costimulatory blockade of the cd28 / cd80-86 / ctla-4 balance in transplantation: impact on memory t cells?
Clicks: 183
ID: 193327
2015
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
183 views
6 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #595 of 644 articles by views in sudebno-meditsinskaia ekspertiza
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 644 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
CD28 and CTLA-4 are prototypal co-stimulatory and co-inhibitory cell surface signaling molecules interacting with CD80/86, known to be critical for immune response initiation and regulation, respectively. Initial bench-to-beside translation, two decades ago, resulted in the development of CTLA4-Ig, a biologic which targets CD80/86 and prevents T-cell costimulation. In spite of its proven effectiveness in inhibiting allo-immune responses, particularly in murine models, clinical experience in kidney transplantation with belatacept (high affinity CTLA4-Ig molecule) reveals a high incidence of acute, cell-mediated rejection. Originally, the etiology of belatacept-resistant graft rejection was thought to be heterologous immunity, i.e. the cross-reactivity of the pool of memory T cells from pathogen specific immune responses with alloantigens. Recently, the standard view that memory T cells arise from effector cells after clonal contraction has been challenged by a developmental model, in which less differentiated memory T cells generate effector cells. This review delineates how this shift in paradigm, given the differences in co-stimulatory and co-inhibitory signal depending on the maturation stage, could profoundly affect our understanding of the CD28 / CTLA-4 / CD80/86 blockade and highlights the potential advantages of selectively targeting CD28, instead of CD80/86, to control post-transplant immune responses.
| Reference Key |
eville2015frontierscostimulatory
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Simon eVille;Simon eVille;Nicolas ePoirier;Nicolas ePoirier;Nicolas ePoirier;Gilles eBlancho;Gilles eBlancho;Bernard eVanhove;Bernard eVanhove;Bernard eVanhove |
| Journal | sudebno-meditsinskaia ekspertiza |
| Year | 2015 |
| DOI |
10.3389/fimmu.2015.00411
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.