Author
Listed:
- Vaiva Vezys
(University of Minnesota
Emory Vaccine Center, Emory University School of Medicine)
- Andrew Yates
(Emory University)
- Kerry A. Casey
(University of Minnesota)
- Gibson Lanier
(Emory Vaccine Center, Emory University School of Medicine)
- Rafi Ahmed
(Emory Vaccine Center, Emory University School of Medicine)
- Rustom Antia
(Emory University)
- David Masopust
(University of Minnesota
Emory Vaccine Center, Emory University School of Medicine)
Abstract
Replying to: R. M. Welsh and L. K. Selin Nature 459, 10.1038/nature08091 (2009) We reported that it is possible to increase the total number of memory CD8 T cells within an organism, and to establish preternatural numbers of vaccine-specific effector memory CD8 T cells while preserving naive CD8 T cells and most pre-existing memory CD8 T cells specific for a previously encountered infection https://www.nature.com/articles/nature08091 1. These findings raise new questions regarding the regulation and limits of generating CD8 T cell immunity. Our discussion highlighted three points related to the issue of attrition. First, that it is possible to over-estimate perceived attrition by only examining percentages (see Fig. 1 of ref. 1)2. Second, our vaccine regimen resulted predominantly in the generation of effector memory CD8 T cells located outside of lymph nodes. It remains possible that the number of lymph node central memory T cells remains tightly regulated. Third, we noted that our data did not refute that attrition could happen under a variety of circumstances. However, our data demonstrate that attrition is not an axiomatic property of immunization, mandated by stringent regulation of the size of the total memory CD8 T-cell compartment. Indeed, we saw no evidence of attrition after single infections with a virus (vaccinia), an intracellular bacteria (Listeria monocytogenes) and a parasite that induces massive splenomegaly (Plasmodium yoelii), and observed comparatively little attrition after a heterologous prime–boost regimen involving successive immunization with three viruses1.
Suggested Citation
Vaiva Vezys & Andrew Yates & Kerry A. Casey & Gibson Lanier & Rafi Ahmed & Rustom Antia & David Masopust, 2009.
"Vezys et al. reply,"
Nature, Nature, vol. 459(7247), pages 4-4, June.
Handle:
RePEc:nat:nature:v:459:y:2009:i:7247:d:10.1038_nature08092
DOI: 10.1038/nature08092
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:nature:v:459:y:2009:i:7247:d:10.1038_nature08092. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.