Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Factors influencing the development of CD4+ T cell subpopulations with differing lymphokine profiles are well established. However, CD4+ cells can show both perforin- and Fas ligand-dependent cytotoxicity, and little is known about conditions favoring the development of these effector activities. We now report that CD8+ cells regulate the development of perforin-dependent cytotoxicity in CD4+ cells. CD4+ cells activated in either the presence or absence of CD8+ cells developed Fas ligand-dependent cytotoxic activity. However, CD4+ cells developed perforin-dependent cytotoxicity only in the absence of activated CD8+ cells. CD8+ cells also inhibited the development of IL-4-secreting CD4+ cells; however, there was no correlation between the expression of perforin-dependent cytotoxic activity and the ability to secrete IL-4, and perforin-dependent cytotoxic CD4+ cells represented only 10% of isolated clones. This suggests that the two characteristics are expressed in different CD4+ subsets and might be regulated by distinct effects of the CD8+ cells. In keeping with this, regulation of the lymphokine profile of CD4+ cells by CD8+ cells was consistent with mediation by IFN-gamma, but only when delivered at high concentrations requiring close proximity of the cells. In contrast, regulation of perforin-dependent cytotoxic activity of CD4+ cells by CD8+ cells seemed inconsistent with an IFN-gamma-dependent mechanism, suggesting either direct cell contact or close proximity to allow delivery of an unidentified soluble factor. The characteristics of perforin-dependent CD4+ CTL and their regulation by activated CD8+ cells suggest that they represent a previously unrecognized subpopulation that plays a defensive role when a CD8+ cell response is absent.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Williams et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: