Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Cytotoxic Effector Function of CD4-Independent, CD8+ T Cells Is Mediated by TNF-α/TNFR

Zimmerer, Jason M.1; Horne, Phillip H.1,2; Fiessinger, Lori A.1; Fisher, Mason G.1; Pham, Thomas A.1; Saklayen, Samiya L.1; Bumgardner, Ginny L.1,3

doi: 10.1097/TP.0b013e318270f3c0
Basic and Experimental Research
Free
SDC

Background Liver parenchymal cell allografts initiate both CD4-dependent and CD4-independent, CD8+ T cell–mediated acute rejection pathways. The magnitude of allospecific CD8+ T cell in vivo cytotoxic effector function is maximal when primed in the presence of CD4+ T cells. The current studies were conducted to determine if and how CD4+ T cells might influence cytotoxic effector mechanisms.

Methods Mice were transplanted with allogeneic hepatocytes. In vivo cytotoxicity assays and various gene-deficient recipient mice and target cells were used to determine the development of Fas-, TNF-α-, and perforin-dependent cytotoxic effector mechanisms after transplantation.

Results CD8+ T cells maturing in CD4-sufficient hepatocyte recipients develop multiple (Fas-, TNF-α-, and perforin-mediated) cytotoxic mechanisms. However, CD8+ T cells, maturing in the absence of CD4+ T cells, mediate cytotoxicity and transplant rejection that is exclusively TNF-α/TNFR-dependent. To determine the kinetics of CD4-mediated help, CD4+ T cells were adoptively transferred into CD4-deficient mice at various times posttransplant. The maximal influence of CD4+ T cells on the magnitude of CD8–mediated in vivo allocytotoxicityf occurs within 48 hours.

Conclusion The implication of these studies is that interference of CD4+ T cell function by disease or immunotherapy will have downstream consequences on both the magnitude of allocytotoxicity as well as the cytotoxic effector mechanisms used by allospecific CD8+ cytolytic T cells.

Supplemental digital content is available in the text.

1 Department of Surgery, Comprehensive Transplant Center, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.

2 Integrated Biomedical Science Graduate Program, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.

3 Address correspondence to: Ginny L. Bumgardner, M.D, Ph.D., F.A.C.S, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center Department of Surgery, Division of Transplant 395 W. 12th Avenue, 166 Faculty Tower Columbus, OH 43210-1250.

This work was supported in part by grants from the American Society of Transplantation Basic Science Physician Scientist Award (to P.H.H.); Roche Organ Transplantation Research Foundation (to G.L.B.); the ASTS-NKF (National Kidney Foundation) Folkert Belzer, MD, ResearchAward (to T.A.P.); the American Society of Transplant Surgeons (to G.L.B.); and National Institutes of Health grants DK072262 and AI083456 (to G.L.B.) and F32 DK082148 (NIDDK; to J.M.Z.). The contentis solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases or the National Institutes of Health.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

E-mail: Ginny.Bumgardner@osumc.edu

J.M.Z. participated in research design, writing of the paper, performance of the research, and data analysis; P.H.H. participated in research design, writing of the paper, performance of the research, and data analysis; L.A.F. participated in research design, writing of the paper, and performance of the research; M.G.F. participated in research design and performance of the research; T.A.P. participated in writing of the paper; S.L.S. participated in performance of the research; and G.L.B. participated in research design, data analysis, writing of the paper, and funding the research.

Supplemental digital content (SDC) is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text, and links to the digital files are provided in the HTML text of this article on the journal’s Web site (www.transplantjournal.com).

Received 9 May 2012. Revision requested 3 June 2012.

Accepted 21 August 2012.

The prevailing dogma in transplant immunology is that CD8+ T cells mediate graft rejection through a perforin- and FasL-mediated cytotoxic mechanism (1–9). However, our previous results using a parenchymal cell transplant model suggest that this paradigm is likely too simplistic. We have previously reported that hepatocyte allografts initiate CD8-dependent rejection and in vivo allospecific cytotoxic effector function mediated by CD8+ T cells whose maturation is either CD4-dependent or CD4-independent (10, 11). While it is generally appreciated that CD8+ T cells require CD4+ T cell help for development of maximal effector function, CD8+ T cells can also be activated directly by antigen presenting cells without CD4+ T cell help when adjuvants or infectious agents are present (12–14). Although the contribution of CD4+ T cell help to CD8-mediated cytotoxic effector function is not clear, CD4+ T cells are known to contribute to CD8+ T cell expansion and, under some circumstances, facilitate trafficking to the site of inflammation (15, 16). In our model, allospecific CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL) effector function is significantly enhanced in magnitude and persistence when primed in the presence of CD4+ T cells. However, our studies utilizing transgenic CD8+ T cells suggest that the enhanced cytotoxic effector activity generated in the presence of CD4+ T cells was not a result of enhanced proliferation, precursor frequency, or CD8+ T cell trafficking to the liver sinusoids (site of cellular transplantation) (17, 18). This led us to investigate the hypothesis that CD8+ T cell cytotoxic effector mechanisms, which develop in CD4-replete conditions, are fundamentally different, and perhaps more complex, from those which develop in CD4-deficient conditions. Additionally, we predicted that CD4+ T cell contribution to heightened in vivo CD8-mediated cytotoxic effector function occurs early during transplant-initiated CD8+ T cell activation.

Back to Top | Article Outline

RESULTS

CD8+ T Cells Activated in the Presence of CD4+ T Cells Develop FasL-, TNF-α/TNFR, and Perforin-Mediated In Vivo Cytotoxic Effector Function

To investigate mechanisms of CD8+ T cell cytotoxic effector function in response to hepatocyte transplant, an in vivo cytotoxicity assay was used, as previously described (17). Cytotoxicity observed in this model is CD8 mediated, as allocytotoxicity was significantly reduced or eliminated after CD8+ T cell depletion just before the in vivo cytotoxicity assay (Fig. 1A, B; P<0.0009 for both) (17, 19). To investigate the role of FasL and TNF-α, the in vivo cytotoxicity assay was performed with wild-type, Fas KO, and TNFRI/II KO allogeneic (H-2b) splenocyte targets. As previously documented (17), we find a significant difference in the magnitude of allocytotoxicity, which develops by day 7 in wild-type (52±8%) versus CD4-deficient recipient mice (CD4-depleted; 22±4%; P=0.032; Fig. 1A, B). Wild-type FVB/N (H-2q) recipients demonstrated FasL/Fas-mediated and TNF-α/TNFR-mediated cytotoxicity because cytotoxicity against Fas-deficient (25±7%) and TNFRI/II-deficient targets (21±5%) was significantly reduced in comparison to the in vivo cytotoxicity occurring with wild-type targets (52±8%; P=0.003 and P=0.01, respectively; Fig. 1A). Treatment of wild-type recipient mice with anti-TNF-α mAb (400 μg, i.p., day 5, 6) partially inhibited allospecific cytotoxicity against wild-type targets (from 52±8% to 32±4%; P=0.042). Concurrent in vivo treatment with anti-TNF-α mAb to inhibit TNF-α/TNFR cytotoxicity and use of Fas-deficient targets to impair FasL/Fas-mediated cytotoxicity did not reduce allocytotoxicity beyond the results with use of Fas-deficient targets alone (28±4% vs. 25±7%, respectively; P>0.05). This suggests that CD4-dependent, CD8+ allospecific CTLs use both FasL and TNF-α (and perhaps other) mechanisms of cytotoxicity. In the absence of methods to interfere with perforin-mediated cytotoxicity in vivo, we tested CD8+ T cells from wild-type recipients for perforin-mediated cytotoxicity using an in vitro cytotoxicity assay (Cr51 release). Perforin-dependent allospecific cytotoxicity was readily detected (see Figure S1B and S1C, SDC,http://links.lww.com/TP/A721). Of note, wild-type mice exhibit serum alloantibody on day 7 that may contribute to residual cytotoxicity, after CD8-depletion or TNF-α inhibition (20). CD4+ T cells do not mediate in vivo cytotoxicity, as previously reported (17).

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 1

Back to Top | Article Outline

CD8+ T Cells Activated in the Absence of CD4+ T Cells Only Develop TNF-α/TNFR In Vivo Cytotoxic Effector Function

In CD4-depleted FVB/N recipients, in vivo cytotoxicity was completely abrogated when TNFRI/II KO targets were used (0±0%; P=0.0007) in comparison to wild-type target cells (22±4%). Treatment of CD4-deficient recipient mice with anti-TNF-α mAb (400 μg, i.p., day 5, 6) significantly inhibited allospecific cytotoxicity against wild-type targets (from 22±4% to 12±2%; P=0.027), but the inhibition was not as complete as observed for the TNFRI/II mutant targets. A possibility exists that the anti-TNF-α mAb treatment dosing regimen was insufficient to inhibit in vivo TNF-α–dependent cytotoxicity. However, this is unlikely because the same regimen significantly inhibited in vivo cytotoxicity in both wild-type and CD4-deficient recipients. Furthermore, we have performed additional higher dosing regimens with anti-TNF-α mAb (800 μg), without additional inhibition of cytotoxicity (data not shown). When Fas-deficient targets were used, in vivo cytotoxicity (32±8%) was not significantly different from that detected with wild-type control targets (Fig. 1B). These results demonstrate that alloreactive CD4-independent CD8+CTLs use only TNF-α/TNFR as a cytotoxic effector mechanism. Under these conditions, alloantibody does not contribute to cytotoxicity because CD4-deficient mice do not produce detectable serum alloantibody (20).

Back to Top | Article Outline

In Vivo CD8+ T Cell Cytotoxic Effector Function Does not Require Perforin

To determine the role of perforin-mediated cytotoxic mechanisms, FVB/N hepatocytes (H-2q) were transplanted into wild-type (C57BL/6, H-2b) and perforin KO (H-2b) mice. A cohort of the recipients was CD4 depleted. Perforin KO recipients exhibited a similar degree of allocytotoxicity compared with wild-type mice (94±1% vs 90±2%, respectively; Fig. 2), suggesting that perforin is not critical to development or magnitude of in vivo CD8-mediated cytotoxicity. Of note, higher overall cytotoxicity is observed in C57BL/6 recipients (17) as compared with FVB/N recipients because of strain differences. Anti-TNF-α mAb reduces in vivo cytotoxicity in perforin KO recipients (84±2%; P=0.006). However, the overall magnitude of cytotoxicity remains high despite the absence of perforin and TNF-α, suggesting Fas/FasL-mediated cytotoxicity (and other mechanisms) are sufficient for CD8-mediated effector mechanism in wild-type recipients. In addition, in CD4-replete perforin KO recipients, alloantibody is detected, and in fact, serum levels are enhanced, as compared with alloantibody levels in wild-type recipients;(21) this may account for some of the observed cytotoxicity. In vivo cytotoxicity in CD4-depleted wild-type (58±7%) and CD4-depleted perforin KO recipients (68±6%) were similarly consistent with the interpretation that perforin is not critical to CD4-independent CD8-mediated cytotoxicity. In contrast, CD4-depleted perforin KO recipients treated with anti-TNF-α mAb have significantly reduced cytotoxicity (30±4%) as compared with control CD4-depleted perforin KO recipients (68±6%; P=0.01). These data, together with results in Figure 1B, demonstrate that in vivo CD8-mediated cytotoxic effector function in CD4-deficient recipients is critically dependent on TNF-α.

FIGURE 2

FIGURE 2

Back to Top | Article Outline

Hepatocellular Allograft Survival Is Enhanced After TNF-α Inhibition in CD4-Deficient Recipient Mice

We know from previous studies that hepatocyte rejection is T cell mediated either by CD4+ or CD8+ T cells (22). Hepatocyte rejection in CD4-deficient recipients is dependent on CD8+ T cells, and transient CD8-depletion (100 μg, day -4, -2) in CD4 KO recipients results in an enhanced hepatocyte allograft survival until repopulation of CD8+ T cells occurs (MST=35 days vs 14 days, P=0.002). To investigate the correlation of CD8-dependent, TNF-α/TNFR-mediated in vivo allocytotoxicity with allograft rejection in CD4-deficient hosts, CD4 KO hepatocyte recipient mice were treated with anti-TNF-α mAb. We found that CD4 KO mice treated with anti-TNF-α mAb (400 μg, daily i.p. injections days 5–20 posttransplant), demonstrated significant enhancement of hepatocyte survival as compared with untreated CD4 KO recipients (MST=24 vs 14 days, P=0.002; Fig. 3A). Anti-TNF-α mAb treatment (initiated 5 days posttransplant) was discontinued on day 20, and hepatocytes were rejected shortly afterward, consistent with the treatment targeting an effector mechanism. Anti-TNF-α mAb treated CD4-depleted wild-type mice exhibited similar enhanced allohepatocyte survival (data not shown) demonstrating that these results are not unique to the CD4 KO strain. An alternative interpretation for enhanced allograft survival by TNF-α inhibition is that hepatocellular rejection is critically dependent on TNF-α–mediated cytotoxicity, both in the presence or absence of CD4+ T cells. To exclude this possibility, we treated wild-type recipients with anti-TNF-α mAb (day 5–20); however, unlike results for CD4-deficient recipients, no enhancement of hepatocyte survival was observed (MST=10 days vs 10 days in untreated wild-type recipients; Fig. 3A). These data suggest that the beneficial effects of TNF-α blockade on allograft survival are unique to conditions where CD8+ T cells are alloactivated in the absence of CD4+ T cells.

FIGURE 3

FIGURE 3

To further investigate the importance of specific CD8-effector mechanisms on susceptibility of transplanted hepatocytes to rejection, studies using donor hepatocytes from wild-type, Fas mutant, or TNFRI/II KO (all H-2b) were performed. Wild-type (CD4-sufficient) FVB/N recipients rejected hepatocyte transplants by day 14, regardless of donor strain (data not shown). CD4-depleted recipients rejected wild-type and Fas mutant hepatocytes with a median survival time of 14 days posttransplant. In contrast, CD4-depleted recipients (250 μg, days -4, -2, 7, and 14) transplanted with TNFRI/II KO donor hepatocytes exhibited significantly enhanced hepatocellular allograft survival (MST=35 days, P=0.003, Fig. 3B). Collectively, these results are consistent with the critical role of CD8-dependent TNF-α/TNFR-mediated cytotoxicity on hepatocyte rejection in CD4-deficient recipients.

Back to Top | Article Outline

CD4+ T Cell Enhancement of CD8-Mediated Cytotoxic Effector Function Occurs Rapidly

To determine if CD8+ T cells in CD4 KO mice have the capacity to develop high magnitude cytotoxicity as observed in wild-type recipients, we performed CD4+ T cell reconstitution of CD4 KO mice. Allogeneic hepatocytes (FVB/N) were transplanted into CD4 KO mice on day 0. CD4+ T cells were adoptively transferred on day -1. We determined that 10×106 column purified CD4+ T cells from wild-type mice were sufficient to promote the development of higher magnitude allocytotoxicity as observed in wild-type recipients (95% cytotoxicity, Fig. 4 and data not shown). To determine the kinetics of CD4+ T cell help for CD8+ T cell effector maturation, we varied the time of adoptive transfer of CD4+ T cells into CD4 KO mice relative to the time of hepatocyte transplant on day 0; 10×106 column purified CD4+ T cells were adoptively transferred into recipient groups on days -1, +1, +2, +3, +5, and +6 with respect to the hepatocyte transplant. Recipient mice were monitored for in vivo cytotoxicity on day 7 posttransplant by using allogeneic (FVB/N) and syngeneic (C57BL/6) target cells. In vivo cytotoxicity assays in mice adoptively transferred with CD4+ T cells on days -1, 1, 2, 3, and 5 all showed significantly higher mean values of cytotoxicity (95%, 84%, 76%, 82%, and 88%, respectively) than control CD4 KO mice (17%; P<0.0002) and equivalent mean values to control wild-type mice (Fig. 4). The adoptive transfer of CD4+ T cells into CD4 KO mice on day +6 posttransplant also exhibited higher cytotoxicity (53%; P=0.0001) than CD4 KO recipients, however, significantly less cytotoxicity when compared with wild-type recipients (P<0.0001). Thus, CD4+ T cells require at least 48 hours to maximally enhance the magnitude of CD8-mediated in vivo allocytotoxicity.

FIGURE 4

FIGURE 4

Back to Top | Article Outline

DISCUSSION

Activation of CD8+ T cells independently of CD4+ T cell help has been observed in many experimental models, such as tumor immunity (23), autoimmune diabetes (24), contact hypersensitivity (25), and allograft rejection (including intestinal, skin, cardiac, and hepatocellular transplantation (11, 26–35)). In fact, activation of alloreactive (CD4-independent) CD8-dependent immune responses has increasingly been identified as a major barrier to the establishment and maintenance of long-term allograft acceptance in both experimental and clinical settings (36–38). The activation of the CD8-dependent pathway of rejection is highly resistant to immunoregulation (26, 27, 29–33, 35, 39) and immunotherapeutic agents, which readily suppress CD4-dependent rejection (27, 29, 31, 34, 40–42). For example, skin, cardiac, and intestinal allograft rejection have been observed to occur by CD8+ T cells activated despite interruption of CD28 and CD40L signaling, a powerful experimental “costimulatory blockade” treatment approach, which effectively controls CD4+-dependent immune pathways (27, 29, 43–45).

The hepatocellular allograft model coupled with in vivo and in vitro cytotoxicity assays were used to investigate the CTL effector mechanisms for CD8+ T cells, which are primed in a CD4-sufficient versus CD4-deficient environment. CD4-sufficient allograft recipients demonstrate CD8+CTL effector function mediated by FasL, TNF-α, and perforin, whereas CD4-deficient allograft recipients use only TNF-α-mediated CTL activity. The perforin/granzyme CTL lytic mechanism has been reported to mediate more efficient killing than FasL-mediated cytotoxicity (46, 47) and has been shown to require stronger activation signals than are required to activate the FasL cytotoxicity pathway (48). In these studies, we further show that CD8+ T cells develop TNF-α/TNFR-mediated cytotoxicity in response to transplant even without CD4+ T cell help; however, CD4+ T cells can further promote the development of multiple cytotoxic effector mechanisms by alloreactive CD8+CTLs. Altogether these data suggest a hierarchy of in vivo CD8-dependent CTL mechanisms, which range in complexity and which contribute to overall magnitude of allocytotoxicity.

These studies demonstrate the vulnerability of allogeneic hepatocytes to CD8-mediated TNFRI/II-dependent acute rejection. Prolongation of hepatocyte survival could be achieved in CD4-deficient recipients by treatment with anti-TNF-α mAb (Fig. 3A). Similarly, TNFRI/II-deficient (unlike Fas-deficient) hepatocytes were protected from acute rejection in CD4-deficient recipients despite the absence of immunosuppression (Fig. 3B). However, rejection eventually occurred by day 42 posttransplant in all recipients. Rejection in these recipients may have been because of non–TNFRI/II-dependent immune mechanisms associated with repopulating CD4+ T cells or to NK cells, which have been reported to mediate cytotoxicity in CD4-independent conditions in the setting of antitumor immunity or costimulatory blockade-resistant bone marrow rejection (49, 50). However, we suspect that repopulating CD4+ T cells are the dominant cells responsible for delayed rejection because we have previously reported that NK cell-depletion does not delay rejection or reduce in vivo cytotoxicity in the absence of CD4+ T cells or CD8+ T cells (33, 51). Interestingly, Langrehr et al. (52) have also shown that anti-CD4 and anti-TNF-α mAb treatment leads to enhanced survival of allogeneic intestinal transplants. Clinical studies using infliximab (anti-TNF-α mAb) to suppress ongoing rejection have shown that blocking TNF-α has efficacy in steroid-resistant intestinal transplant recipients (53, 54). It is possible that the prolongation of intestinal allograft survival by TNF-α inhibition was due to suppression of a CD4-independent, CD8-mediated response that we and others have shown to be resistant to therapies that readily control CD4-dependent rejection responses (31–33, 35, 39).

Although perforin is an important cytotoxic effector mechanism (46, 47), our studies show that perforin is not required for in vivo alloreactive CD8+ T cell–mediated cytotoxicity (Fig. 2) or hepatocyte rejection (data not shown) because both readily occur in perforin KO recipients. These findings regarding perforin are consistent with results in other transplant models (3, 55, 56). Our data show that CD8 effector function (without CD4+ T cells) is TNF dependent but perforin and FasL independent. CD8 effector function in CD4-replete recipients is FasL and TNF dependent (Fig. 1A) and perforin independent (Fig. 2). Our explanation for these data is based on alternate mechanisms known to mediate CD8-dependent cytotoxicity and on small amounts of alloantibody known to occur in wild-type recipients. For example, CD8+ T cell use of TRAIL, TWEAK, and/or TL1A (57) could account for the observation that cytotoxicity is not further suppressed by interference with both FasL/Fas and TNF-α/TNFR (Fig. 1A) or both perforin and TNF-α/TNFR (Fig. 2) cytotoxic mechanisms. In addition, cytotoxicity from alloantibody in CD4-replete wild-type recipients (no antibody in CD4-depleted recipients) could also account for detectable in vivo cytotoxicity. We do not think CD8+ memory cells contribute to in vivo cytotoxicity in these studies based on previous work showing that memory responses require a second transplant and that the magnitude and kinetics of in vivo cytotoxicity are quite different after a primary and secondary transplant in wild-type recipients (17). When testing for in vitro allocytotoxicity, we only detect perforin-mediated killing by CD8+ splenocytes from wild-type but not from CD4-deficient recipients (see Figure 1SA and 1SB, SDC, http://links.lww.com/TP/A721). In vitro assays preferentially reflect perforin-mediated cytotoxic effector mechanisms as previously noted (58, 59) and accounts for the failure to detect in vitro cytotoxicity by CD8+ T cells from CD4-deficient recipients.

Our findings that transplanted cells initiate multiple CD8+CTL cytotoxic effector mechanisms are consistent with results in other transplant as well as nontransplant experimental systems. For example, it has been reported that Fas/FasL (60–62), TNF-α/TNFR (60, 63), and perforin/granule release (61) are cytotoxic mechanisms that participate in CD8+ T cell-dependent hepatic viral clearance. These studies, however, did not investigate the influence of CD4+ T cells on the resultant CD8+ T cell effector mechanism. Borson et al. (64) has reported that after skin transplantation, graft infiltrating cells express FasL, TNF-α, and perforin mRNA. Interestingly, they also found that after CD4 depletion, graft-infiltrating cells express predominantly TNF-α mRNA compared with perforin and FasL mRNA. However, they did not determine what cells expressed these molecules. Our study is the first to show that CD8-mediated cytotoxic effector mechanisms, which develop in the presence of CD4+ T cells, are fundamentally different and more complex than those that develop in the absence of CD4+ T cell help. Immunotherapy to interfere with cytotoxic effector mechanisms mediating ongoing rejection will likely require a multifaceted and targeted approach.

In testing the kinetics of CD4-mediated help, we found that the adoptive transfer of CD4+ T cells into CD4 KO mice on day 0, at the time of transplant, resulted in the development of wild-type allocytotoxicity (which peaks on day 7 posttransplant). Surprisingly, adoptive transfer of CD4+ T cells on day 5 after transplant was also sufficient to promote wild-type magnitude of cytotoxicity even when tested for cytotoxicity just 48 hours after CD4 transfer (on day 7 after transplant; Fig. 4). Adoptive transfer of CD4+ T cells on day 6 after transplantation only partially restores CD8-mediated cytotoxicity, suggesting that (although 48 hours is sufficient), 24 hours is insufficient duration for CD4+ T cell activation and delivery of help to CD8+ T cells. These studies indicate that CD4+ T cell contribution to CD8+ T cell allocytotoxicity occurs rapidly and is not necessarily required at the time of initial antigen exposure. Other recent studies, which have investigated kinetics of CD4+ T cell interaction with CD8+ T cells in vivo, have also concluded that these interactions occur rapidly (65–68).

Because CD8+ allo-CTLs cells exhibit distinct effector mechanisms in the presence or absence of CD4+ T cells, an interesting question is what precursors contribute to the development of these functionally disparate CTL subsets. Experiments to address this question, as well as specific mechanisms of CD4-help required for distinct CD8+ effector cells, are in progress. Finally, although the experimental models to compare maturation of alloreactive CD8+ T cells in wild-type and CD4-deficient hosts represent extreme differences in host immune repertoire, they are ultimately designed to reflect CD8-dependent immune outcomes in humans with CD4+ T cell function impaired by genetic deficiencies, acquired disease, and/or immunotherapies. Understanding the effector mechanisms activated under specific conditions could promote the development of novel immunotherapies that would avoid global perturbation of the immune system by targeting specific effector pathways.

Back to Top | Article Outline

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Experimental Animals

FVB/N (H-2q MHC haplotype, Taconic), C57BL/6, CD4 KO, Fas mutant, TNFR I/II dKO, and Perforin KO (all others H-2b, Jackson Laboratory) mouse strains (all 6–10 weeks of age) were used in this study. Transgenic FVB/N and C57BL/6 mice expressing human alpha-1 antitrypsin (hA1AT) were the source of “donor” hepatocytes, as previously described (33, 69). All experiments were performed in compliance with the guidelines of the Institutional Laboratory Animal Care and Use Committee of The Ohio State University (Protocol 2008A0068).

Back to Top | Article Outline

Hepatocyte Transplantation

Hepatocyte isolation and purification were performed, as described previously (33, 69). Hepatocyte viability and purity has been determined to be consistently greater than 95%. Recipients (nontransgenic) were transplanted with 2×106 purified allogeneic hA1AT+ hepatocytes, and graft survival was monitored as previously described (33, 69).

Back to Top | Article Outline

Antibodies Used for In Vivo T Cell Subset Depletion

CD4+ T cells were depleted by intraperitoneal injections of anti-CD4 mAb (250 μg, day -4,-2; clone GK1.5; Bioexpress, West Lebanon, NH). CD8+ T cell were depleted by intraperitoneal injections of anti-CD8 mAb (100 μg, day -1,-2; clone 53.6.72; Bioexpress). Depletion was confirmed through flow cytometric analysis of recipient peripheral blood lymphocytes.

Back to Top | Article Outline

In Vivo Cytotoxicity Assay

Detection of in vivo cytolytic T cell function through clearance of carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester (CFSE; Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) stained allogeneic (CFSEhigh) and syngeneic (CFSElow) target cells was performed as previously described (17, 51). Cohorts of these recipients were also treated with anti-TNF-α mAb (clone MP6-XT2.2-11, 400 μg, i.p.; National Cell Culture Center, Minneapolis, MN) just before the in vivo cytotoxicity assay (days -1 and 0 with respect to the cytotoxicity assay). Syngeneic and allogeneic target cells (20×106 each) were injected into allograft and control mice. Spleens were harvested 18 hours after injection, analyzed using flow cytometry for CFSE+ splenocytes, and percent allospecific cytotoxicity was calculated, as described (17).

Back to Top | Article Outline

CD4+ T Cell Isolation and Purification

Isolation and purification of CD4+ T cells was performed via negative selection column as per the manufacturer’s recommendations (R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN). Briefly, splenocytes were treated with an antibody cocktail, bound to a column, and the non-antibody bound cells were eluted. The purity of the recovered CD4+ T cells ranged from 90% to 93%.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Statistical Analysis

Graft survival between experimental groups was compared using Kaplan Meier survival curves and log-rank statistics (Predictive Analytics SoftWare, SSPS Inc.). Other statistical calculations were performed using Student t test to analyze differences between experimental groups. P<0.05 was considered significant. To demonstrate the distribution of the data, results are listed as the mean±standard error.

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. Barber DL, Wherry EJ, Ahmed R. Cutting edge: rapid in vivo killing by memory CD8 T cells. J Immunol 2003; 171: 27.
2. Strehlau J, Pavlakis M, Lipman M, et al.. Quantitative detection of immune activation transcripts as a diagnostic tool in kidney transplantation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997; 94: 695.
3. Halloran PF, Urmson J, Ramassar V, et al.. Lesions of T-cell-mediated kidney allograft rejection in mice do not require perforin or granzymes A and B. Am J Transplant 2004; 4: 705.
4. O’Connell PJ, Pacheco-Silva A, Nickerson PW, et al.. Unmodified pancreatic islet allograft rejection results in the preferential expression of certain T cell activation transcripts. J Immunol 1993; 150: 1093.
5. Han D, Xu X, Baidal D, et al.. Assessment of cytotoxic lymphocyte gene expression in the peripheral blood of human islet allograft recipients: elevation precedes clinical evidence of rejection. Diabetes 2004; 53: 2281.
6. Sleater M, Diamond AS, Gill RG. Islet allograft rejection by contact-dependent CD8+ T cells: perforin and FasL play alternate but obligatory roles. Am J Transplant 2007; 7: 1927.
7. Niederkorn JY, Stevens C, Mellon J, et al.. Differential roles of CD8+ and CD8- T lymphocytes in corneal allograft rejection in ’high-risk’ hosts. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 705.
8. Meiraz A, Garber OG, Harari S, et al.. Switch from perforin-expressing to perforin-deficient CD8(+) T cells accounts for two distinct types of effector cytotoxic T lymphocytes in vivo. Immunology 2009; 128: 69.
9. Martin PJ, Akatsuka Y, Hahne M, et al.. Involvement of donor T-cell cytotoxic effector mechanisms in preventing allogeneic marrow graft rejection. Blood 1998; 92: 2177.
10. Horne PH, Lunsford KE, Walker JP, et al.. Recipient immune repertoire and engraftment site influence the immune pathway effecting acute hepatocellular allograft rejection. Cell Transplant 2008; 17: 829.
11. Lunsford KE, Gao D, Eiring AM, et al.. Evidence for tissue directed immune responses: analysis of CD4-dependent and CD8-dependent alloimmunity. Transplantation 2004; 78: 1125.
12. Ridge JP, Di Rosa F, Matzinger P. A conditioned dendritic cell can be a temporal bridge between a CD4+ T-helper and a T-killer cell. Nature 1998; 393: 474.
13. Lindell DM, Moore TA, McDonald RA, et al.. Generation of antifungal effector CD8+ T cells in the absence of CD4+ T cells during Cryptococcus neoformans infection. J Immunol 2005; 174: 7920.
14. Dikopoulos N, Riedl P, Schirmbeck R, et al.. Novel peptide-based vaccines efficiently prime murine "help"-independent CD8+ T cell responses in the liver. Hepatology 2004; 40: 300.
15. Bevan MJ. Helping the CD8(+) T-cell response. Nat Rev Immunol 2004; 4: 595.
16. Nakanishi Y, Lu B, Gerard C, et al.. CD8(+) T lymphocyte mobilization to virus-infected tissue requires CD4(+) T-cell help. Nature 2009; 462: 510.
17. Horne PH, Koester MA, Jayashankar K, et al.. Disparate primary and secondary allospecific CD8+ T cell cytolytic effector function in the presence or absence of host CD4+ T cells. J Immunol 2007; 179: 80.
18. Lunsford KE, Jayanshankar K, Eiring AM, et al.. Alloreactive (CD4-Independent) CD8+ T cells jeopardize long-term survival of intrahepatic islet allografts. Am J Transplant 2008; 8: 1113.
19. Lunsford KE, Horne PH, Koester MA, et al.. Activation and maturation of alloreactive CD4-independent, CD8 cytolytic T cells. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 2268.
20. Zimmerer JM, Pham TA, Sanders VM, et al.. CD8+ T cells negatively regulate IL-4-dependent, IgG1-dominant posttransplant alloantibody production. J Immunol 2010; 185: 7285.
21. Horne PH, Lunsford KE, Eiring AM, et al.. CD4+ T-cell-dependent immune damage of liver parenchymal cells is mediated by alloantibody. Transplantation 2005; 80: 514.
22. Bumgardner GL, Gao D, Li J, et al.. Rejection responses to allogeneic hepatocytes by reconstituted SCID mice, CD4, KO, and CD8 KO mice. Transplantation 2000; 70: 1771.
23. Yamazaki K, Nguyen T, Podack ER. Cutting edge: tumor secreted heat shock-fusion protein elicits CD8 cells for rejection. J Immunol 1999; 163: 5178.
24. Graser RT, DiLorenzo TP, Wang F, et al.. Identification of a CD8 T cell that can independently mediate autoimmune diabetes development in the complete absence of CD4 T cell helper functions. J Immunol 2000; 164: 3913.
25. Desvignes C, Etchart N, Kehren J, et al.. Oral administration of hapten inhibits in vivo induction of specific cytotoxic CD8+ T cells mediating tissue inflammation: a role for regulatory CD4+ T cells. J Immunol 2000; 164: 2515.
26. He G, Hart J, Kim OS, et al.. The role of CD8 and CD4 T cells in intestinal allograft rejection: a comparison of monoclonal antibody-treated and knockout mice. Transplantation 1999; 67: 131.
27. Newell KA, He G, Guo Z, et al.. Blockade of the CD28/B7 costimulatory pathway inhibits intestinal allograft rejection mediated by CD4+ but not CD8+ T cells. J Immunol 1999; 163: 2358.
28. Shelton MW, Walp LA, Basler JT, et al.. Mediation of skin allograft rejection in scid mice by CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Transplantation 1992; 54: 278.
29. Trambley J, Bingaman AW, Lin A, et al.. Asialo GM1+ CD8+ T cells play a critical role in costimulation blockade-resistant allograft rejection. J Clin Invest 1999; 104: 1715.
30. Han WR, Zhan Y, Murray-Segal LJ, et al.. Prolonged allograft survival in anti-CD4 antibody transgenic mice: lack of residual helper T cells compared with other CD4-deficient mice. Transplantation 2000; 70: 168.
31. Jones ND, Van_Maurik A, Hara M, et al.. CD40-CD40 ligand-independent activation of CD8+ T cells can trigger allograft rejection. J Immunol 2000; 165: 1111.
32. Bishop DK, Wood SC, Eichwald EJ, et al.. Immunobiology of allograft rejection in the absence of IFN-gamma: CD8+ effector cells develop independently of CD4+ cells and CD40-CD40 ligand interactions. J Immunol 2001; 166: 3248.
33. Bumgardner GL, Gao D, Li J, et al.. Rejection responses to allogeneic hepatocytes by reconstituted SCID mice, CD4 KO, and CD8 KO mice. Transplantation 2000; 70: 1771.
34. Gao D, Li J, Orosz C, et al.. Different costimulation signals used by CD4+ and CD8+ cells that independently initiate rejection of allogeneic hepatocytes in mice. Hepatology 2000; 32: 1018.
35. Bumgardner GL, Li J, Prologo JD, et al.. Patterns of immune responses evoked by allogeneic hepatocytes. I. Evidence for independent co-dominant roles for CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses in acute rejection. Transplantation 1999; 68: 555.
36. Csencsits KL, Bishop DK. Contrasting alloreactive CD4+ and CD8+ T cells: there’s more to it than MHC restriction. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 107.
37. Le Moine A, Goldman M. Non-classical pathways of cell-mediated allograft rejection: new challenges for tolerance induction? Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 101.
38. Boleslawski E, Conti F, Sanquer S, et al.. Defective inhibition of peripheral CD8+ T cell IL-2 production by anti-calcineurin drugs during acute liver allograft rejection. Transplantation 2004; 77: 1815.
39. Wang Y, Gao D, Lunsford KE, et al.. Targeting LFA-1 synergizes with CD40/CD40L blockade for suppression of both CD4-dependent and CD8-dependent rejection. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 1251.
40. Bumgardner GL, Gao D, Li J, et al.. MHC-identical heart and hepatocyte allografts evoke opposite immune responses within the same host. Transplantation 2002; 74: 855.
41. Guo Z, Meng L, Kim O, et al.. CD8 T cell-mediated rejection of intestinal allografts is resistant to inhibition of the CD40/CD154 costimulatory pathway. Transplantation 2001; 71: 1351.
42. Iwakoshi NN, Moredes JP, Markees TG, et al.. Treatment of allograft recipients with donor-specific transfusion and anti-CD154 antibody leads to deletion of alloreactive CD8+ T cells and prolonged graft survival in a CTLA4-dependent manner. J Immunol 2000; 164: 512.
43. Williams MA, Trambley J, Ha J, et al.. Genetic characterization of strain differences in the ability to mediate CD40/CD28-Independent rejection of skin allografts. J Immunol 2000; 165: 6849.
44. Meng L, Guo Z, Kim O, et al.. Blockade of the CD40 pathway fails to prevent CD8 T cell-mediated intestinal allograft rejection. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 418.
45. Szot GL, Zhou P, Rulifson I, et al.. Different mechanisms of cardiac allograft rejection in wildtype and CD28-deficient mice. Am J Transplant 2001; 1: 38.
46. Russell JH, Ley TJ. Lymphocyte-mediated cytotoxicity. Annu Rev Immunol 2002; 20: 323.
47. Heusel JW, Wesselschmidt RL, Shresta S, et al.. Cytotoxic lymphocytes require granzyme B for the rapid induction of DNA fragmentation and apoptosis in allogeneic target cells. Cell 1994; 76: 977.
48. Kojima H, Toda M, Sitkovsky MV. Comparison of Fas- versus perforin-mediated pathways of cytotoxicity in TCR- and Thy-1-activated murine T cells. Int Immunol 2000; 12: 365.
49. Adam C, King S, Allgeier T, et al.. DC-NK cell cross talk as a novel CD4+ T-cell-independent pathway for antitumor CTL induction. Blood 2005; 106: 338.
50. Kean LS, Hamby K, Koehn B, et al.. NK cells mediate costimulation blockade-resistant rejection of allogeneic stem cells during nonmyeloablative transplantation. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 292.
51. Horne PH, Zimmerer JM, Fisher MG, et al.. Critical role of effector macrophages in mediating CD4-dependent alloimmune injury of transplanted liver parenchymal cells. J Immunol 2008; 181: 1224.
52. Langrehr JM, Gube K, Hammer MH, et al.. Short-term anti-CD4 plus anti-TNF-alpha receptor treatment in allogeneic small bowel transplantation results in long-term survival. Transplantation 2007; 84: 639.
53. Pascher A, Klupp J, Langrehr JM, et al.. Anti-TNF-alpha therapy for acute rejection in intestinal transplantation. Transplant Proc 2005; 37: 1635.
54. Gerlach UA, Koch M, Muller HP, et al.. Tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors as immunomodulatory antirejection agents after intestinal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2011; 11: 1041.
55. Ahmed KR, Guo TB, Gaal KK. Islet rejection in perforin-deficient mice: the role of perforin and Fas. Transplantation 1997; 63: 951.
56. Diamond AS, Gill RG. Resistance to induction of long-term allograft survival in IFNg- deficient mice maps to a hyperaggressive CD8 T cell subset. Transplantation 2000; 69: S298.
57. Zimmerman Z, Shatry A, Deyev V, et al.. Effector cells derived from host CD8 memory T cells mediate rapid resistance against minor histocompatibility antigen-mismatched allogeneic marrow grafts without participation of perforin, Fas ligand, and the simultaneous inhibition of 3 tumor necrosis factor family effector pathways. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2005; 11: 576.
58. Diamond AS, Gill RG. An essential contribution by IFN-gamma to CD8+ T cell-mediated rejection of pancreatic islet allografts. J Immunol 2000; 165: 247.
59. Hsieh MH, Korngold R. Differential use of FasL- and perforin-mediated cytolytic mechanisms by T-cell subsets involved in graft-versus-myeloid leukemia responses. Blood 2000; 96: 1047.
60. Abougergi MS, Gidner SJ, Spady DK, et al.. Fas and TNFR1, but not cytolytic granule-dependent mechanisms, mediate clearance of murine liver adenoviral infection. Hepatology 2005; 41: 97.
61. Roth E, Pircher H. IFN-gamma promotes Fas ligand- and perforin-mediated liver cell destruction by cytotoxic CD8 T cells. J Immunol 2004; 172: 1588.
62. Kennedy NJ, Russell JQ, Michail N, et al.. Liver damage by infiltrating CD8+ T cells is Fas dependent. J Immunol 2001; 167: 6654.
63. Kafrouni MI, Brown GR, Thiele DL. The role of TNF-TNFR2 interactions in generation of CTL responses and clearance of hepatic adenovirus infection. J Leukoc Biol 2003; 74: 564.
64. Borson ND, Strausbauch MA, Kennedy RB, et al.. Temporal sequence of transcription of perforin, Fas ligand, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha genes in rejecting skin allografts. Transplantation 1999; 67: 672.
65. Beuneu H, Garcia Z, Bousso P. Cutting edge: cognate CD4 help promotes recruitment of antigen-specific CD8 T cells around dendritic cells. J Immunol 2006; 177: 1406.
66. Agarwal P, Raghavan A, Nandiwada SL, et al.. Gene regulation and chromatin remodeling by IL-12 and type I IFN in programming for CD8 T cell effector function and memory. J Immunol 2009; 183: 1695.
67. Gerner MY, Casey KA, Mescher MF. Defective MHC class II presentation by dendritic cells limits CD4 T cell help for antitumor CD8 T cell responses. J Immunol 2008; 181: 155.
68. Curtsinger JM, Gerner MY, Lins DC, et al.. Signal 3 availability limits the CD8 T cell response to a solid tumor. J Immunol 2007; 178: 6752.
69. Bumgardner GL, Heininger M, Li J, et al.. A functional model of hepatocyte transplantation for in vivo immunologic studies. Transplantation 1998; 65: 53.
Keywords:

CD8+ T cells; FasL; TNF-α; CD4+ T cells

Supplemental Digital Content

Back to Top | Article Outline
© 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.