Berke G, Rosen D
Transplant Proc. 1987 Feb;19(1 Pt 1):412-6.
We examined whether in vivo-primed, alloimmune, peritoneal exudate CTL obtained directly from the animal kill TC by perforating their membranes with C-like lesions produced by P1 or P2 originating in cytolytic granules of the CTL. In control experiments lytic granules were isolated from the formerly lytic CTLL-2 line as well as from Con A-activated lymphoblasts but not from the in vivo-primed CTL. The use of anti-P1 of CTLL-2 origin supports the above results in that immunoblots were positive with CTLL-2 extracts and isolated granules thereof but negative with extracts and isolated (nonlytic) granules from in vivo primed CTL; immunofluorescence of permeabilized cells gave similar results. We observed typical "ring structures" on EL4 membranes attacked by Ab + C as well as after exposure to lytic granules extracted from the formerly lytic CTLL-2 line; however, no such "structures" were observed after attack by the in vivo-primed CTL. These results are at variance with the recent suggestion of a common lytic mechanism--employed by CTL--of secreted lytic granules containing P1 (and P2) thereof that acts analogously to C9. An alternative mechanism for CTL-induced lysis not involving initial perforation of the TC membrane by 160A "holes" (Poly P1) has been presented elsewhere. It is important to note that our results with in vivo-primed CTL do not preclude involvement of a secreted, pore (channel)-forming agent(s) that is not observed by negative staining EM.
我们研究了直接从处死动物获得的体内致敏、同种免疫的腹膜渗出细胞毒性T淋巴细胞(CTL)是否通过CTL溶细胞颗粒中产生的P1或P2所导致的类似补体C的损伤来穿孔靶细胞(TC)膜从而杀伤TC。在对照实验中,溶细胞颗粒从先前具有溶细胞活性的CTL - 2细胞系以及从刀豆蛋白A激活的淋巴母细胞中分离得到,但未从体内致敏的CTL中分离得到。使用源于CTL - 2的抗P1抗体支持上述结果,即免疫印迹对CTL - 2提取物及其分离的颗粒呈阳性,但对体内致敏CTL的提取物和分离的(非溶细胞性)颗粒呈阴性;通透细胞的免疫荧光也得到类似结果。我们在EL4膜上观察到,在抗体加补体(Ab + C)攻击后以及暴露于从先前具有溶细胞活性的CTL - 2细胞系提取的溶细胞颗粒后会出现典型的“环状结构”;然而,在体内致敏的CTL攻击后未观察到此类“结构”。这些结果与最近提出的CTL所采用的一种共同溶细胞机制不同,该机制认为含有P1(和P2)的分泌溶细胞颗粒的作用类似于补体C9。 elsewhere已提出了一种CTL诱导细胞溶解的替代机制,该机制不涉及160A“孔”(多聚P1)对靶细胞膜的初始穿孔。需要注意的是,我们关于体内致敏CTL的结果并不排除存在一种通过负染电子显微镜未观察到的分泌性孔(通道)形成剂的参与。