These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Chlamydia trachomatis infection alters the development of memory CD8+ T cells.
    Author: Loomis WP, Starnbach MN.
    Journal: J Immunol; 2006 Sep 15; 177(6):4021-7. PubMed ID: 16951365.
    Abstract:
    The obligate intracellular bacterium Chlamydia trachomatis is the most common cause of bacterial sexually transmitted disease in the United States and the leading cause of preventable blindness worldwide. Prior exposure to C. trachomatis has been shown to provide incomplete protection against subsequent infection. One possible explanation for the limited immunity afforded by prior C. trachomatis infection is poor activation of Chlamydia-specific memory CD8+ T cells. In this study, we examined the development of CD8+ memory T cell responses specific for the Chlamydia Ag CrpA. The percentage of CrpA63-71-specific T cells expressing an effector memory T cell phenotype (IL-7R+ CD62low) was dramatically diminished in mice immunized with C. trachomatis, compared with mice immunized with vaccinia virus expressing the CrpA protein. These alterations in memory T cell development were correlated with a significant reduction in the capacity of convalescent mice to mount an enhanced recall response to Chlamydia Ags, compared with the primary response. CrpA-specific memory T cells primed during VacCrpA infection also failed to respond to a challenge with Chlamydia. We therefore investigated whether C. trachomatis infection might have a global inhibitory effect on CD8+ T cell activation by coinfecting mice with C. trachomatis and Listeria monocytogenes and we found that the activation of Listeria-specific naive and memory CD8+ T cells was reduced in the presence of C. trachomatis. Together, these results suggest that Chlamydia is able to alter the development of CD8+ T cell responses during both primary and secondary infection, perhaps accounting for the incomplete protection provided by prior Chlamydia infection.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]