Voie d'immunisation et séquence d'administration de l ... - TEL

Voie d'immunisation et séquence d'administration de l ... - TEL Voie d'immunisation et séquence d'administration de l ... - TEL

tel.archives.ouvertes.fr
from tel.archives.ouvertes.fr More from this publisher
27.06.2013 Views

tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013 This high background may prevent the visualization of a small increase in these conditions. Repeating this experiment using alternative restimulation strategies, or analysis at earlier time points is required to validate these results. Figure 48. Type I IFN has a limited action on antigen-specific T cells. 5x10 3 CD45.1/2 WT OT-I and 5x10 3 CD45.2/2 IFNAR -/- OT-I were transferred into IFNAR -/- CD45.1/1 recipients. The day after, mice were immunized i.d. with 5x10 5 K bm1 mOva splenocytes. They received 100µg of poly I:C on day 3. On day 7, enrichment was performed using a CD45.2 antibody to detect the 2 populations of OT-I. After ex vivo restimulation, IFNγ intracellular staining was done. The percentages of WT and IFNAR -/- CD8 + OT-I cells producing IFNγ (A) as well as the geometric fluorescent mean for IFNγ (B) are reported. Together these data demonstrate that the timing-dependent differential effects of poly I:C are at least partially type I IFN-dependent. This adjuvant clearly acts at the level of antigen- presenting DCs by modulating their survival and/or migration, maturation state, ability to cross-present antigen and even the persistence of antigen inside them. Type I IFN might also play a critical role at the level of responding T cells but additional work will be needed to confirm this. III. HOW TO CHOOSE THE OPTIMAL TIMING FOR ADJUVANT DELIVERY? Our data demonstrate that the optimal timing for adjuvant delivery is dependent on the route of immunization. We first showed that the early administration of adjuvant abrogates subsequent cross-priming (I). These results were followed by a more detailed study that attempted to understand the mechanisms underlying the differential effects of poly I:C and 130

tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013 the type I IFN that are produced upon adjuvant delivery on immune response. These findings remain preliminary and additional work is needed to confirm our results. Nevertheless, we convincingly demonstrated that poly I:C acts at the level of antigen uptake and cross- presentation by cDCs (II). When adjuvant is delivered early, it leads to DC maturation, resulting in the downregulation of antigen uptake; DC migration to lymph nodes, which removes DCs that engulf antigen from the site of injection; and/or DC death, which also may explain the disappearance of cross-presenting DCs. The combination of these effects creates an environment that is no longer optimal for cross-presentation. In contrast, if adjuvant stimulation occurred with a short delay, once DCs have engulfed antigen, the beneficial effects of adjuvant on maturation and migration to the lymph nodes could act to effectively promote cross-priming. Following from these results, we returned to our comparison between the two routes of immunization and optimal timing of adjuvant delivery. Poly I:C acts on antigen uptake, DC maturation and antigen presentation, and it is clear that the kinetics of these steps vary depending on the route of immunization (Figure 32). As adjuvant delivery should be well coordinated with antigen uptake and presentation in order to enhance these processes, this may explain why the optimal timing for its delivery is delayed upon i.d. immunization. Taken these data together, we propose the following model to explain the differential impact of adjuvant delivery, with regards to the route of immunization (Figure 49). Systemic dissemination (represented by i.v. injection) of cell-associated antigen allows for capture and cross-presentation within one day. Within this kinetic, administration of poly I:C on day 1 post-immunization serves to stimulate cross-presenting DCs and enhances priming (Figure 49A). In contrast, localized delivery of cell-associated antigen, as seen with i.d. immunization, requires three days for efficient antigen uptake and presentation. Consequently, administration of poly I:C on day 1 results in “pre-mature” DCs, which are unable to cross-present cell-associated antigen (Figure 49B). If instead, adjuvant administration is performed on day 3 post-immunization, there has been sufficient time for uptake and cross-presentation and the pro-maturation/pro-migration effects of the adjuvant result in the enhancement of cross-priming (Figure 49C). Page 131 of 256

tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013<br />

the type I IFN that are produced upon adjuvant <strong>de</strong>livery on immune response. These findings<br />

remain preliminary and additional work is nee<strong>de</strong>d to confirm our results. Nevertheless, we<br />

convincingly <strong>de</strong>monstrated that poly I:C acts at the level of antigen uptake and cross-<br />

presentation by cDCs (II). When adjuvant is <strong>de</strong>livered early, it leads to DC maturation,<br />

resulting in the downregulation of antigen uptake; DC migration to lymph no<strong>de</strong>s, which<br />

removes DCs that engulf antigen from the site of injection; and/or DC <strong>de</strong>ath, which also may<br />

explain the disappearance of cross-presenting DCs. The combination of these effects creates<br />

an environment that is no longer optimal for cross-presentation. In contrast, if adjuvant<br />

stimulation occurred with a short <strong>de</strong>lay, once DCs have engulfed antigen, the beneficial<br />

effects of adjuvant on maturation and migration to the lymph no<strong>de</strong>s could act to effectively<br />

promote cross-priming.<br />

Following from these results, we r<strong>et</strong>urned to our comparison b<strong>et</strong>ween the two routes of<br />

immunization and optimal timing of adjuvant <strong>de</strong>livery. Poly I:C acts on antigen uptake, DC<br />

maturation and antigen presentation, and it is clear that the kin<strong>et</strong>ics of these steps vary<br />

<strong>de</strong>pending on the route of immunization (Figure 32). As adjuvant <strong>de</strong>livery should be well<br />

coordinated with antigen uptake and presentation in or<strong>de</strong>r to enhance these processes, this<br />

may explain why the optimal timing for its <strong>de</strong>livery is <strong>de</strong>layed upon i.d. immunization. Taken<br />

these data tog<strong>et</strong>her, we propose the following mo<strong>de</strong>l to explain the differential impact of<br />

adjuvant <strong>de</strong>livery, with regards to the route of immunization (Figure 49). Systemic<br />

dissemination (represented by i.v. injection) of cell-associated antigen allows for capture and<br />

cross-presentation within one day. Within this kin<strong>et</strong>ic, administration of poly I:C on day 1<br />

post-immunization serves to stimulate cross-presenting DCs and enhances priming (Figure<br />

49A). In contrast, localized <strong>de</strong>livery of cell-associated antigen, as seen with i.d.<br />

immunization, requires three days for efficient antigen uptake and presentation.<br />

Consequently, administration of poly I:C on day 1 results in “pre-mature” DCs, which are<br />

unable to cross-present cell-associated antigen (Figure 49B). If instead, adjuvant<br />

administration is performed on day 3 post-immunization, there has been sufficient time for<br />

uptake and cross-presentation and the pro-maturation/pro-migration effects of the adjuvant<br />

result in the enhancement of cross-priming (Figure 49C).<br />

Page 131 of 256

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!