Our study demonstrates that CD40 was expressed on hRPE cells when
stimulated by IFNγ. Despite CD40 and MHC class II expression, our
results show that adult stimulated hRPE cells expressed neither B7.1 or
B7.2. Moreover, even under CD40 triggering, one of the powerful way to
induce B7 in different systems, hRPE cells still did not express B7
molecules. The absence of B7.1 and B7.2 expression on adult hRPE cells
is in agreement with the work of Rezai et al.,
23 in which
they found neither B7.1 nor B7.2 expression on fetal hRPE cells,
although no information was provided on CD40 expression on those cells.
We, thus, found on adult IFNγ-activated hRPE cells the coexpression
of MHC class II and CD40, but B7.1 and B7.2 expression was not seen.
This phenotype is not limited to hRPE cells and is also shared by
Langerhans cells from the hair follicle, Grave’s thyroid epithelial
cells, and gingival fibroblasts.
28 29 30 The inability of
hRPE to express either B7.1 or B7.2 suggests that they would not be
able to act as conventional APCs. Antigen presentation in the absence
of B7 costimulation may result in a deviant antigen presentation,
leading in fact to ignorance, anergy, or apoptosis.
16 However, there is growing evidence that T-cell activation may also
occur through an alternate pathway involving CD40–CD40L stimulation.
For example, stimulation of CD40 may induce BB-1 or CD44H surface
expression on fibroblasts and Chinese hamster ovary cells,
respectively.
31 32 Both are able to costimulate T-cell
proliferation and are distinct from B7.1 and B7.2. One other
alternative pathway, which could be implicated in a B7-independent
T-cell activation by hRPE cells, is the CD2–CD58
pathway.
33 Nonetheless, our finding of an absence of CD58
expression makes this unlikely, although Liversidge et
al.
34 found that rat RPE cells may stimulate CD2 on T
cells through CD48 and CD59. Actually, controversy exists over these
molecules as ligands for CD2.
35