Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The blockade of B7, using B7 antagonists such as anti-CD80 and/or -CD86 mAbs or CTLA4Ig in vivo, has been shown to induce an efficient suppression of T cell-mediated immune responses in allograft, allergy, and autoimmune models. However, this treatment does not result in complete tolerance. In this study, we examined CD28-B7-independent activation pathways in the pathogenesis of graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) using allogeneic T cells from CD28-deficient mice. Acute GVHD was induced in the absence of CD28 on donor T cells and its manifestations were obvious in the lymphoid tissues. The CD28-independent GVHD was significantly improved by treatment with anti-CD40 ligand (CD40L) mAb. In contrast, treatment with anti-CD80 plus anti-CD86 mAbs exacerbated the clinical manifestations of GVHD and increased the T cell response against host alloantigen, resulting in the expression of CTLA4, CD40L, and CD25 on splenic T cells. These data suggested that the CD40L-CD40 pathway significantly contributed to the CD28-independent pathogenesis of acute GVHD, whereas the CTLA4-B7 pathway acted protectively in the development of GVHD. These results imply that selectively blockading CD28, instead of disrupting both CD28 and CTLA4, would be a better therapeutic strategy for GVHD. Additionally, the simultaneous use of CD40 antagonists may be advantageous.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saito et al. (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: