Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The IL-2 pathway is portrayed often as central to allograft rejection. To test this hypothesis, we studied IL-2-deficient mice as allograft recipients. IL-2 gene knockout (KO) mice reject islet allografts and demonstrate a classical mononuclear leukocytic infiltrate, containing CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, surrounding and invading the islet allografts. Moreover, allograft rejection in the IL-2 KO mouse is associated with intragraft expression of certain cytokine and CTL attack molecule genes (e.g. IFN-gamma, IL-4, IL-7, IL-10, and granzyme B). In separate experiments, IL-2 KO mice generated CTLs in response to in vivo challenge with allogeneic tumor cells. Although IL-2 KO mice reject allografts in vivo, spleen cells from immunologically naive IL-2 KO mice exhibit a diminished proliferative response to mitogens in vitro that could be restored largely by exogenous IL-2, IL-4, or IL-7. The paradoxical ability to execute graft rejection in vivo despite near absent T cell proliferative responses in vitro may result from the expression of IL-7 in vivo, but not in vitro. Con A-stimulated bulk spleen cell cultures derived from IL-2 KO mice were essentially devoid not only of IL-2 but also IL-7 gene transcripts. These data indicate that 1) IL-2 is not the sole T cell growth factor capable of supporting allograft rejection and 2) expression of IL-4, but not IL-2, during the allograft response does not lead inevitably to tolerance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Steiger et al. (1995) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: