Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Transplantation
Volume 2013, Article ID 761429, 17 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/761429
Review Article

Dendritic Cell-Based Approaches for Therapeutic Immune Regulation in Solid-Organ Transplantation

1Department of Cardiology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland
2Molecular Cardiology Laboratory, Fondazione Cardiocentro Ticino, 6900 Lugano, Switzerland

Received 31 May 2013; Accepted 16 September 2013

Academic Editor: F. H. J. Claas

Copyright © 2013 Giuseppe Vassalli. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

To avoid immune rejection, allograft recipients require drug-based immunosuppression, which has significant toxicity. An emerging approach is adoptive transfer of immunoregulatory cells. While mature dendritic cells (DCs) present donor antigen to the immune system, triggering rejection, regulatory DCs interact with regulatory T cells to promote immune tolerance. Intravenous injection of immature DCs of either donor or host origin at the time of transplantation have prolonged allograft survival in solid-organ transplant models. DCs can be treated with pharmacological agents before injection, which may attenuate their maturation in vivo. Recent data suggest that injected immunosuppressive DCs may inhibit allograft rejection, not by themselves, but through conventional DCs of the host. Genetically engineered DCs have also been tested. Two clinical trials in type-1 diabetes and rheumatoid arthritis have been carried out, and other trials, including one trial in kidney transplantation, are in progress or are imminent.

1. Introduction

Allogeneic cell and solid-organ grafts trigger immune responses that cause destructive graft rejection in the absence of sustained drug-based immunosuppression [1]. Unfortunately, the latter is associated with major side effects including severe infections and cancer, especially after many years of treatment. Moreover, immunosuppressive drugs have failed to prevent chronic graft rejection, which is primarily manifested by allograft vasculopathy. The hope in the immunotherapy field is to develop a therapy that targets and neutralizes the alloimmune response selectively, while leaving protective immunity intact.

Patients with a functioning allograft in the absence of maintenance immunosuppression have been described occasionally [2]. In some of them, immunosuppressive drugs were discontinued because of infection or cancer [3]. Others decided to stop taking the drugs [4]. Some liver transplant recipients were enrolled in studies of weaning immunosuppression [5]. Moreover, some kidney transplant recipients participated in studies of tolerance induction [69] which, in part, included hematopoietic cell transplantation [8, 9]. These reports demonstrate the sporadic occurrence of operational tolerance, as defined by lack of destructive graft rejection in the absence of maintenance immunosuppression [10].

Sixty years ago, Billingham et al. described “actively acquired tolerance” of foreign cells. They claimed that, “if the first presentation of foreign cells takes place in fetal life, resistance to a graft [from the same donor or from some other member of the donor’s strain] transplanted on some later occasion is abolished or at least reduced” [11]. This concept implied the existence of regulatory mechanisms, other than deletion of donor-reactive immune cells, favoring graft acceptance. Thirty years later, Hall et al. reported that rats that accepted cardiac allografts for extended periods of time in the absence of treatment with cyclosporine or other immunosuppressive drugs had suppressor T cells that actively prevented graft rejection [12].

Multiple leukocyte populations including dendritic cells (DCs), macrophages, T and B cells, and natural killer (NK) cells participate in the immune reaction against the allograft [1]. However, these populations include subsets of cells showing regulatory activity. Analyses of immune cells in patients who did not reject the allograft in the absence of drug-based immunosuppression revealed major roles for regulatory T cells (Tregs) [1315], regulatory B cells [1618], and regulatory DCs in the establishment of operational tolerance. Regulatory immune cells are selected to either exert inhibitory functions during development or acquire regulatory activity within the graft or in draining lymphoid tissue [2]. The balance between donor-reactive effector cells and regulatory cells in the graft and its environment is naturally shifted towards effector cells and graft rejection. In this review, we wish to summarize our current understanding of tolerogenic DCs favoring the development of antigen-specific immune tolerance and graft acceptance (Table 1). Emerging DC-based approaches for therapeutic immune modulation in solid-organ transplantation, with a focus on heart transplantation, are briefly discussed.

tab1
Table 1: Recent advances in DC biology, tolerogenic DCs, and pharmacological conditioning protocols.

2. DC Populations

DC and monocyte lineages originate from a common monocyte and DC progenitor (MDP) that gives rise to monocytes and committed DC progenitors (CDPs) in the bone marrow. CDPs then give rise to pre-DCs that migrate to lymphoid and nonlymphoid tissue and differentiate into the two major populations of lymphoid tissue DCs and nonlymphoid tissue CD103+ DCs [22, 23, 40]. Acting as antigen-presenting cells, DCs trigger innate and adaptive immune responses to microbial antigens and alloantigens, as well as to self-antigens in autoimmune diseases. DCs initiate the innate immune response through activation of NK cells. They also set off the adaptive immune response through activation of naive B and T lymphocytes. Besides their traditional role as immunogenic cells, DCs regulate the immune reaction and mediate peripheral T-cell unresponsiveness under homeostatic conditions in vivo [41]. The regulatory activity of DCs can be accounted for by multiple mechanisms including the production and release of anti-inflammatory cytokines [32], Fas/Fas-ligand-induced apoptosis of effector immune cells [42], deletion, and induction of Tregs [39, 4346] (Figure 1). Tolerogenic DCs comprise a majority of immature DCs and subpopulations of DCs with various maturation stages, including plasmacytoid DCs [43]. However, a major drawback in vivo is the potential of tolerogenic DCs to mature during infections or inflammation, which would convert them into immunogenic cells [47].

761429.fig.001
Figure 1: Regulatory T cells (Tregs) are present in the host at the time of transplantation and are recruited to the allograft. They respond to donor alloantigen through cross-reactivity and inhibit T-cell proliferation in draining lymphoid tissue. Tolerogenic DCs favor the generation of Tregs from naive T cells, which then block effector T-cell proliferation while also triggering apoptosis of these cells. They inhibit TH1 cells. These processes facilitate allograft acceptance through several mechanisms including the production and release of immunosuppressive cytokines, such as IL-10 and TGFβ (modified from Wood et al. [2]).

DCs are a heterogeneous population. At least seven DC subpopulations have been defined in mice based on differential expression of surface and intracellular markers [4853]. The relationships between mouse and human DC populations are incompletely understood; however, recent comparative genomics studies have revealed functional equivalences between DC subsets in the two species [25]. Based on morphology, cell-surface markers, and gene expression profiles, DCs have traditionally been subdivided into classical and plasmacytoid DCs [24, 27, 5457]. The latter are characterized by the CD11clowCD45RAhiMHC-IIlow immunophenotype in mice and the CD4hiCD8negCD11clowCD45RAhiMHC-IIlow immunophenotype in human [2].

Alternatively, a development-oriented nomenclature has also been used [23]. This classification subdivides DCs into conventional and monocyte-derived DCs. It is based on the assumption that monocytes give rise to mucosal DCs, but not to splenic, conventional DCs [58]. The existence of genuine monocyte-derived DCs in vivo is presently being explored. At steady state, most DCs in mouse lymphoid organs do not arise from monocytes and depend upon fms-like transcript 3 ligand (Flt3L) for their development [59]. However, some tissue (e.g., the gut) harbor macrophage colony-stimulating factor (M-CSF)—dependent monocytes at steady state [60, 61]. Langerhans cells are DCs within the epidermis and other squamous epithelia, which rely on M-CSF for their development [60, 62]. In histiocytosis X, the expansion of Langerhans cells is manifested by either granuloma formation or a more diffuse proliferative disease [63].

Another classification subdivides DCs into resident and migratory DCs [23]. Resident DCs traffic directly to lymphoid tissue from a blood precursor, whereas migratory DCs first enter tissue before moving to lymph nodes [6466]. DC populations express distinct pattern recognition receptors [67] and play different roles in nature. Monocyte-derived DCs can be observed in lymphoid tissue in response to infection with Leishmania major [68] or Listeria monocytogenes [69].

The development of DCs with either immunogenic or regulatory activity depends on a series of biological processes including differentiation, expansion, migration, antigen uptake and processing, and maturation.

3. DC Maturation

Under homeostatic conditions, tissue-resident DCs are immature and express low levels of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II and little or no T-cell costimulatory molecules. The role of immature DCs is not precisely defined, as they can give rise to either mature DCs or semimature regulatory DCs that share some phenotypic traits of mature DCs (e.g., CCR7 chemokine receptor expression [70]). Immature DCs sense the presence of pathogen- and damage-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs and DAMPs) from microbial agents and damaged cells, respectively, and activate proinflammatory molecular signaling cascades, such as nuclear factor kappa B (NFκB) and interferon responsive factor (IRF) pathways [71, 72]. Activation of these signaling pathways is associated with DC maturation. Maturing DCs lose their ability to take up soluble antigen and acquire T-cell stimulatory activity as a result of increased antigen processing capacity and upregulation of MHC, T-cell costimulatory molecules, and proinflammatory cytokines [73, 74]. Traffic molecules (e.g., CCR7) are upregulated in maturing DCs, allowing them to migrate to lymphoid tissue [70, 7578]. In vitro, mature DCs present “probing movements” characterized by the incessant lengthening and retraction of long processes from the cell body [79]. Steady-state DCs in intact lymph nodes in vivo extend and retract processes in a fairly similar way [80]. Immature DCs and, to a lesser extent, mature DCs take up particles and apoptotic cells [81, 82]. Uptake of apoptotic cells has been implicated in antigen cross-presentation, a mechanism that entails either immune tolerance under homeostatic conditions or immune activation upon DC maturation [83]. In addition, DCs participate in two “nonclassical” pathways of antigen presentation that involve autophagy of cytosolic components for presentation on MHC class II and cross-presentation of endocytosed substrates on MHC class I [84]. Peptide-MHC-class II complexes formed in lysosomes during DC maturation move to the cell surface [8587] and interact with the T-cell receptor. Maturing DCs upregulate T-cell costimulatory molecules including CD80, CD86, CD40, OX40L, and inducible T-cell costimulator ligand (ICOSL/CD275) [88, 89], along with proinflammatory cytokines (e.g., IL-1β, IL-2, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12, and IL-18).

The costimulation paradigm dictates that strong T-cell activation requires three distinct signals: the antigenic stimulus provided by MHC presenting a cognate peptide, costimulatory molecules, and stimulatory cytokines. Antigen presentation in the absence of strong costimulation can induce a state of antigen-specific T-cell unresponsiveness or anergy. Repetitive stimulation with allogeneic immature human DCs has been shown to induce IL-10-producing, nonproliferating CD4+ T cells with regulatory activity [90]. Systemic injection of immature, but not of mature, donor bone marrow-derived CD8α DCs to the recipient before engraftment prolonged cardiac allograft survival in the absence of immunosuppression in mice [91, 92]. Both immature and comparatively mature CD8α+ “lymphoid-related” DCs injected 7 days before transplantation likewise prolonged cardiac allograft survival in fully MHC-mismatched mice [93]. Moreover, systemically injected donor DCs prevented rejection of MHC-mismatched skin grafts [94] and lethal acute graft-versus-host disease [95] in mice. Immature DCs derived from recipient bone marrow progenitors similarly improved cardiac allograft survival in mice [96].

Immature DCs with inhibitory properties can be generated from monocyte precursors in vitro [97]. Alternatively, immature DC precursors can be mobilized in the live donor by Flt3L or granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), collected by leukapheresis, purified, and injected to the recipient before transplantation. However, this is not a feasible method with deceased donors, such as in heart transplantation. In human, bone marrow cell mobilization by G-CSF preferentially increased circulating plasmacytoid DC precursors [98].

4. DCs and Tregs

DCs continuously present harmless self- and nonself-antigens in a way that favors tolerance. Following antigen presentation in the absence of costimulatory signals in mice, immature DCs induce conventional naive T cells to convert into Tregs and boost the regulatory activity of existing Tregs at once [99106]. Immature DCs in secondary lymphoid tissue accumulate antigen and bolster the generation of Tregs that promote antigen-specific tolerance. Mice lacking functional immature DCs develop fatal autoimmune disease, possibly owing to low numbers of Tregs [19, 61, 107, 108]. Mammals, including human, lacking functional Tregs likewise develop fatal autoimmune disease [109].

Regulatory DCs interact with Tregs in bidirectional ways. Tregs express inhibitory receptors, such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA4), lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3), and glucocorticoid-induced tumor necrosis factor receptor (GITR), along with anti-inflammatory cytokines such as TGF-β, IL-10, and IL-35 [110, 111]. TGF-β is a central mediator in the generation of Tregs [112, 113]. These cells can be subdivided into CD4+ natural Tregs that are formed during thymic development in the fetus [114116] and adaptive Tregs. The transcription factor Foxp3 is upregulated in developing T cells upon recognition of self-antigen in the thymus and controls the function of Tregs [114, 117]. Natural Tregs can convert into adaptive CD4+ or CD8+ Tregs in secondary lymphoid organs. In two human volunteers, a single subcutaneous injection with autologous immature monocyte-derived DCs pulsed with influenza matrix peptide induced IL-10-producing, peptide-specific CD8+ Tregs and suppressed peptide-specific killing activities of CD8+ T cells [118]. These results indicate that immature DCs can induce Tregs and inhibit antigen-specific effector T cells in human.

5. Tolerogenic DCs

Immature DCs are comprised of distinct populations that differ in their capacity to present antigen, produce cytokines, and promote tolerance. Phenotypically mature DCs are not always immunogenic. For instance, immature DCs that upregulate MHC and costimulatory molecules after in vitro treatment with TNF-α or IFN-γ, a typical attribute of mature DCs, but are still able to promote the generation of Tregs from naive T cells, have been described [119, 120]. Also, some immature DCs in peripheral tissue express high levels of CCR7, another typical feature of mature DCs, while maintaining the capacity of inducing Tregs [121124]. CCR7 deficiency prevents lymphatic migration of immature DCs and induction of inhaled and oral tolerance, indicating a major role for this chemokine receptor in tolerance induction [125].

Plasmacytoid DCs, originally identified as a subset of DCs that produce type I interferons in response to viral infection, differ from traditional DCs in several ways including decreased costimulatory molecule expression and reduced allostimulatory capacity. Human plasmacytoid DCs preferentially express immunoglobulin-like transcript 7 (ILT7) that couples with a signaling adapter to activate a prominent immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activation motif- (ITAM-) mediated signaling pathway [27]. Nonlymphoid, tissue-resident plasmacytoid DCs are key cellular players in the regulation of mucosal immunity at steady state and in the induction of central and peripheral tolerance. They have been associated with generation of alloantigen-specific CD4+ Tregs or CD8+ Tregs that promote graft tolerance [26, 54, 57, 126133] and long-term cardiac allograft survival [131, 132].

Natural tolerogenic DCs originate from hematopoietic precursors and maintain tolerance constitutively under homeostatic conditions [134]. In the thymus, where central tolerance is set up, natural tolerogenic DCs induce the generation of Foxp3+ natural Tregs by a mechanism that is mediated by IL-7-related thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) produced by Hassall’s corpuscles in the thymic medulla [135]. Induced tolerogenic DCs differ from natural DCs in that their tolerogenic activity is controlled by molecular signals from the environment, such as TGF-β and IL-10 in the intestinal mucosa, which oppose maturation stimuli. In vitro treatment of immature DCs with these anti-inflammatory cytokines promotes the development of tolerogenic DCs that assist in the conversion of naive T cells into Tregs more effectively than the immature DCs themselves. Several strategies have been developed to generate tolerogenic DCs for therapeutic use in organ transplantation [44, 136142]. The two major general approaches consist of pharmacological conditioning and genetic engineering of immature DCs.

5.1. Pharmacologically Conditioned DCs

The development of immunosuppressive drugs has traditionally been focused on inhibition of lymphocyte proliferation, which was initially perceived as a key process in immune responses to all kinds of antigens. By screening many agents for inhibition of lymphocyte proliferation, Schwartz and Dameshek discovered the immunosuppressant 6-mercaptopurine in 1959 [143]. Over the past two decades, it has been increasingly recognized that many drugs that primarily act by inhibiting T-cell proliferation concurrently modulate DC function.

Glucocorticoids inhibit DC differentiation and maturation both in vitro and in vivo [144150]. Dexamethasone preferentially blocked the differentiation of plasmacytoid DCs and enhanced their apoptotic death [150]. DCs conditioned by vitamin D3 in vitro exhibited several attributes of tolerogenic DC, such as resistance to maturation, IL-10 release upon stimulation, and low T-cell allostimulatory capacity [151, 152]. Human monocyte-derived, vitamin D3-treated DCs displayed a semimature phenotype, anti-inflammatory properties, and low T-cell allostimulatory capacity [153]. T cells from patients with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis cultured with autologous vitamin D3-treated DCs loaded with myelin peptides induced hyporesponsiveness of myelin-reactive T cells [153]. Synergistic effects of vitamin D3 and dexamethasone have been reported [149]. Vitamin D3 combined with dexamethasone was used to derive tolerogenic DCs from healthy subjects and from patients with rheumatoid arthritis [154]. In vitro LPS-stimulated tolerogenic DCs, referred to as “alternatively activated” DCs, exhibited enhanced ability to migrate to lymphoid tissue and to present antigen. They induced memory T-cell hyporesponsiveness, proliferation of naive T cells, low IFN-γ expression, and high IL-10 expression [155, 156].

DCs conditioned by IL-10 or other immunosuppressive cytokines in vitro promoted antigen-specific anergy and regulatory activity in memory CD4+ T cells [21, 157]. Two different populations of DCs were derived from monocytes cultured in the presence of GM-CSF and IL-4, depending on the time point of their exposure to IL-10. When IL-10 was added at the end of culture, DCs showed an immature phenotype, were resistant to maturation [158, 159], and induced antigen-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell anergy [159161]. DCs derived from macaque monocytes treated with vitamin D3 and IL-10 were resistant to maturation and displayed low T-cell allostimulatory activity in vitro [162]. Systemic injection of these DCs to MHC-mismatched recipient macaques treated with antihistamine drug and CTLA4Ig (soluble CTLA4-immunoglobulin fusion protein) elicited a transient increase in donor antigen-specific T-cell proliferation, with no changes in antidonor antibodies [162]. Conversely, when IL-10 was added at the initiation of monocyte culture, the differentiating DCs expressed CD83, CD80, and CD86, similar to mature cells, but also Ig-like transcript- (ILT-) 2, ILT3, ILT4, and human leukocyte antigen G, similar to tolerogenic DCs [163]. Importantly, IL-10-treated DCs supported the differentiation of type-1 Tregs (Tr1) [163, 164]. On the other hand, IL-10 downregulated CCR7, thereby impairing lymphoid homing of DCs in vivo [165, 166].

Cyclosporine A and tacrolimus (FK-506), two calcineurin inhibitors, inhibited IFN-γ production and MHC-restricted antigen presentation by myeloid DCs [167], as well as activatory interactions of DCs with T cells [168]. In one study [169], cyclosporine A downregulated chemokine receptors and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2). This effect was associated with impaired DC migration. However, another study [166] showed that cyclosporine A and tacrolimus, unlike dexamethasone and IL-10, did not downregulate CCR7 nor did they inhibit CCL19 chemokine-mediated migration of human monocyte-derived DCs in vitro or lymphoid homing of mouse DCs in vivo.

Another important molecule used to generate tolerogenic DCs is mycophenolate mofetil. This agent inhibits T- and B-cell proliferation by interfering with de novo synthesis of purines required for the production of nucleic acids. Mycophenolate mofetil inhibits the maturation of DCs in vitro and their immunostimulatory capacity in vivo [170].

Aspirin [171174] and deoxyspergualin [175], two inhibitors of the NF-κB signaling pathway, likewise inhibit DC maturation. Immature host DCs conditioned ex vivo with oligodeoxynucleotides (ODN) against NF-κB achieved long-term cardiac allograft survival in rats [176]. Blocking NF-κB signaling during human DC differentiation induced anergy and Treg activity for one, but not two, HLA-DR mismatches [177]. Interestingly, a clinical study showed a significant correlation between low-dose aspirin therapy and improved allograft function and survival in kidney transplant recipients [178]. Systemic administration of immature autologous myeloid DCs combined with a deoxyspergualin derivative induced donor-specific tolerance in a heart transplant model in rats [20]. This effect was associated with an increase in NKTCRαβ+CD3+CD4CD8double negative Tregs, a population that has been linked to donor-specific improvement of graft survival [179], but not in conventional CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ or CD8CD45RClow Tregs in host spleens. The double negative Treg population expressed IFN-γ. This cytokine is produced by alloantigen-reactive CD4+Foxp3+ Tregs and enhances their regulatory activity in vivo through an autocrine mechanism [180]. IFN-γ also induces the development of Foxp3+ Tregs from CD4+CD25cells. These findings indicate that IFN-γ released by double negative Tregs potentiates their ability to suppress alloreactive CD4+ and CD8+ T cells [181].

Rapamycin, an immunosuppressive macrolide, inhibits the integrative kinase mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). Inhibition of mTOR exerts immunoregulatory activity [182] including attenuated innate immune responses [183]. Mouse monocyte-derived DCs conditioned by rapamycin in vitro were resistant to maturation induced by inflammatory stimuli while conserving their ability to migrate to lymphoid tissue and to enrich the naturally occurring CD4+ Tregs. Intravenous injection of host rapamycin-treated DCs pulsed with donor antigen before heart transplantation, combined with a short course of immunosuppression, prolonged allograft survival indefinitely in rodents [2830, 184, 185]. Rapamycin-treated DCs expressed CD83, CD86, low levels of IL-10, and high levels of IL-12p40/p70 [186]. Although these features were typical of a mature phenotype, these DCs inhibited T-cell alloproliferation, similar to those treated with vitamin D3 and dexamethasone [187]. Upon LPS stimulation, they expressed high levels of IL-12 [28], a cytokine that participates in the generation of Foxp3+ Tregs. However, human rapamycin-treated DCs, unlike murine, were only partially maturation resistant in vivo [30].

DC-mediated NK T-cell activation is a critical event in the early immune response to renal ischemia/reperfusion injury. DCs treated with adenosine 2A receptor (A2AR) agonists protected the kidney from ischemia/reperfusion injury through suppression of IFN-γ production by NK T-cells and decreased costimulatory molecule expression [31]. In a recent study [188], protein kinase C inhibitors induced the development of stable human tolerogenic DCs.

5.2. DCs Generated in the Presence of Low-Dose GM-CSF without IL-4

A combination of high-dose GM-CSF and IL-4 has been used as a standard protocol for generation of DCs from bone marrow precursors in vitro. Although DCs generated using this protocol induced primary allogeneic T-cell anergy in vitro, they were not resistant to maturation. The potential of tolerogenic DCs to mature within an inflammatory environment, turning into immunogenic cells in vivo, is of major concern to therapeutic applications [47]. An alternative protocol consists of culturing bone marrow precursors with low-dose GM-CSF in the absence of IL-4. Mouse DCs generated using this protocol efficiently captured and presented antigen, were maturation-resistant and poor stimulators of T-cell proliferation, and prolonged cardiac allograft survival in vivo [92]. DCs derived from monkey bone marrow in the presence of GM-CSF without IL-4 gave rise to two populations showing a similar phenotype but different functional properties. The adherent population displayed immunoregulatory properties that were correlated with upregulation of heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1), an anti-inflammatory enzyme, both in vitro and in a rat allotransplant model in vivo. Conversely, the nonadherent population was immunogenic [189]. Immature DCs derived from human bone marrow by low doses of GM-CSF in the absence of IL-4 were resistant to common maturation stimuli and exhibited tolerogenic properties in vitro [47, 190], including induction of T-cell anergy in naive allogeneic T cells when stimulated twice with immature DCs [47]. Therefore, the establishment of the anergic state appeared to require two subsequent stimulations by immature DCs.

5.3. Tolerogenic DC Therapy Combined with Immunosuppressive Drug Administration

In vivo injection of immature DCs can be combined with the systemic administration of immunosuppressive drugs. For instance, immature donor DC therapy combined with either anti-CD154 (CD40 ligand) antibody [191] or anti-CD54 (intercellular adhesion molecule) antibody together with CTLA4Ig [192] prolonged cardiac allograft survival in mice for more than 100 days. Likewise, adoptive transfer of immature donor DCs combined with anti-CD154 antibody inhibited intimal hyperplasia and arterial lesions in mouse aortic allografts [193]. Alloantigen-pulsed, rapamycin-treated DCs combined with a low dose of rapamycin administered at the time of transplantation induced indefinite cardiac allograft survival in mice [184]. Moreover, mature donor DCs combined with a systemic treatment with tacrolimus prolonged cardiac allograft survival in rats, whereas DCs alone were ineffective in this model [194]. Other studies did not support synergistic effects of tolerogenic DC therapy and systemic treatment with rapamycin or cyclosporine A in transplant models [167]. On the other hand, immunosuppressive drugs can modify DC function and hinder the efficacy of tolerogenic DC therapy. As an example, tacrolimus inhibits the ability of DCs to process and/or present antigen [167, 195]. For these reasons, interactions of systemic drug treatments with injected tolerogenic DCs need to be investigated in animal models before the initiation of clinical trials, as discussed below.

5.4. Genetically Modified DCs

One critical aspect of tolerogenic DC therapy is the stability of tolerogenic DCs, which should not turn into immunogenic DCs in vivo when exposed to proinflammatory cytokines. This consideration is important in transplantation, a condition associated with chronic inflammation. Semimature tolerogenic DCs have been shown to convert into immunogenic DCs in an inflammatory environment in vivo [196, 197], which can accelerate graft rejection. Because the conditioning effect by pharmacological agents on DCs in vitro may not last in vivo, genetic engineering of DCs to express an immunosuppressive factor may represent an attractive approach. Genetically modified DCs can express the therapeutic gene for extended periods of time in vivo. Because DCs are manipulated genetically in vitro, the recipient is not directly exposed to the gene transfer vector. Recombinant adenovirus vectors have been used in many studies due to their high efficiency, despite their proinflammatory effects that entail DC maturation [198]. Recombinant retrovirus vectors and nonviral gene transfer systems may induce lower levels of DC maturation [199]. With respect to the transgene which is to be constitutively expressed by DCs, candidates include genes that encode an immunosuppressive cytokine, a costimulatory inhibitor, a death ligand that causes killing of effector T cells, a chemokine receptor, or an adhesion molecule that mediates lymphoid homing, among others.

Early studies focused on DCs constitutively expressing immunosuppressive cytokines, particularly IL-10, IL-4, and TGF-β [200208]. These approaches had limited effects on allograft survival. We have shown that bone marrow-derived mouse DCs constitutively expressing indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO), an inhibitor of T-cell activation, attenuated T-cell alloproliferative responses in the mixed leukocyte reaction in vitro [209]. DCs expressing soluble CTLA4Ig significantly prolonged both cardiac and islet allograft survival in rodents [210214]. However, this approach was not significantly more effective than CTLA4Ig peptide treatment or direct CTLA4Ig gene delivery into the graft.

By binding the cell death receptor Fas (CD95), Fas ligand participates in the maintenance of peripheral T-cell tolerance and maintenance of immune privilege in certain organs. DCs expressing transgenic Fas ligand inhibited antigen-specific T-cell responsiveness, prolonging the survival of fully MHC-mismatched cardiac allografts in some studies [215, 216], but not in others [217, 218]. Mouse tolerogenic DCs generated with antisense ODN against the costimulatory molecules CD40, CD80, and CD86 remained costimulatory deficient in vivo, even after 3 weeks of injection [219]. Low CD40 expression translates into low levels of cytokine (IL-12, TNF-α) production upon CD40 ligation [219]. DCs generated with antisense ODN against CD80/86 prolonged allograft survival in a transplant model [220]. Similar findings were reported with immature DCs constitutively expressing soluble TNF-α type-1 receptor (sTNFR-1) [221]. DCs engineered genetically to express CCR7 showed enhanced lymphoid homing. Injection of DCs constitutively expressing both IL-10 and CCR7, but not those expressing either gene alone, prolonged cardiac allograft survival in mice [222]. This finding exemplifies synergistic effects resulting from simultaneous targeting of multiple parameters of DC function, such as maturation and lymphoid homing.

Galectin- (gal-) 1 is an endogenous inhibitor of T-cell activation, DC function, and immune cell trafficking [223225]. DCs deliver tolerogenic signals to T cells through a gal-1-driven immunoregulatory circuit that involves IL-27 and IL-10 [226]. Lung cancer-derived gal-1 mediates DC anergy through inhibitor of DNA binding 3/IL-10 signaling pathway [227]. Gal-1 and -3 genes silencing in immature and mature DCs enhance T-cell activation and IFN-γ production [228]. DCs constitutively expressing gal-1 delayed onset of autoimmune diabetes in mice [223]. Moreover, gal-1 prolonged liver allograft survival from Flt3L-pretreated donors in mice [229]. Mice deficient in gal-1 showed accelerated CD8+ T-cell-mediated rejection of skin allografts [230]. These findings establish gal-1 as an attractive candidate for gene therapy for transplantation.

5.5. DCs Conditioned by Donor Apoptotic Cells and Exosomes

An emerging strategy consists of in situ delivery of donor antigen to quiescent host DCs using donor apoptotic cells or exosomes [231, 232]. The latter are 40–100 nm size membrane vesicles rich in microRNA, which play important roles in intercellular communication [233], including the transfer of functional microRNA molecules between DCs [35]. Interaction or phagocytosis of cells in early apoptosis exerts a potent anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive stimulus on DCs and macrophages. In situ-targeting of DCs with donor apoptotic cells restrained indirect allorecognition and attenuated graft vasculopathy in a transplant model [234]. Systemically delivered exosomes rich in donor MHC molecules were taken up by host DCs and prolonged allograft survival [231]. Exosomes from immature DCs combined with rapamycin induced tolerance to cardiac allografts in mice [36].

5.6. Tolerogenic DC Therapy May Act through Conventional DCs of the Host

Recent evidence suggests that in vivo injected immunosuppressive DCs may attenuate alloresponses and improve cardiac allograft survival, not by themselves, but through quiescent conventional DCs of the recipient [33, 34]. Indeed, transient depletion of conventional DCs of the recipient by the time of DC therapy abolished its beneficial effect on graft survival. This phenomenon was also observed when immunosuppressive DCs were combined with low-dose pharmacological immunosuppression. Following DC therapy, presentation of donor-derived peptides by conventional DCs led to preferential deletion of indirect-pathway CD4+ effector T cells, increasing the percentage of Foxp3+ CD4+ T cells [33]. These results are in line with earlier studies showing that i.v. injection of donor immunosuppressive DCs before heart transplantation inhibited antidonor responses through the direct pathway, which involves recognition of intact donor MHC molecules by recipient T cells [92, 210]. The high precursor frequency of direct-pathway T cells and their predominance in most in vitro assays of alloreactivity led to the assumption that the direct pathway was the dominant mechanism of allorecognition during acute cardiac allograft rejection and that systemic injection of donor immunosuppressive DCs inhibited direct responses by interacting with direct-pathway T cells [34]. The aforementioned findings regarding transient depletion of recipient DCs at the time of donor DC therapy [33] demonstrate that depletion of conventional DCs prevents not only downregulation of the indirect T-cell pathway, as anticipated, but also the direct-pathway response elicited by cardiac allografts. This observation suggests that, in vivo, donor-derived immunosuppressive DCs by themselves are unable to downregulate direct T-cell responses in the absence of conventional DCs of the recipient [34].

Because generation of donor immunosuppressive DCs is not applicable to deceased donors, use of host DCs pulsed with donor antigen has been viewed as a more feasible method in clinical heart transplantation. Within this context, pulsing host DCs with donor antigen has been used to inhibit the indirect pathway of allorecognition [235, 236]. However, the aforementioned study [33] indicated that systemically injected host immunosuppressive DCs pulsed with MHC class I- or MHC class II-restricted peptides mediated their beneficial effect through conventional DCs of the recipient. These findings suggest that the intrinsic immune regulatory activity of delivered DCs in vivo may be less important than what was previously thought. They also raise the question as to whether the function of conventional DCs of the recipients, which are required for the efficacy of DC therapies, is preserved in transplant candidates with an end-stage disease.

5.7. Clinical Applications of Tolerogenic DCs

While several clinical trials of immunogenic DC therapy for cancer have been performed [237, 238], clinical DC-based “negative vaccination” is still very much in its infancy. In 2001, a pioneering study showed that autologous immature DCs injected subcutaneously into healthy volunteers were well tolerated, did not cause autoimmunity, and induced antigen-specific CD8+ Tregs along with antigen-specific T-cell hyporesponsiveness [118, 239]. Recently, proof of safety for tolerogenic DC therapy was provided by a clinical phase-1 trial in 10 patients with type-1 diabetes who received an intradermal injection of autologous DCs generated in the presence of GM-CSF and IL-4, with or without antisense ODN against CD40, CD80, and C86 [37]. No adverse effects were observed. Meanwhile, two clinical trials of tolerogenic DC therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis have been started [38, 240]. Other trials are in progress or are imminent. In transplantation, the OneStudy phase-1 clinical trial has been designed to evaluate tolerogenic DC therapy in renal transplant recipients [39, 241]. Autologous monocyte-derived tolerogenic DCs will be generated from patients with chronic renal failure. Each disease condition for which DC therapy is envisaged can potentially modify the function and in vivo survival of tolerogenic DCs derived from the recipient. It therefore is important to test DCs from patients in animal models before starting a clinical trial. Ahead of the clinical trial in kidney transplantation, tolerogenic DCs from patients with chronic renal failure have been validated in a skin transplant model [241]. Moreover, tolerogenic DCs from patients with rheumatoid arthritis were compared with those from healthy controls before the initiation of a clinical trial for this disease; tolerogenic DCs from the two groups showed a similar phenotype and in vitro function [154]. Ahead of a clinical trial in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, tolerogenic DCs generated with vitamin D3 from these patients were compared with those derived from healthy controls and found to have a comparable phenotype and function [153].

In renal transplant recipients enrolled in the OneStudy trial and treated with tolerogenic DC therapy, drug-based immunosuppression consisting of low doses of mycophenolate mofetil, tacrolimus, and prednisolone is not discontinued [241]. This raises the question as to whether these drugs could modify the function of injected tolerogenic DCs in vivo. As already mentioned, immunosuppressive drugs can either enhance or hamper the effect of DC therapy. In preliminary experiments performed ahead of the OneStudy trial, tolerogenic DC therapy did not impair, but actually slightly enhanced, the effect of mycophenolate mofetil on graft survival in a transplant model [241]. While tacrolimus inhibits the ability of DCs to process and/or present antigen [167, 195], tacrolimus immunosuppression has been shown to prolong cardiac allograft survival after in vivo injection of mature donor DCs in a transplant model [194]. Before the initiation of a clinical trial, it is therefore important to assess graft survival with each immunosuppressive drug to be used in the trial, with and without DC therapy, in a transplant model.

Another aspect that affects immunogenicity and survival of injected DCs in vivo is the route of administration. In one study [242], dexamethasone/LPS-treated DCs prolonged mouse cardiac allograft survival when delivered intravenously, whereas they were ineffective when delivered subcutaneously. Recent evidence in monkeys suggests that autologous tolerogenic DCs may prime an immune response when delivered intradermally, but not when delivered intravenously [39]. In another study in monkeys, intravenous injection of tolerogenic DCs was well tolerated [162].

An unresolved issue in DC therapy for transplantation is the choice between donor and recipient DCs. Most studies have utilized donor DCs or recipient DCs loaded with donor peptides. The OneStudy trial in kidney transplantation has been designed to evaluate autologous DCs not pulsed with donor antigens [39]. The investigators pointed out that a risk of donor sensitization due to the presence of a slight contaminant cell product or the destruction of the injected cells by nonself-recognition [243] could not be excluded using tolerogenic DCs from the donor [39], whereas such a risk should be minimized using autologous DCs. In addition, donor DCs or recipient DCs pulsed with donor peptides require LPS or cytokine stimulation for efficient lymphoid homing and antigen presentation in transplant models (“alternatively activated” DCs) [155, 156]; however, such a stimulation can foster DC maturation. On the contrary, autologous immature DCs do not need LPS stimulation in rodent transplant models [96]. Also, recent evidence suggests donor DCs may die quickly after in vivo injection, and the effect of DC therapy may be mediated by endogenous DCs [33, 34], as discussed above. To the opposite, autologous immature DCs have been detected in the spleen of recipient rats at least two weeks after in vivo injection [96]. Thus, autologous DCs may offer several advantages over donor DCs as a source for tolerogenic DCs [39]; however, this question has not been answered definitively.

6. Concluding Remarks

Studies in rodent and monkey transplant models have provided proof of principle for tolerogenic DC therapy for solid-organ transplantation. Clinical trials testing this strategy have been carried out in patients with type-1 diabetes or rheumatoid arthritis, and a trial in renal transplant recipients has been designed. Nevertheless, several important questions remain. Are autologous DCs superior to donor DCs? Should autologous DCs be pulsed with donor antigen? Are genetically engineered DCs superior to pharmacologically conditioned DCs? Does maintenance drug-based immunosuppression influence the outcome of DC therapy? Which immunosuppressive drugs are most suitable in this regard? What is the best time for DC administration? How can DCs be made truly maturation resistant in vivo? As conventional DCs of the recipient seem to be critical for the success of tolerogenic DC therapy, would it be possible to promote tolerance without any cell injection? Answering these questions will likely advance the field and optimize these approaches. Meanwhile, a successful completion of the first clinical trial of DC therapy in transplantation may open a new avenue in the field.

Conflict of Interests

The author declares that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgment

The author is grateful for funding support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (Research Grant 310030-118210), the Fondation Vaudoise de Cardiologie, and the Cecilia Augusta Foundation.

References

  1. K. J. Wood and R. Goto, “Mechanisms of rejection: current perspectives,” Transplantation, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. K. J. Wood, A. Bushell, and J. Hester, “Regulatory immune cells in transplantation,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 12, pp. 417–430, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  3. S. I. Alexander, N. Smith, D. Verran et al., “Chimerism and tolerance in a recipient of a deceased-donor liver transplant,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 358, no. 4, pp. 369–374, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. L. J. West, “ABO-incompatible hearts for infant transplantation,” Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 548–554, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. M. Takatsuki, S. Uemoto, Y. Inomata et al., “Weaning of immunosuppression in living donor liver transplant recipients,” Transplantation, vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 449–454, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. S. Strober, M. Dhillon, M. Schubert et al., “Acquired immune tolerance to cadaveric renal allografts. A study of three patients treated with total lymphoid irradiation,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 321, no. 1, pp. 28–33, 1989. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. T. Kawai, D. H. Sachs, M. Sykes, A. B. Cosimi, and Immune Tolerance Network, “HLA-mismatched renal transplantation without maintenance immunosuppression,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 368, no. 19, pp. 1850–1852, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  8. J. D. Scandling, S. Busque, S. Dejbakhsh-Jones et al., “Tolerance and withdrawal of immunosuppressive drugs in patients given kidney and hematopoietic cell transplants,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1133–1145, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. J. Leventhal, M. Abecassis, J. Miller et al., “Tolerance induction in HLA disparate living donor kidney transplantation by donor stem cell infusion: durable chimerism predicts outcome,” Transplantation, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 169–176, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  10. A. D. Salama, G. Remuzzi, W. E. Harmon, and M. H. Sayegh, “Challenges to achieving clinical transplantation tolerance,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 108, no. 7, pp. 943–948, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. R. E. Billingham, L. Brent, and P. B. Medawar, “‘Actively acquired tolerance’ of foreign cells,” Nature, vol. 172, no. 4379, pp. 603–606, 1953. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. B. M. Hall, M. E. Jelbart, and S. E. Dorsch, “Suppressor T cells in rats with prolonged cardiac allograft survival after treatment with cyclosporine,” Transplantation, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 595–600, 1984. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. K. J. Wood and S. Sakaguchi, “Regulatory T cells in transplantation tolerance,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 199–210, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. Y. Li, T. Koshiba, A. Yoshizawa et al., “Analyses of peripheral blood mononuclear cells in operational tolerance after pediatric living donor liver transplantation,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 4, no. 12, pp. 2118–2125, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. M. Martínez-Llordella, I. Puig-Pey, G. Orlando et al., “Multiparameter immune profiling of operational tolerance in liver transplantation,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 309–319, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. S. Brouard, E. Mansfield, C. Braud et al., “Identification of a peripheral blood transcriptional biomarker panel associated with operational renal allograft tolerance,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 104, no. 39, pp. 15448–15453, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. K. A. Newell, A. Asare, A. D. Kirk et al., “Identification of a B cell signature associated with renal transplant tolerance in humans,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 120, no. 6, pp. 1836–1847, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. P. Sagoo, E. Perucha, B. Sawitzki et al., “Development of a cross-platform biomarker signature to detect renal transplant tolerance in humans,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 120, no. 6, pp. 1848–1861, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. C. Ohnmacht, A. Pullner, S. B. S. King et al., “Constitutive ablation of dendritic cells breaks self-tolerance of CD4 T cells and results in spontaneous fatal autoimmunity,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 206, no. 3, pp. 549–559, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. M. Hill, P. Thebault, M. Segovia et al., “Cell therapy with autologous tolerogenic dendritic cells induces allograft tolerance through interferon-gamma and Epstein-Barr virus-induced gene 3,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 2036–2045, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. H. Torres-Aguilar, S. R. Aguilar-Ruiz, G. González-Pérez et al., “Tolerogenic dendritic cells generated with different immunosuppressive cytokines induce antigen-specific anergy and regulatory properties in memory CD4+ T cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 184, no. 4, pp. 1765–1775, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. K. Liu and M. C. Nussenzweig, “Origin and development of dendritic cells,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 45–54, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. R. M. Steinman and J. Idoyaga, “Features of the dendritic cell lineage,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 5–17, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. S. Laffont and F. Powrie, “Immunology: dendritic-cell genealogy,” Nature, vol. 462, no. 7274, pp. 732–733, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. K. Crozat, R. Guiton, M. Guilliams et al., “Comparative genomics as a tool to reveal functional equivalences between human and mouse dendritic cell subsets,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 177–198, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. N. M. Rogers, J. S. Isenberg, and A. W. Thomson, “Plasmacytoid dendritic cells: no longer an enigma and now key to transplant tolerance?” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1125–1133, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  27. W. Cao and L. Bover, “Signaling and ligand interaction of ILT7: receptor-mediated regulatory mechanisms for plasmacytoid dendritic cells,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 163–176, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. A. W. Thomson, R. Fischer, H. R. Turnquist, and T. Taner, “Use of rapamycin in the induction of tolerogenic dendritic cells,” Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, vol. 188, pp. 215–232, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. R. T. Fischer, H. R. Turnquist, Z. Wang, D. Beer-Stolz, and A. W. Thomson, “Rapamycin-conditioned, alloantigen-pulsed myeloid dendritic cells present donor MHC class I/peptide via the semi-direct pathway and inhibit survival of antigen-specific CD8+ T cells in vitro and in vivo,” Transplant Immunology, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 20–26, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. C. Macedo, H. Turquist, D. Metes, and A. W. Thomson, “Immunoregulatory properties of rapamycin-conditioned monocyte-derived dendritic cells and their role in transplantation,” Transplantation Research, vol. 1, no. 1, article 16, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  31. L. Li, L. Huang, H. Ye et al., “Dendritic cells tolerized with adenosine A2AR agonist attenuate acute kidney injury,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 122, no. 11, pp. 3931–3942, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  32. T. Nikolic and B. O. Roep, “Regulatory multitasking of tolerogenic dendritic cells—lessons taken from vitamin d3-treated tolerogenic dendritic cells,” Frontiers in Immunology, vol. 4, article 113, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  33. S. J. Divito, Z. Wang, W. J. Shufesky et al., “Endogenous dendritic cells mediate the effects of intravenously injected therapeutic immunosuppressive dendritic cells in transplantation,” Blood, vol. 116, no. 15, pp. 2694–2705, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. Z. Wang, S. J. Divito, W. J. Shufesky et al., “Dendritic cell therapies in transplantation revisited: deletion of recipient DCs deters the effect of therapeutic DCs,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 1398–1408, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. A. Montecalvo, A. T. Larregina, W. J. Shufesky et al., “Mechanism of transfer of functional microRNAs between mouse dendritic cells via exosomes,” Blood, vol. 119, no. 3, pp. 756–766, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. X. Li, J. J. Li, J. Y. Yang et al., “Tolerance induction by exosomes from immature dendritic cells and rapamycin in a mouse cardiac allograft model,” PLoS ONE, vol. 7, no. 8, Article ID e44045, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  37. N. Giannoukakis, B. Phillips, D. Finegold, J. Harnaha, and M. Trucco, “Phase I, (safety) study of autologous tolerogenic dendritic cells in type 1 diabetic patients,” Diabetes Care, vol. 34, pp. 2026–2032, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  38. C. M. Hilkens and J. D. Isaacs, “Tolerogenic dendritic cell therapy for rheumatoid arthritis: where are we now?” Clinical and Experimental Immunology, vol. 172, no. 2, pp. 148–157, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  39. A. Moreau, E. Varey, L. Bouchet-Delbos, and M. C. Cuturi, “Cell therapy using tolerogenic dendritic cells in transplantation,” Transplantation Research, vol. 1, article 13, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  40. J. Banchereau, F. Briere, C. Caux et al., “Immunobiology of dendritic cells,” Annual Review of Immunology, vol. 18, pp. 767–811, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. D. Hawiger, K. Inaba, Y. Dorsett et al., “Dendritic cells induce peripheral T cell unresponsiveness under steady state conditions in vivo,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 194, no. 6, pp. 769–779, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. G. Süss and K. Shortman, “A subclass of dendritic cells kills CD4 T cells via Fas/Fas-ligand-induced apoptosis,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 183, no. 4, pp. 1789–1796, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. R. A. Maldonado and U. H. von Andrian, “How tolerogenic dendritic cells induce regulatory T cells,” Advances in Immunology, vol. 108, pp. 111–165, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. A. E. Morelli and A. W. Thomson, “Tolerogenic dendritic cells and the quest for transplant tolerance,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 610–621, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. K. Pletinckx, A. Döhler, V. Pavlovic, and M. B. Lutz, “Role of dendritic cell maturity/costimulation for generation, homeostasis, and suppressive activity of regulatory T cells,” Frontiers in Immunology, vol. 2, article 39, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  46. M. Ezzelarab and A. W. Thomson, “Tolerogenic dendritic cells and their role in transplantation,” Seminars in Immunology, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 252–263, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. T. G. Berger, H. Schulze-Koops, M. Schäfer, E. Müller, and M. B. Lutz, “Immature and maturation-resistant human dendritic cells generated from bone marrow require two stimulations to induce T cell anergy in vitro,” PLoS ONE, vol. 4, no. 8, Article ID e6645, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. H. Ueno, E. Klechevsky, R. Morita et al., “Dendritic cell subsets in health and disease,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 219, no. 1, pp. 118–142, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. B. Pulendran, H. Tang, and T. L. Denning, “Division of labor, plasticity, and crosstalk between dendritic cell subsets,” Current Opinion in Immunology, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 61–67, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. K. R. R. Siddiqui and F. Powrie, “CD103+ GALT DCs promote Foxp3+ regulatory T cells,” Mucosal Immunology, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. S34–S38, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. K. Shortman and W. R. Heath, “The CD8+ dendritic cell subset,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 18–31, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. C. Coquerelle and M. Moser, “DC subsets in positive and negative regulation of immunity,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 317–334, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. S. Milling, U. Yrlid, V. Cerovic, and G. MacPherson, “Subsets of migrating intestinal dendritic cells,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 259–267, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. M. Swiecki and M. Colonna, “Unraveling the functions of plasmacytoid dendritic cells during viral infections, autoimmunity, and tolerance,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 142–162, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. D. Vremec, M. Zorbas, R. Scollay et al., “The surface phenotype of dendritic cells purified from mouse thymus and spleen: investigation of the CD8 expression by a subpopulation of dendritic cells,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 176, no. 1, pp. 47–58, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. X. Ju, G. Clark, and D. N. J. Hart, “Review of human DC subtypes,” Methods in Molecular Biology, vol. 595, pp. 3–20, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. A. G. Jegalian, F. Facchetti, and E. S. Jaffe, “Plasmacytoid dendritic cells physiologic roles and pathologic states,” Advances in Anatomic Pathology, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 392–404, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. C. Varol, L. Landsman, D. K. Fogg et al., “Monocytes give rise to mucosal, but not splenic, conventional dendritic cells,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 204, no. 1, pp. 171–180, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. M. A. Schmid, D. Kingston, S. Boddupalli, and M. G. Manz, “Instructive cytokine signals in dendritic cell lineage commitment,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 32–44, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. J. Helft, F. Ginhoux, M. Bogunovic, and M. Merad, “Origin and functional heterogeneity of non-lymphoid tissue dendritic cells in mice,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 55–75, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. L. Bar-On and S. Jung, “Defining dendritic cells by conditional and constitutive cell ablation,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 76–89, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. N. Romani, B. E. Clausen, and P. Stoitzner, “Langerhans cells and more: langerin-expressing dendritic cell subsets in the skin,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 120–141, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. R. Maarten Egeler, A. G. S. Van Halteren, P. C. W. Hogendoorn, J. D. Laman, and P. J. M. Leenen, “Langerhans cell histiocytosis: fascinating dynamics of the dendritic cell-macrophage lineage,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 213–232, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. S.-Y. Chang and M.-N. Kweon, “Langerin-expressing dendritic cells in gut-associated lymphoid tissues,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 233–246, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. H. Tezuka and T. Ohteki, “Regulation of intestinal homeostasis by dendritic cells,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 247–258, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. M.-L. Del Rio, G. Bernhardt, J.-I. Rodriguez-Barbosa, and R. Förster, “Development and functional specialization of CD103+ dendritic cells,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 268–281, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. A. M. Kerrigan and G. D. Brown, “Syk-coupled C-type lectin receptors that mediate cellular activation via single tyrosine based activation motifs,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 234, no. 1, pp. 335–352, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. B. León, M. López-Bravo, and C. Ardavín, “Monocyte-derived dendritic cells formed at the infection site control the induction of protective T helper 1 responses against leishmania,” Immunity, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 519–531, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. N. V. Serbina, T. P. Salazar-Mather, C. A. Biron, W. A. Kuziel, and E. G. Pamer, “TNF/iNOS-producing dendritic cells mediate innate immune defense against bacterial infection,” Immunity, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 59–70, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  70. F. Sallusto, P. Schaerli, P. Loetscher et al., “Rapid and coordinated switch in chemokine receptor expression during dendritic cell maturation,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 28, pp. 2760–2769, 1998. View at Google Scholar
  71. F. Re and J. L. Strominger, “Heterogeneity of TLR-induced responses in dendritic cells: from innate to adaptive immunity,” Immunobiology, vol. 209, no. 1-2, pp. 191–198, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. E. Meylan and J. Tschopp, “Toll-like receptors and RNA helicases: two parallel ways to trigger antiviral responses,” Molecular Cell, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 561–569, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. R. M. Steinman, G. Kaplan, M. D. Witmer, and Z. A. Cohn, “Identification of a novel cell type in peripheral lymphoid organs of mice. V. Purification of spleen dendritic cells, new surface markers, and maintenance in vitro,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 149, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 1979. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. W. C. Van Voorhis, L. S. Hair, R. M. Steinman, and G. Kaplan, “Human dendritic cells. Enrichment and characterization from peripheral blood,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 155, no. 4, pp. 1172–1187, 1982. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. Ö. Türeci, H. Bian, F. O. Nestle et al., “Cascades of transcriptional induction during dendritic cell maturation revealed by genome-wide expression analysis,” FASEB Journal, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 836–847, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  76. D. McIlroy, S. Tanguy-Royer, N. Le Meur et al., “Profiling dendritic cell maturation with dedicated microarrays,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 78, no. 3, pp. 794–803, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  77. M.-C. Dieu, B. Vanbervliet, A. Vicari et al., “Selective recruitment of immature and mature dendritic cells by distinct chemokines expressed in different anatomic sites,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 188, no. 2, pp. 373–386, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  78. A. Martín-Fontecha, S. Sebastiani, U. E. Höpken et al., “Regulation of dendritic cell migration to the draining lymph node: impact on T lymphocyte traffic and priming,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 198, no. 4, pp. 615–621, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  79. R. M. Steinman and Z. A. Cohn, “Identification of a novel cell type in peripheral lymphoid organs of mice. I. Morphology, quantitation, tissue distribution,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 137, pp. 1142–1162, 1973. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  80. R. L. Lindquist, G. Shakhar, D. Dudziak et al., “Visualizing dendritic cell networks in vivo,” Nature Immunology, vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 1243–1250, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  81. K. Inaba, M. Inaba, M. Naito, and R. M. Steinman, “Dendritic cell progenitors phagocytose particulates, including Bacillus Calmette-Guerin organisms, and sensitize mice to mycobacterial antigens in vivo,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 178, no. 2, pp. 479–488, 1993. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  82. F.-P. Huang, N. Platt, M. Wykes et al., “A discrete subpopulation of dendritic cells transports apoptotic intestinal epithelial cells to T cell areas of mesenteric lymph nodes,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 191, no. 3, pp. 435–443, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  83. W. R. Heath, G. T. Belz, G. M. N. Behrens et al., “Cross-presentation, dendritic cell subsets, and the generation of immunity to cellular antigens,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 199, pp. 9–26, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  84. D. Schmid, M. Pypaert, and C. Münz, “Antigen-loading compartments for major histocompatibility complex class ii molecules continuously receive input from autophagosomes,” Immunity, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 79–92, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  85. K. Inaba, S. Turley, T. Iyoda et al., “The formation of immunogenic major histocompatibility complex class II-peptide ligands in lysosomal compartments of dendritic cells is regulated by inflammatory stimuli,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 191, no. 6, pp. 927–936, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  86. S. J. Turley, K. Inaba, W. S. Garrett et al., “Transport of peptide-MHC class II complexes in developing dendritic cells,” Science, vol. 288, no. 5465, pp. 522–527, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  87. A. Chow, D. Toomre, W. Garrett, and I. Mellman, “Dendritic cell maturation triggers retrograde MHC class II transport from lysosomes to the plasma membrane,” Nature, vol. 418, no. 6901, pp. 988–994, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  88. M. H. Sayegh and L. A. Turka, “Thr role of T-cell costimulatory activation pathways in transplant rejection,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 338, no. 25, pp. 1813–1821, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  89. S. J. F. Cronin and J. M. Penninger, “From T-cell activation signals to signaling control of anti-cancer immunity,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 220, no. 1, pp. 151–168, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  90. H. Jonuleit, E. Schmitt, G. Schuler, J. Knop, and A. H. Enk, “Induction of interleukin 10-producing, nonproliferating CD4+ T cells with regulatory properties by repetitive stimulation with allogeneic immature human dendritic cells,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 192, no. 9, pp. 1213–1222, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  91. F. Fu, Y. Li, S. Qian et al., “Costimulatory molecule-deficient dendritic cell progenitors (MHC class II+, CD80(dim), CD86-) prolong cardiac allograft survival in nonimmunosuppressed recipients,” Transplantation, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 659–665, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  92. M. B. Lutz, R. M. Suri, M. Niimi et al., “Immature dendritic cells generated with low doses of GM-CSF in the absence of IL-4 are maturation resistant and prolong allograft survival in vivo,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 30, pp. 1813–1822, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  93. P. J. O'Connell, W. Li, Z. Wang, S. M. Specht, A. J. Logar, and A. W. Thomson, “Immature and mature CD8α+ dendritic cells prolong the survival of vascularized heart allografts,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 168, no. 1, pp. 143–154, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  94. D. L. Roelen, D. H. Schuurhuis, D. E. M. Van Den Boogaardt et al., “Prolongation of skin graft survival by modulation of the alloimmune response with alternatively activated dendritic cells,” Transplantation, vol. 76, no. 11, pp. 1608–1615, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  95. K. Sato, N. Yamashita, N. Yamashita, M. Baba, and T. Matsuyama, “Regulatory dendritic cells protect mice from murine acute graft-versus-host disease and leukemia relapse,” Immunity, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 367–379, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  96. H. Pêche, B. Trinité, B. Martinet, and M. C. Cuturi, “Prolongation of heart allograft survival by immature dendritic cells generated from recipient type bone marrow progenitors,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 255–267, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  97. C. Caux, C. Dezutter-Dambuyant, D. Schmit, and J. Banchereau, “GM-CSF and TNF-α cooperate in the generation of dendritic Langerhans cells,” Nature, vol. 360, no. 6401, pp. 258–261, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  98. M. Arpinati, C. L. Green, S. Heimfeld, J. E. Heuser, and C. Anasetti, “Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor mobilizes T helper 2-inducing dendritic cells,” Blood, vol. 95, no. 8, pp. 2484–2490, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  99. K. Y. Vermaelen, I. Carro-Muino, B. N. Lambrecht, and R. A. Pauwels, “Specific migratory dendritic cells rapidly transport antigen from the airways to the thoracic lymph nodes,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 193, no. 1, pp. 51–60, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  100. I. Apostolou and H. Von Boehmer, “In vivo instruction of suppressor commitment in naive T cells,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 199, no. 10, pp. 1401–1408, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  101. M. Ostroukhova, C. Seguin-Devaux, T. B. Oriss et al., “Tolerance induced by inhaled antigen involves CD4+ T cells expressing membrane-bound TGF-β and FOXP3,” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 114, no. 1, pp. 28–38, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  102. H. J. De Heer, H. Hammad, T. Soullié et al., “Essential role of lung plasmacytoid dendritic cells in preventing asthmatic reactions to harmless inhaled antigen,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 200, no. 1, pp. 89–98, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  103. K. Kretschmer, I. Apostolou, D. Hawiger, K. Khazaie, M. C. Nussenzweig, and H. von Boehmer, “Inducing and expanding regulatory T cell populations by foreign antigen,” Nature Immunology, vol. 6, no. 12, pp. 1219–1227, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  104. S. Yamazaki, K. Inaba, K. V. Tarbell, and R. M. Steinman, “Dendritic cells expand antigen-specific Foxp3+CD25+ CD4+ regulatory T cells including suppressors of alloreactivity,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 212, pp. 314–329, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  105. N. M. Tsuji and A. Kosaka, “Oral tolerance: intestinal homeostasis and antigen-specific regulatory T cells,” Trends in Immunology, vol. 29, no. 11, pp. 532–540, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  106. B. N. Lambrecht and H. Hammad, “Biology of lung dendritic cells at the origin of asthma,” Immunity, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 412–424, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  107. T. Birnberg, L. Bar-On, A. Sapoznikov et al., “Lack of conventional dendritic cells is compatible with normal development and T cell homeostasis, but causes myeloid proliferative syndrome,” Immunity, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 986–997, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  108. G. Darrasse-Jèze, S. Deroubaix, H. Mouquet et al., “Feedback control of regulatory T cell homeostasis by dendritic cells in vivo,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 206, no. 9, pp. 1853–1862, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  109. S. Paust and H. Cantor, “Regulatory T cells and autoimmune disease,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 204, pp. 195–207, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  110. Q. Tang and J. A. Bluestone, “The Foxp3+ regulatory T cell: a jack of all trades, master of regulation,” Nature Immunology, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 239–244, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  111. D. A. A. Vignali, L. W. Collison, and C. J. Workman, “How regulatory T cells work,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 523–532, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  112. M. A. Travis, B. Reizis, A. C. Melton et al., “Loss of integrin αvβ8 on dendritic cells causes autoimmunity and colitis in mice,” Nature, vol. 449, no. 7160, pp. 361–365, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  113. Y. Laouar, T. Town, D. Jeng et al., “TGF-β signaling in dendritic cells is a prerequisite for the control of autoimmune encephalomyelitis,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 105, no. 31, pp. 10865–10870, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  114. J. A. Bluestone and A. K. Abbas, “Natural versus adaptive regulatory T cells,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 253–257, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  115. C.-W. J. Lio and C.-S. Hsieh, “A two-step process for thymic regulatory T cell development,” Immunity, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 100–111, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  116. J. E. Mold, J. Michaëlsson, T. D. Burt et al., “Maternal alloantigens promote the development of tolerogenic fetal regulatory T cells in utero,” Science, vol. 322, no. 5907, pp. 1562–1565, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  117. J. M. Kim and A. Rudensky, “The role of the transcription factor Foxp3 in the development of regulatory T cells,” Immunological Reviews, vol. 212, pp. 86–98, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  118. M. V. Dhodapkar, R. M. Steinman, J. Krasovsky, C. Munz, and N. Bhardwaj, “Antigen-specific inhibition of effector T cell function in humans after injection of immature dendritic cells,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 193, no. 2, pp. 233–238, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  119. C. Reis E Sousa, “Dendritic cells in a mature age,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 476–483, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  120. R. Tisch, “Immunogenic versus tolerogenic dendritic cells: a matter of maturation,” International Reviews of Immunology, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 111–118, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  121. L. Ohl, M. Mohaupt, N. Czeloth et al., “CCR7 governs skin dendritic cell migration under inflammatory and steady-state conditions,” Immunity, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 279–288, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  122. G. Hintzen, L. Ohl, M.-L. Del Rio et al., “Induction of tolerance to innocuous inhaled antigen relies on a CCR7-dependent dendritic cell-mediated antigen transport to the bronchial lymph node,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 177, no. 10, pp. 7346–7354, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  123. M. H. Jang, N. Sougawa, T. Tanaka et al., “CCR7 is critically important for migration of dendritic cells in intestinal lamina propria to mesenteric lymph nodes,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 176, no. 2, pp. 803–810, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  124. T. Worbs, U. Bode, S. Yan et al., “Oral tolerance originates in the intestinal immune system and relies on antigen carriage by dendritic cells,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 203, no. 3, pp. 519–527, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  125. R. Förster, A. C. Davalos-Misslitz, and A. Rot, “CCR7 and its ligands: balancing immunity and tolerance,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 362–371, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  126. M. Cella, F. Facchetti, A. Lanzavecchia, and M. Colonna, “Plasmacytoid dendritic cells activated by influenza virus and CD40L drive a potent TH1 polarization,” Nature Immunology, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 305–310, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  127. H. Hadeiba, T. Sato, A. Habtezion, C. Oderup, J. Pan, and E. C. Butcher, “CCR9 expression defines tolerogenic plasmacytoid dendritic cells able to suppress acute graft-versus-host disease,” Nature Immunology, vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 1253–1260, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  128. D. Tokita, G. V. Mazariegos, A. F. Zahorchak et al., “High PD-L1/CD86 ratio on plasmacytoid dendritic cells correlates with elevated T-regulatory cells in liver transplant tolerance,” Transplantation, vol. 85, no. 3, pp. 369–377, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  129. M. Kool, M. Van Nimwegen, M. A. M. Willart et al., “An anti-inflammatory role for plasmacytoid dendritic cells in allergic airway inflammation,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 183, no. 2, pp. 1074–1082, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  130. Q. Tang and J. A. Bluestone, “Plasmacytoid DCs and Treg cells: casual acquaintance or monogamous relationship?” Nature Immunology, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 551–553, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  131. J. C. Ochando, C. Homma, Y. Yang et al., “Alloantigen-presenting plasmacytoid dendritic cells mediate tolerance to vascularized grafts,” Nature Immunology, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 652–662, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  132. M. Abe, Z. Wang, A. De Creus, and A. W. Thomson, “Plasmacytoid dendritic cell precursors induce allogeneic T-cell hyporesponsiveness and prolong heart graft survival,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 1808–1819, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  133. M. Gilliet and Y.-J. Liu, “Generation of human CD8 T regulatory cells by CD40 ligand-activated plasmacytoid dendritic cells,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 195, no. 6, pp. 695–704, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  134. A. I. Proietto, S. Van Dommelen, P. Zhou et al., “Dendritic cells in the thymus contribute to T-regulatory cell induction,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 105, no. 50, pp. 19869–19874, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  135. N. Watanabe, Y.-H. Wang, H. K. Lee et al., “Hassall's corpuscles instruct dendritic cells to induce CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells in human thymus,” Nature, vol. 436, no. 7054, pp. 1181–1185, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  136. G. Beriou, A. Moreau, and M. C. Cuturi, “Tolerogenic dendritic cells: applications for solid organ transplantation,” Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 42–47, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  137. A. W. Thomson, “Tolerogenic dendritic cells: all present and correct?” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 214–219, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  138. P. T. H. Coates, B. L. Colvin, H. Hackstein, and A. W. Thomson, “Manipulation of dendritic cells as an approach to improved outcomes in transplantation,” Expert Reviews in Molecular Medicine, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 1–21, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  139. P. T. H. Coates, B. L. Colvin, K. Kaneko, T. Taner, and A. W. Thomson, “Pharmacologic, biologic, and genetic engineering approaches to potentiation of donor-derived dendritic cell tolerogenicity,” Transplantation, vol. 75, no. 9, pp. 32S–36S, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  140. H. Hackstein and A. W. Thomson, “Dendritic cells: emerging pharmacological targets of immunosuppressive drugs,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 24–34, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  141. A. H. Enk, “Dendritic cells in tolerance induction,” Immunology Letters, vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 8–11, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  142. K. R. McCurry, B. L. Colvin, A. F. Zahorchak, and A. W. Thomson, “Regulatory dendritic cell therapy in organ transplantation,” Transplant International, vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 525–538, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  143. R. Schwartz and W. Dameshek, “Drug-induced immunological tolerance,” Nature, vol. 183, no. 4676, pp. 1682–1683, 1959. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  144. M. Moser, T. De Smedt, T. Sornasse et al., “Glucocorticoids down-regulate dendritic cell function in vitro and in vivo,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 2818–2824, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  145. L. Piemonti, P. Monti, P. Allavena et al., “Glucocorticoids affect human dendritic cell differentiation and maturation,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 162, no. 11, pp. 6473–6481, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  146. N. Vanderheyde, V. Verhasselt, M. Goldman, and F. Willems, “Inhibition of human dendritic cell functions by methylprednisolone,” Transplantation, vol. 67, no. 10, pp. 1342–1347, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  147. M. K. Matyszak, S. Citterio, and M. Rescigno, “Differential effects of corticosteroids during different stages of dendritic cell maturation,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 30, pp. 1233–1242, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  148. A. M. Woltman, J. W. de Fijter, S. W. Kamerling, L. C. Paul, M. R. Daha, and C. van Kooten, “The effect of calcineurin inhibitors and corticosteroids on the differentiation of human dendritic cells,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 1807–1812, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  149. A. E. Pedersen, E. G. W. Schmidt, M. Gad, S. S. Poulsen, and M. H. Claesson, “Dexamethasone/1α-25-dihydroxyvitamin D3-treated dendritic cells suppress colitis in the SCID T-cell transfer model,” Immunology, vol. 127, no. 3, pp. 354–364, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  150. M. Abe and A. W. Thomson, “Dexamethasone preferentially suppresses plasmacytoid dendritic cell differentiation and enhances their apoptotic death,” Clinical Immunology, vol. 118, no. 2-3, pp. 300–306, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  151. L. Piemonti, P. Monti, M. Sironi et al., “Vitamin D3 affects differentiation, maturation, and function of human monocyte-derived dendritic cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 164, no. 9, pp. 4443–4451, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  152. M. D. Griffin, W. H. Lutz, V. A. Phan, L. A. Bachman, D. J. McKean, and R. Kumar, “Potent inhibition of dendritic cell differentiation and maturation by vitamin D analogs,” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, vol. 270, no. 3, pp. 701–708, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  153. D. Raïch-Regué, L. Grau-Lopez, M. Naranjo-Gomez et al., “Stable antigen-specific T-cell hyporesponsiveness induced by tolerogenic dendritic cells from multiple sclerosis patients,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 771–782, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  154. R. A. Harry, A. E. Anderson, J. D. Isaacs, and C. M. U. Hilkens, “Generation and characterisation of therapeutic tolerogenic dendritic cells for rheumatoid arthritis,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, vol. 69, no. 11, pp. 2042–2050, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  155. A. E. Anderson, B. L. Sayers, M. A. Haniffa et al., “Differential regulation of naïve and memory CD4+ T cells by alternatively activated dendritic cells,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 84, no. 1, pp. 124–133, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  156. A. E. Anderson, D. J. Swan, B. L. Sayers et al., “LPS activation is required for migratory activity and antigen presentation by tolerogenic dendritic cells,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 243–250, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  157. K. Steinbrink, M. Wölfl, H. Jonuleit, J. Knop, and A. H. Enk, “Induction of tolerance by IL-10-treated dendritic cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 159, no. 10, pp. 4772–4780, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  158. C. Buelens, F. Willems, A. Delvaux et al., “Interleukin-10 differentially regulates B7-1 (CD80) and B7-2 (CD86) expression on human peripheral blood dendritic cells,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 2668–2672, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  159. C. Buelens, V. Verhasselt, D. De Groote, K. Thielemans, M. Goldman, and F. Willems, “Human dendritic cell responses to lipopolysaccharide and CD40 ligation are differentially regulated by interleukin-10,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 1848–1852, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  160. K. Steinbrink, H. Jonuleit, G. Müller, G. Schuler, J. Knop, and A. H. Enk, “Interleukin-10-treated human dendritic cells induce a melanoma-antigen- specific anergy in CD8+ T cells resulting in a failure to lyse tumor cells,” Blood, vol. 93, no. 5, pp. 1634–1642, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  161. K. Steinbrink, E. Graulich, S. Kubsch, J. Knop, and A. H. Enk, “CD4+ and CD8+ anergic T cells induced by interleukin-10-treated human dendritic cells display antigen-specific suppressor activity,” Blood, vol. 99, no. 7, pp. 2468–2476, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  162. A. F. Zahorchak, L. S. Kean, D. Tokita et al., “Infusion of stably immature monocyte-derived dendritic cells plus CTLA4Ig modulates alloimmune reactivity in rhesus macaques,” Transplantation, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 196–206, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  163. S. Gregori, D. Tomasoni, V. Pacciani et al., “Differentiation of type 1 T regulatory cells (Tr1) by tolerogenic DC-10 requires the IL-10-dependent ILT4/HLA-G pathway,” Blood, vol. 116, no. 6, pp. 935–944, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  164. M. K. Levings, S. Gregori, E. Tresoldi, S. Cazzaniga, C. Bonini, and M. G. Roncarolo, “Differentiation of Tr1 cells by immature dendritic cells requires IL-10 but not CD25+CD4+ Tr cells,” Blood, vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 1162–1169, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  165. T. Takayama, A. E. Morelli, N. Onai et al., “Mammalian and viral IL-10 enhance C-C chemokine receptor 5 but down-regulate C-C chemokine receptor 7 expression by myeloid dendritic cells: impact on chemotactic responses and in vivo homing ability,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 166, no. 12, pp. 7136–7143, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  166. V. Sordi, G. Bianchi, C. Buracchi et al., “Differential effects of immunosuppressive drugs on chemokine receptor CCR7 in human monocyte-derived dendritic cells: selective upregulation by rapamycin,” Transplantation, vol. 82, no. 6, pp. 826–834, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  167. Y.-R. Lee, I.-H. Yang, Y.-H. Lee et al., “Cyclosporin A and tacrolimus, but not rapamycin, inhibit MHC-restricted antigen presentation pathways in dendritic cells,” Blood, vol. 105, no. 10, pp. 3951–3955, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  168. H. Matsue, C. Yang, K. Matsue, D. Edelbaum, M. Mummert, and A. Takashima, “Contrasting impacts of immunosuppressive agents (rapamycin, FK506, cyclosporin A, and dexamethasone) on bidirectional dendritic cell-T cell interaction during antigen presentation,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 169, no. 7, pp. 3555–3564, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  169. T. Chen, J. Guo, M. Yang et al., “Cyclosporin A impairs dendritic cell migration by regulating chemokine receptor expression and inhibiting cyclooxygenase-2 expression,” Blood, vol. 103, no. 2, pp. 413–421, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  170. A. Mehling, S. Grabbe, M. Voskort, T. Schwarz, T. A. Luger, and S. Beissert, “Mycophenolate mofetil impairs the maturation and function of murine dendritic cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 165, no. 5, pp. 2374–2381, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  171. R. Matasic, A. B. Dietz, and S. Vuk-Pavlovic, “Cyclooxygenase-independent inhibition of dendritic cell maturation by aspirin,” Immunology, vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 53–60, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  172. H. Hackstein, A. E. Morelli, A. T. Larregina et al., “Aspirin inhibits in vitro maturation and in vivo immunostimulatory function of murine myeloid dendritic cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 166, no. 12, pp. 7053–7062, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  173. M. Buckland, C. B. Jago, H. Fazekasova et al., “Aspirin-treated human DCs up-regulate ILT-3 and induce hyporesponsiveness and regulatory activity in responder T cells,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 6, no. 9, pp. 2046–2059, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  174. M. Buckland and G. Lombardi, “Aspirin and the induction of tolerance by dendritic cells,” Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, vol. 188, pp. 197–213, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  175. M. A. Tepper, S. G. Nadler, J. M. Esselstyn, and K. G. Sterbenz, “Deoxyspergualin inhibits κ light chain expression in 70Z/3 pre-B cells by blocking lipopolysaccharide-induced NF-κb activation,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 155, no. 5, pp. 2427–2436, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  176. M.-M. Tiao, L. Lu, R. Tao, L. Wang, J. J. Fung, and S. Qian, “Prolongation of cardiac allograft survival by systemic administration of immature recipient dendritic cells deficient in NF-κB activity,” Annals of Surgery, vol. 241, no. 3, pp. 497–505, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  177. A. Hernandez, M. Burger, B. B. Blomberg et al., “Inhibition of NF-κB during human dendritic cell differentiation generates anergy and regulatory T-cell activity for one but not two human leukocyte antigen DR mismatches,” Human Immunology, vol. 68, no. 9, pp. 715–729, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  178. W. Grotz, S. Siebig, M. Olschewski, C. W. Strey, and K. Peter, “Low-dose aspirin therapy is associated with improved allograft function and prolonged allograft survival after kidney transplantation,” Transplantation, vol. 77, no. 12, pp. 1848–1853, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  179. Z.-X. Zhang, L. Yang, K. J. Young, B. DuTemple, and L. Zhang, “Identification of a previously unknown antigen-specific regulatory T cell and its mechanism of suppression,” Nature Medicine, vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 782–789, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  180. B. Sawitzki, C. I. Kingsley, V. Oliveira, M. Karim, M. Herber, and K. J. Wood, “IFN-γ production by alloantigen-reactive regulatory T cells is important for their regulatory function in vivo,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 201, no. 12, pp. 1925–1935, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  181. L. Zhang and A. W. Thomson, “New partners for tolerogenic dendritic cells,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 2003–2004, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  182. A. W. Thomson, H. R. Turnquist, and G. Raimondi, “Immunoregulatory functions of mTOR inhibition,” Nature Reviews Immunology, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 324–337, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  183. T. Weichhart, G. Costantino, M. Poglitsch et al., “The TSC-mTOR signaling pathway regulates the innate inflammatory response,” Immunity, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 565–577, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  184. H. R. Turnquist, G. Raimondi, A. F. Zahorchak, R. T. Fischer, Z. Wang, and A. W. Thomson, “Rapamycin-conditioned dendritic cells are poor stimulators of allogeneic CD4+ T cells, but enrich for antigen-specific Foxp3+ T regulatory cells and promote organ transplant tolerance,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 178, no. 11, pp. 7018–7031, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  185. H. R. Turnquist, T. L. Sumpter, A. Tsung et al., “IL-1β-driven ST2L expression promotes maturation resistance in rapamycin-conditioned dendritic cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 181, no. 1, pp. 62–72, 2008. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  186. H. R. Turnquist, J. Cardinal, C. Macedo et al., “mTOR and GSK-3 shape the CD4+ T-cell stimulatory and differentiation capacity of myeloid DCs after exposure to LPS,” Blood, vol. 115, no. 23, pp. 4758–4769, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  187. M. Naranjo-Gomez, D. Raïch-Regué, C. Oñate et al., “Comparative study of clinical grade human tolerogenic dendritic cells,” Journal of Translational Medicine, vol. 9, article 89, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  188. T. Matsumoto, H. Hasegawa, S. Onishi, J. Ishizaki, K. Suemori, and M. Yasukawa, “Protein kinase C inhibitor generates stable human tolerogenic dendritic cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 191, no. 5, pp. 2247–2257, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  189. A. Moreau, M. Hill, P. Thébault et al., “Tolerogenic dendritic cells actively inhibit T cells through heme oxygenase-1 in rodents and in nonhuman primates,” FASEB Journal, vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 3070–3077, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  190. S. Chitta, L. Santambrogio, and L. J. Stern, “GMCSF in the absence of other cytokines sustains human dendritic cell precursors with T cell regulatory activity and capacity to differentiate into functional dendritic cells,” Immunology Letters, vol. 116, no. 1, pp. 41–54, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  191. L. Lu, W. Li, C. Zhong et al., “Increased apoptosis of immunoreactive host cells and augmented donor leukocyte chimerism, not sustained inhibition of B7 molecule expression are associated with prolonged cardiac allograft survival in mice preconditioned with immature donor dendritic cells plus anti-CD40L mAb,” Transplantation, vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 747–757, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  192. Q. Wang, M. Zhang, G. Ding et al., “Anti-ICAM-1 antibody and CTLA-4Ig synergistically enhance immature dendritic cells to induce donor-specific immune tolerance in vivo,” Immunology Letters, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 33–42, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  193. Z. Wang, A. E. Morelli, H. Hackstein, K. Kaneko, and A. W. Thomson, “Marked inhibition of transplant vascular sclerosis by in vivo-mobilized donor dendritic cells and anti-CD154 mAb,” Transplantation, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 562–571, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  194. O. Azhipa, K. Kimizuka, A. Nakao et al., “Comparative analysis of the fate of donor dendritic cells and B cells and their influence on alloreactive T cell responses under tacrolimus immunosuppression,” Clinical Immunology, vol. 114, no. 2, pp. 199–209, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  195. A. Imai, H. Sahara, Y. Tamura et al., “Inhibition of endogenous MHC class II-restricted antigen presentation by tacrolimus (FK506) via FKBP51,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 1730–1738, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  196. C. Voigtländer, S. Rößner, E. Cierpka et al., “Dendritic cells matured with TNF can be further activated in vitro and after subcutaneous injection in vivo which converts their tolerogenicity into immunogenicity,” Journal of Immunotherapy, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 407–415, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  197. D.-S. Lim, M.-S. Kang, J.-A. Jeong, and Y.-S. Bae, “Semi-mature DC are immunogenic and not tolerogenic when inoculated at a high dose in collagen-induced arthritis mice,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 1334–1343, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  198. A. E. Morelli, A. T. Larregina, R. W. Ganster et al., “Recombinant adenovirus induces maturation of dendritic cells via an NF-κB-dependent pathway,” Journal of Virology, vol. 74, no. 20, pp. 9617–9628, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  199. J.-M. Humbert and F. Halary, “Viral and non-viral methods to genetically modify Dendritic cells,” Current Gene Therapy, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 127–136, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  200. D. Rea, D. Laface, B. Hutchins et al., “Recombinant adenovirus-transduced human dendritic cells engineered to secrete interleukin-10 (IL-10) suppress Th1-type responses while selectively activating IL-10-producing CD4+ T cells,” Human Immunology, vol. 65, no. 11, pp. 1344–1355, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  201. P. T. H. Coates, R. Krishnan, S. Kireta, J. Johnston, and G. R. Russ, “Human myeloid dendritic cells transduced with an adenoviral interleukin-10 gene construct inhibit human skin graft rejection in humanized NOD-scid chimeric mice,” Gene Therapy, vol. 8, no. 16, pp. 1224–1233, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  202. T. Takayama, H. Tahara, and A. W. Thomson, “Differential effects of myeloid dendritic cells retrovirally transduced to express mammalian or viral interleukin-10 on cytotoxic T lymphocyte and natural killer cell functions and resistance to tumor growth,” Transplantation, vol. 71, no. 9, pp. 1334–1340, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  203. W.-C. Lee, C. Zhong, S. Qian et al., “Phenotype, function, and in vivo migration and survival of allogeneic dendritic cell progenitors genetically engineered to express TGF-β,” Transplantation, vol. 66, no. 12, pp. 1810–1817, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  204. T. Takayama, K. Kaneko, A. E. Morelli, W. Li, H. Tahara, and A. W. Thomson, “Retroviral delivery of transforming growth factor-β1 to myeloid dendritic cells: inhibition of T-cell priming ability and influence on allograft survival,” Transplantation, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 112–119, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  205. C. Asiedu, S. S. Dong, A. Pereboev et al., “Rhesus monocyte-derived dendritic cells modified to over-express TGF-β1 exhibit potent veto activity,” Transplantation, vol. 74, no. 5, pp. 629–637, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  206. S. Buonocore, S. Van Meirvenne, F.-X. Demoor et al., “Dendritic cells transduced with viral interleukin 10 or Fas ligand: no evidence for induction of allotolerance in vivo,” Transplantation, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. S27–S30, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  207. W.-C. Lee, S. Qiani, Y. Wan et al., “Contrasting effects of myeloid dendritic cells transduced with an adenoviral vector encoding interleukin-10 on organ allograft and tumour rejection,” Immunology, vol. 101, no. 2, pp. 233–241, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  208. K. Kaneko, Z. Wang, S. H. Kim, A. E. Morelli, P. D. Robbins, and A. W. Thomson, “Dendritic cells genetically engineered to express IL-4 exhibit enhanced IL-12p70 production in response to CD40 ligation and accelerate organ allograft rejection,” Gene Therapy, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 143–152, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  209. J. Li, A. Meinhardt, M.-E. Roehrich et al., “Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase gene transfer prolongs cardiac allograft survival,” American Journal of Physiology, vol. 293, no. 6, pp. H3415–H3423, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  210. C. A. Bonham, L. Peng, X. Liang et al., “Marked prolongation of cardiac allograft survival by dendritic cells genetically engineered with NF-κB oligodeoxyribonucleotide decoys and adenoviral vectors encoding CTLA4-Ig,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 169, no. 6, pp. 3382–3391, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  211. L. Lu, A. Gambotto, W.-C. Lee et al., “Adenoviral delivery of CTLA4lg into myeloid dendritic cells promotes their in vitro tolerogenicity and survival in allogeneic recipients,” Gene Therapy, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 554–563, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  212. T. Takayama, A. E. Morelli, P. D. Robbins, H. Tahara, and A. W. Thomson, “Feasibility of CTLA4lg gene delivery and expression in vivo using retrovirally transduced myeloid dendritic cells that induce alloantigen-specific T cell anergy in vitro,” Gene Therapy, vol. 7, no. 15, pp. 1265–1273, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  213. R. W. O'Rourke, S.-M. Kang, J. A. Lower et al., “A dendritic cell line genetically modified to express CTLA4-Ig as a means to prolong islet allograft survival,” Transplantation, vol. 69, no. 7, pp. 1440–1446, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  214. W. Sun, Q. Wang, L. Zhang et al., “Blockade of CD40 pathway enhances the induction of immune tolerance by immature dendritic cells genetically modified to express cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 immunoglobulin,” Transplantation, vol. 76, no. 9, pp. 1351–1359, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  215. H. Matsue, K. Matsue, M. Walters, K. Okumura, H. Yagita, and A. Takashima, “Induction of antigen-specific immunosuppression by CD95L cDNA- transfected 'killer' dendritic cells,” Nature Medicine, vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 930–937, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  216. W.-P. Min, R. Gorczynski, X.-Y. Huang et al., “Dendritic cells genetically engineered to express Fas ligand induce donor-specific hyporesponsiveness and prolong allograft survival,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 164, no. 1, pp. 161–167, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  217. S. Buonocore, F. Paulart, A. Le Moine et al., “Dendritic cells overexpressing CD95 (Fas) ligand elicit vigorous allospecific T-cell responses in vivo,” Blood, vol. 101, no. 4, pp. 1469–1476, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  218. S. Buonocore, V. Flamand, N. Claessen, P. Heeringa, M. Goldman, and S. Florquin, “Dendritic cells overexpressing Fas-ligand induce pulmonary vasculitis in mice,” Clinical and Experimental Immunology, vol. 137, no. 1, pp. 74–80, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  219. J. Machen, J. Harnaha, R. Lakomy, A. Styche, M. Trucco, and N. Giannoukakis, “Antisense oligonucleotides down-regulating costimulation confer diabetes-preventive properties to nonobese diabetic mouse dendritic cells,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 173, no. 7, pp. 4331–4341, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  220. X. Liang, L. Lu, Z. Chen et al., “Administration of dendritic cells transduced with antisense oligodeoxyribonucleotides targeting CD80 or CD86 prolongs allograft survival,” Transplantation, vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 721–729, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  221. Q. Wang, Y. Liu, J. Wang et al., “Induction of allospecific tolerance by immature dendritic cells genetically modified to express soluble TNF receptor,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 177, no. 4, pp. 2175–2185, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  222. K. R. Garrod, C. K. Chang, F.-C. Liu, T. V. Brennan, R. D. Foster, and S.-M. Kang, “Targeted lymphoid homing of dendritic cells is required for prolongation of allograft survival,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 177, no. 2, pp. 863–868, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  223. M. J. Perone, S. Bertera, Z. S. Tawadrous et al., “Dendritic cells expressing transgenic galectin-1 delay onset of autoimmune diabetes in mice,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 177, no. 8, pp. 5278–5289, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  224. D. Cooper, J. M. Ilarregui, S. A. Pesoa, D. O. Croci, M. Perretti, and G. A. Rabinovich, “Multiple functional targets of the immunoregulatory activity of Galectin-1. Control of immune cell trafficking, dendritic cell physiology, and T-cell fate,” Methods in Enzymology, vol. 480, pp. 199–244, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  225. A. E. Morelli and A. W. Thomson, “Galectin-1, immune regulation and liver allograft survival,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 535–536, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  226. J. M. Ilarregui, D. O. Croci, G. A. Bianco et al., “Tolerogenic signals delivered by dendritic cells to T cells through a galectin-1-driven immunoregulatory circuit involving interleukin 27 and interleukin 10,” Nature Immunology, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 981–991, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  227. P.-L. Kuo, J.-Y. Hung, S.-K. Huang et al., “Lung cancer-derived galectin-1 mediates dendritic cell anergy through inhibitor of DNA binding 3/IL-10 signaling pathway,” Journal of Immunology, vol. 186, no. 3, pp. 1521–1530, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  228. A. Mobergslien and M. Sioud, “Galectin-1 and -3 gene silencing in immature and mature dendritic cells enhances T cell activation and interferon-γ production,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 91, no. 3, pp. 461–467, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  229. Y. Ye, S. Yan, G. Jiang et al., “Galectin-1 prolongs survival of mouse liver allografts from Flt3L-pretreated donors,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 569–579, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  230. A. Moreau, A. Noble, K. Ratnasothy et al., “Absence of Galectin-1 accelerates CD8+ T cell-mediated graft rejection,” European Journal of Immunology, vol. 42, no. 11, pp. 2881–2888, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  231. A. E. Morelli, “The immune regulatory effect of apoptotic cells and exosomes on dendritic cells: its impact on transplantation,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 254–261, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  232. A. E. Morelli and A. T. Larregina, “Apoptotic cell-based therapies against transplant rejection: role of recipient's dendritic cells,” Apoptosis, vol. 15, no. 9, pp. 1083–1097, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  233. T. H. Lee, E. D'Asti, N. Magnus, K. Al-Nedawi, B. Meehan, and J. Rak, “Microvesicles as mediators of intercellular communication in cancer—the emerging science of cellular 'debris',” Seminars in Immunopathology, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 455–467, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  234. Z. Wang, W. J. Shufesky, A. Montecalvo, S. J. Divito, A. T. Larregina, and A. E. Morelli, “In situ-targeting of dendritic cells with donor-derived apoptopic cells restrains indirect allorecognition and ameliorates allograft vasculopathy,” PLoS ONE, vol. 4, no. 3, Article ID e4940, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  235. M. Garrovillo, A. Ali, H. A. Depaz et al., “Induction of transplant tolerance with immunodominant allopeptide-pulsed host lymphoid and myeloid dendritic cells,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 129–137, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  236. T. Taner, H. Hackstein, Z. Wang, A. E. Morelli, and A. W. Thomson, “Rapamycin-treated, alloantigen-pulsed host dendritic cells induce Ag-specific T cell regulation and prolong graft survival,” American Journal of Transplantation, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 228–236, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  237. P. Correale, G. Campoccia, K. Y. Tsang et al., “Recruitment of dendritic cells and enhanced antigen-specific immune reactivity in cancer patients treated with hr-GM-CSF (Molgramostim) and hr-IL-2: results from a phase Ib clinical trial,” European Journal of Cancer, vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 892–902, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  238. B. G. Redman, A. E. C. Alfred E. Chang, J. W. Joel Whitfield et al., “Phase Ib trial assessing autologous, tumor-pulsed dendritic cells as a vaccine administered with or without IL-2 in patients with metastatic melanoma,” Journal of Immunotherapy, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 591–598, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  239. M. V. Dhodapkar and R. M. Steinman, “Antigen-bearing immature dendritic cells induce peptide-specific CD8+ regulatory T cells in vivo in humans,” Blood, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 174–177, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  240. R. Thomas, S. Street, N. Ramnoruth et al., “Safety and preliminary evidence of efficacy in a phase I clinical trial of autologous tolerising dendritic cells exposed to citrullinated peptides (Rheumavax) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis,” Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, vol. 70, supplement 3, article 169, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  241. A. Moreau, E. Varey, G. Bériou et al., “Tolerogenic dendritic cells and negative vaccination in transplantation: from rodents to clinical trials,” Frontiers in Immunology, vol. 3, article 218, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  242. P. M. Emmer, J. Van Der Vlag, G. J. Adema, and L. B. Hilbrands, “Dendritic cells activated by lipopolysaccharide after dexamethasone treatment induce donor-specific allograft hyporesponsiveness,” Transplantation, vol. 81, no. 10, pp. 1451–1459, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  243. G. Yu, X. Xu, D. V. Minh, E. D. Kilpatrick, and C. L. Xian, “NK cells promote transplant tolerance by killing donor antigen-presenting cells,” Journal of Experimental Medicine, vol. 203, no. 8, pp. 1851–1858, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus