Major histocompatibility complex class I deficiency prolongs islet allograft survival.
ABSTRACT Because of islet allograft rejection, nonimmunosuppressed pancreatic islet allotransplantation has been unsuccessful for the treatment of type I diabetes. The role of major histocompatibility complex class I antigen expression on islet allograft survival was evaluated with the use of mice homozygous for a beta 2-microglobulin gene disruption. These mice express little if any functional major histocompatibility complex class I antigen. When these major histocompatibility complex class I-deficient islets were used as donors in an allogenic murine transplantation model, islet allograft survival was markedly prolonged. These results demonstrate a major importance for the alloresponse directed against major histocompatibility complex class I antigen.
- Transplantation 01/1994; 57(6):783-787. DOI:10.1097/00007890-199403270-00001 · 3.78 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The immunologic mechanisms involved in the destruction of murine cardiac allografts were evaluated using MHC-deficient mice. Specifically, we examined the survival of immediately vascularized heterotopic adult cardiac grafts deficient in MHC class I, MHC class II, or both MHC class I and II antigens following transplantation to allogeneic hosts. We observed indefinite cardiac graft survival when donors lacked MHC class II or both MHC I and II antigens. In parallel experiments, we studied the survival of cardiac grafts harvested from normal donors in recipients severely depleted of either CD4 (class II-deficient mice) or CD8 (class I-deficient mice) T cells. Craft survival was dramatically prolonged in the absence of CD4 but not CD8 T cells. Collectively, our results demonstrate that the interaction of host CD4 T cells with donor class II antigens is critical to the rejection of murine cardiac grafts.Transplantation Proceedings 03/1995; 27(1):254-5. DOI:10.1097/00007890-199501270-00006 · 0.95 Impact Factor
- Current Biology 07/1995; 5(6):625-34. DOI:10.1016/S0960-9822(95)00127-8 · 9.92 Impact Factor