2011
DOI: 10.1038/bmt.2011.22
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

G-CSF downregulates natural killer cell-mediated cytotoxicity in donors for hematopoietic SCT

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
18
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
6
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Meanwhile, in accordance with a previous report,8, 9 we found that the cytotoxicity of overall NK cells, CD56 bri NK subsets as well as CD56 dim NK subsets in GPB was significantly decreased compared to that in NGPB, which could not be rescued by IL‐2 stimulation. Based on the data in this study, we propose the following hypotheses.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Meanwhile, in accordance with a previous report,8, 9 we found that the cytotoxicity of overall NK cells, CD56 bri NK subsets as well as CD56 dim NK subsets in GPB was significantly decreased compared to that in NGPB, which could not be rescued by IL‐2 stimulation. Based on the data in this study, we propose the following hypotheses.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…However, the predictive value of KIR ligand mismatch on clinical outcome has been inconsistent among different transplantation centres utilizing different protocols 6, 7. One of the most important reasons would be the in vivo application of G‐CSF for donor stem cell preparation that decreased the cytotoxicity of NK cells 8, 9. However, previous studies have considered only the cytotoxic roles of NK cells under haploidentical transplantation while neglecting the immune regulatory effect of NK cells.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have demonstrated that G-CSF mobilizes regulatory T and NK cells into the peripheral blood, impairs T and NK TH1-type reactions and produces an immune-suppressive environment. [33][34][35][36][37][38][39] All patients in our cohort received G-CSF post transplant, starting from day +6 till engraftment. Interestingly our results align with those by Le Blanc et al…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…62 No impact 64 DC T-and NK-cell priming, temper T-cell alloreactivity, may impair GVL efficacy Induced IL-4 and IL-10 production 42,44 Increased mobilization of pDC and regulatory mDC compared with G-CSF. 62,63 NK Immune recovery, GVL Impaired cytotoxicity 55 Increased mobilization compared with G-CSF. 62 Reduced mobilization 63 Abbreviations: mDC = monocyte-derived dendritic cells; pDC = plasmacytoid-derived dendritic cells; NK = NK cells; T CD3 + = T lymphocytes; T EM = T effector memory; Th2 = T helper 2 lymphocytes; Treg = regulatory T cells.…”
Section: T Emmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…54 There is evidence of a detrimental effect of G-CSF on their function, which seems to be transient and not to affect late-phase GVL activity. 55 Given the variety of immune cells contained in the apheresis product, many strategies have been developed in order to rationally select graft effectors and provide designed adoptive immunotherapies, especially in the haploidentical stem cell transplant setting. [56][57][58] In this scenario, Schumm et al 59 recently introduced an innovative approach of graft manipulation, which consist in depleting the leukapheresis product of only TCR αβ + T cells and CD19 + B cells, thus retaining large numbers of crucial immune effectors such as TCR γδ + T cells, NK cells and DCs; this method has been safely tested in a cohort of children by Locatelli and colleagues.…”
Section: Mobilized Pbsc: the Immunological Perspective F Saraceni Et Almentioning
confidence: 99%