|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepublished online as a Blood First Edition Paper on July 5, 2002; DOI 10.1182/blood-2002-03-0872.
TRANSPLANTATION
From the University of Minnesota Cancer Center and
Department of Pediatrics, Division of Bone Marrow Transplantation,
Minneapolis, MN; and the Department of Microbiology, Dartmouth Medical
College, Hanover, NH.
The immunosuppressive drugs, cyclosporine A (CsA), tacrolimus, or
sirolimus, were analyzed as single agents and in combination with
anti-CD40L monoclonal antibody (mAb) for their effects on alloengraftment in mice conditioned with minimal total body irradiation (TBI). Whereas anti-CD40L mAb facilitated chimerism, neither sirolimus nor CsA resulted in substantial alloengraftment. However,
sirolimus was synergistic with anti-CD40L mAb for inducing donor
chimerism. Contrary to expectations, CsA, a T-cell receptor
(TCR) signaling inhibitor, did not abrogate anti-CD40L
mAb-facilitated engraftment but rather increased engraftment in
anti-CD40L mAb-treated mice. Although tacrolimus alone or with
anti-CD40L mAb resulted in similar levels of donor chimerism, donor
T-cell reconstitution was very low in tacrolimus-treated mice. At 1 week after transplantation, CsA decreased thymic numbers more
profoundly than sirolimus or tacrolimus in anti-CD40L mAb-treated
recipients. In contrast, only sirolimus resulted in a decrease in host
splenic T-cell numbers in anti-CD40L mAb-treated recipients.
Importantly, sirolimus and anti-CD40L mAb induced profound donor
tolerance with 100% acceptance of donor skin grafts placed early after
bone marrow transplantation (BMT). In contrast, anti-CD40L mAb
alone or in combination with CsA resulted in 12% or less donor skin
graft acceptance early (1 month) and 60% or less later (3 months)
after BMT. These data have clinical relevance and indicate that
immunosuppressive pharmacologic agents enhance anti-CD40L
mAb-facilitated alloengraftment and tolerance induction under
nonmyeloablative conditioning.
(Blood. 2002;100:3400-3407) Productive T-cell activation and
proliferation require 2 signaling events. The first, antigen
recognition, is the engagement of the T-cell receptor (TCR)
with the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) peptide ligand complex
on the surface of the antigen-presenting cell (APC). The second,
provided by costimulatory signals, is required for interleukin 2 (IL-2)
production, T-cell proliferation, and full effector function. Signal 1 in the absence of signal 2 renders a T cell nonresponsive or tolerant
to antigen. Blockade of the CD40L/CD40 costimulatory pathway via
anti-CD40L monoclonal antibody (mAb) has been effective in the
promotion of alloengraftment of bone marrow (BM) and solid organs in
several murine transplant models.1-7 Although anti-CD40L
mAb as a single agent has been shown to facilitate BM and solid organ
engraftment in mice, it has been less effective in nonhuman primate
transplant models.8-10 Therefore, in these studies, we
evaluated the efficacy of the pharmacologic immune suppressive agents,
sirolimus, cyclosporine A (CsA), and tacrolimus as single agents and in
combination with anti-CD40L mAb for their effects on alloengraftment
under a nonmyeloablative-conditioning regime.
The macrolide antibiotic sirolimus binds to molecular target of
rapamycin (mTOR) and blocks a late stage of T-cell activation downstream of both TCR engagement (signal 1) and costimulation (signal
2). Sirolimus mediates immunosuppression by inhibiting IL-2
responsiveness. Previously, we reported that sirolimus potently inhibited graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) mortality11-14
and also increased donor chimerism in sublethally (600 cGy total body
irradiation [TBI]) irradiated murine recipients.15
Studies by Li et al16 indicated that sirolimus was
additive or synergistic with costimulatory blockade for the acceptance
of donor skin allografts in unconditioned mice. Additionally, a recent
clinical trial concluded that sirolimus had substantial activity in the
treatment of steroid-refractory acute GVHD, indicating that sirolimus
is a beneficial immunosuppressive agent in bone marrow transplantation
(BMT).17 These data and the mode of action suggested that
sirolimus might be additive or synergistic with costimulatory blockade
strategies for the promotion of alloengraftment by preventing the
clonal expansion of alloreactive T cells that escaped costimulatory blockade.
CsA and tacrolimus are calcineurin inhibitors that block TCR signaling
(signal 1) at an early stage in T-cell activation. Although CsA and
tacrolimus are proven immunosuppressive reagents for the promotion of
engraftment and amelioration of GVHD in rodents, these agents may
antagonize tolerance induction when used in combination with
costimulatory blockade strategies by inhibiting TCR signals necessary
for tolerance induction. Additionally, the administration of CsA has
been shown to inhibit CD40L expression on CD4+ T cells
induced by TCR signaling,18 albeit not CD40L expression induced by multiple cytokines sharing the IL-2 receptor common Mice
Bone marrow transplantation
Flow cytometric analysis Peripheral blood leukocytes (PBLs) were obtained by retro-orbital venipuncture and harvested over a Ficoll gradient. Single cell suspensions were made of thymi and spleens. Cells were stained with fluorochrome-conjugated antibodies (anti-CD8, anti-CD4, anti-MAC-1, anti-CD19, anti-H2d, anti-H2b, and irrelevant isotype controls) purchased from PharMingen (San Diego, CA). Stained cells were analyzed using CellQuest software on a FACSCalibur flow cytometer (Becton Dickinson, Mountain View, CA).Skin grafting Full-thickness skin grafts (approximately 1 cm2) obtained from BALB/c and B10.BR donor mice were transplanted on the lateral thorax of recipient mice and secured with a bandage for 7 days. Grafts were monitored daily for the first 3 weeks and then twice weekly thereafter. Rejection was defined as the complete loss of viable donor graft tissue.Statistics Group comparisons of percentage donor chimerism were made by Student t test. Group comparisons of rates of engraftment were made by chi-squared test. P .05 was considered significant.
Anti-CD40L mAb and sirolimus are synergistic for the promotion of alloengraftment under a nonmyeloablative-conditioning regime To determine the effect of sirolimus on engraftment as a single agent, and in combination with anti-CD40L mAb, B6 mice were conditioned with 200 cGy TBI and administered a single dose (40 × 106) of BALB/c BM. Recipients received a 2-week course of irrelevant hIgG, anti-CD40L mAb, sirolimus, or a combination of anti-CD40L mAb and sirolimus. Mice were evaluated for percentage of donor chimerism at 6 weeks (data not shown) and 3.5 months after transplantation by PBL phenotyping (Table 1, experiment 1). All 10 anti-CD40L-treated mice had donor engraftment (mean of 69% ± 5%) in contrast to 0 of 10 hIgG-treated mice. Although sirolimus has been shown to substantially increase donor engraftment under conditions of heavier TBI,15 no engraftment was evident in any sirolimus-treated mice conditioned with 200 cGy TBI. Combined anti-CD40L mAb and sirolimus resulted in similar rates and only a modestly higher level of engraftment as compared with anti-CD40L mAb administered as a single agent (75% ± 6% versus 69% ± 5%; P = .038, Table 1, experiment 1). These data indicated that anti-CD40L mAb was a more potent engraftment-enhancing agent than sirolimus, and sirolimus only modestly enhanced the potent engraftment-promoting effect of anti-CD40L mAb in the context of 200 cGy TBI.
PBLs from hIgG-treated rejected control mice and anti-CD40L-treated
and anti-CD40L plus sirolimus-treated engrafted mice were phenotyped
for percentages of T cells, B cells, and myeloid cells (Figure
1A). Mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb plus
sirolimus had a modest but significantly higher proportion of donor
CD4+ T cells compared with mice receiving only anti-CD40L
mAb (51% versus 41%; P = .0007). There was also a higher
proportion of donor CD8+ T cells in mice receiving both
anti-CD40L mAb and sirolimus. Total donor PBL chimerism remained stable
or increased in each engrafted mouse over the course of a year with no
mortality, apparent morbidity, or weight loss associated with either
treatment (data not shown).
Although there was not an effect on engraftment by the addition of
sirolimus to anti-CD40L mAb, the baseline engraftment rate and level
were relatively high in mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb as a single
agent. To increase the likelihood of finding an effect by sirolimus on
anti-CD40L-facilitated engraftment, the TBI dose was reduced. At 100 cGy TBI, 9 of 19 (47%) anti-CD40L-treated mice had evidence of
chimerism with a group mean of 19% donor at 3.5 months after BMT
(Table 2, experiment 1). Mice receiving sirolimus as a single agent had no evidence of donor engraftment even
if the drug dose was escalated 3-fold to 4.5 mg/kg/dose (data not
shown). In contrast, 20 of 20 (100%) mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb and
sirolimus engrafted with a mean of 48% donor (P < .001 compared with anti-CD40L mAb alone). Interestingly, donor chimerism was
higher in mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb and sirolimus than in mice
receiving depleting anti-CD4 mAb and sirolimus (Table 2, experiment 1, P = .009). Sirolimus in conjunction with CD8 depletion did
not result in donor chimerism.
Control mice and mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb or sirolimus or the combination were evaluated at 8.5 months after BMT for PBLs, as well as thymic and splenic cellularity and phenotype. There were no abnormalities suggestive of GVHD such as thymic aplasia or peripheral T or B lymphopenia, and no substantial phenotypic differences were noted between groups (n = 4/group, data not shown). The combination of sirolimus and anti-CD40L mAb promoted high levels of stable, long-term donor chimerism with no apparent treatment-associated morbidity in recipients receiving 100 cGy TBI. CsA is additive with anti-CD40L mAb in increasing the proportion of chimeric nonmyeloablated recipients To determine the effect of CsA on alloengraftment as a single agent, and in combination with anti-CD40L mAb, B6 mice were conditioned with 200 cGy TBI and administered a single dose (40 × 106) of BALB/c BM. Reagents were administered for 2 weeks after transplantation. Mice were evaluated for donor chimerism 6 weeks (data not shown) and 3.5 months after BMT. Anti-CD40L mAb resulted in a high level of engraftment in 9 of 10 mice (mean of 64%; Table 1, experiment 2). CsA did not abrogate engraftment in anti-CD40L mAb-treated mice. All 17 mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb plus CsA engrafted with a mean of 62% donor cells (Table 1, experiment 2). Phenotyping analysis of PBLs revealed that recipients of anti-CD40L mAb and CsA had a reduced percentage of donor CD4+ T cells as compared with recipients of anti-CD40L mAb alone (Figure 1B; 14% versus 26%, P = .028). All other lineages were proportionately similar between these 2 groups. CsA as a single agent resulted in engraftment in 3 of 9 mice. However, all 3 mice had higher engraftment levels when evaluated for donor chimerism 2 months earlier, and an additional mouse lost donor chimerism entirely (Table 1, experiment 2 and data not shown), indicating that CsA alone did not result in stable, long-term chimerism. Although donor chimerism was stable and long term (> 8 months) in mice receiving both anti-CD40L mAb and CsA, the proportion of T cells that were of donor origin was significantly lower than in mice receiving only anti-CD40L mAb (53% versus 82%, P = .036, data not shown). Although CsA does not abrogate engraftment promotion achieved by anti-CD40L mAb, it may lower donor T-cell representation.To increase the likelihood of finding an effect on anti-CD40L-facilitated engraftment, CsA was evaluated in mice conditioned with only 100 cGy TBI (Table 2, experiment 2). The combination of CsA and anti-CD40L mAb resulted in a substantially increased incidence of donor chimerism compared with anti-CD40L mAb as a single agent. Twelve of 19 (63%) anti-CD40L-treated mice versus 18 of 19 (95%) anti-CD40L mAb plus CsA-treated mice engrafted (P = .017; Table 2, experiment 2). Although donor chimerism was present in 4 of 20 (25%) CsA-treated mice at 6 weeks after transplantation, 3 of the 4 mice lost donor chimerism and the fourth mouse had a declining chimerism level at 3.5 months after BMT (28% at 6 weeks to 15% at 3.5 months). Although one anti-CD40L mAb plus CsA-treated mouse lost donor chimerism between 6 weeks and 3.5 months, engraftment was stable and durable in the remaining 18 mice for 1 year (data not shown). Similar to sirolimus, CsA in conjunction with CD4+, but not CD8+ T-cell depletion, resulted in engraftment of all mice (Table 2, experiment 2). Unlike sirolimus, CsA-treated mice transiently lost approximately 10% of their body weight during the 2-week course of CsA administration. At approximately 3 months after transplantation, anti-CD40L mAb and CsA-treated mice again lost weight and about 30% to 50% died 3 to 6 months after BMT with signs consistent with CsA-induced GVHD (weight loss, erythema, and alopecia, data not shown).26 Because some CsA-treated mice with no donor chimerism experienced the same signs, we conclude that autologous GVHD occurred likely because of calcineurin inhibitor-mediated thymic injury with a subsequent failure to control autoaggression.26 Because these data indicated that sirolimus or CsA could substantially
increase anti-CD40L-facilitated alloengraftment, these agents were
evaluated in nonirradiated recipients. We have reported previously that
anti-CD40L mAb does not result in substantial macrochimerism in the
absence of TBI in mice receiving a relatively modest allogeneic BM cell
dose (40 × 106). Other studies have found that a much
higher BM dose can facilitate engraftment under nonmyeloablative
conditions.6,27-29 Consistent with these studies,
increasing the BM dosage to 80 × 106 cells or
administering 2 doses of 40 × 106 cells 2 weeks apart
resulted in low-level donor chimerism (3%-15%) in most mice receiving
anti-CD40L mAb alone or in combination with either sirolimus or CsA
(Table 3). Neither sirolimus nor CsA
alone or in combination resulted in significant engraftment (Table 3).
Although long-term donor chimerism was achieved in a substantial
proportion of anti-CD40L mAb-treated mice (alone or in combination with
sirolimus or CsA) in the absence of TBI, donor T-cell engraftment was
very low (
Tacrolimus promotes alloengraftment as a single agent but impairs donor T-cell reconstitution Although structurally related to sirolimus, tacrolimus disrupts calcium-dependent signaling pathways, thereby blocking signal 1 similar to CsA. Unlike either sirolimus or CsA, tacrolimus as a single agent facilitated engraftment in all recipients conditioned with 200 or 100 cGy TBI (Table 4). However, in contrast to sirolimus or CsA, tacrolimus modestly decreased donor chimerism in anti-CD40L mAb-treated mice (Table 4). Multilineage phenotyping of PBLs at 3.5 months after transplantation revealed that tacrolimus administration, either as a single agent or in combination with anti-CD40L mAb, resulted in a dramatic inhibition of donor T-cell reconstitution (Figure 2A,B). Sixty-eight percent of peripheral blood (PB) T cells were of donor origin in anti-CD40L-treated mice conditioned with 200 cGy TBI. In contrast, only 11% or 16% of PB T cells were of donor origin in mice receiving tacrolimus as a single agent or in combination with anti-CD40L mAb, respectively (Figure 2A). The reduction in anti-CD40L mAb-facilitated engraftment by tacrolimus may have been due to the fact that donor T-cell reconstitution was severely compromised in mice receiving tacrolimus. Overall, the proportion of T cells, particularly CD4+ T cells, of either donor or host origin in the PB of mice receiving tacrolimus alone or with anti-CD40L mAb was substantially lower than in mice not receiving tacrolimus. Similar effects were observed in tacrolimus-treated mice conditioned with only 100 cGy TBI (Figure 2B). PB phenotyping at 7 months after transplantation indicated that, although donor chimerism was stable in tacrolimus-treated mice, donor T-cell reconstitution remained very poor (data not shown), suggesting a more prolonged thymic defect than seen in CsA-treated mice. However, it may be difficult to fully extrapolate the comparative differences between CsA and tacrolimus on murine T-cell recovery to humans.
Sirolimus, CsA, and tacrolimus have differential effects on central and peripheral host T-cell numbers early after transplantation To further investigate the differential effects of sirolimus, CsA, and tacrolimus on anti-CD40L-facilitated alloengraftment, thymic and splenic cellularity and phenotypes were evaluated 7 days after transplantation in mice conditioned with 200 cGy TBI (Tables 5 and 6). Previous studies have determined that thymic and splenic cellularity reach their nadir,7 and the rejection process is complete by 7 to 10 days after sublethal TBI and BMT.30 Although anti-CD40L mAb-treated mice had high numbers of thymocytes, the coadministration of sirolimus, CsA, or tacrolimus resulted in a significant reduction in total thymocyte number as compared with anti-CD40L mAb alone (Table 5). CsA resulted in substantially greater reductions in mature CD4 and CD8 single-positive (SP) and intermediate double-positive (DP) thymic populations compared with either anti-CD40L mAb alone or combined with sirolimus. Mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb as a single agent had 5.9-fold more total thymocytes, 8.8-fold more CD4 SP cells, 4-fold more CD8 SP cells, and 6.5-fold more DP cells than mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb plus CsA (Table 5). The coadministration of tacrolimus and anti-CD40L mAb resulted in less thymic reduction than CsA but more than sirolimus.
Quantification of splenic T-cell numbers 7 days after BMT revealed that the coadministration of sirolimus, but neither CsA nor tacrolimus, resulted in a significant decrease (2-fold) in both host CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell numbers in anti-CD40L-treated mice (Table 6). Despite having no effects on host T-cell number, CsA-treated mice had greater numbers of donor MHC class I+ cells compared with mice receiving only anti-CD40L mAb, suggesting that the ability of CsA to facilitate engraftment was not due to effects on host T-cell depletion (Table 6). These data indicated that CsA and tacrolimus administration resulted in thymic but not peripheral host T-cell depletion. In contrast, sirolimus administration resulted in both central and peripheral reductions in host T-cell numbers. Anti-CD40L mAb in combination with sirolimus results in a more profound degree of in vivo donor tolerance than anti-CD40L mAb alone or in combination with CsA or tacrolimus Despite a differential targeting of central versus peripheral T-cell depletion by the immunosuppressive agents, the combinations of anti-CD40L mAb with sirolimus, CsA, or tacrolimus resulted in approximately equivalent high levels of donor alloengraftment, albeit with differing levels of donor T-cell reconstitution. To investigate potential differences in donor tolerance conferred by these immunosuppressive reagents, donor skin grafts were placed early (1 month) or later (3 months) after BMT (Table 7). Twelve of 27 (44%) anti-CD40L-treated mice accepted donor grafts if skin grafting was delayed for 3 months, although none of 3 mice accepted donor grafts placed at 1 month after BMT (Table 7). The combination of anti-CD40L mAb and CsA resulted in similar donor skin graft acceptance compared with anti-CD40L mAb alone when grafts were placed at 3 months (7 of 18 [39%] versus 12 of 27 [44%], P = .27). Similar to anti-CD40L mAb monotherapy, only a low proportion (1 of 8 [12%]) of anti-CD40L mAb and CsA-treated mice accepted donor grafts placed 1 month after BMT. In contrast, all 6 anti-CD40L mAb plus sirolimus-treated mice accepted donor skin grafts placed as early as 1 month, and all 5 accepted donor grafts placed 3 months after BMT. Few tacrolimus-treated mice survived long term for evaluation of long-term donor graft survival, but tacrolimus did not promote early skin graft acceptance in any of the 4 skin-grafted recipients. As expected, none of the hIgG-treated control mice accepted donor skin grafts placed early (0 of 6) or later (0 of 20) after BMT. Additionally, all mice in all groups promptly rejected third-party B10.BR skin grafts by 3 weeks after grafting (data not shown). Collectively, these data indicate anti-CD40L mAb combined with sirolimus results in an earlier and more profound donor tolerance than when combined with either CsA or tacrolimus or administered as a single agent.
These studies are the first to compare the effects of CsA, sirolimus, and tacrolimus administered after BMT, as single agents and in combination with anti-CD40L mAb, on alloengraftment using a nonmyeloablative-conditioning regimen. Unlike anti-CD40L mAb, neither CsA nor sirolimus promoted engraftment as single agents in a nonmyeloablative-conditioning regime. However, either sirolimus or CsA increased donor engraftment in anti-CD40L mAb-treated mice under conditions of limited baseline engraftment. Although tacrolimus resulted in donor chimerism as a single agent, it modestly decreased anti-CD40L mAb-mediated engraftment and resulted in very poor donor T-cell reconstitution. The combination of sirolimus and anti-CD40L mAb induced an early and profound degree of donor tolerance. Sirolimus was predicted to be a useful adjunct to costimulatory
blockade for the promotion of alloengraftment. However, the use of
calcineurin inhibitors in conjunction with costimulatory blockade
strategies has been controversial. One study found that sirolimus
induced anergy in a T-cell clone, and CsA inhibited sirolimus-induced
anergy.22 Consistent with our studies in a nonmyeloablative, allogeneic BMT model, Li et al16 found
that sirolimus and costimulatory blockade were synergistic for skin allograft acceptance. In contrast to our data in BM transplant recipients, the addition of CsA to costimulatory blockade resulted in
the abrogation of donor tolerance in both cardiac and skin murine
allograft models in non-BM transplant recipients.16,20 The
mechanism responsible for the antagonistic effects of CsA on
costimulatory blockade appeared to be the prevention of apoptosis of
alloreactive T cells.16,20 Moreover, Smiley et
al18 found that CsA, but not sirolimus, inhibited
activation-induced CD40L expressed on CD4+ T cells and
abrogated anti-CD40L mAb-induced cardiac allograft survival. However, a
recent study indicates that IL-2, IL-4, IL-7, and IL-15 can induce
CD40L expression on human CD4+ T cells via the common
receptor Other data indicate that CsA, as a single agent, can induce immunologic tolerance to a solid organ allograft31-33 and be combined successfully with costimulatory blockade. One study determined that CsA administration did not adversely affect renal allograft survival in primates receiving anti-B7 mAbs and may even have resulted in less severe histologic signs of rejection.21 Another study found that CsA did not abrogate renal allograft survival facilitated by CTLA4 immunoglobulin-mediated CD28/B7 blockade.23 Our data indicate that CsA did not abrogate donor BM engraftment mediated by anti-CD40L mAb and, under some conditions, increased the proportion of recipients that engrafted (Table 2, experiment 2). We hypothesize that CsA reduced the intensity of TCR signaling or clonally reduced the alloreactive T-cell population that may allow for a more readily attainable costimulatory blockade in a greater proportion of recipients. Complete block of signal 1, which might have been expected to preclude engraftment mediated by costimulatory blockade, may be difficult to achieve in BMT in which the antigens that trigger a TCR response are very widely distributed. Because the induction of tissue injury resulting in the release of proinflammatory cytokines can occur in conditioned mice, the strength of TCR signals resulting from alloantigen recognition may need to be dampened by immunosuppressive agents such as CsA or tacrolimus to permit costimulatory pathway blockade to be effective. Additionally, CD40L expression induced by cytokines in a proinflammatory environment would be CsA resistant19 and potentially susceptible to blockade by anti-CD40L mAb. As well as being a general immunosuppressive agent, CsA also has been used successfully before transplantation to create "thymic space" to facilitate alloengraftment with minimal conditioning.34 Our studies indicate that CsA administration beginning the day prior to transplantation resulted in significant thymic, but not peripheral, T-cell reduction by day 7 after BMT that may have contributed to the increase in the rate of engraftment mediated by CsA in anti-CD40L mAb-treated mice (Table 5). The most profound degree of early donor tolerance, as measured by donor skin graft acceptance, was in mice treated with the combination of anti-CD40L and sirolimus. The rejection of donor skin grafts in anti-CD40L mAb-treated mice not receiving sirolimus may be due to the expansion of alloreactive host T cells that escape costimulatory blockade and are primed by the donor graft. Additionally, sirolimus, unlike CsA, does not interfere with the apoptosis of alloreactive T cells that become primed by the donor skin allograft.16 Studies by Umemura et al35 also found a dissociation of BM chimerism and allograft tolerance and indicated that donor T-cell engraftment was required for allograft tolerance but not for durable donor BM chimerism. Consistent with this idea, one possible explanation for the higher rate of early donor skin graft acceptance in mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb and sirolimus may be that this group of mice had the highest proportion of donor T-cell representation. Despite having similar overall chimerism levels (37%-43%) at 8 months after BMT, 28% of PBL T cells were of donor origin in mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb and sirolimus versus 18% in mice receiving only anti-CD40L mAb versus 7% in mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb and CsA (data not shown). Superior donor T-cell reconstitution in mice receiving anti-CD40L mAb and sirolimus might contribute to early donor skin graft acceptance. The reduction in host splenic T-cell numbers by sirolimus, but not CsA or tacrolimus, early after transplantation also may have aided engraftment promotion and early donor tolerance in mice receiving the combination of anti-CD40L mAb and sirolimus. Despite rejection of donor skin grafts by some anti-CD40L mAb-treated mice not receiving sirolimus, donor BM chimerism remained stable with no apparent perturbations in phenotype or signs of morbidity in those mice even when evaluated several months after the rejection episode (data not shown). Although donor skin graft acceptance with third-party graft rejection is a stringent test for donor tolerance, our data suggest that donor skin graft rejection does not necessarily portend an inevitable loss of donor chimerism. Donor skin graft rejection might indicate only a lack of tolerance to specific donor-type skin antigens or suggest that tolerance is not yet complete. The finding of lower donor skin graft acceptance in mice receiving CsA, rather than sirolimus, in combination with anti-CD40L mAb, might not preclude the use of CsA with costimulatory blockade strategies in BMT patients, although sirolimus may be the preferred pharmacologic agent for this purpose.
Submitted March 19, 2002; accepted May 19, 2002.
Prepublished online as Blood First Edition Paper, July 5, 2002; DOI 10.1182/blood-2002-03-0872.
Supported by National Institutes of Health Grants RO1 AI 3449, RO1 HL 63452, R37 HL56067, and PO1 AI-35225 (B.R.B.).
The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. Therefore, and solely to indicate this fact, this article is hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. section 1734.
Reprints: Bruce Blazar, University of Minnesota, MMC 109, 420 Delaware St SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455; e-mail: blaza001{at}tc.umn.edu.
1.
Parker DC, Greiner DL, Phillips NE, et al.
Survival of mouse pancreatic islet allografts in recipients treated with allogeneic small lymphocytes and antibody to CD40 ligand.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
1995;92:9560-9564 2. Larsen CP, Elwood ET, Alexander DZ, et al. Long-term acceptance of skin and cardiac allografts after blocking CD40 and CD28 pathways. Nature. 1996;381:434-438[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 3. Blazar BR, Taylor PA, Panoskaltsis-Mortari A, et al. Blockade of CD40 ligand-CD40 interaction impairs CD4+ T cell-mediated alloreactivity by inhibiting mature donor T cell expansion and function after bone marrow transplantation. J Immunol. 1997;158:29-39[Abstract].
4.
Seung E, Iwakoshi N, Woda BA, et al.
Allogeneic hematopoietic chimerism in mice treated with sublethal myeloablation and anti-CD154 antibody: absence of graft-versus-host disease, induction of skin allograft tolerance, and prevention of recurrent autoimmunity in islet-allografted NOD/Lt mice.
Blood.
2000;95:2175-2182
5.
Durham MM, Bingaman AW, Adams AB, et al.
Cutting edge: administration of anti-CD40 ligand and donor bone marrow leads to hemopoietic chimerism and donor-specific tolerance without cytoreductive conditioning.
J Immunol.
2000;165:1-4 6. Wekerle T, Kurtz J, Ito H, et al. Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation with co-stimulatory blockade induces macrochimerism and tolerance without cytoreductive host treatment. Nat Med. 2000;6:464-469[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
7.
Taylor PA, Lees CJ, Waldmann H, Noelle RJ, Blazar BR.
Requirements for the promotion of allogeneic engraftment by anti-CD154 (anti-CD40L) monoclonal antibody under nonmyeloablative conditions.
Blood.
2001;98:467-474 8. Kirk AD, Burkly LC, Batty DS, et al. Treatment with humanized monoclonal antibody against CD154 prevents acute renal allograft rejection in nonhuman primates. Nat Med. 1999;5:686-693[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 9. Pierson RN III, Chang AC, Blum MG, et al. Prolongation of primate cardiac allograft survival by treatment with ANTI-CD40 ligand (CD154) antibody. Transplantation. 1999;68:1800-1805[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 10. Pierson RN III, Crowe JE Jr, Pfeiffer S, Atkinson J, Azimzadeh A, Miller GG. CD40-ligand in primate cardiac allograft and viral immunity. Immunol Res. 2001;23:253-262[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 11. Blazar BR, Taylor PA, Snover DC, Sehgal SN, Vallera DA. Murine recipients of fully mismatched donor marrow are protected from lethal graft-versus-host disease by the in vivo administration of rapamycin but develop an autoimmune-like syndrome. J Immunol. 1993;151:5726-5741[Abstract]. 12. Blazar BR, Taylor PA, Sehgal SN, Vallera DA. Rapamycin prolongs survival of murine recipients of fully allogeneic donor grafts when administered during the graft-versus-host disease process. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993;685:73-85[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
13.
Blazar BR, Taylor PA, Panoskaltsis-Mortari A, Sehgal S, Vallera DA.
In vivo inhibition of cytokine responsiveness and graft-versus-host disease mortality by rapamycin leads to a clinical-pathological syndrome discrete from that observed with cyclosporin A.
Blood.
1996;87:4001-4009
14.
Blazar BR, Taylor PA, Panoskaltsis-Mortari A, Vallera DA.
Rapamycin inhibits the generation of graft-versus-host disease- and graft-versus-leukemia-causing T cells by interfering with the production of Th1 or Th1 cytotoxic cytokines.
J Immunol.
1998;160:5355-5365
15.
Blazar BR, Taylor PA, Sehgal SN, Vallera DA.
Rapamycin, a potent inhibitor of T-cell function, prevents graft rejection in murine recipients of allogeneic T-cell-depleted donor marrow.
Blood.
1994;83:600-609 16. Li Y, Li XC, Zheng XX, Wells AD, Turka LA, Strom TB. Blocking both signal 1 and signal 2 of T-cell activation prevents apoptosis of alloreactive T cells and induction of peripheral allograft tolerance. Nat Med. 1999;5:1298-1302[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 17. Benito AI, Furlong T, Martin PJ, et al. Sirolimus (rapamycin) for the treatment of steroid-refractory acute graft-versus-host disease. Transplantation. 2001;72:1924-1929[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 18. Smiley ST, Csizmadia V, Gao W, Turka LA, Hancock WW. Differential effects of cyclosporine A, methylprednisolone, mycophenolate, and rapamycin on CD154 induction and requirement for NFkappaB: implications for tolerance induction. Transplantation. 2000;70:415-419[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 19. Fayen JD. Multiple cytokines sharing the common receptor gamma chain can induce CD154/CD40 ligand expression by human CD4+ T lymphocytes via a cyclosporin A-resistant pathway. Immunology. 2001;104:299-306[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 20. Li Y, Zheng XX, Li XC, Zand MS, Strom TB. Combined costimulation blockade plus rapamycin but not cyclosporine produces permanent engraftment. Transplantation. 1998;66:1387-1388[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 21. Ossevoort MA, Ringers J, Kuhn EM, et al. Prevention of renal allograft rejection in primates by blocking the B7/CD28 pathway. Transplantation. 1999;68:1010-1018[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
22.
Powell JD, Lerner CG, Schwartz RH.
Inhibition of cell cycle progression by rapamycin induces T cell clonal anergy even in the presence of costimulation.
J Immunol.
1999;162:2775-2784
23.
Azuma H, Chandraker A, Nadeau K, et al.
Blockade of T-cell costimulation prevents development of experimental chronic renal allograft rejection.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
1996;93:12439-12444
24.
Hill GR, Teshima T, Rebel VI, et al.
The p55 TNF-alpha receptor plays a critical role in T cell alloreactivity.
J Immunol.
2000;164:656-663 25. Blazar BR, Taylor PA, Fitzsimmons WE, Vallera DA. FK506 inhibits graft-versus-host disease and bone marrow graft rejection in murine recipients of MHC disparate donor grafts by interfering with mature peripheral T cell expansion post-transplantation. J Immunol. 1994;153:1836-1846[Abstract]. 26. Zhang H, Horwitz L, Ruvolo P, Colombani P, Hess AD. The role of cyclosporine-induced autoreactive T lymphocytes in solid organ allograft survival and chronic rejection. Transplantation. 1995;60:115-122[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 27. Bachar-Lustig E, Rachamim N, Li HW, Lan F, Reisner Y. Megadose of T cell-depleted bone marrow overcomes MHC barriers in sublethally irradiated mice. Nat Med. 1995;1:1268-1273[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 28. Sykes M, Szot GL, Swenson KA, Pearson DA. Induction of high levels of allogeneic hematopoietic reconstitution and donor-specific tolerance without myelosuppressive conditioning. Nat Med. 1997;3:783-787[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
29.
Quesenberry PJ, Zhong S, Wang H, Stewart M.
Allogeneic chimerism with low-dose irradiation, antigen presensitization, and costimulator blockade in H-2 mismatched mice.
Blood.
2001;97:557-564 30. Blazar BR, Hirsch R, Gress RE, Carroll SF, Vallera DA. In vivo administration of anti-CD3 monoclonal antibodies or immunotoxins in murine recipients of allogeneic T cell-depleted marrow for the promotion of engraftment. J Immunol. 1991;147:1492-1503[Abstract].
31.
White DJ, Timmerman W, Davies HS, Nagao T, Kasahara K, Plumb A.
Properties of cyclosporin 32. Green CJ, Allison AC. Extensive prolongation of rabbit kidney allograft survival after short-term cyclosporin-A treatment. Lancet. 1978;1:1182-1183[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 33. Calne RY, White DJ, Rolles K, Smith DP, Herbertson BM. Prolonged survival of pig orthotopic heart grafts treated with cyclosporin A. Lancet. 1978;1:1183-1185[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
34.
Nikolic B, Zhao G, Swenson K, Sykes M.
A novel application of cyclosporine A in nonmyeloablative pretransplant host conditioning for allogeneic BMT.
Blood.
2000;96:1166-1172
35.
Umemura A, Morita H, Li XC, Tahan S, Monaco AP, Maki T.
Dissociation of hemopoietic chimerism and allograft tolerance after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation.
J Immunol.
2001;167:3043-3048
© 2002 by The American Society of Hematology.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
  H. Xu, Y. Huang, P. M. Chilton, L.-R. Hussain, M. K. Tanner, J. Yan, and S. T. Ildstad Strategic Nonmyeloablative Conditioning: CD154:CD40 Costimulatory Blockade at Primary Bone Marrow Transplantation Promotes Engraftment for Secondary Bone Marrow Transplantation after Engraftment Failure J. Immunol., November 1, 2008; 181(9): 6616 - 6624. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. C. Gondek, V. DeVries, E. C. Nowak, L.-F. Lu, K. A. Bennett, Z. A. Scott, and R. J. Noelle Transplantation Survival Is Maintained by Granzyme B+ Regulatory Cells and Adaptive Regulatory T Cells J. Immunol., October 1, 2008; 181(7): 4752 - 4760. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Tanaka, M. J. Albin, X. Yuan, K. Yamaura, A. Habicht, T. Murayama, M. Grimm, A. M. Waaga, T. Ueno, R. F. Padera, et al. PDL1 Is Required for Peripheral Transplantation Tolerance and Protection from Chronic Allograft Rejection J. Immunol., October 15, 2007; 179(8): 5204 - 5210. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Xu, P. M. Chilton, M. K. Tanner, Y. Huang, C. L. Schanie, M. Dy-Liacco, J. Yan, and S. T. Ildstad Humoral immunity is the dominant barrier for allogeneic bone marrow engraftment in sensitized recipients Blood, November 15, 2006; 108(10): 3611 - 3619. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Battaglia, A. Stabilini, E. Draghici, B. Migliavacca, S. Gregori, E. Bonifacio, and M.-G. Roncarolo Induction of Tolerance in Type 1 Diabetes via Both CD4+CD25+ T Regulatory Cells and T Regulatory Type 1 Cells Diabetes, June 1, 2006; 55(6): 1571 - 1580. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. T. Ildstad, P. M. Chilton, H. Xu, M. A. Domenick, and M. B. Ray Preconditioning of NOD mice with anti-CD8 mAb and costimulatory blockade enhances chimerism and tolerance and prevents diabetes, while depletion of {alpha}{beta}-TCR+ and CD4+ cells negates the effect Blood, March 15, 2005; 105(6): 2577 - 2584. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Metzler, P. Gfeller, M. Bigaud, J. Li, G. Wieczorek, C. Heusser, P. Lake, and A. Katopodis Combinations of Anti-LFA-1, Everolimus, Anti-CD40 Ligand, and Allogeneic Bone Marrow Induce Central Transplantation Tolerance through Hemopoietic Chimerism, Including Protection from Chronic Heart Allograft Rejection J. Immunol., December 1, 2004; 173(11): 7025 - 7036. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Bachar-Lustig, S. Reich-Zeliger, and Y. Reisner Anti-third-party veto CTLs overcome rejection of hematopoietic allografts: synergism with rapamycin and BM cell dose Blood, September 15, 2003; 102(6): 1943 - 1950. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Blaha, S. Bigenzahn, Z. Koporc, M. Schmid, F. Langer, E. Selzer, H. Bergmeister, F. Wrba, J. Kurtz, C. Kiss, et al. The influence of immunosuppressive drugs on tolerance induction through bone marrow transplantation with costimulation blockade Blood, April 1, 2003; 101(7): 2886 - 2893. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
| Copyright © 2002 by American Society of Hematology Online ISSN: 1528-0020 | |||||||||
Top
Abstract
Introduction
chain.
1. On day 0, 40 × 106 whole BM
cells from BALB/c mice were injected intravenously by lateral tail vein
injection into irradiated B6 recipients. This BM cell dose
(2 × 109/kg) is within the range achievable clinically
by the combined infusion of BM plus granulocyte colony-stimulating
factor (G-CSF)-mobilized peripheral blood stem cells. Survival was
monitored daily, and mice were weighed twice weekly for the first month
after transplantation, then once weekly thereafter. Anti-CD40L mAb
(hybridoma MR1, hamster immunoglobulin G [IgG]) was obtained by
culturing the hybridoma in 10% fetal bovine serum-Dulbecco minimum
essential medium in a hollow fiber bioreactor (Accucyst JR; Cellex
Biosciences, Minneapolis, MN). Supernatant was purified by ammonium
sulfate precipitation. Anti-CD40L mAb or irrelevant hamster IgG (hIgG)
(Rockland, Gilbertsville, PA) was administered intraperitoneally at a
dosage of 200 µg daily from days 
A-induced graft acceptance.
Transplant Proc.
1981;13:379-382