Myeloid Blood CD11c(+) Dendritic Cells and Monocyte-derived Dendritic Cells Differ in Their Ability to Stimulate T Lymphocytes
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Dendritic cells (DCs) initiate and direct immune responses. Recent studies have defined different DC populations, therefore we undertook this study comparing 2 types of myeloid DCs: blood CD11c(+) DCs and in vitro monocyte-derived DCs (Mo-DCs), which are both candidates as cellular adjuvants for cancer immunotherapy. Blood CD11c(+) DCs were prepared by cell sorting from peripheral blood mononuclear cells cultured overnight in RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with autologous or pooled AB serum. Mo-DCs were prepared in the same medium using granulocyte macrophage-colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF)/interleukin 4 (IL-4) and differentiated/activated with lipopolysaccharide or monocyte-conditioned medium (ActMo-DCs). Morphologically, differences between the DC preparations were noted both at a light and and electron microscopic level. Blood CD11c(+) DCs expressed similar levels of HLA-DR, CD40, CD86, and CD83 as Mo-DCs. CD209 was present on Mo-DCs but not on blood CD11c(+) DCs. Blood CD11c(+) DCs generated a lower proliferative mixed leukocyte response (MLR) than Mo-DCs. Blood CD11c(+) DCs loaded with 0.1 microg/mL tetanus toxoid (TT)-generated greater T lymphocyte proliferative responses than did Mo-DCs or ActMo-DCs, but when loaded with higher TT concentrations no difference in T lymphocyte proliferative response was observed. Keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH)-loaded blood CD11c(+) DCs generated greater T lymphocyte proliferative responses than Mo-DCs or ActMo-DCs. Allogeneic MLR- or KLH-specific responses induced by blood CD11c(+) DCs generated more Th1 effectors than the responses induced by Mo-DCs or ActMo-DCs. These data establish several differences in the properties of blood CD11c(+) DCs, Mo-DCs, and ActMo-DCs, which suggest that blood DCs merit further consideration as DC preparations for clinical programs are evolved.
Zhao C, Jia B, Jiang Y, Shike H, Annageldiyev C, Cioccio J Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2025; 74(4):117.
PMID: 39998689 PMC: 11861774. DOI: 10.1007/s00262-025-03971-y.
Activation of the Coagulation Cascade as a Universal Danger Sign.
Starikova E, Mammedova J, Rubinstein A, Sokolov A, Kudryavtsev I Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2025; 47(2).
PMID: 39996829 PMC: 11854423. DOI: 10.3390/cimb47020108.
NY-ESO-1 antigen: A promising frontier in cancer immunotherapy.
Alsalloum A, Shevchenko J, Sennikov S Clin Transl Med. 2024; 14(9):e70020.
PMID: 39275923 PMC: 11399778. DOI: 10.1002/ctm2.70020.
Siegel M, Padamsey A, Bolender A, Hargreaves P, Fraidling J, Ducret A Front Immunol. 2024; 15:1406804.
PMID: 39229274 PMC: 11368763. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1406804.
Vaccine approaches to treat urothelial cancer.
Giudice G, Sonpavde G Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2024; 20(1):2379086.
PMID: 39043175 PMC: 11268260. DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2024.2379086.