PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 1, 1996Annual Review of Immunology591 citations

Molecular Mechanisms of Lymphocyte-Mediated Cytotoxicity and Their Role in Immunological Protection and Pathogenesis In Vivo

View Full Paper
DKDavid KägiBLBirgit LedermannKBKurt Bürki

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Studies with perforin-deficient mice have demonstrated that two independent mechanisms account for T cell-mediated cytotoxicity: A main pathway is mediated by the secretion of the pore-forming protein perforin by the cytotoxic T cell, whereas an alternative nonsecretory pathway relies on the interaction of the Fas ligand that is upregulated during T cell activation with the apoptosis-inducing Fas molecule on the target cell. NK cells use the former pathway exclusively. The protective role of the perforin-dependent pathway has been shown for infection with the noncytopathic lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus, for infection with Listeria monocytogenes, and for the elimination of tumor cells by T cells and NK cells. In contrast, perforin-dependent cytotoxicity is not involved in protection against the cytopathic vaccinia virus and vesicular stomatitis virus. LCMV-induced immunopathology and autoimmune diabetes have been found to require perforin-expression. A contribution of perforin-dependent cytotoxicity to the rejection of MHC class I-disparate heart grafts has also been observed. Its absence is efficiently compensated in rejection of fully allogeneic organ or skin grafts. So far, evidence for a role of Fas-dependent cytotoxicity as a T cell effector mechanism in vivo is lacking. Current data suggest that the main function of Fas may be in regulation of the immune response and apparently less at the level of an effector mechanism in host defense. Further analysis is necessary, however, to settle this point finally.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kägi et al. (1996) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a091ed20d765b5cefd2566ehttps://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.immunol.14.1.207
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Role of Natural Killer Cells in the Destruction of Circulating Tumor Emboli231980 · 388 citations
  2. 2Studies with MHC-deficient knock-out mice reveal impact of both MHC I- and MHC II-dependent T cell responses on listeria monocytogenes infection1995 · 238 citations
  3. 3Effective protection against Listeria monocytogenes and delayed-type hypersensitivity to listerial antigens depend on cooperation between specific L3T4+ and Lyt 2+ T cells1985 · 122 citations
  4. 4CD8 T Cells Are Not Required for Islet Destruction Induced by a CD4+ Islet-Specific T-Cell Clone1992 · 68 citations
  5. 5The Role of Antibodies in Natural and Acquired Resistance of Mice to Vesicular Stomatitis Virus2008 · 76 citations