Cargando…

How is the effectiveness of immune surveillance impacted by the spatial distribution of spreading infections?

What effect does the spatial distribution of infected cells have on the efficiency of their removal by immune cells, such as cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL)? If infected cells spread in clusters, CTL may initially be slow to locate them but subsequently kill more rapidly than in diffuse infections. We...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kadolsky, Ulrich D., Yates, Andrew J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4528487/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26150655
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0289
_version_ 1782384683276828672
author Kadolsky, Ulrich D.
Yates, Andrew J.
author_facet Kadolsky, Ulrich D.
Yates, Andrew J.
author_sort Kadolsky, Ulrich D.
collection PubMed
description What effect does the spatial distribution of infected cells have on the efficiency of their removal by immune cells, such as cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL)? If infected cells spread in clusters, CTL may initially be slow to locate them but subsequently kill more rapidly than in diffuse infections. We address this question using stochastic, spatially explicit models of CTL interacting with different patterns of infection. Rather than the effector : target ratio, we show that the relevant quantity is the ratio of a CTL's expected time to locate its next target (search time) to the average time it spends conjugated with a target that it is killing (handling time). For inefficient (slow) CTL, when the search time is always limiting, the critical density of CTL (that required to control 50% of infections, C(*)) is independent of the spatial distribution and derives from simple mass-action kinetics. For more efficient CTL such that handling time becomes limiting, mass-action underestimates C(*), and the more clustered an infection the greater is C(*). If CTL migrate chemotactically towards targets the converse holds—C(*) falls, and clustered infections are controlled most efficiently. Real infections are likely to spread patchily; this combined with even weak chemotaxis means that sterilizing immunity may be achieved with substantially lower numbers of CTL than standard models predict.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4528487
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher The Royal Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45284872015-09-23 How is the effectiveness of immune surveillance impacted by the spatial distribution of spreading infections? Kadolsky, Ulrich D. Yates, Andrew J. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci Articles What effect does the spatial distribution of infected cells have on the efficiency of their removal by immune cells, such as cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL)? If infected cells spread in clusters, CTL may initially be slow to locate them but subsequently kill more rapidly than in diffuse infections. We address this question using stochastic, spatially explicit models of CTL interacting with different patterns of infection. Rather than the effector : target ratio, we show that the relevant quantity is the ratio of a CTL's expected time to locate its next target (search time) to the average time it spends conjugated with a target that it is killing (handling time). For inefficient (slow) CTL, when the search time is always limiting, the critical density of CTL (that required to control 50% of infections, C(*)) is independent of the spatial distribution and derives from simple mass-action kinetics. For more efficient CTL such that handling time becomes limiting, mass-action underestimates C(*), and the more clustered an infection the greater is C(*). If CTL migrate chemotactically towards targets the converse holds—C(*) falls, and clustered infections are controlled most efficiently. Real infections are likely to spread patchily; this combined with even weak chemotaxis means that sterilizing immunity may be achieved with substantially lower numbers of CTL than standard models predict. The Royal Society 2015-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4528487/ /pubmed/26150655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0289 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ © 2015 The Authors. Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Articles
Kadolsky, Ulrich D.
Yates, Andrew J.
How is the effectiveness of immune surveillance impacted by the spatial distribution of spreading infections?
title How is the effectiveness of immune surveillance impacted by the spatial distribution of spreading infections?
title_full How is the effectiveness of immune surveillance impacted by the spatial distribution of spreading infections?
title_fullStr How is the effectiveness of immune surveillance impacted by the spatial distribution of spreading infections?
title_full_unstemmed How is the effectiveness of immune surveillance impacted by the spatial distribution of spreading infections?
title_short How is the effectiveness of immune surveillance impacted by the spatial distribution of spreading infections?
title_sort how is the effectiveness of immune surveillance impacted by the spatial distribution of spreading infections?
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4528487/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26150655
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0289
work_keys_str_mv AT kadolskyulrichd howistheeffectivenessofimmunesurveillanceimpactedbythespatialdistributionofspreadinginfections
AT yatesandrewj howistheeffectivenessofimmunesurveillanceimpactedbythespatialdistributionofspreadinginfections