TH1 vs. TH2 Redux

M. Doherty M_Doherty at NIH.gov
Tue Aug 1 17:43:45 EST 1995


In article <3vl7fl$rq6 at netnews.upenn.edu>, David Peritt
<Peritt_d at a1.mscf.upenn.edu> wrote:

> In article <M_Doherty-3107951212390001 at db454.niaid.nih.gov> M. Doherty,
> M_Doherty at NIH.gov writes:
> >>         (1) At what point does a CD4+ cell commit to a TH1 vs. a TH2
> >> response?  Does it "commit," or is the process reversible?
> 
> 
> This topic was dealt with in various workshops at the recent congress.  I
> think Anne O'Garra put it best.  The commitment starts very early but is
> reversible until the cell is activated several times in the proper LK
> milieu then it becomes fixed.  This explains why some investigators can
> switch an existing response.  The switch is usually an outgrowth of
> previously unstimulated cells.  Since most mouse people work at the
> polyclonal/bulk level.  Us humanists who use clones do not see switching
> in established clones.  The LK must be there early but commitment may
> take some time to fully reach permanance.

I had the talks at the conference in mind, when I wrote my comments, but
OTOH, I am not yet ready to dismiss reports such as the ones from Jan de
Vries' group or Serigio Romagnani's group, suggesting that even (human)
clones can be at least temporarily altered in the cytokine profile.  There
was also some discussion at the meeting about inhibition of IFN-g
secretion from Th1 (mouse) clones.  Sorry, cant remember whose work.

I can't remember the Romagnani paper off the top of my head, (or even if
the results were merely bought up in a discussion) but the DNAX one is:
Yssel et al. 1994 Int Imm 6:1091

Cheers, Mark



More information about the Immuno mailing list