The first stage of elucidation of pathways by which the VIP–VPAC
2 neuroimmune axis regulates the nature of tissue compartmental immune responses consisted of in vitro studies of effects of VIP on numerous functions of cultured immune cells (
5). Recognition of the capacity of the VIP–VPAC
2 axis to alter the normal ratio of Th1/Th2 activities, and thereby subsequent effector events, led to the development of T cell-selective VPAC
2 TG mice and VPAC
2-null (KO) mice (
10,
11). The findings that VPAC
2 TG mice had an increased Th2:Th1 ratio, leading to high serum levels of IgE, heightened IgE Ab responses, eosinophilia, and elevated immediate-type hypersensitivity reactions, whereas VPAC
2 KO mice had a decreased Th2:Th1 ratio, resulting in strikingly augmented DTH and diminished immediate-type hypersensitivity strongly supported a central role for the VIP–VPAC
2 axis as a major determinant of the nature of immune effector responses. What remained to be established was whether and how regulation of secretion of VIP by Th2 cells and of VPAC
2 signal transduction in Th2 cells contributed substantially to the immune effector outcome. The present studies were designed to begin to answer these questions and to delineate possible contributions to net VPAC
2 signal transduction in T cells of a newly recognized and functionally different T cell SD splice-variant of mouse VPAC
2.
These initial investigations were conducted in a model Th2-type D10G4.1 cell with low background expression of WT VPAC
2, because native Th2 cells are the main source of immune VIP and show the greatest functional responses to VPAC
2-transduced signals (
3). Transfectants were created that consistently expressed similar levels of mRNA and membrane protein for WT and SD mouse VPAC
2 ( and ). The first point demonstrated in this system was that both types of transfectants generated and secreted similar levels of VIP that established nanomolar concentrations of extracellular VIP (). The remaining studies thus focused on transduction of VIP signals by the two forms of mouse VPAC
2. That the VIP secreted by D10G4.1 Th2 cells expressing WT VPAC
2 acts as an autocrine and possibly juxtacrine stimulus capable of signaling through WT VPAC
2 to enhance IL-4 generation was shown by the very significant suppression of IL-4 secretion when VIPase eliminated endogenous VIP (). In contrast, IL-4 generation by D10G4.1 Th2 cells expressing SD VPAC
2 was significantly lower than that by the WT VPAC
2 transfectants and did not decrease as a result of VIPase treatment, indicating a lack of influence of the VIP–SD VPAC
2 axis that apparently is attributable to ineffective transduction of stimulatory VIP signals by the SD VPAC
2. To examine this difference further at VIP concentrations exceeding those attainable from the Th2 cells but documented in some immunological inflammatory states, the effects of signals from WT and SD VPAC
2 were examined in two different protocols. In the first, 10
−8 M to 3 × 10
−7 M exogenous VIP enhanced significantly secretion of IL-4 by WT VPAC
2 transfectants, whereas 3 × 10
−8 M to 3 × 10
−7 M exogenous VIP inhibited secretion of IL-4 by SD VPAC
2 transfectants (). In the second protocol, IL-4 generation by anti-CD3 plus anti-CD28-stimulated transfectants expressing WT and SD VPAC
2 together at different ratios was enhanced by WT VPAC
2-predominant mixtures, not enhanced (unchanged) at WT to SD VPAC
2 ratios of 0.5 to 2, and suppressed slightly by the higher concentration of VIP when the ratio was 4 (). Thus the SD splice-variant of VPAC
2 suppresses IL-4-enhancing VIP signals from WT VPAC
2 but does not suppress IL-4 generation as much below control levels in a mixture as it did when expressed alone.
To begin delineation of the signaling pathways used by SD VPAC
2, as well as WT VPAC
2, to regulate IL-4 generation, the transcription factors c-Maf and Jun B that are known to be involved in VIP enhancement of IL-4 generation (
16) were examined in a series of VPAC
2 transfectants. The VIP–WT VPAC
2 axis, but not the VIP–SD VPAC
2 axis, increased nuclear levels of c-Maf and Jun B proteins and of active Jun B as quantified respectively by Western blots and a plate-bound consensus oligonucleotide-active Jun B-anti-Jun B Ab assay ( and ). In WT plus SD VPAC
2 cotransfectants, VIP had no apparent effect on nuclear levels of c-Maf and Jun B proteins, and much less effect on nuclear levels of active Jun B than in WT VPAC
2-only transfectants, suggesting competitive interactions between the two forms of VPAC
2 in the same signaling pathway.
The next logical step to complete these investigations will be to quantify separately the expression of WT and SD VPAC2 in native CD4 T cells under a range of conditions representing states in which the VIP–VPAC2 axis significantly influences T cell-directed immune effector reactions. These studies also could include CD4 T cells from VPAC2 TG and VPAC2-null (KO) mice to assess, respectively, any influence of elevated levels of WT VPAC2 on those of SD VPAC2 and dependence of expression of SD VPAC2 on that of WT VPAC2. As the ratio of these two forms of VPAC2 appears to determine the net effect of VIP, mechanisms controlling expression of the SD VPAC2 are important targets of research and possibly therapeutic intervention. Initial quantification of the two forms of VPAC2 relied on real-time PCR and Western blots of cellular proteins, but it would be desirable also to analyze the orientation of SD VPAC2 in plasma membranes. That only a 14-aa deletion in a transmembrane domain distinguished one form from the other suggested a daunting problem for immunochemical quantification. However, recent results of structural studies indicate that the C-terminal tail of the SD VPAC2 is extracellular rather than cytoplasmic as for the WT VPAC2. Thus, application of Abs that recognize the native C-terminal tail or a C-terminal epitope tag will permit studies of expression of each form separately in intact cells by labeling without and with permeabilization of the plasma membrane. In addition, the possibility must be considered that signal-transducing proteins interact with a different domain of SD VPAC2 than WT VPAC2. All such data will be integrated into a tentative model depicting differences between T cell SD VPAC2 and WT VPAC2.