Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Next in The JI
    • Archive
    • Brief Reviews
    • Pillars of Immunology
    • Translating Immunology
    • Most Read
    • Top Downloads
    • Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • COVID-19/SARS/MERS Articles
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • For Authors
    • Journal Policies
    • Influence Statement
    • For Advertisers
  • Editors
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Journal Policies
  • Subscribe
    • Journal Subscriptions
    • Email Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
    • ImmunoCasts
  • More
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • ImmunoCasts
    • AAI Disclaimer
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Other Publications
    • American Association of Immunologists
    • ImmunoHorizons

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Immunology
  • Other Publications
    • American Association of Immunologists
    • ImmunoHorizons
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
The Journal of Immunology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Next in The JI
    • Archive
    • Brief Reviews
    • Pillars of Immunology
    • Translating Immunology
    • Most Read
    • Top Downloads
    • Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • COVID-19/SARS/MERS Articles
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • For Authors
    • Journal Policies
    • Influence Statement
    • For Advertisers
  • Editors
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Journal Policies
  • Subscribe
    • Journal Subscriptions
    • Email Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
    • ImmunoCasts
  • More
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • ImmunoCasts
    • AAI Disclaimer
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Follow The Journal of Immunology on Twitter
  • Follow The Journal of Immunology on RSS

CD83 Knockdown in Monocyte-Derived Dendritic Cells by Small Interfering RNA Leads to a Diminished T Cell Stimulation

Alexander T. Prechtel, Nadine M. Turza, Alexandros A. Theodoridis and Alexander Steinkasserer
J Immunol May 1, 2007, 178 (9) 5454-5464; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.178.9.5454
Alexander T. Prechtel
Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nadine M. Turza
Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alexandros A. Theodoridis
Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alexander Steinkasserer
Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • FIGURE 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1.

    Identification of an efficient and specific siRNA duplex targeted against CD83. A, iDCs were electroporated with 5.0 μg of different CD83-siRNA duplexes and maturation was induced 4 h after electroporation. After 24 h of maturation time, total RNA was isolated and reverse transcribed and real-time PCRs were performed with CD83 mRNA as the target and β-glucuronidase as an internal control. The normalized ratio of CD83 to β-glucuronidase in untreated cells was set to 100% (column 1). iDCs electroporated without any siRNA demonstrated no significant down-regulation of the CD83 messenger (column 2). A significant effect (∗, p < 0.01) on CD83 mRNA was detected for duplex no.1 and no.5 (columns 3 and 7). The specific mRNA level was reduced up to 50%. The data represent the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. Changes were considered as significant if p < 0.01. B, Additional real-time PCRs were performed to quantify the mRNA amounts of the typical DC surface markers CD80 and CD86. The normalized ratios of iDCs electroporated without any siRNA were set to 100% and compared with cells that were electroporated with 7.5 μg of duplex no.1. Only in the case of CD83 mRNA was a significant down-regulation observed (column 2). Neither CD80 (column 3) nor CD86 (column 4) were influenced by the siRNA duplex, demonstrating the specificity of the knockdown. The data represent the mean ± SD of three independent experiments. Changes were considered as significant if p < 0.01.

  • FIGURE 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 2.

    CD83 is stable over a long time and its expression is rapidly induced upon maturation. A, Mature DCs were incubated for 24, 48, or 72 h in the absence (open symbols) or presence (filled symbols) of 10 μg/ml CHX. The percentage of cells positive for CD83 (panel 1), CD80 (panel 2), CD86 (panel 3), and HLA-DR (panel 4) was determined by FACS (cells were gated on living cells) analyses at the indicated time points. Although CD80, CD86, and HLA-DR show almost constant surface expression regardless of whether cells were incubated with CHX or not, CD83 surface expression was slightly influenced by CHX treatment. After 24 h, ∼98% of the untreated cells were CD83 positive. The treatment with CHX reduced the CD83 surface expression levels to ∼80%. After 72 h, both untreated and CHX-treated cells showed equal expression of ∼80%. These data represent the mean ± SD of three independent experiments with cells from different donors. However, as shown in panel 1 CD83 expression was only slightly altered, indicating the high stability of CD83. B, Cell viability was determined using trypan blue, PI, and annexin V staining. The number of living cells (i.e., the percentage of trypan blue-negative cells) was reduced over time. The CHX treatment also increased the number of PI-positive cells (panel 2, line with filled squares) and the number of annexin V-positive cells (panel 3, line with filled squares). The data represent the mean ± SD of three independent experiments with cells from different donors. C, Immature DCs were simultaneously analyzed for intracellular and extracellular CD83 expression in the absence or presence of maturation stimuli. Freshly prepared iDCs (topmost panel) do not express large amounts of CD83, as only 2% of the population was double positive for intracellular and extracellular CD83. The induction of maturation (right column) led to rapid expression of both intracellular and extracellular CD83: 89% of the cells were double positive after 6 h and 98% after 24 h. Although no maturation stimuli were present in the medium, iDCs accumulated intracellular CD83, probably due to the mechanical treatment/stress. After 24 h, 96% of the cells express intracellular CD83 (left column, lower panel, upper and lower right quadrants; representing fluorescence channel 1). The data are representative of three independent experiments with cells from different donors.

  • FIGURE 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 3.

    CD83 knockdown is also specific and long lasting at the protein level. A, Western blot analyses. CD83 siRNA electroporated DCs showed dramatically reduced CD83 levels when compared with untreated and mock electroporated (EP) cells. After 48 h, the total cellular protein extract of electroporated DCs was separated on a 12% SDS-polyacrylamide gel. CD83 was detected using an anti-CD83 Ab (clone 1G11). Afterward, the membranes were stripped and reprobed with an anti-β-actin Ab. Although untreated DCs (lane 1) and mock electroporated DCs (lane 2) showed almost equal expression levels of highly glycosylated CD83 (35 ), the CD83 siRNA duplex no.1 electroporated cells (lane 3) showed dramatically reduced levels of CD83. The data are representative of two independent experiments with cells from different donors. B–D, FACS analyses of the surface expression of CD83 (B), CD80 (C), and CD86 (D). Immature DCs were either left untreated (B–D, left columns), mock electroporated (EP) (B–D; middle column), or electroporated with 7.5 μg of CD83 siRNA duplex no.1 (B–D; right columns). Although the surface expression of CD80 and CD86 was not influenced at any condition, CD83 was efficiently knocked down from the cell’s surface (B, left column, untreated cells, 81–85%; middle column, mock-electroporated cells, 80–86%; right column, CD83 duplex no.1 electroporated cells, 20–35%). The silencing of CD83 had also a long lasting effect, because after 72 h only 29% of the cells still expressed CD83 on their surface (B, right column, lower panel). The data are representative for five independent experiments with cells from different donors. E, Influence of CD83 siRNA electroporation on other surface markers. Immature DCs were either left untreated (upper row), mock electroporated (EP) (middle row), or electroporated with 7.5 μg of CD83 siRNA duplex no.1 (bottom row). Forty-eight hours after electroporation, CD40 (left column), B7-H1 (second column from left), B7-H2 (third column from the left), and HLA-DR (MHC-II; right column) were not significantly influenced in their expression. These data are representative for three independent experiments with cells from different donors.

  • FIGURE 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 4.

    CD83 siRNA electroporated mature DCs show reduced capacity to stimulate allogenic T cells. Immature DCs were electroporated with 7.5 μg of CD83 siRNA duplex no.1, incubated for 4 h, and then matured for 24 h and finally seeded together with allogeneic T cells for 72 h. Cells were then pulsed with [3H]thymidine for 24 h and harvested and the filters were counted. Cells that were electroporated with the CD83 siRNA (□) showed a dramatically reduced capacity to induce T cell proliferation when compared with cells that were mock electroporated (▪) or left untreated (▾). These results are representative of three independent experiments with cells from different donors.

  • FIGURE 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 5.

    Coculture of T cells and CD83 siRNA electroporated DCs leads to strongly reduced cytokine expression. Shown are rMFI values of the following cytokines: IFN-γ (A), IL-1β (B), IL-2 (C), IL-4 (D), IL-5 (E), IL-6 (F), IL-10 (G), and TNF-α (H). A cytokine expression profile of T cells that were cocultivated with DCs is shown in each panel. Untreated (left column in each graph), mock-electroporated (middle column in each graph), and CD83 siRNA treated DCs (right column in each graph) were incubated with T cells essentially as described above for the MLR assays. After 72 h of cocultivation supernatants were removed and cytokine expression levels were determined by a cytokine bead array assay. A significant lower expression of each cytokine was detectable in the presence of CD83 siRNA duplex no.1 electroporated cells, while mock electroporated cells (middle column in each graph) as well as untreated cells (left column in each graph) induced similar expression levels. The data represents the mean ± SD of three independent experiments with cells from different donors. The p values were calculated using Student’s t test.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table I.

    CD83 siRNA duplexes

    NameTarget SequenceSequence of Sense and Antisense Oligonucleotide
    CD83 no. 15′-CCTGCTATTACTAAGGAGTAA-3′r(UGCUAUUACUAAGGAGUAA)dTdT (sense)
    r(UUACUCCUUAGUAAUAGCA)dGdG (antisense)
    CD83 no. 25′-AAGGCATTTATTGCTGAGTTA-3′r(GGCAUUUAUUGCUGAGUUA)dTdT (sense)
    r(UAACUCAGCAAUAAAUGCC)dTdT (antisense)
    CD83 no. 35′-CCGGATGGGCAGAGAAACCTA-3′r(GGAUGGGCAGAGAAACCUA)dTdT (sense)
    r(UAGGUUUCUCUGCCCAUCC)dGdG (antisense)
    CD83 no. 45′-TGGGCTAATGAAGATCATATA-3′r(GGCUAAUGAAGAUCAUAUA)dTdT (sense)
    r(UAUAUGAUCUUCAUUAGCC)dCdA (antisense)
    CD83 no. 55′-AACGGATACCAAGTTGATTTA-3′r(CGGAUACCAAGUUGAUUUA)dTdT (sense)
    r(UAAAUCAACUUGGUAUCCG)dTdT (antisense)
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Immunology: 178 (9)
The Journal of Immunology
Vol. 178, Issue 9
1 May 2007
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Immunology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
CD83 Knockdown in Monocyte-Derived Dendritic Cells by Small Interfering RNA Leads to a Diminished T Cell Stimulation
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Immunology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Immunology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
CD83 Knockdown in Monocyte-Derived Dendritic Cells by Small Interfering RNA Leads to a Diminished T Cell Stimulation
Alexander T. Prechtel, Nadine M. Turza, Alexandros A. Theodoridis, Alexander Steinkasserer
The Journal of Immunology May 1, 2007, 178 (9) 5454-5464; DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.9.5454

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
CD83 Knockdown in Monocyte-Derived Dendritic Cells by Small Interfering RNA Leads to a Diminished T Cell Stimulation
Alexander T. Prechtel, Nadine M. Turza, Alexandros A. Theodoridis, Alexander Steinkasserer
The Journal of Immunology May 1, 2007, 178 (9) 5454-5464; DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.9.5454
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgment
    • Disclosures
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Innate Immunity Together with Duration of Antigen Persistence Regulate Effector T Cell Induction
  • Regulatory Roles of IL-2 and IL-4 in H4/Inducible Costimulator Expression on Activated CD4+ T Cells During Th Cell Development
  • Induction of CD4+ T Cell Apoptosis as a Consequence of Impaired Cytoskeletal Rearrangement in UVB-Irradiated Dendritic Cells
Show more CELLULAR IMMUNOLOGY AND IMMUNE REGULATION

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Next in The JI
  • Archive
  • Brief Reviews
  • Pillars of Immunology
  • Translating Immunology

For Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Instructions for Authors
  • About the Journal
  • Journal Policies
  • Editors

General Information

  • Advertisers
  • Subscribers
  • Rights and Permissions
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Public Access
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer

Journal Services

  • Email Alerts
  • RSS Feeds
  • ImmunoCasts
  • Twitter

Copyright © 2021 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc.

Print ISSN 0022-1767        Online ISSN 1550-6606