GA is used as an immunomodulatory treatment in patients with MS. It is thought to deviate GA-specific CD4
+ T cell responses toward the Th2 phenotype, thereby causing bystander suppression of the pathogenic myelin-specific Th1 responses (
21–
27). However, direct immunophenotypic analysis of GA-induced responses has not been carried out thus far. In the present study, we characterized the immunophenotype of GA-induced T cell responses.
Using CFSE-based flow cytometric proliferation assays, we detected T cell responses to GA in both healthy individuals and MS patients, as described in previous studies (
23,
24). However, we observed significant differences in the phenotypic subsets of T cells responding to this drug. Whereas the CD4
+ GA-specific T cell responses were comparable in all groups, the CD8
+ responses were significantly lower in untreated MS patients (Figure ). To our knowledge, this is the first direct immunophenotypic evidence of a CD8
+ proliferative response to GA.
Following treatment with GA, the GA-induced CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses displayed differential regulation. The overall pattern of CD4+ responses appeared to be a transient upregulation around the 3-month time point followed by a gradual decline (Figure ; Table ). The CD8+ T cell responses, however, showed distinct upregulation after treatment and were significantly higher compared with baseline levels, more comparable to those seen in healthy individuals (Figures and ). Since CD4+ responses to GA show temporal downregulation, in contrast to upregulation of CD8+ responses, it is possible that the immunomodulatory effect of this drug may be mediated, at least in part, by the GA-induced CD8+ T cells.
Prior studies have used traditional
3H-thymidine–based in vitro proliferation assays that measure antigen-induced incorporation of
3H-thymidine in proliferating cell cultures. Using these assay procedures, we found a transient increase in GA-specific bulk proliferation followed by a decline during the treatment course (Figure ), similar to previously reported observations (
24,
25). Thus, the temporal dynamics of
3H-thymidine–based proliferation appears to predominantly mirror the CD4
+ GA-specific T cell responses. Whereas dividing CD8
+ T cells would undoubtedly incorporate
3H-thymidine during DNA synthesis, it is important to note that the enhanced CD8
+ T cell responses are not reflected in bulk proliferation. The CD8
+ T cell population forms a minor component of the overall proliferating fraction due to the high CD4/CD8 ratio. This is especially true in patients with MS, who may show a skewed CD4 preponderance (
36). As an example, in Figure a, at the 3-month time point for patient no. MS1, we observed a prominent GA-specific CD8
+ T cell response with a proliferating fraction of 21.32%. However, this represents only 3.08% of the total live cells in culture, whereas the concurrent CD4
+ response with a proliferating fraction of 42.43% represents 26.21% of the total live cells. Thus, the CD4
+ T cell response contributes a far greater proportion of the bulk proliferation. To detect shifts in the CD8
+ responses, it is essential to specifically analyze that population of T cells. Additionally, the CFSE-based proliferation assay measures cumulative proliferation over the entire culture period, whereas the
3H-thymidine–based assay measures incorporation only over the last 12–18 hours of culture. These factors explain why a previous report using comparative bulk proliferation assays before and after depletion of CD8
+ T cells from untreated MS patients did not detect significant differences, leading to the interpretation that there are no CD8
+ responses to GA (
23). However, it is still possible that such a difference may be detected in fractionated cells from healthy individuals or treated MS patients who have a robust CD8
+ T cell response. This emphasizes the need to specifically evaluate this subset of cells by using direct phenotypic assays or pre-sorted populations of cells.
Several investigators have reported that MS patients have defective suppressor function in their CD8
+ T cell compartment (
36–
38). A regulatory role for CD8
+ T cells has been demonstrated in EAE (
39–
42). Upregulation of such suppressive ability has also been seen following combined therapy with etretinate and IFN-β1b (
43). From these studies, it is tempting to speculate that the diminished CD8
+ T cell response to GA in untreated MS patients may be reflective of the global defect of regulatory cells in this subset. As a corollary, treatment with GA may function, in part, through the induction and restoration of this regulatory population of cells.
To investigate the functional profile of GA-induced T cell responses, we performed flow cytometric staining on GA-responsive cells as well as molecular evaluation of flow-sorted populations of GA-reactive CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells (Figures –). There were changes in the cytokine profiles of post-treatment GA-specific cells. IL-4 was detected predominantly in post-treatment CD4
+ T cells. This finding corroborates previous reports that have shown a shift toward the Th0/Th2 phenotype of long-term T cell lines derived from treated patients and in ELISPOT assays performed on bulk PBMC specimens (
24–
26).
GA-reactive CD8
+ T cells were positive for IFN-γ protein and message (Figures –). One previous report, using ELISPOT assays performed on one GA-treated patient, suggested that GA-specific IFN-γ production may be prominent in the CD8
+ subset (
26). Using short-term cytokine flow cytometry assays (6–8 hours of culture), we have also observed such GA-specific IFN-γ production in CD8
+ T cells at the protein level in some patients (unpublished observations). Thus, GA treatment appears to induce an IFN-γ–secreting CD8
+ T cell response. Inter-estingly, the suppressive activity of CD8
+ T cells in mitogen-driven in vitro proliferation assays is thought to be mediated by IFN-γ secretion (
37).
We also detected the presence of TGF-β message in GA-specific CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells (Figure ). This is a significant finding, as TGF-β has been shown to be an important mediator of bystander suppressive effects of Th2/Th3–type responses in EAE (
44–
46). However, TNF-α was also detected in these cells, which may be pro- or antiinflammatory in different systems. Thus, the overall cytokine profile of GA-induced CD8
+ T cells appears to have a component that may mediate regulatory inhibition of disease-mediating responses.
Of note, we did not observe statistically significant changes in the MBP-specific proliferative responses in these patients during the treatment course, although individual patients showed mild variation. This finding is consistent with previous reports (
24). Thus, at least in the PBMC compartment, there does not appear to be an obvious suppression of the MBP-specific response. It is possible that GA-specific T cells exert their regulatory effect locally at the site of tissue damage or through cross-reactive competition in these microenvironments. Further investigation is required to determine the exact mechanisms and the extent to which GA-specific CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells may play a role in the modulatory effect of this drug.
To summarize, our observations provide the first direct immunophenotypic evidence, to our knowledge, of the presence of GA-induced CD8+ T cell responses. These responses are deficient in untreated MS patients and are upregulated in patients on GA therapy. The overall cytokine profiles of GA-induced responses are suggestive of, but do not provide conclusive evidence for, a regulatory functional profile. These findings support the notion that GA-induced CD8+ T cells may play an important regulatory role in the immunomodulatory effects of this drug and warrant further characterization. Finally, the upregulation of CD8+ T cell responses may serve as a useful marker in the monitoring of GA therapy.