Cargando…

Differences in phenotype, homing properties and suppressive activities of regulatory T cells induced by epicutaneous, oral or sublingual immunotherapy in mice sensitized to peanut

Allergen-specific immunotherapy has been proposed as an attractive strategy to actively treat food allergy using the following three different immunotherapy routes: oral (OIT), sublingual (SLIT) and epicutaneous (EPIT) immunotherapy. Regulatory T cells (Tregs) have been shown to have a pivotal role...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dioszeghy, Vincent, Mondoulet, Lucie, Puteaux, Emilie, Dhelft, Véronique, Ligouis, Mélanie, Plaquet, Camille, Dupont, Christophe, Benhamou, Pierre-Henri
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5596241/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27063469
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/cmi.2016.14
_version_ 1783263494448087040
author Dioszeghy, Vincent
Mondoulet, Lucie
Puteaux, Emilie
Dhelft, Véronique
Ligouis, Mélanie
Plaquet, Camille
Dupont, Christophe
Benhamou, Pierre-Henri
author_facet Dioszeghy, Vincent
Mondoulet, Lucie
Puteaux, Emilie
Dhelft, Véronique
Ligouis, Mélanie
Plaquet, Camille
Dupont, Christophe
Benhamou, Pierre-Henri
author_sort Dioszeghy, Vincent
collection PubMed
description Allergen-specific immunotherapy has been proposed as an attractive strategy to actively treat food allergy using the following three different immunotherapy routes: oral (OIT), sublingual (SLIT) and epicutaneous (EPIT) immunotherapy. Regulatory T cells (Tregs) have been shown to have a pivotal role in the mechanisms of immunotherapy. The aim of this study was to compare the phenotype and function of Tregs induced in peanut-sensitized BALB/c mice using these three routes of treatment. We show that although EPIT, OIT and SLIT were all able to effectively desensitize peanut-sensitized mice, they induced different subsets of Tregs. Foxp3+ Tregs were induced by the three treatment routes but with greater numbers induced by EPIT. EPIT and OIT also increased the level of LAP+ Tregs, whereas SLIT induced IL-10+ cells. The suppressive activity of EPIT-induced Tregs did not depend on IL-10 but required CTLA-4, whereas OIT acted through both mechanisms and SLIT was strictly dependent on IL-10. Moreover, the three routes influenced the homing properties of induced Tregs differently, with a larger repertoire of chemokine receptors expressed by EPIT-induced Tregs compared with OIT- and SLIT- induced cells, resulting in different protective consequences against allergen exposure. Furthermore, whereas OIT- or SLIT-induced Tregs lost their suppressive activities after treatment was discontinued, the suppressive activities of EPIT-induced Tregs were still effective 8 weeks after the end of treatment, suggesting the induction of a more long-lasting tolerance. In summary, EPIT, OIT and SLIT mediated desensitization through the induction of different subsets of Tregs, leading to important differences in the subsequent protection against allergen exposure and the possible induction of tolerance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5596241
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55962412017-09-13 Differences in phenotype, homing properties and suppressive activities of regulatory T cells induced by epicutaneous, oral or sublingual immunotherapy in mice sensitized to peanut Dioszeghy, Vincent Mondoulet, Lucie Puteaux, Emilie Dhelft, Véronique Ligouis, Mélanie Plaquet, Camille Dupont, Christophe Benhamou, Pierre-Henri Cell Mol Immunol Research Article Allergen-specific immunotherapy has been proposed as an attractive strategy to actively treat food allergy using the following three different immunotherapy routes: oral (OIT), sublingual (SLIT) and epicutaneous (EPIT) immunotherapy. Regulatory T cells (Tregs) have been shown to have a pivotal role in the mechanisms of immunotherapy. The aim of this study was to compare the phenotype and function of Tregs induced in peanut-sensitized BALB/c mice using these three routes of treatment. We show that although EPIT, OIT and SLIT were all able to effectively desensitize peanut-sensitized mice, they induced different subsets of Tregs. Foxp3+ Tregs were induced by the three treatment routes but with greater numbers induced by EPIT. EPIT and OIT also increased the level of LAP+ Tregs, whereas SLIT induced IL-10+ cells. The suppressive activity of EPIT-induced Tregs did not depend on IL-10 but required CTLA-4, whereas OIT acted through both mechanisms and SLIT was strictly dependent on IL-10. Moreover, the three routes influenced the homing properties of induced Tregs differently, with a larger repertoire of chemokine receptors expressed by EPIT-induced Tregs compared with OIT- and SLIT- induced cells, resulting in different protective consequences against allergen exposure. Furthermore, whereas OIT- or SLIT-induced Tregs lost their suppressive activities after treatment was discontinued, the suppressive activities of EPIT-induced Tregs were still effective 8 weeks after the end of treatment, suggesting the induction of a more long-lasting tolerance. In summary, EPIT, OIT and SLIT mediated desensitization through the induction of different subsets of Tregs, leading to important differences in the subsequent protection against allergen exposure and the possible induction of tolerance. Nature Publishing Group 2017-09 2016-04-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5596241/ /pubmed/27063469 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/cmi.2016.14 Text en Copyright © 2016 Chinese Society of Immunology and The University of Science and Technology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
spellingShingle Research Article
Dioszeghy, Vincent
Mondoulet, Lucie
Puteaux, Emilie
Dhelft, Véronique
Ligouis, Mélanie
Plaquet, Camille
Dupont, Christophe
Benhamou, Pierre-Henri
Differences in phenotype, homing properties and suppressive activities of regulatory T cells induced by epicutaneous, oral or sublingual immunotherapy in mice sensitized to peanut
title Differences in phenotype, homing properties and suppressive activities of regulatory T cells induced by epicutaneous, oral or sublingual immunotherapy in mice sensitized to peanut
title_full Differences in phenotype, homing properties and suppressive activities of regulatory T cells induced by epicutaneous, oral or sublingual immunotherapy in mice sensitized to peanut
title_fullStr Differences in phenotype, homing properties and suppressive activities of regulatory T cells induced by epicutaneous, oral or sublingual immunotherapy in mice sensitized to peanut
title_full_unstemmed Differences in phenotype, homing properties and suppressive activities of regulatory T cells induced by epicutaneous, oral or sublingual immunotherapy in mice sensitized to peanut
title_short Differences in phenotype, homing properties and suppressive activities of regulatory T cells induced by epicutaneous, oral or sublingual immunotherapy in mice sensitized to peanut
title_sort differences in phenotype, homing properties and suppressive activities of regulatory t cells induced by epicutaneous, oral or sublingual immunotherapy in mice sensitized to peanut
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5596241/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27063469
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/cmi.2016.14
work_keys_str_mv AT dioszeghyvincent differencesinphenotypehomingpropertiesandsuppressiveactivitiesofregulatorytcellsinducedbyepicutaneousoralorsublingualimmunotherapyinmicesensitizedtopeanut
AT mondouletlucie differencesinphenotypehomingpropertiesandsuppressiveactivitiesofregulatorytcellsinducedbyepicutaneousoralorsublingualimmunotherapyinmicesensitizedtopeanut
AT puteauxemilie differencesinphenotypehomingpropertiesandsuppressiveactivitiesofregulatorytcellsinducedbyepicutaneousoralorsublingualimmunotherapyinmicesensitizedtopeanut
AT dhelftveronique differencesinphenotypehomingpropertiesandsuppressiveactivitiesofregulatorytcellsinducedbyepicutaneousoralorsublingualimmunotherapyinmicesensitizedtopeanut
AT ligouismelanie differencesinphenotypehomingpropertiesandsuppressiveactivitiesofregulatorytcellsinducedbyepicutaneousoralorsublingualimmunotherapyinmicesensitizedtopeanut
AT plaquetcamille differencesinphenotypehomingpropertiesandsuppressiveactivitiesofregulatorytcellsinducedbyepicutaneousoralorsublingualimmunotherapyinmicesensitizedtopeanut
AT dupontchristophe differencesinphenotypehomingpropertiesandsuppressiveactivitiesofregulatorytcellsinducedbyepicutaneousoralorsublingualimmunotherapyinmicesensitizedtopeanut
AT benhamoupierrehenri differencesinphenotypehomingpropertiesandsuppressiveactivitiesofregulatorytcellsinducedbyepicutaneousoralorsublingualimmunotherapyinmicesensitizedtopeanut