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


     
 

The Journal of Immunology, 2008, 180, 5991 -5999
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 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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wang, T.
Right arrow Articles by Chong, A. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wang, T.
Right arrow Articles by Chong, A. S.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
*Gene*GEO Profiles
*HomoloGene*UniGene
*Substance via MeSH
Medline Plus Health Information
*Heart Transplantation
*Listeria Infections

Prevention of Allograft Tolerance by Bacterial Infection with Listeria monocytogenes1

Tongmin Wang*, Luqiu Chen{dagger}, Emily Ahmed*, Lianli Ma*, Dengping Yin*, Ping Zhou{dagger}, Jikun Shen*, Honglin Xu{ddagger}, Chyung-Ru Wang{ddagger}, Maria-Luisa Alegre2,{dagger} and Anita S. Chong2,3,*

* Section of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, {dagger} Section of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, and {ddagger} Department of Pathology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Disclosures
 References
 
Exposure to certain viruses and parasites has been shown to prevent the induction of transplantation tolerance in mice via the generation of cross-reactive memory T cell responses or the induction of bystander activation. Bacterial infections are common in the perioperative period of solid organ allograft recipients in the clinic, and correlations between bacterial infections and acute allograft rejection have been reported. However, whether bacterial infections at the time of transplantation have any effect on the generation of transplantation tolerance remains to be established. We used the Gram-positive intracellular bacterium Listeria monocytogenes (LM) as a model pathogen because its effects on immune responses are well described. Perioperative LM infection prevented cardiac and skin allograft acceptance induced by anti-CD154 and donor-specific transfusion in mice. LM-mediated rejection was not due to the generation of cross-reactive T cells and was largely independent of signaling via MyD88, an adaptor for most TLRs, IL-1, and IL-18. Instead, transplant rejection following LM infection was dependent on the expression of the phagosome-lysing pore former listeriolysin O and on type I IFN receptor signaling. Our results indicate that bacterial exposure at the time of transplantation can antagonize tolerogenic regimens by enhancing alloantigen-specific immune responses independently of the generation of cross-reactive memory T cells.


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Disclosures
 References
 
Clinical data support a correlation between viral infections and acute rejection of established allografts (1, 2, 3, 4). Experimental animal models have revealed that the exposure of hosts to viral or parasitic agents prior to transplantation can result in the development of memory T cells (5, 6, 7) that are resistant to the effects of anti-CD154 therapy (8, 9). A subset of these pathogen-specific memory T cells has been shown to cross-react, by molecular mimicry, with alloantigen presented by donor or recipient MHC molecules (10). In addition to viral infections prior to transplantation, acute or persistent viral infections at the time of transplantation can prevent the induction of tolerance by costimulation-targeting regimens (11, 12, 13, 14). This is thought to occur via direct activation of cross-reacting alloreactive T cells by viral Ags (7, 9) or upon bystander activation of allospecific T cells (9, 12). We and others have also shown that engagement of single TLRs, receptors that recognize molecular patterns expressed by viruses, fungi, parasites, and bacteria, is sufficient to prevent transplantation tolerance by anti-CD154 mAb (15, 16, 17). Conversely, elimination of the TLR adaptor MyD88 facilitated the induction of transplantation tolerance to skin allografts (15, 17). Together, these experiments underscore the importance of the TLR/MyD88 pathway in the ability to prevent transplantation tolerance (18). Whether different classes of live microorganisms can all trigger acute rejection and use the TLR/MyD88 pathway to do so remains to be investigated.

Bacterial infections occurring during the perioperative or early postoperative period have been reported to occur in liver, kidney, and heart transplant recipients and are especially prevalent in lung, small bowel, and bone marrow transplants in both adult and pediatric recipients (19, 20, 21). The incidence of these early bacterial infections can reach 20–80% of patients, and activation by diverse microorganisms of the innate and adaptive immune system is likely to trigger multiple immune consequences. However, it is not clear whether bacterial infections directly precipitate allograft reception in the clinic or whether they could hinder the development of transplantation tolerance.

Listeria monocytogenes (LM)4 is an intracellular Gram-positive bacterium that has been used extensively to study the mammalian immune responses to infection (22). The natural route of LM infection is through the gastrointestinal tract, and food-borne LM infections have been reported to occur in transplanted patients within the first 6 mo after transplantation (23, 24), but their consequences on alloimmune responses and transplant fate are not known. Following ingestion, LM traverses the epithelial cell layer and disseminates in the blood stream to other organs such as liver and spleen. LM is phagocytosed by splenic and hepatic macrophages, as well as by hepatocytes, and escapes the phagosome by secreting listeriolysin O (LLO), which destroys the phagosomal membrane. LM then propels itself though the cytosol and infects neighboring cells using the actin assembly-inducing protein (ActA). The invasion of the cytosol triggers early inflammatory responses and, ultimately, protective immunity that depends both on innate and adaptive immune responses. Innate immune events include the production of MCP-1 (CCL2) and type I IFNs in a MyD88-independent but NF-{kappa}B-dependent, manner (25). The secretion of MCP-1 by LM-infected cells results in the emigration of neutrophils and blood CD11b+ monocytes out of the bone marrow (26). The monocytes then differentiate in a MyD88-dependent manner into a unique population of TNF-{alpha}- and inducible NO synthase-producing (Tip) dendritic cells (DCs). NO, reactive oxygen radicals, and TNF-{alpha} produced by neutrophils and Tip DCs are the principal mediators of early LM clearance. Tip DCs (CD11bintCD11cintMac-3high, where "int" is "intermediate") are not required for the priming of LM-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses (26). Instead, CD8+ DCs are reported to be the principal DC subset that initiates LM-specific CD8+ T cell responses in vivo (27), although in vitro-generated CD8– DC subsets can also stimulate LM-specific CD8+ T cells (28).

In this study, we investigated whether LM infection at the time of transplantation can prevent the induction of tolerance by anti-CD154/donor-specific transfusion (DST). We report that infection with LM potently antagonizes the induction of allograft tolerance in a largely MyD88-independent but LLO- and type I IFN-dependent, manner. These results draw attention to the potential impact of perioperative bacterial infections in transplant recipients in the clinic and highlight novel potential molecular mechanisms of the prevention of tolerance.


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

C57BL/6 (B6, H-2b), BALB/c (B/c, H-2d), C3H/HeJ (H-2k), CD4–/–, and CD8–/– mice on the B6 background were purchased from The Jackson Laboratory. MyD88–/– mice on a B/c and a B6 background were provided by Dr. S. Akira (Osaka University, Osaka, Japan) (29). MyD88+/– littermates were used as wild-type (WT) control mice. IFN{alpha}R1–/– mice (eight generation backcrosses to B6) that lack IFN-{alpha} and IFN-β receptor signaling were obtained from A. Bendelac (University of Chicago, Chicago, IL), and OTII-Tg mice on a RAG–/–/B6/CD90.1 background whose T cells recognize OVA peptide presented by I-Ab were a gift from Y.-X. Fu (University of Chicago, Chicago, IL). Animals were kept in a biohazard facility and used in agreement with our Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee according to the National Institutes of Health guidelines for animal use.

Bacterial preparations

LM strains LM-WT (LM), LM-LLO–, and LM-ActA– were grown in brain-heart infusion broth (BD Biosciences). Log phase cultures of LM were washed twice and diluted in PBS. Titers were determined following OD adjustment and colony forming unit assessment in spleens from infected mice. All mice receiving LM were infected i.p. on the day of transplantation. For infection experiments in MyD88–/– mice or when indicated in WT mice, ampicillin (25 mg/mouse/day) was administered i.p. for 5 days starting on day 2 posttransplantation or cefazolin (10 mg/mouse) was injected i.p. on the day of transplantation.

Transplantation

Abdominal heterotopic cardiac transplantation was performed using a technique adapted from Corry and colleagues (30). Cardiac allografts were transplanted in the abdominal cavity by anastomosing the aorta and pulmonary artery of the graft end-to-side to the recipient’s aorta and vena cava, respectively. Recipient mice were treated with anti-CD154 (MR1; 1 mg/dose i.v. on day 0 and i.p. on days 7 and 14 posttransplantation) in combination with DST (107 donor splenocytes on the day of transplantation). Some animals received an i.p. injection of different bacterial strains of LM at the indicated doses. For parental LM, an LD50 of 5 x 105 was chosen for subsequent experiments because all transplanted mice survived an injection of 105 CFU, whereas most died when injected with 106 CFU. Some animals received an i.p. injection of IFN-β (2 x 104 U on day 0 or on days 0 and 2). The day of rejection was defined as the last day of a detectable heartbeat in the graft. In some animals, depletion of CD8+ T cells was performed by i.v. injection of rat anti-mouse CD8 mAb (YTS-169.4; 1 mg/mouse) on day –2 and day –1 before transplantation. CD8 depletion was confirmed by flow cytometry on spleen and peripheral blood in pilot experiments.

Full thickness skin grafts (~1 cm2) were obtained from the dorsal flank of B/c mice and transplanted onto the dorsal flank of B6 or IFN{alpha}R1–/– recipient mice. The recipient mice were treated with anti-CD154 and DST as described for the heart transplantation experiments.

Detection of donor-specific alloantibodies

Donor-specific alloantibody titers were determined by flow cytometry. Briefly, a 1/100 dilution of mouse sera from transplanted mice was incubated with B/c lymph node cells for 1 h at 4°C before the addition of PE-conjugated anti-mouse IgM (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories) or fluorescein-conjugated (FITC) anti-mouse IgG (Southern Biotechnology). The geometric mean channel fluorescence of the stained samples was determined by flow cytometry and by analyzing the binding of Abs to non-B cells.

IFN-{gamma} ELISPOT assays

Splenocytes (106/well in triplicate) were stimulated with irradiated (2000 rad) donor (B/c), syngeneic (B6), or third party (C3H/HeJ) splenocytes (5 x 105/well) for 12 h. The ELISPOT assay was conducted according to the instructions of the manufacturer (BD Biosciences), and the numbers of spots per well were enumerated using the ImmunoSpot Analyzer (CTL Analyzers).

Immunohistochemistry

Grafts were removed on the day of rejection or day 30 posttransplantation for syngeneic grafts, embedded in OCT (Tissue-Tek Miles), and immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen. Cryostat sections were stained with anti-CD4, anti-CD8, anti-IgG, and anti-IgM Abs as previously described (31).

Colony-counting assay

WT B6 mice were infected i.p. with LM (105) or LM-LLO– (5 x 107) bacteria. Mice were sacrificed on day 2 after infection and spleens were homogenized in PBS. One hundred micrograms of serially diluted homogenates were plated on brain heart infusion (BHI) agar plates and incubated at 37°C overnight. Bacterial colonies were counted and total number of bacteria per spleen was calculated.

Serum IFN-β and IFN-{alpha}

B6, B6/MyD88–/–, and B6/IFN{alpha}R1–/– mice were infected with LM (105 CFU i.p.). Blood was collected by retro-orbital puncture at the indicated time points and serum was isolated and frozen at –20°C for subsequent use. Concentrations of IFN-β and IFN-{alpha} were measured by ELISA according to the instructions of the manufacturer (PBL IFN Source).

OT-II proliferation assays

OT-II cells were prepared by negative selection over magnetic beads (Stem Cell Technologies) from the lymph nodes of male Rag–/–/OTII-Tg mice. Stimulator cells were splenocytes isolated from B6 mice that were either naive or infected 2 days prior with LM (105 bacteria/mouse) in the presence or absence of an anti-CD154/DST regimen as described for transplanted animals. Stimulator cells were prepared by depleting T cells using anti-Thy1.2 mAb and rabbit complement. CFSE (5 µM)-labeled OTII cells (106) were mixed with stimulator cells (0.5 x 106) in the presence or absence of OVA peptide (aa 323–339; 1 µg/well). Cells were cultured for 5 days, stained with anti-CD4, anti-V{alpha}2, and anti-Vβ5 (BD Pharmingen) to identify OTII cells, and analyzed by flow cytometry. Transfer of live LM organisms from infected splenocytes to the culture dishes was excluded, as we verified that the concentration of penicillin/streptomycin contained in our standard culture medium effectively killed LM (data not shown).

Statistical methods

Comparisons of means were performed using the two-tailed Student’s t test or ANOVA and the posthoc Tukey test for multiple comparisons, when appropriate. Graft mean survival time and p values were calculated using Kaplan-Meier/log rank test methods.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
Discussion
 Disclosures
 References
 
LM infection prevents allograft acceptance in recipients treated with anti-CD154/DST

To test whether bacterial infection prevents the induction of allograft tolerance, we used a fully mismatched model of heterotopic heart transplantation with B/c mice (H-2d) as donors and B6 mice (H-2b) as recipients. Tolerance was induced by the administration of anti-CD154 and DST. An i.p. injection of LM (105/mouse) on the day of transplantation prevented anti-CD154/DST-mediated graft acceptance, with all the grafts being rejected within 10 days (Fig. 1A). Comparable results were also observed with B/c recipients of B6 heart grafts treated with anti-CD154/DST and infected with LM (data not shown). LM infection did not affect the survival of syngeneic heart grafts, demonstrating that LM infection did not interfere with wound healing, and suggesting that the effect of LM infection in anti-CD154/DST-treated recipients was due to an alteration in the alloimmune response. Histological and immunohistochemical analysis of grafts from untreated and LM-infected mice revealed infiltration by CD4+ and CD8+ T cells and IgM/IgG deposition consistent with acute rejection in allografts but not syngeneic grafts (Fig. 1B).


Figure 1
View larger version (106K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 1. LM infection prevents anti-CD154 ({alpha}-CD154)/DST-mediated allograft acceptance. A, LM infection prevents anti-CD154/DST-mediated cardiac allograft acceptance. B6 recipients of B/c heterotopic heart grafts were left untreated (n = 5) or were treated with anti-CD154 (1 mg/mouse on days 0, 7, and 14 posttransplantation) and DST (5 x 106 splenocytes, i.v. on the day of transplantation) in the absence (n = 6) or presence (n = 8) of an infection with LM (105 CFU i.p. on the day of transplantation). Recipients of syngeneic hearts (Syn) were untreated but received the same dose of LM as the anti-CD154/DST groups (n = 4); p < 0.01 for anti-CD154/DST vs no treatment; p < 0.001 for anti-CD154/DST vs anti-CD154/DST plus LM. B, Histology and immunohistochemistry of cardiac allografts isolated at the time of rejection from an untreated mice and from mice treated with anti-CD154/DST and anti-CD154/DST plus LM, as well as from a syngeneic grafts harvested on day 30 from mice infected with LM. Cellular infiltration of CD4+ and CD8+ cells is observed as well as alloantibody deposition in the rejected but not syngeneic grafts. This result is representative of three allografts analyzed per group (original magnification, x 200). HE, H&E. C, LM infection prevents anti-CD154/DST-mediated skin allograft acceptance. B6 mice were transplanted with B/c or B6 skin and treated as indicated (no treatment, n = 5; anti-CD154/DST, n = 8; anti-CD154/DST plus LM, n = 5; syngeneic plus LM, n = 5). Skin grafts were considered rejected when fully scabbed and necrotic. p < 0.001 for anti-CD154/DST vs no treatment and vs anti-CD154/DST plus LM.

 
Similar experiments were performed using skin grafts from B/c mice transplanted into B6 recipients. In this case, administration of anti-CD154/DST resulted in long-term acceptance of skin allografts but not in transplantation tolerance, and skin grafts were eventually rejected between days 50 and 100 (Fig. 1C). LM infection at the time of transplantation completely abrogated the ability of anti-CD154/DST to prolong skin graft survival.

LM infection restores alloreactive B and T cells responses in recipients treated with anti-CD154/DST

LM-mediated rejection correlated with elevated serum levels of donor-specific IgG but not IgM Abs (Fig. 2A), suggesting that alloreactive Th and B cell responses were restored in anti-CD154/DST-treated recipients by LM infection. The absence of detectable circulating allo-IgM, but its presence in the allograft (Fig. 1B), may be due to the ability of LM infections to enhance class-switching from IgM to IgG. Primed donor-specific IFN-{gamma}-producing cells were detected in the spleen of LM-infected anti-CD154/DST-treated recipients of cardiac allografts (Fig. 2B). LM-mediated rejection of skin allografts also correlated with an increased frequency of donor-specific IFN-{gamma}-producing splenocytes (data not shown). Together, these data are supportive of LM infection overriding the immunosuppressive activity of anti-CD154/DST and enhancing donor-specific immune responses.


Figure 2
View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 2. LM infection restores B and T cell alloreactivity in anti-CD154 ({alpha}-CD1540/DST-treated recipients. A, Restoration of allo-IgG responses. Serum from transplanted mice was collected at the indicated time points and concentrations of allo-reactive IgM and IgG Abs were determined by flow cytometry. Results represent the mean and SD of four determinations per group. p < 0.05 for allografts plus anti-CD154/DST plus LM vs no treatment vs syngeneic hearts (Syn) plus LM and vs allografts plus anti-CD154/DST. B, Restoration of primed allospecific IFN-{gamma}-producing cells. Splenocytes from transplanted or naive mice treated as indicated were isolated 2–3 wk posttransplantation and stimulated with syngeneic (B6), donor (B/c), or third party (C3H/HEJ) irradiated splenocytes. The frequency of IFN-{gamma}-producing cells was analyzed as indicated in Materials and Methods. Results represent the mean and SD of four determinations per group; p < 0.001 for allografts plus anti-CD154/DST plus LM vs allografts plus anti-CD154/DST vs naive plus LM and vs naive; not significant vs no treatment. C, LM infection results in increased APC capacity to prime T cells. B6 mice were infected with LM and either untreated or treated with anti-CD154/DST. The splenocytes were isolated 48 h after infection and depleted of T cells using anti-Th1.2 mAb and rabbit complement. T cell-depleted splenocytes, either unpulsed or pulsed with OVA peptide, were used to stimulate CFSE-labeled OVA-specific B6/RAG1–/–/OTII-Tg T cells that had been enriched by negative selection over magnetic beads. Cultures were harvested after 5 days and analyzed by flow cytometry. Results represent CFSE fluorescence intensity of CD4+V{alpha}2+ cells and are representative of three independent experiments. p < 0.01 for LM-infected plus OVA and LM-infected/anti-CD154/DST plus OVA vs naive plus OVA.

 
We hypothesized that LM infection promoted APC maturation/activation that, in turn, resulted in enhanced stimulation of alloreactive T cells. Using Ag-specific T cells, splenocytes from control, LM-infected, or LM-infected and anti-CD154/DST-treated mice were isolated 48 h postinfection, T depleted, irradiated, pulsed with OVA peptide, and used to stimulate CFSE-labeled syngeneic naive OTII-Tg OVA-specific T cells for 5 days. As shown in Fig. 2C, OTII T cells proliferated more vigorously in response to OVA presented by splenocytes from LM-infected mice, whether initially immunosuppressed with anti-CD154/DST or not, compared with splenocytes from control uninfected mice. These data are consistent with the conclusion that splenocytes from LM-infected mice have a greater Ag-presentation capacity than control splenocytes, which resulted in enhanced T cell priming in LM-infected animals. Consistent with this hypothesis, we observed statistically significant increases in expression levels of CD80 and CD86, but not MHC class II, in CD11c+ DCs from LM-infected mice (data not shown).

CD4+ or CD8+ T cells can mediate allograft rejection in LM-infected recipients

To determine whether LM-triggered rejection was T cell mediated, CD8–/– and CD4–/– mice were used. CD8–/– mice rejected B/c heart grafts at a rate comparable to that of WT mice, while treatment with anti-CD154/DST resulted in long-term graft survival for >60 days. LM infection in anti-CD154/DST-treated CD8–/– mice resulted in acute rejection (Fig. 3A) associated with an increased frequency of donor-specific IFN-{gamma}-producing T cells and elevated alloantibody titers (data not shown). Thus, LM-induced rejection in anti-CD154/DST-treated recipients is not dependent on the presence of alloreactive CD8+ cells.


Figure 3
View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 3. CD4+ or CD8+ T cells can mediate allograft rejection in LM-infected recipients. A, B6/CD8–/– mice were transplanted with B/c hearts and treated as described for Fig. 1 (n = 5 mice/group); p < 0.01 for CD8–/– plus anti-CD154 ({alpha}-CD154)/DST vs no treatment and vs CD8–/– plus anti-CD154/DST plus LM. B, B6/CD4–/– mice were used as recipients of B/c hearts. Mice were left untreated, or infected with LM. In one group, CD8+ cells were depleted with anti-CD8 mAb (n = 4–5 mice/group); p < 0.01 for WT vs CD4–/– vs CD4–/– plus anti-CD8 plus LM and vs CD4–/– plus LM; p < 0.05 for CD4–/– plus LM vs CD4–/– and vs CD4–/– plus anti-CD8+LM.

 
As previously described, CD4–/– mice spontaneously accepted B/c heart allografts (31). LM infection resulted in acute rejection in 60% of CD4–/– recipients of cardiac allografts (Fig. 3B). To confirm that the rejection in LM-infected CD4–/– mice was due to activated CD8 cells, CD4–/– recipients were depleted of CD8+ cells (Fig. 3B). In the absence of CD4+ and CD8+ cells, none of the LM-infected recipients rejected their grafts. Together, these results demonstrate that rejection of the allografts in LM infected recipients can be mediated by either CD4+ or CD8+ T cells and that LM infection renders alloreactive CD4+ T cells resistant to the immunosuppressive effects of anti-CD154/DST and the activation of CD8+ T cells largely independent of CD4+ T cells.

The ability of LM infection to prevent transplantation tolerance is not due to the stimulation of cross-reactive T cells

Previous studies demonstrating the ability of lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus and Pichinde virus, but not murine cytomegalovirus and vaccinia, viral infections to prevent the induction of tolerance (7, 11, 12) have led to the suggestion that the acquired resistance to tolerance is due to the generation of cross-reactive memory T cells corecognizing viral peptides and alloantigens. To test whether the ability of LM to prevent the induction of tolerance is due to LM-specific T cells cross-reacting with alloantigen, we tested whether the prior generation of anti-LM memory responses resulted in resistance to subsequent transplantation tolerance. Recipients preimmunized with live LM 2 wk before heart transplantation successfully accepted cardiac allografts when treated with anti-CD154/DST, even if they were reinfected with LM at the time of heart transplantation and anti-CD154/DST treatment (Fig. 4). This indicates both successful generation of protective anti-LM immune responses (as otherwise a peritransplant LM infection would have prevented transplantation tolerance) and insufficient generation of cross-reacting allospecific T cell responses to mediate allograft rejection. Similarly, infection with LM 7 wk before transplantation to ensure more time for the development of memory responses did not prevent the ability of anti-CD154/DST to induce transplantation tolerance (Fig. 4). Together, these data suggest that generation of cross-reactive allospecific T cell responses is not the mechanism by which LM prevents transplantation tolerance.


Figure 4
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 4. The ability of LM infection to prevent transplantation tolerance is not due to the stimulation of cross-reactive T cells. B6 mice were infected with LM only on day –45 (D-45; n = 5), on days –14 and 0 (D-14+0; n = 4), or only on day 0 (D0; n = 7) relative to transplantation with B/c hearts and initiation of the anti-CD154/DST treatment p < 0.001 for no treatment vs anti-CD154 ({alpha}-CD154)/DST vs anti-CD154/DST plus LM on day –45 and vs anti-CD154/DST plus LM on days –14 and 0.

 
LLO but not ActA expression is required for LM to prevent transplantation tolerance

We next focused on the features of LM that conferred its ability to trigger acute allograft rejection despite treatment with anti-CD154/DST. Common molecular patterns expressed by LM can potentially engage various TLRs, and several immune responses elicited by LM are dependent on the expression in host cells of the TLR adaptor MyD88 (22). The pro-rejection effect of live LM was mostly independent of MyD88-mediated signaling, because LM infection induced acute rejection in the majority of anti-CD154/DST-treated B6/MyD88–/– recipients of B/c/MyD88–/– allografts (Fig. 5A).


Figure 5
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 5. Mechanisms of acute rejection by LM. A, B6/MyD88–/– recipients of B/c/MyD88–/– hearts were treated as in Fig. 1 (untreated, n = 3; anti-CD154 ({alpha}-CD154)/DST, n = 6; anti-CD154/DST plus LM, n = 10); p < 0.01 for MyD88–/– vs MyD88–/– plus anti-CD154 ({alpha}-CD154)/DST plus LM and vs MyD88–/– plus anti-CD154/DST; p < 0.01 for MyD88 plus anti-CD154/DST vs MyD88–/– plus anti-CD154/DST plus LM. B, B6 recipients of B/c cardiac allografts were treated as in Fig. 1. Some groups received ampicillin (25 mg/mouse for 5 days) or cefazolin (10 mg/mouse) starting on the day of LM infection (D0; n = 6) or 2 days later (D2; n = 6); p < 0.001 for anti-CD154/DST vs anti-CD154/DST plus LM and vs anti-CD154/DST plus LM plus antibiotic on day 2. C, LM (105 CFU, n = 7), ActA-deficient LM (LM-Act–; 107 CFU, n = 5), or LLO-deficient LM (LM-LLO–, 5 x 107 CFU, n = 9) were used on the day of transplantation to infect B6 recipients of B/c hearts treated with anti-CD154/DST as for Fig. 1; p < 0.001 for LM-LLO– vs LM-WT and vs LM-ActA–. D, Number of LM-WT and LM-LLO– bacteria recovered from the spleen 2 days after infection (n = 4/group) as described in Materials and Methods; p = 0.2096, not significant.

 
We observed that live bacteria needed to be present for only a short time after transplantation, as treatment with high doses of the anti-LM antibiotic ampicillin on day 0 but not day 2 (as performed by others to isolate early molecular events triggered by LM; Ref. 32) after infection and transplantation prevented LM-induced allograft rejection (Fig. 5B). These observations suggest that early events of LM infection, including LLO-dependent escape from the phagosome and cytosolic invasion as well as ActA-dependent infection of neighboring cells by LM, may be critical. To test whether cellular invasion by live LM was necessary for the inhibition of tolerance induction, LLO-deficient and ActA-deficient LM strains were used. Whereas maximally tolerated numbers of ActA-deficient bacteria (107 CFU) were as effective as parental LM at preventing anti-CD154/DST-mediated transplantation tolerance, LLO-deficient bacteria even at high titers (5 x 107 CFU) were unable to inhibit transplantation tolerance (Fig. 5C). The failure of LLO-deficient LM to promote acute rejection was not due to its inability to replicate to sufficient bacterial titers, as splenic bacterial counts in mice infected with LLO-deficient (5 x 107 CFU) and parental (105 CFU) LM were similar on day 2 postinfection (Fig. 5D), a time after which the elimination of LM with ampicillin has no effect on graft outcome (Fig. 5B).

Prevention of tolerance by LM infection is mediated by type I IFNs

The LLO-mediated phagosomal lysis and cytosolic propagation by LM is known to result in IFN-β production by infected cells in a MyD88-independent manner (26). To test for the role of type I IFN in the rejection process, we first analyzed the kinetics of production of IFN-β and IFN-{alpha} following LM infection. As shown in Fig. 6A, LM infection resulted in increased serum levels of IFN-β that peaked at 48 h after infection and were similar in WT and MyD88–/– mice, confirming previous reports that IFN-β production by LM is MyD88 independent (25). IFN-β serum levels were not increased in LM-infected IFN{alpha}R1–/– mice (Fig. 6A), consistent with the notion that IFN{alpha}R signaling provides an amplification loop for type I IFN production (33). In contrast to IFN-β, LM infection did not result in detectable serum levels of IFN-{alpha} in any of these three mouse strains (data not shown). These data reveal a correlation between rejection and the production of IFN-β by LM-infected mice.


Figure 6
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 6. Prevention of tolerance by LM infection is mediated by type I IFNs. A, In vivo production of IFN-β by B6, B6/MyD88–/–, and B6/IFN{alpha}R1–/– mice infected with LM (105 CFU). Animals were bled at the indicated time points and the concentration of serum IFN-β was measured by ELISA; *, p < 0.05 between serum from LM-infected B6 mice at 48 h and all other time points and with serum from LM-infected IFN{alpha}R1–/– mice at 48 h. B, Prevention of tolerance by LM infection is dependent on Type I IFNs. B6/IFN{alpha}R1–/– mice were used as recipients of B/c heart (a) or skin (b) allografts. Mice were left untreated or were treated with anti-CD154({alpha}-CD154)/DST or anti-CD154/DST/LM (n = 4–6 mice in all groups). a, p < 0.05 for IFN{alpha}R1–/– plus anti-CD154/DST plus LM vs IFN{alpha}R1–/– plus no treatment and WT plus anti-CD154/DST plus LM. b, p < 0.01 for IFNR{alpha}R1–/– plus no treatment vs IFNR{alpha}R1–/– plus anti-CD154/DST and vs anti-CD154/DST plus LM. C, IFN-β is sufficient to prevent anti-CD154/DST-mediated graft survival. B6 mice were transplanted with B/c skin and left untreated or treated with anti-CD154/DST. Two groups of mice received i.p. injections of IFN-β (104 U on day 0, n = 5 or 2 x 104 U/mouse on days 0 and 2 posttransplant, n = 5); p < 0.05 between IFN-β-treated and anti-CD154/DST alone groups.

 
To test whether the pro-rejection effect of LM was dependent on type I IFN signaling, we used IFN{alpha}R1–/– B6 mice as recipients of B/c heart and skin transplants. Anti-CD154/DST induced similar prolongation of heart and skin allograft survival in IFN{alpha}R1–/– and WT B6 animals (Fig. 6B). Whereas LM infection prevented anti-CD154/DST-mediated prolongation of heart and skin allograft survival in WT recipients (Fig. 1, A and C), administration of LM to IFN{alpha}R1–/– mice failed to prevent anti-CD154/DST-mediated long-term graft acceptance of both heart (Fig. 6Ba) and skin allografts (Fig. 6Bb). These results indicate that type I IFN signaling is necessary for LM infection to induce acute rejection.

Finally, we demonstrate that the administration of IFN-β in a dose-dependent manner was sufficient to prevent anti-CD154/DST-mediated prolongation of skin allograft survival (Fig. 6C). Together, these experiments show a correlation between LM-induced IFN-β production and the prevention of allograft acceptance, the necessity of IFN{alpha}R1 signaling for LM to prevent anti-CD154/DST-induced graft survival, and the sufficiency of type I IFN to prevent anti-CD154/DST-mediated graft survival, thus fulfilling Koch’s postulate for a role of type I IFN in the prevention of allograft acceptance.


   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
Disclosures
 References
 
Our results show that infection with the intracellular Gram-positive bacterium LM at the time of transplantation prevents cardiac transplant tolerance and long-term skin allograft acceptance induced by anti-CD154/DST. LM-mediated acute graft rejection is dependent on its expression of LLO and on type I IFN signaling but is mostly independent of MyD88 expression. Our data suggest that live LM infection results in the activation of APCs that promote the stimulation of alloreactive T cells rather than activation of T cells cross-reactive to LM and alloantigen.

We and others have previously shown that the administration of single TLR agonists can prevent the induction of cardiac transplantation tolerance or of long-term skin allograft acceptance by anti-CD154/DST (15, 16, 17). However, several pieces of evidence indicate that the mechanisms by which TLR ligands and LM prevent transplantation tolerance can be distinct. First, the kinetics of acute rejection induced by TLR ligands are slower than those triggered by LM. In fact, TLR-induced acute rejection of cardiac allografts did not occur until discontinuation of the anti-CD154 therapy on day 21 posttransplantation (15). In contrast, LM infection completely eliminated the protective effects of anti-CD154/DST, resulting in similar rejection kinetics as those in untreated animals. This suggests more a vigorous enhancement of adaptive immune responses by LM compared with TLR agonists. Additionally, whereas cardiac allograft rejection following the injection of CpG in anti-CD154/DST-treated mice is dependent on MyD88 (L. Chen and M. K. Alegre, unpublished results), LM-driven acute rejection could proceed largely independently of MyD88 expression. This result is consistent with the demonstration that CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses to LM can be elicited independently of TLR2, TLR4, and MyD88 (32). Similarly, in our study the enhancement of allogeneic T cell responses and antagonism of transplantation tolerance by LM is mostly independent of MyD88. Because LM may also trigger signals dependent on other receptors for microbial molecular patterns (22), it is conceivable that non-MyD88-dependent receptors mediate signals that play a role in the ability of LM to prevent transplantation tolerance.

Anti-CD154-mediated immunosuppression has been shown to operate via different mechanisms, including inhibition of T cell activation, induction of T cell anergy, facilitation of the deletion of alloreactive T cells, and the promotion of donor-specific regulation (34). The latter has been ascribed to both the conversion of conventional T cells into FoxP3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs) (35) and the chemokine-driven recruitment of Tregs into cardiac allografts from tolerant animals (36). We have shown that CpG-mediated rejection coincides with reduced anti-CD154-induced recruitment of Tregs into cardiac allografts, perhaps because of the decreased expression of CCL17 (thymus- and activation-regulated chemokine or TARC) and CCL22 (macrophage-derived chemokine or MDC), two chemokines that attract CCR4-expressing cells (15). Because CCR4 is preferentially expressed on Tregs (36), a reduction of intragraft CCL17 and CCL22 in CpG-treated recipients results in an increased ratio of effector T cells to Tregs in the graft (15). This supports a hypothesis of reduced suppression by Tregs of effector responses within the allograft, leading to acute rejection. The rapid rejection kinetics induced by LM is incompatible with a similar mechanism of prevention of tolerance. Indeed, LM-induced rejection occurs within the first 10 days after transplantation, a time point before the recruitment of Tregs into cardiac allografts in anti-CD154-treated animals. Therefore, acute rejection induced by LM is unlikely to be due to reduced Treg recruitment to cardiac allografts. Instead, our results support a model in which increased activation of alloreactive T cells results in escape from suppression by Tregs at the priming rather than at the effector stage of the response. Whether LM infection also prevents the conversion of conventional T cells into Tregs remains to be investigated.

The pro-rejection effect of LM is dependent on the expression of LLO, a pore-forming molecule that is specific to LM and that is necessary for the cytosolic invasion and subsequent production of type I IFNs. Indeed, our results indicate that LM-mediated acute rejection depends on IFN{alpha}R1 expression and that exogenous IFN-β can prevent the induction of transplantation tolerance.

The interplay between type I IFN signaling and tolerance is becoming recognized in the autoimmunity field as evidence suggests that type I IFNs may interfere with tolerance and promote autoimmunity both in experimental models and in the clinic. In NOD mice, IFN-β accelerates autoimmune diabetes and breaks the tolerance to β cells in nondiabetes-prone mice (37). In humans, increased serum levels of type I IFNs have been described in lupus patients where type I IFN signaling is thought to promote the maturation of DCs, resulting in enhanced T cell activation (38). Interestingly, polymorphisms in the type I IFN pathway are associated with disease susceptibility (39).

The consequences of type I IFN signaling in transplantation are less well established but appear to play a major role in ischemia/reperfusion injury (40, 41). Recently, type I IFNs have been reported to mediate the prevention of skin allograft acceptance by LPS and polyinosinic:polycytidylic acid by reducing the deletion of alloreactive CD8+ T cells necessary for graft acceptance (42). We have extended these findings to a microbial infection and demonstrate a correlation between LM-induced IFN-β production and the prevention of allograft acceptance, the necessity of IFN{alpha}R1 signaling for LM to prevent anti-CD154/DST-induced graft survival, and the sufficiency of type I IFN to prevent anti-CD154/DST-mediated graft survival. These data taken together support the hypothesis that Listeria infections prevent long-term allograft survival mediated by anti-CD154 through the secretion of IFN-β.

LM infection also enhanced the ability of splenic APCs to present Ag to naive T cells in vitro and enhanced Ag-specific differentiation/effector function as determined by the augmented production of IFN-{gamma} by alloreactive T cells and the restored allo-IgG response. These results are consistent with the known properties of type I IFNs, which induce up-regulation of B7 costimulatory molecules (43) and facilitate the expansion and survival of T cells (44, 45). Furthermore, the production of type I IFN after LM infection has been reported to enhance the capacity of CD4+ T cells to produce IFN-{gamma} (46). Several cell types have been shown to produce IFN-β after LM infection, including NK cells, DCs, and macrophages (47, 48). The specific cell types producing IFN-β in LM-infected recipients of cardiac allografts remain to be elucidated.

In summary, our results point to type I IFNs as interesting potential targets for facilitating transplantation tolerance. Type I IFNs can be induced by many microbial infections (49) and can occur downstream of MD88-dependent and -independent events (50, 51). We therefore speculate that such infections occurring during the perioperative period may be capable of enhancing alloreactivity and preventing transplantation tolerance. IFN-{alpha} was the first biotherapeutic drug to be approved for clinical use, and type I IFNs are routinely used for the treatment of hepatitis B and C and multiple sclerosis (52, 53, 54). This use of type I IFNs has been reported to precipitate episodes of acute rejection (55, 56). Our results prompt the speculation that such treatments in transplant recipients may additionally antagonize transplantation tolerance. Finally, our data draw attention to an important potential impact of perioperative bacterial infections in transplanted patients and their impending interference with the induction of transplantation tolerance or the long-term acceptance of allografts. Of note are our preliminary observations that injection of Staphylococcus aureus also prevents anti-CD154/DST-mediated acceptance of skin allografts (E. Ahmed, T. Wang, C.-R. Wang, M. K. Alegre, and A. S. Chang, manuscript in preparation). However, the mechanisms by which this is accomplished appear to be distinct from those of LM infection. Thus, investigations into the impact of infections on the induction of transplantation tolerance are likely to identify new approaches that facilitate the induction of tolerance.


   Acknowledgments
 
We are indebted to Drs. Akira, Bendelac, and Fu for generously providing us with genetically altered animals.


   Disclosures
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Disclosures
References
 
The authors have no financial conflict 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 is supported by American Heart Association Fellowship Grant 0620026Z (to L.C.), National Institutes of Health Grants R01 AI052352 (to M.-L.A.) and R01 AI072630, Roche Organ Transplantation Research Foundation Grant 280559271 (to A.S.C.), and an American Society of Transplantation Branch-Out Faculty Grant (to A.S.C. and C.-R.W.). Back

2 M.-L.A. and A.S.C. are co-senior authors. Back

3 Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Anita Chong, Department of Surgery, 5841 South Maryland Avenue, Room AMB-J542, Chicago, IL 60637. E-mail address: achong{at}surgery.bsd.uchicago.edu Back

4 Abbreviations used in this paper: LM, Listeria monocytogenes; ActA, actin assembly-inducing protein; B/c, BALB/c mice; B6, C57BL/6 mice; DC, dendritic cell; DST, donor-specific transfusion; LLO, listeriolysin O; Tip, TNF-{alpha}- and inducible NO synthase-producing; Treg, regulatory T cell; WT, wild type. Back

Received for publication July 23, 2007. Accepted for publication February 10, 2008.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Disclosures
 References
 

  1. Reinke, P., E. Fietze, S. Ode-Hakim, S. Prosch, J. Lippert, R. Ewert, H. D. Volk. 1994. Late-acute renal allograft rejection and symptomless cytomegalovirus infection. Lancet 344: 1737-1738. [Medline]
  2. McLaughlin, K., C. Wu, G. Fick, N. Muirhead, D. Hollomby, A. Jevnikar. 2002. Cytomegalovirus seromismatching increases the risk of acute renal allograft rejection. Transplantation 74: 813-816. [Medline]
  3. Sageda, S., K. P. Nordal, A. Hartmann, S. Sund, H. Scott, M. Degre, A. Foss, T. Leivestad, K. Osnes, P. Fauchald, H. Rollag. 2002. The impact of cytomegalovirus infection and disease on rejection episodes in renal allograft recipients. Am. J. Transplant. 2: 850-856. [Medline]
  4. Vilchez, R. A., J. Dauber, K. McCurry, A. Iacono, S. Kusne. 2003. Parainfluenza virus infection in adult lung transplant recipients: an emergent clinical syndrome with implication on allograft function. Am. J. Transplant. 3: 116-120. [Medline]
  5. Pantenburg, B., F. Heinzel, L. Das, P. S. Heeger, A. Valujskikh. 2002. T cells primed by Leishmania major infection cross-react with alloantigens and alter the course of allograft rejection. J. Immunol. 169: 3686-3693. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Adams, A. B., T. C. Pearson, C. P. Larsen. 2003. Heterologous immunity: an overlooked barrier to tolerance. Immunol. Rev. 196: 147-160. [Medline]
  7. Brehm, M. A., T. G. Markees, K. A. Daniels, D. L. Greiner, A. A. Rossini, R. M. Welsh. 2003. Direct visualization of cross-reactive effector and memory allo-specific CD8 T cells generated in response to viral infections. J. Immunol. 170: 4077-4086. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Valujskikh, A., B. Pantenburg, P. S. Heeger. 2002. Primed allospecific T cells prevent the effects of costimulatory blockade on prolonged cardiac allograft survival in mice. Am. J. Transplant. 2: 501-509. [Medline]
  9. Adams, A. B., M. A. Williams, T. R. Jones, N. Shirasugi, M. M. Durham, S. M. Kaech, E. J. Wherry, T. Onami, J. G. Lanier, K. E. Kokko, et al 2003. Heterologous immunity provides a potent barrier to transplantation tolerance. J. Clin. Invest. 111: 1887-1895. [Medline]
  10. Hudrisier, D., J. Riond, O. Burlet-Schiltz, M. G. von Herrath, H. Lewicki, B. Monsarrat, M. B. Oldstone, J. E. Gairin. 2001. Structural and functional identification of major histocompatibility complex class I-restricted self-peptides as naturally occurring molecular mimics of viral antigens. Possible role in CD8+ T cell-mediated, virus-induced autoimmune disease. J. Biol. Chem. 276: 19396-19403. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Welsh, R. M., T. G. Markees, B. A. Woda, K. A. Daniels, M. A. Brehm, J. P. Mordes, D. L. Greiner, A. A. Rossini. 2000. Virus-induced abrogation of transplantation tolerance induced by donor-specific transfusion and anti-CD154 antibody. J. Virol. 74: 2210-2218. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Welsh, R. M., J. M. McNally, M. A. Brehm, L. K. Selin. 2000. Consequences of cross-reactive and bystander CTL responses during viral infections. Virology 270: 4-8. [Medline]
  13. Williams, M. A., J. T. Tan, A. B. Adams, M. M. Durham, N. Shirasugi, J. K. Whitmire, L. E. Harrington, R. Ahmed, T. C. Pearson, C. P. Larsen. 2001. Characterization of virus-mediated inhibition of mixed chimerism and allospecific tolerance. J. Immunol. 167: 4987-4995. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Williams, M. A., T. M. Onami, A. B. Adams, M. M. Durham, T. C. Pearson, R. Ahmed, C. P. Larsen. 2002. Cutting edge: persistent viral infection prevents tolerance induction and escapes immune control following CD28/CD40 blockade-based regimen. J. Immunol. 169: 5387-5391. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Chen, L., T. Wang, L. Molinero, J. Shen, T. Phillips, S. Akira, R. L. Fairchild, M. L. Alegre, A. Chong. 2006. TLR signaling prevents transplantation tolerance. Am. J. Transplant. 6: 2282-2291. [Medline]
  16. Thornley, T. B., M. A. Brehm, T. G. Markees, L. D. Shultz, J. P. Mordes, R. M. Welsh, A. A. Rossini, D. L. Greiner. 2006. TLR agonists abrogate costimulation blockade-induced prolongation of skin allografts. J. Immunol. 176: 1561-1570. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Walker, W. E., I. W. Nasr, G. Camirand, B. M. Tesar, C. J. Booth, D. R. Goldstein. 2006. Absence of innate MyD88 signaling promotes inducible allograft acceptance. J. Immunol. 177: 5307-5316. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Gangappa, S., C. P. Larsen, T. C. Pearson. 2007. Alloimmunity: no toll exemption. Am. J. Transplant. 7: 3-4. [Medline]
  19. Villacian, J. S., C. V. Paya. 1999. Prevention of infections in solid organ transplant recipients. Transpl. Infect Dis. 1: 50-64. [Medline]
  20. Afessa, B., S. G. Peters. 2006. Major complications following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Semin. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 27: 297-309. [Medline]
  21. Danziger-Isakov, L. A., S. Sweet, M. Delamorena, C. B. Huddleston, E. Mendeloff, M. R. Debaun. 2005. Epidemiology of bloodstream infections in the first year after pediatric lung transplantation. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 24: 324-330. [Medline]
  22. Pamer, E. G.. 2004. Immune responses to Listeria monocytogenes. Nat Rev Immunol. 4: 812-823. [Medline]
  23. Patel, R., C. V. Paya. 1997. Infections in solid-organ transplant recipients. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 10: 86-124. [Abstract]
  24. Fishman, J. A., R. H. Rubin. 1998. Infection in organ-transplant recipients. N. Engl. J. Med. 338: 1741-1751. [Free Full Text]
  25. O’Connell, R. M., S. A. Vaidya, A. K. Perry, S. K. Saha, P. W. Dempsey, G. Cheng. 2005. Immune activation of type I IFNs by Listeria monocytogenes occurs independently of TLR4, TLR2, and receptor interacting protein 2 but involves TNFR-associated NF{kappa}B kinase-binding kinase 1. J. Immunol. 174: 1602-1607. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Serbina, N. V., W. Kuziel, R. Flavell, S. Akira, B. Rollins, E. G. Pamer. 2003. Sequential MyD88-independent and -dependent activation of innate immune responses to intracellular bacterial infection. Immunity 19: 891-901. [Medline]
  27. Belz, G. T., K. Shortman, M. J. Bevan, W. R. Heath. 2005. CD8{alpha}+ dendritic cells selectively present MHC class I-restricted noncytolytic viral and intracellular bacterial antigens in vivo. J. Immunol. 175: 196-200. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Badovinac, V. P., K. A. Messingham, A. Jabbari, J. S. Haring, J. T. Harty. 2005. Accelerated CD8+ T-cell memory and prime-boost response after dendritic-cell vaccination. Nat. Med. 11: 748-756. [Medline]
  29. Adachi, O., T. Kawai, K. Takeda, M. Matsumoto, H. Tsutsui, M. Sakagami, K. Nakanishi, S. Akira. 1998. Targeted disruption of the MyD88 gene results in loss of IL-1- and IL-18-mediated function. Immunity 9: 143-150. [Medline]
  30. Corry, R. J., H. J. Winn, P. S. Russell. 1973. Primarily vascularized allografts of hearts in mice. The role of H-2D, H-2K, and non-H-2 antigens in rejection. Transplantation 16: 343-350. [Medline]
  31. Szot, G. L., P. Zhou, I. Rulifson, J. Wang, Z. Guo, O. Kim, K. A. Newel, J. R. Thistlethwaite, J. A. Bluestone, M. L. Alegre. 2001. Different mechanisms of cardiac allograft rejection in wildtype and CD28-deficient mice. Am. J. Transplant. 1: 38-46. [Medline]
  32. Kursar, M., H. W. Mittrucker, M. Koch, A. Kohler, M. Herma, S. H. Kaufmann. 2004. Protective T cell response against intracellular pathogens in the absence of Toll-like receptor signaling via myeloid differentiation factor 88. Int. Immunol. 16: 415-421. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Takaoka, A., T. Taniguchi. 2003. New aspects of IFN-{alpha}/β signalling in immunity, oncogenesis and bone metabolism. Cancer Sci. 94: 405-411. [Medline]
  34. Alegre, M. L., N. Najafian. 2006. Costimulatory molecules as targets for the induction of transplantation tolerance. Curr. Mol. Med. 6: 843-857. [Medline]
  35. Ochando, J. C., C. Homma, Y. Yang, A. Hidalgo, A. Garin, F. Tacke, V. Angeli, Y. Li, P. Boros, Y. Ding, et al 2006. Alloantigen-presenting plasmacytoid dendritic cells mediate tolerance to vascularized grafts. Nat. Immunol. 7: 652-662. [Medline]
  36. Lee, I., L. Wang, A. D. Wells, M. E. Dorf, E. Ozkaynak, W. W. Hancock. 2005. Recruitment of Foxp3+ T regulatory cells mediating allograft tolerance depends on the CCR4 chemokine receptor. J. Exp. Med. 201: 1037-1044. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Alba, A., M. C. Puertas, J. Carrillo, R. Planas, R. Ampudia, X. Pastor, F. Bosch, R. Pujol-Borrell, J. Verdaguer, M. Vives-Pi. 2004. IFNβ accelerates autoimmune type 1 diabetes in nonobese diabetic mice and breaks the tolerance to β cells in nondiabetes-prone mice. J. Immunol. 173: 6667-6675. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Banchereau, J., V. Pascual. 2006. Type I interferon in systemic lupus erythematosus and other autoimmune diseases. Immunity 25: 383-392. [Medline]
  39. Kyogoku, C., N. Tsuchiya. 2007. A compass that points to lupus: genetic studies on type I interferon pathway. Genes Immun. 8: 445-455. [Medline]
  40. Zhai, Y., X. D. Shen, R. O’Connell, F. Gao, C. Lassman, R. W. Busuttil, G. Cheng, J. W. Kupiec-Weglinski. 2004. Cutting edge: TLR4 activation mediates liver ischemia/reperfusion inflammatory response via IFN regulatory factor 3-dependent MyD88-independent pathway. J. Immunol. 173: 7115-7119. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Tsuchihashi, S., Y. Zhai, Q. Bo, R. W. Busuttil, J. W. Kupiec-Weglinski. 2007. Heme oxygenase-1 mediated cytoprotection against liver ischemia and reperfusion injury: inhibition of type-1 interferon signaling. Transplantation 83: 1628-1634. [Medline]
  42. Thornley, T. B., N. E. Phillips, B. C. Beaudette-Zlatanova, T. G. Markees, K. Bahl, M. A. Brehm, L. D. Shultz, E. A. Kurt-Jones, J. P. Mordes, R. M. Welsh, et al 2007. Type 1 IFN mediates cross-talk between innate and adaptive immunity that abrogates transplantation tolerance. J. Immunol. 179: 6620-6629. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Cho, H. J., T. Hayashi, S. K. Datta, K. Takabayashi, J. H. Van Uden, A. Horner, M. Corr, E. Raz. 2002. IFN-{alpha} β promote priming of antigen-specific CD8+ and CD4+ T lymphocytes by immunostimulatory DNA-based vaccines. J. Immunol. 168: 4907-4913. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. Ahonen, C. L., C. L. Doxsee, S. M. McGurran, T. R. Riter, W. F. Wade, R. J. Barth, J. P. Vasilakos, R. J. Noelle, R. M. Kedl. 2004. Combined TLR and CD40 triggering induces potent CD8+ T cell expansion with variable dependence on type I IFN. J. Exp. Med. 199: 775-784. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Curtsinger, J. M., M. Y. Gerner, D. C. Lins, M. F. Mescher. 2007. Signal 3 availability limits the CD8 T cell response to a solid tumor. J. Immunol. 178: 6752-6760. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Way, S. S., C. Havenar-Daughton, G. A. Kolumam, N. N. Orgun, K. Murali-Krishna. 2007. IL-12 and type-I IFN synergize for IFN-{gamma} production by CD4 T cells, whereas neither are required for IFN-{gamma} production by CD8 T cells after Listeria monocytogenes infection. J. Immunol. 178: 4498-4505. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. Nakane, A., T. Minagawa. 1984. The significance of {alpha}/β interferons and {gamma} interferon produced in mice infected with Listeria monocytogenes. Cell. Immunol. 88: 29-40. [Medline]
  48. Feng, H., D. Zhang, D. Palliser, P. Zhu, S. Cai, A. Schlesinger, L. Maliszewski, J. Lieberman. 2005. Listeria-infected myeloid dendritic cells produce IFN-β, priming T cell activation. J. Immunol. 175: 421-432. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  49. Pietras, E. M., S. K. Saha, G. Cheng. 2006. The interferon response to bacterial and viral infections. J. Endotoxin Res. 12: 246-250. [Medline]
  50. Sun, S., X. Zhang, D. F. Tough, J. Sprent. 1998. Type I interferon-mediated stimulation of T cells by CpG DNA. J. Exp. Med. 188: 2335-2342. [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  51. Stetson, D. B., R. Medzhitov. 2006. Type I interferons in host defense. Immunity 25: 373-381. [Medline]
  52. Pestka, S., C. D. Krause, M. R. Walter. 2004. Interferons, interferon-like cytokines, and their receptors. Immunol. Rev. 202: 8-32. [Medline]
  53. Clerico, M., G. Contessa, L. Durelli. 2007. Interferon-β1a for the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 7: 535-542. [Medline]
  54. Santantonio, T.. 2004. Treatment of acute hepatitis C. Curr. Pharm. Des. 10: 2077-2080. [Medline]
  55. Carbognin, S. J., N. M. Solomon, F. E. Yeo, S. J. Swanson, E. M. Bohen, J. M. Koff, S. G. Sabnis, K. C. Abbott. 2006. Acute renal allograft rejection following pegylated IFN-{alpha} treatment for chronic HCV in a repeat allograft recipient on hemodialysis: a case report. Am. J. Transplant. 6: 1746-1751. [Medline]
  56. Braun, M., J. M. Vierling. 2003. The clinical and immunologic impact of using interferon and ribavirin in the immunosuppressed host. Liver Transpl. 9: S79-S89. [Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Immunol.Home page
L. Chen, E. Ahmed, T. Wang, Y. Wang, J. Ochando, A. S. Chong, and M.-L. Alegre
TLR Signals Promote IL-6/IL-17-Dependent Transplant Rejection
J. Immunol., May 15, 2009; 182(10): 6217 - 6225.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

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 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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wang, T.
Right arrow Articles by Chong, A. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wang, T.
Right arrow Articles by Chong, A. S.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
*Gene*GEO Profiles
*HomoloGene*UniGene
*Substance via MeSH
Medline Plus Health Information
*Heart Transplantation
*Listeria Infections

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS