CCL3 and CCL4 secretion by T regulatory cells attracts CD4+ and CD8+ T cells (P1077)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract FOXP3+ T regulatory cells (Tregs) function to restrain immune responses. Accumulating evidence has shown that Tregs mediate their suppression by migrating to tissues based on their distinct expression of chemokine receptors. Yet how Tregs ensure they are close to their targets is unknown. Using ELISA and intracellular staining we discovered that both human and mouse Tregs produce CCL3 and CCL4, ligands for CCR5. Since chemokines recruit immune cells and the broad suppressive activities of Tregs require intimate cell proximity, we hypothesized that the secretion of the pro-inflammatory chemokines may bring immune cells closer to Tregs to be suppressed. To determine whether Tregs can recruit CD4+ and CD8+ cells via a CCR5-dependent mechanism, we performed migration assays and showed CCL3- and CCL4- containing-supernatants from Tregs attracted both subsets of T cells as well Tregs. Additionally, CCR5-/- T cells had a significantly reduced capacity to migrate towards Tregs in vitro and in vivo, supporting that chemokine signalling through CCR5 is critical. Furthermore, decreased proportion of FOXP3+CCL3+ Tregs was observed in patients with type 1 diabetes compared to healthy controls, implying that the altered chemokine secretion could contribute to the inadequate Treg function. These results suggest that active recruitment of their targets of suppression may be a novel mechanism of action by Tregs and that this pathway could be a potential therapeutic target in autoimmunity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".