Donor-lymphocyte infusion induces transplantation tolerance by activating systemic and graft-infiltrating double-negative regulatory T cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Donor-lymphocyte infusion (DLI) before transplantation can lead to specific tolerance to allografts in mice, nonhuman primates, and humans. We and others have demonstrated a role for regulatory T cells in DLI-induced, donor-specific transplantation tolerance, but it is not known how regulatory T cells are activated and where they execute their function. In this study, we observed, in both transgenic and normal mice, that DLI before transplantation is required for activation of alphabeta-T-cell-receptor-positive, CD3(+)CD4(-)CD8(-) double-negative (DN) regulatory T cells in the periphery of recipient mice. More interestingly, DLI induced DN regulatory T cells to migrate preferentially to donor-specific allogeneic skin grafts and to form a majority of graft-infiltrating T cells in accepted skin allografts. Furthermore, both recipient-derived peripheral and graft-infiltrating DN T cells were able to suppress and kill antidonor CD8(+) T cells in an antigen-specific manner. These data indicate that DLI may induce donor-specific transplantation tolerance by activating recipient DN regulatory T cells in the periphery and by promoting migration of regulatory T cells to donor-specific allogeneic skin grafts. Our results also show that DN regulatory T cells can eliminate antidonor T cells both systemically and locally, a finding suggesting that graft-infiltrating T cells can be beneficial to graft survival.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".