS–/– mice exhibited increased size and numbers of GL7+ clusters within B cell follicles compared with control-treated mice (Fig. 7C). This corresponded to an increase in the FDC network itself, as evidenced by staining with FDC-M1 to identify the "secondary" GC-FDC network (Fig. 7C). Serum from these treated mice showed elevated levels of high-affinity anti-NP IgG1 Ab compared with control-treated ICOS–/– mice (p ≤ 0.05) (Fig. 7D). Interestingly, when we examined LT{alpha}β expression on GL7+ GC B cells, there was an increase in the level of LT{alpha}β on GL7+ GC B cells from treated ICOS–/– mice such that it was comparable to what was observed on WT GL7+ GC B cells (Fig. 7Ei). Quantitative analysis of LT{alpha}β expression on GL7+ GC B cells over basal expression on follicular B cells showed that anti-CD40-treated ICOS–/– mice had a statistically significant (p ≤ 0.01) increase in fold expression of LT{alpha}β compared with control-treated ICOS–/– mice (Fig. 7Eii).


Figure 7
View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 7. Treatment with agonistic anti-CD40 Ab restores GC responses and LT{alpha}β expression on GC B cells in ICOS–/– mice. WT and ICOS–/– mice were immunized with NP-CGG and on days 3 and 7 postimmunization, ICOS–/– mice were treated with 50 µg of anti-CD40 or isotype control Ab. Mice that were not immunized are indicated as Ctrl. Mice were harvested on day 12 and GC formation was assessed. A, FACS analysis of GC B cells as detected using Ab against GL7 and Fas on gated B220+ cells. Total numbers of GL7+Fas+ cells among gated B220+ cells are depicted in B (**, p ≤ 0.001). C, Spleen sections stained with anti-GL7 (red) and anti-B220 (blue) to detect GC clusters within B cell follicles or FDC-M1 (red) and anti-IgD (blue) to detect the secondary FDC network within the IgD– GC. Arrows indicate GC structures. D, Serum from treated ICOS–/– mice was obtained 11 days after immunization, and affinity of anti-NP IgG1 was evaluated as in Fig. 6E and F (*, p = 0.05). Ei, LT{alpha}β expression on GC B cells was evaluated on gated GL7+B220+ cells (blue line). Shaded histograms represent LTβ–/– samples, and dashed lines represent follicular (GL7–Fas–) B cells (gating shown in Fig. 5A). Eii, Fold increase of LT{alpha}β expression on GL7+ B cells over GL7– follicular B cells (*, p ≤ 0.01). F, The level of LT{alpha}β on B cells cocultured with ICOS-stimulated T cells was measured as in Fig. 5. In the upper histogram, B cells cocultured with WT T cells (blue trace) were compared with B cells cocultured with CD40L–/– T cells (dashed trace), and the shaded histograms represented B cells cocultured with nonstimulated T cell controls. In the bottom histogram, control Ab-treated wells (blue trace) were compared with anti-CD40L (MR1)- treated wells (dashed histograms) and nonstimulated controls (shaded histogram).

 
To examine whether the ICOS-dependent up-regulation of LT{alpha}β on B cells is indeed CD40 dependent, we returned to our in vitro assay system and substituted CD40L–/– T cells for WT T cells. Although the population of CD25+-activated B cells is diminished when cocultured with CD40L–/– T cells, there remains a small population that can be analyzed for LT{alpha}β expression (Fig. 7F dot plots). Consistent with a role for CD40 signaling in ICOS-dependent LT{alpha}β expression on B cells, we failed to observe the induction of LT{alpha}β on B cells cocultured with CD40L–/– T cells (Fig. 7F, upper histogram with blue trace representing WT cells). The same results were obtained if we blocked CD40L using the MR1 Ab (Fig. 7F, lower histogram). Therefore, our results show that anti-CD40 treatment in ICOS–/– mice restores GC structures concomitant with the recovery of LT{alpha}β expression on GC-B cells, and that CD40 signaling is likely responsible for the ICOS-dependent up-regulation of LT{alpha}β on GC B cells.

Rescue of GC reaction in ICOS–/– mice with anti-CD40 is dependent on LTβR signaling

Although these data link the expression of LT{alpha}β with CD40 stimulation on GC B cells in vivo, they did not prove whether the restoration of LT{alpha}β expression on anti-CD40-treated ICOS–/– GC B cells was responsible for the recovery of the GC microenvironment in ICOS–/– mice. To determine whether CD40-mediated rescue of the GC response is dependent on LTβR signaling in ICOS–/– mice, we doubly treated these mice with the anti-CD40 agonist Ab together with a competitive inhibitor of the LT pathway (LTβR-Ig). As before, anti-CD40 treatment combined with a matched control Ab succeeded in restoring the numbers of GL7+Fas+ cells in ICOS–/– mice. Indeed, the number of GC B cells appears greater, likely due to the increased splenic cellularity observed in anti-CD40-treated ICOS–/– mice. Nonetheless, the representation of GC B cells as a frequency of the B cell compartment is comparable (Fig. 8, A and B). In contrast, ICOS–/– mice that received LTβR-Ig did not show evidence of a recovered GC B cell population upon treatment with anti-CD40 agonistic Ab (p ≤ 0.0009) (Fig. 8, A and B). Likewise, although affinity maturation of the IgG1 response is restored in anti-CD40-treated ICOS–/– mice, this restoration is slightly but significantly blunted in the presence of LTβR-Ig (p ≤ 0.03) (Fig. 8C). Finally, the restoration of the GC network that was observed with anti-CD40 treatment in ICOS–/– mice was nullified in the presence of LTβR-Ig, as evidenced by a lack of GL7 clusters and FDC-M1 expressing cells within the IgD-negative GC niche (Fig. 8D). These results imply that CD40 and LTβR signaling are both required to restore GC responses in ICOS–/– mice.


Figure 8
View larger version (64K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 8. Effects of anti-CD40 treatment are nullified in the presence of an LT pathway inhibitor. WT and ICOS–/– mice were immunized with NP-CGG, and on days 3 and 7 postimmunization, ICOS–/– mice were treated with 50 µg of anti-CD40 or isotype control Ab and dually treated with LTβR-Ig or matched control on days –1 and 7 (see legend under FACS plots). Mice were harvested on day 12, and GC formation was assessed. A, FACS analysis of GC B cells as detected using Ab against GL7 and Fas on gated B220+ cells. Total numbers of GL7+Fas+ cells among gated B220+ cells are depicted in B (***, p ≤ 0.0009). C, Serum from treated ICOS–/– mice was obtained 12 days after immunization, and affinity of anti-NP IgG1 was evaluated as in Fig. 6E (*, p = 0.03; **, p = 0.004). D, Spleen sections stained with anti-GL7 (red) and anti-B220 (blue) to detect GC clusters within B cell follicles or FDC-M1 (red) and anti-IgD (blue) to detect the secondary FDC network within the IgD– GC. This experiment was performed twice on a total of 7 mice per group.

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
Disclosures
 References
 
Within the GC microenvironment, GC B cells make protracted contacts with FDC-M1+ cells (35). Additionally, Th cells also make contact with GC B cells within this niche, presumably to provide a source of CD40L and cytokines, and this help may be limiting (36). The sequence of events that leads to the formation of a functional GC niche depends on molecules expressed by each of these three cell types: follicular Th cells, GC B cells, and FDCs. Because ICOS–/– mice exhibit multiple downstream defects that culminate in the inability to form a GC niche, we took advantage of these mice to dissect the key requirements for GC formation. We have shown herein that ICOS stimulation is required for optimal expression of LT{alpha}β on GC B cells; however, engagement of the LTβR on its own was insufficient to restore GCs in these mice. Because ICOS stimulation induces CD40L expression on Th cells beyond what is observed with conventional CD28 costimulation (12), and ICOS–/– T cells have impaired CD40L expression (13), we examined the consequences of enforced CD40 signaling in ICOS–/– mice. Administration of agonistic anti-CD40 Ab to ICOS–/– mice resulted in the recovery of the GC niche concomitant with the restoration of LT{alpha}β levels on GC B cells. As these effects were nullified in the presence of a LT pathway inhibitor, input from both CD40 and LTβR is required downstream of ICOS stimulation to promote GC formation.

Maintenance of the FDC network in primary splenic follicles requires the continual expression of low levels of LT{alpha}β on a subset of resting follicular B cells. Constitutive LTβR engagement on resident stromal cells and FDC within the white pulp follicle is important for maintaining homeostatic levels of CXCL13, which serves two major functions: to attract CXCR5+ resting B cells into the follicle, and to induce/maintain the expression of LT{alpha}β on the B cell by signaling through CXCR5 (37). Little is known regarding how LT{alpha}β functions to maintain "inducible" stromal cell niches that are provoked during an immune response, such as the GC. Clearly, these networks rely on LTβR signaling, but it is not understood how the expression of LT{alpha}β on activated GC B cells is regulated. Indeed, although LT{alpha}β expression on follicular B cells depends on CXCR5 signaling, the level of LT{alpha}β on GL7+ GC B cells is normal in CXCL13–/– mice (25). We have shown that ICOS signaling on T cells is required to regulate LT{alpha}β expression on GC B cells in a CD40-dependent manner. This provides a novel mechanism for the local regulation of LT{alpha}β expression in the inducible GC niche. In contrast, ICOS–/– follicular B cells express normal levels of LT{alpha}β (Figs. 3 and 4) and exhibit an intact primary FDC network (Fig. 3) as well as normal T-B segregation and marginal zone organization (data not shown), all of which depend on LTβR signaling outside of the GC. Thus, depending on the anatomic location, LT{alpha}β expression is regulated by different sets of molecules.

Administration of agonistic anti-LTβR Ab to ICOS–/– mice did not significantly restore GC structures, although we observed improved aggregation of GL7+ cells into a tightly organized structure. Thus, expression of LT{alpha}β on GC B cells may induce a GC organization sequela, provoking LTβR+ FDCs, which normally form a loose network within the primary follicle, to come together in an organized niche within what will become a secondary follicle. In agreement with this notion, treatment of Cynomolgus macaques with LTβR-Ig results in the disappearance of FDCs; however, upon withdrawal of this agent, FDCs gradually reemerge, but in diffuse networks (19). Presumably once the inhibitor is fully cleared and maximal LTβR signaling is restored, chemokine gradients become reestablished in such a way that FDC networks coalesce completely to form a dense FDC network scaffold within the GC. This would be analogous to the situation of administration of agonistic Ab in our experiments. Interestingly, however, the anti-LTβR Ab failed to augment the total number of GL7+Fas+ GC B cells in ICOS–/– mice, nor did this treatment improve affinity maturation of the anti-NP response. We reason that other ICOS-dependent factors (such as CD40L) are required for promoting the survival of GC B cells as well as affinity maturation and Ab class-switching activities in vivo. In other words, because ICOS–/– mice have impaired CD40L expression (13), and because CD40 activation is essential for B cell activation (38), it makes sense that LTβR signaling on its own would be insufficient to restore GCs. Thus, while anti-LTβR treatment can act on resident stromal cells and FDCs inducing their organization into GC structures, enforced LTβR signaling is not sufficient to completely restore the GC response in ICOS–/– mice where T cell help is largely absent.

Administration of agonistic anti-CD40 Ab, however, restored the defect in T cell help in ICOS–/– mice. Importantly, we found that recovery of GC correlated with the recovery of LT{alpha}β expression on ICOS–/– GC B cells. Although supraphysiological levels of CD40 signaling may supersede many subtle effects of a normal immune response, these results demonstrate that CD40 signaling can promote LT{alpha}β expression within the GC niche in vivo, which is consistent with our finding that ICOS-dependent LT{alpha}β expression on B cells is dependent on CD40 signaling in vitro. These data provide a mechanism for the dependence on ICOS signaling for optimal LT{alpha}β expression on GC B cells. Moreover, the restoration of LT{alpha}β on ICOS–/– GC B cells in anti-CD40-treated mice suggested to us that CD40L and LT{alpha}β were working in concert to induce proper GC formation. Indeed, our data using dual treatment of agonistic anti-CD40 with LTβR-Ig blocking reagent demonstrate that the CD40-dependent rescue of the GC reaction is dependent on LT{alpha}β expression.

We do not have direct evidence that LT{alpha}β on the GC B cells themselves is responsible for the rescue of the GC niche, and in the absence of markers for GC-resident follicular Th cells (for example, CD57 identifies these cells in humans but not in mice) (39), we were unable to evaluate whether anti-CD40 treatment likewise induced LT{alpha}β expression on GC-resident T cells indirectly. For example, anti-CD40 treatment may activate dendritic cells such that they may costimulate Ag-specific T cells to become activated, express LT{alpha}β, and migrate to the GC. Bone marrow chimera experiments have shown that B cells are the relevant source of LT{alpha}β for maintenance of the FDC network (22, 23), although in the absence of B cell-expressed LT{alpha}β there is some compensation from the T cell compartment (24). In the context of ICOS–/– mice, we think that T cells are an unlikely source of LT{alpha}β for sustaining the GC niche during in vivo priming because LT{alpha}β expression on activated T cells is transient (40) and is therefore not likely to sustain GC architecture several days postimmunization. Additionally, conventional costimulation (CD28) is adequate for up-regulation of LT{alpha}β on T cells (Fig. 5), and thus this would not explain the GC defect in ICOS–/– mice where CD28 costimulation is intact. Therefore, we favor the hypothesis that LT{alpha}β on the GC B cell represents the most likely reservoir of LTβR ligand responsible for the formation of the secondary FDC network within the GC niche. The consequences of LTβR stimulation within the GC niche via GC B cell-expressed LT{alpha}β are likely numerous, including the restoration of chemokine gradients and adhesion molecules such as VCAM. In the future, it would be interesting to determine what downstream consequences of LTβR signaling are blocked in the absence of LT{alpha}β specifically expressed on GC B cells.

Although treatment with anti-CD40 agonistic Ab in ICOS–/– mice can restore class switching (12), affinity maturation can occur independent of the GC microenvironment (41), and the effect of anti-CD40 on affinity maturation in ICOS–/– mice has not been evaluated. We found that anti-CD40 treatment was able to restore affinity maturation of the T-dependent NP-specific response. Additionally, affinity maturation still occurred in anti-CD40 + LTβR-Ig dual-treated mice. LTβR–/– mice exhibit a profound defect in affinity maturation at low doses of Ag (1 µg NP-CGG); however, at high doses (200 µg NP-CGG) the defect is only mild (42). Because our study also used high doses of Ag, we were not surprised that LTβR-Ig treatment did not completely prevent affinity maturation in dual-treated mice, although there was a slight but statistically significant reduction in high-affinity IgG1 anti-NP titers in dual-treated ICOS–/– mice compared with mice treated with anti-CD40 alone. Thus, our observations reveal a partial dependence on LTβR signaling for optimal affinity maturation of the anti-NP IgG1 response in ICOS–/– mice.

Our model is that ICOS stimulation on activated T cells results in the acquisition of a follicular Th phenotype (expression of CXCR5) to enable migration into the B cell follicle (17). In agreement, in our system CXCR5+ Th cells were also significantly decreased in ICOS–/– mice (data not shown). Follicular Th cells express very high levels of CD40L (39), and their proximity with Ag-specific B cells provides a means for CD40 triggering in the B cell. Because CD40 signaling has been shown to induce the expression of LT{alpha}β on splenic B cells in vitro (25), and enforced CD40 signaling restores high levels of LT{alpha}β expression on GC B cells in vivo (Fig. 7D), we hypothesized that CD40 signaling is responsible for the elevated levels of LT{alpha}β expression that we and others have observed on the surface of GC B cells as compared with resting follicular B cells. Indeed, we found that ICOS-activated CD40L-deficient T cells could not provoke LT{alpha}β expression on cocultured B cells (Fig. 7), thus placing CD40 activation downstream of ICOS in the regulation of LT{alpha}β on B cells. A concentrated source of LT{alpha}β on GC B cells in turn may provide a strong signal via LTβR on the FDC so that FDC coalesce into a tight secondary network. Taken together, the GC microenvironment requires both: Formula a LTβR-dependent FDC network sustained by LT{alpha}β expressed on GC B cells, which serves as a necessary scaffold for B cells and Formula CD40-dependent signals delivered to B cells to provoke and sustain survival/proliferation and seeding of the emerging GC niche (Fig. 9). ICOS-mediated cytokines are also likely important for an optimal GC reaction; however, we think that ICOS-dependent cytokines such as IL-4/IL-10 play a secondary role in regulating LT{alpha}β expression within the GC as compared with CD40L. Indeed, attempts at blocking Th2 cytokines IL-4, IL-5, IL-10, and IL-13 did not affect ICOS-dependent LT{alpha}β expression on B cells in vitro (data not shown).


Figure 9
View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 9. Model of sequential activation of ICOS, CD40, and LTβR during the T-dependent GC reaction. Following immunization, Ag-specific B cells migrate to the edges of the follicle where they receive help from cognate Th cells. The interaction between Ag-specific B cells and T cells via ICOS-ICOSL results in the up-regulation of CD40L as well as the expression of CXCR5 on Th cells to enable their migration to the emerging GC. CD40L expression on follicular Th cells stimulates proximal GC B cells to induce the up-regulation of LT{alpha}β Figure 9. It is these very high levels of LT{alpha}β that in turn stimulate the LTβR on resident FDC, encouraging them to coalesce into a tight network and produce chemokines Figure 9. Together, signals from both LTβR and CD40 receptors work in concert to achieve full GC formation.

 
In summary, our studies have provided insight into the regulation of LT{alpha}β expression within the GC niche. Additionally, the failure to up-regulate LT{alpha}β on GC B cells in ICOS–/– mice provides a potential explanation for the abortive GC structures that form when these animals are immunized with T-dependent Ag. These results reveal a sequence of molecular events, beginning with ICOS activation, that integrate to initiate GC formation.


   Acknowledgments
 
We acknowledge Cheryl Smith and Dionne White for management of the Faculty of Medicine flow cytometry facility. We also acknowledge Drs. Tania Watts and Mariana Vidric for experimental advice, and Drs. Jeff Browning and Evangelia Notidis for critical input and for providing LTβR-Ig and BBF6 reagents.


   Disclosures
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Disclosures
References
 
The authors have no financial conflicts of interest.


   Footnotes
 
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1 This work was supported by an operating grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Grant 165683 to J.L.G.), an Ontario Graduate Studentship award (to F.V.), the National Institutes of Health (Grant R37A133068 to C.F.W.), and Associazione Italiana Ricerca sul Cancro (to U.D.). Back

2 Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Jennifer L. Gommerman, Department of Immunology, University of Toronto, 1 King’s College Circle, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5S 1A8. E-mail address: jen.gommerman{at}utoronto.ca Back

3 Abbreviations used in this paper: GC, germinal center; AP, alkaline phosphatase; CGG, chicken {gamma}-globulin; FDC, follicular dendritic cell; KLH, keyhole limpet hemocyanin; LT, lymphotoxin; LTβR, lymphotoxin β receptor; MFI, mean fluorescence intensity; NP, (4-hydroxy-3-nitrophenyl)acetyl; PNA, peanut lectin (agglutinin); WT, wild type. Back

Received for publication September 26, 2007. Accepted for publication December 10, 2007.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Disclosures
 References
 

  1. Garside, P., E. Ingulli, R. R. Merica, J. G. Johnson, R. J. Noelle, M. K. Jenkins. 1998. Visualization of specific B and T lymphocyte interactions in the lymph node. Science 281: 96-99. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Foy, T. M., J. D. Laman, J. A. Ledbetter, A. Aruffo, E. Claassen, R. J. Noelle. 1994. gp39-CD40 interactions are essential for germinal center formation and the development of B cell memory. J. Exp. Med. 180: 157-163. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Wolniak, K. L., S. M. Shinall, T. J. Waldschmidt. 2004. The germinal center response. Crit. Rev. Immunol. 24: 39-65. [Medline]
  4. Tew, J. G., J. Wu, D. Qin, S. Helm, G. F. Burton, A. K. Szakal. 1997. Follicular dendritic cells and presentation of antigen and costimulatory signals to B cells. Immunol. Rev. 156: 39-52. [Medline]
  5. Hutloff, A., A. M. Dittrich, K. C. Beier, B. Eljaschewitsch, R. Kraft, I. Anagnostopoulos, R. A. Kroczek. 1999. ICOS is an inducible T-cell co-stimulator structurally and functionally related to CD28. Nature 397: 263-266. [Medline]
  6. McAdam, A. J., T. T. Chang, A. E. Lumelsky, E. A. Greenfield, V. A. Boussiotis, J. S. Duke-Cohan, T. Chernova, N. Malenkovich, C. Jabs, V. K. Kuchroo, et al 2000. Mouse inducible costimulatory molecule (ICOS) expression is enhanced by CD28 costimulation and regulates differentiation of CD4+ T cells. J. Immunol. 165: 5035-5040. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Brodie, D., A. V. Collins, A. Iaboni, J. A. Fennelly, L. M. Sparks, X. N. Xu, P. A. van der Merwe, S. J. Davis. 2000. LICOS, a primordial costimulatory ligand?. Curr. Biol. 10: 333-336. [Medline]
  8. Ling, V., P. W. Wu, H. F. Finnerty, K. M. Bean, V. Spaulding, L. A. Fouser, J. P. Leonard, S. E. Hunter, R. Zollner, J. L. Thomas, et al 2000. Cutting edge: Identification of GL50, a novel B7-like protein that functionally binds to ICOS receptor. J. Immunol. 164: 1653-1657. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Swallow, M. M., J. J. Wallin, W. C. Sha. 1999. B7h, a novel costimulatory homolog of B7.1 and B7.2, is induced by TNF{alpha}. Immunity 11: 423-432. [Medline]
  10. Wang, S., G. Zhu, A. I. Chapoval, H. Dong, K. Tamada, J. Ni, L. Chen. 2000. Costimulation of T cells by B7–H2, a B7-like molecule that binds ICOS. Blood 96: 2808-2813. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Yoshinaga, S. K., J. S. Whoriskey, S. D. Khare, U. Sarmiento, J. Guo, T. Horan, G. Shih, M. Zhang, M. A. Coccia, T. Kohno, et al 1999. T-cell co-stimulation through B7RP-1 and ICOS. Nature 402: 827-832. [Medline]
  12. McAdam, A. J., R. J. Greenwald, M. A. Levin, T. Chernova, N. Malenkovich, V. Ling, G. J. Freeman, A. H. Sharpe. 2001. ICOS is critical for CD40-mediated antibody class switching. Nature 409: 102-105. [Medline]
  13. Tafuri, A., A. Shahinian, F. Bladt, S. K. Yoshinaga, M. Jordana, A. Wakeham, L. M. Boucher, D. Bouchard, V. S. Chan, G. Duncan, et al 2001. ICOS is essential for effective T-helper-cell responses. Nature 409: 105-109. [Medline]
  14. Dong, C., A. E. Juedes, U. A. Temann, S. Shresta, J. P. Allison, N. H. Ruddle, R. A. Flavell. 2001. ICOS co-stimulatory receptor is essential for T-cell activation and function. Nature 409: 97-101. [Medline]
  15. Wong, S. C., E. Oh, C. H. Ng, K. P. Lam. 2003. Impaired germinal center formation and recall T-cell-dependent immune responses in mice lacking the costimulatory ligand B7–H2. Blood 102: 1381-1388. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Dong, C., U. A. Temann, R. A. Flavell. 2001. Cutting edge: Critical role of inducible costimulator in germinal center reactions. J. Immunol. 166: 3659-3662. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Akiba, H., K. Takeda, Y. Kojima, Y. Usui, N. Harada, T. Yamazaki, J. Ma, K. Tezuka, H. Yagita, K. Okumura. 2005. The role of ICOS in the CXCR5+ follicular B helper T cell maintenance in vivo. J. Immunol. 175: 2340-2348. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Gommerman, J. L., J. L. Browning. 2003. Lymphotoxin/light, lymphoid microenvironments and autoimmune disease. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 3: 642-655. [Medline]
  19. Gommerman, J. L., F. Mackay, E. Donskoy, W. Meier, P. Martin, J. L. Browning. 2002. Manipulation of lymphoid microenvironments in nonhuman primates by an inhibitor of the lymphotoxin pathway. J. Clin. Invest. 110: 1359-1369. [Medline]
  20. Mackay, F., G. R. Majeau, P. Lawton, P. S. Hochman, J. L. Browning. 1997. Lymphotoxin but not tumor necrosis factor functions to maintain splenic architecture and humoral responsiveness in adult mice. Eur. J. Immunol. 27: 2033-2042. [Medline]
  21. Ware, C. F., T. L. VanArsdale, P. D. Crowe, J. L. Browning. 1995. The ligands and receptors of the lymphotoxin system. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 198: 175-218. [Medline]
  22. Endres, R., M. B. Alimzhanov, T. Plitz, A. Futterer, M. H. Kosco-Vilbois, S. A. Nedospasov, K. Rajewsky, K. Pfeffer. 1999. Mature follicular dendritic cell networks depend on expression of lymphotoxin β receptor by radioresistant stromal cells and of lymphotoxin β and tumor necrosis factor by B cells. J. Exp. Med. 189: 159-168. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Fu, Y. X., G. Huang, Y. Wang, D. D. Chaplin. 1998. B lymphocytes induce the formation of follicular dendritic cell clusters in a lymphotoxin {alpha}-dependent fashion. J. Exp. Med. 187: 1009-1018. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Tumanov, A., D. Kuprash, M. Lagarkova, S. Grivennikov, K. Abe, A. Shakhov, L. Drutskaya, C. Stewart, A. Chervonsky, S. Nedospasov. 2002. Distinct role of surface lymphotoxin expressed by B cells in the organization of secondary lymphoid tissues. Immunity 17: 239-250. [Medline]
  25. Ansel, K. M., V. N. Ngo, P. L. Hyman, S. A. Luther, R. Forster, J. D. Sedgwick, J. L. Browning, M. Lipp, J. G. Cyster. 2000. A chemokine-driven positive feedback loop organizes lymphoid follicles. Nature 406: 309-314. [Medline]
  26. Wilhelm, P., D. S. Riminton, U. Ritter, F. A. Lemckert, C. Scheidig, R. Hoek, J. D. Sedgwick, H. Korner. 2002. Membrane lymphotoxin contributes to anti-leishmanial immunity by controlling structural integrity of lymphoid organs. Eur. J. Immunol. 32: 1993-2003. [Medline]
  27. McCarthy, D. D., S. Chiu, Y. Gao, L. E. Summers-deLuca, J. L. Gommerman. 2006. BAFF induces a hyper-IgA syndrome in the intestinal lamina propria concomitant with IgA deposition in the kidney independent of LIGHT. Cell. Immunol. 241: 85-94. [Medline]
  28. Redoglia, V., U. Dianzani, J. M. Rojo, P. Portoles, M. Bragardo, H. Wolff, D. Buonfiglio, S. Bonissoni, C. A. Janeway, Jr. 1996. Characterization of H4: a mouse T lymphocyte activation molecule functionally associated with the CD3/T cell receptor. Eur. J. Immunol. 26: 2781-2789. [Medline]
  29. Tao, W., F. Hardardottir, A. L. Bothwell. 1993. Extensive somatic mutation in the Ig heavy chain V genes in a late primary anti-hapten immune response. Mol. Immunol. 30: 593-602. [Medline]
  30. Jacob, J., R. Kassir, G. Kelsoe. 1991. In situ studies of the primary immune response to (4-hydroxy-3-nitrophenyl)acetyl: I. The architecture and dynamics of responding cell populations. J. Exp. Med. 173: 1165-1175. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Koni, P. A., R. Sacca, P. Lawton, J. L. Browning, N. H. Ruddle, R. A. Flavell. 1997. Distinct roles in lymphoid organogenesis for lymphotoxins {alpha} and β revealed in lymphotoxin β-deficient mice. Immunity 6: 491-500. [Medline]
  32. Naito, Y., H. Takematsu, S. Koyama, S. Miyake, H. Yamamoto, R. Fujinawa, M. Sugai, Y. Okuno, G. Tsujimoto, T. Yamaji, et al 2007. Germinal center marker GL7 probes activation-dependent repression of N-glycolylneuraminic acid, a sialic acid species involved in the negative modulation of B-cell activation. Mol. Cell. Biol. 27: 3008-3022. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Browning, J. L., I. Dougas, A. Ngam-ek, P. R. Bourdon, B. N. Ehrenfels, K. Miatkowski, M. Zafari, A. M. Yampaglia, P. Lawton, W. Meier, et al 1995. Characterization of surface lymphotoxin forms: use of specific monoclonal antibodies and soluble receptors. J. Immunol. 154: 33-46. [Abstract]
  34. Taylor, P. R., M. C. Pickering, M. H. Kosco-Vilbois, M. J. Walport, M. Botto, S. Gordon, L. Martinez-Pomares. 2002. The follicular dendritic cell restricted epitope, FDC-M2, is complement C4: localization of immune complexes in mouse tissues. Eur. J. Immunol. 32: 1888-1896. [Medline]
  35. Schwickert, T. A., R. L. Lindquist, G. Shakhar, G. Livshits, D. Skokos, M. H. Kosco-Vilbois, M. L. Dustin, M. C. Nussenzweig. 2007. In vivo imaging of germinal centres reveals a dynamic open structure. Nature 446: 83-87. [Medline]
  36. Allen, C. D., T. Okada, H. L. Tang, J. G. Cyster. 2007. Imaging of germinal center selection events during affinity maturation. Science 315: 528-531. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Ngo, V. N., H. Korner, M. D. Gunn, K. N. Schmidt, D. S. Riminton, M. D. Cooper, J. L. Browning, J. D. Sedgwick, J. G. Cyster. 1999. Lymphotoxin {alpha}β and tumor necrosis factor are required for stromal cell expression of homing chemokines in B and T cell areas of the spleen. J. Exp. Med. 189: 403-412. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Noelle, R. J., M. Roy, D. M. Shepherd, I. Stamenkovic, J. A. Ledbetter, A. Aruffo. 1992. A 39-kDa protein on activated helper T cells binds CD40 and transduces the signal for cognate activation of B cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89: 6550-6554. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Vinuesa, C. G., S. G. Tangye, B. Moser, C. R. Mackay. 2005. Follicular B helper T cells in antibody responses and autoimmunity. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 5: 853-865. [Medline]
  40. Summers-DeLuca, L. E., D. D. McCarthy, B. Cosovic, L. A. Ward, C. C. Lo, S. Scheu, K. Pfeffer, J. L. Gommerman. 2007. Expression of lymphotoxin-{alpha}β on antigen-specific T cells is required for DC function. J. Exp. Med. 204: 1071-1081. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Matsumoto, M., S. F. Lo, C. J. Carruthers, J. Min, S. Mariathasan, G. Huang, D. R. Plas, S. M. Martin, R. S. Geha, M. H. Nahm, D. D. Chaplin. 1996. Affinity maturation without germinal centres in lymphotoxin-{alpha}-deficient mice. Nature 382: 462-466. [Medline]
  42. Futterer, A., K. Mink, A. Luz, M. H. Kosco-Vilbois, K. Pfeffer. 1998. The lymphotoxin β receptor controls organogenesis and affinity maturation in peripheral lymphoid tissues. Immunity 9: 59-70. [Medline]

Related articles in The JI:

IN THIS ISSUE

The JI 2008 180: 2005-2006. [Full Text]  




This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Related articles in The JI
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vu, F.
Right arrow Articles by Gommerman, J. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vu, F.
Right arrow Articles by Gommerman, J. L.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS