May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
Costimulatory Molecules on Murine Endothelium; Implications for Corneal Graft Rejection
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • M.P. Watson
    Immunology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
  • A.J. T. George
    Immunology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
  • D.F. P. Larkin
    Immunology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    Cornea and External Diseases, Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  M.P. Watson, None; A.J.T. George, None; D.F.P. Larkin, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  The Wellcome Trust GR071527MF
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 3591. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      M.P. Watson, A.J. T. George, D.F. P. Larkin; Costimulatory Molecules on Murine Endothelium; Implications for Corneal Graft Rejection . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):3591.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: T lymphocytes have a central role in allograft rejection, including cornea. On engagement of the T cell receptor by antigenic peptide–MHC complex, a second ‘costimulatory’ signal is critical to T cell activation or otherwise. Having already shown that blockade of CD28 and/or CD40 costimulatory molecules can prolong corneal transplant survival in vivo (IOVS 2003), an in vitro correlate of corneal allograft rejection has been established to characterise the expression of costimulatory molecules on murine corneal endothelium and their response to pro–inflammatory cytokines (TNFα, IL–1α, IFNγ). Methods: Initial characterisation was carried out on two murine endothelial cell lines, cornea (MCEC) and vascular (sEnd.1) followed by primary corneal endothelium cultured in vitro. Expression on unmodified and cytokine stimulated cells was determined by flow cytometry. T cell proliferation was measured by 3H–thymidine incorporation. Results: As cornea is an immune privileged tissue we first studied the presence of ligands that generate negative costimulatory signals. Neither PD–L1 nor PD–L2 was constitutively expressed on primary corneal cells or MCEC but PD–L1 was upregulated following cytokine stimulation. Similar expression was found on the sEnd.1. Of the positive costimulation ligands, CD40 expression was present on MCEC but not on primary corneal cells or sEnd.1 whereas ICOSL was absent on all cell types. CD80 and CD86 ligands can act as either positive or negative costimulation through CD28/CTLA4 respectively. There was constitutive expression of CD80 on primary corneal cells whereas CD86 was undetectable on all cell types. Primary corneal endothelium stimulated with cytokine prior to co–culture demonstrated T cell proliferation that was greater than unstimulated endothelium. Conclusions: We have shown that corneal endothelium not only expresses costimulatory molecules but also has the capacity to stimulate T cells. Expression of CD80 acting as a positive costimulatory signal through CD28 ligation may explain in part why corneal allografts undergo rejection despite relative immune privilege. However the presence of PD–L1 and CD80, when ligating PD–1 and CTLA4 respectively play a role in prolonging corneal allograft survival due to T cell inhibition. Expression on transplanted corneal endothelium may allow costimulation of recipient T cells in the anterior chamber in addition to the lymphatic system.

Keywords: cornea: endothelium • transplantation • immunomodulation/immunoregulation 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.