High-Avidity CTL Exploit Two Complementary Mechanisms to Provide Better Protection Against Viral Infection Than Low-Avidity CTL
Michael A. Derby, Martha A. Alexander‐Miller, Richard Tse, Jay A. Berzofsky
Abstract
Michael A. Derby, Martha A. Alexander‐Miller, Richard Tse, Jay A. Berzofsky
Abstract
Previously, we observed that high-avidity CTL are much more effective in vivo than low-avidity CTL in elimination of infected cells, but the mechanisms behind their superior activity remained unclear. In this study, we identify two complementary mechanisms: 1) high-avidity CTL lyse infected cells earlier in the course of a viral infection by recognizing lower Ag densities than those distinguished by low-avidity CTL and 2) they initiate lysis of target cells more rapidly at any given Ag density. Alternative mechanisms were excluded, including: 1) the possibility that low-avidity CTL might control virus given more time (virus levels remained as high at 6 days following transfer as at 3 days) and 2) that differences in efficacy might be correlated with homing ability. Furthermore, adoptive transfer of high- and low-avidity CTL into SCID mice demonstrated that transfer of a 10-fold greater amount of low-avidity CTL could only partially compensate for their decreased ability to eliminate infected cells. Thus, we conclude that high-avidity CTL exploit two complementary mechanisms that combine to prevent the spread of virus within the animal: earlier recognition of infected cells when little viral protein has been made and more rapid lysis of infected cells.
OpenAlex reports 204 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Previously, we observed that high-avidity CTL are much more effective in vivo than low-avidity CTL in elimination of infected cells, but the mechanisms behind their superior activity remained unclear. In this study, we identify two complementary mechanisms: 1) high-avidity CTL lyse infected cells earlier in the course of a viral infection by recognizing lower Ag densities than those distinguished by low-avidity CTL and 2) they initiate lysis of target cells more rapidly at any given Ag density. Alternative mechanisms were excluded, including: 1) the possibility that low-avidity CTL might control virus given more time (virus levels remained as high at 6 days following transfer as at 3 days) and 2) that differences in efficacy might be correlated with homing ability. Furthermore, adoptive transfer of high- and low-avidity CTL into SCID mice demonstrated that transfer of a 10-fold greater amount of low-avidity CTL could only partially compensate for their decreased ability to eliminate infected cells. Thus, we conclude that high-avidity CTL exploit two complementary mechanisms that combine to prevent the spread of virus within the animal: earlier recognition of infected cells when little viral protein has been made and more rapid lysis of infected cells.
Key concepts: Avidity, CTL*, Virology, Adoptive cell transfer, Biology, Cytolysis, Virus, Immunology