Talk:Regulatory T cell

=Need References=

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Immacarle14. Peer reviewers: Immcarle15.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
This is a really neat article, but we need some references...PLEASE! doctorwolfie (talk) 15:40, 6 June 2012 (UTC) =Leishmaniasis= This is an addition for the functions section. It describes what is known about cross regulation between CD4+ T helper cells and CD8+ T suppressor cells from human subjects with a history of infection with Leishmania chagasi. I think it is particulary current given recent findings about the role of CD8+ T suppressor cells in diseases other than leishmaniasis. Putative cytokines secreted by leishmania specific CD4+ T helper cells have been shown to inhibit and kill CD8+ T suppressor cells but not CD4+ T helper cells. These soluble factors have not yet been isolated or identified. This is my first time contributing to Wikipedia.

Studies of human subjects with a history of leishmania infection suggest that modulation of CD8+ suppressor T cells is, at least partly, mediated by cytokines. Leishmania specific CD4+ helper T cells predominate in adults with strong protective immunity (skin-test positive with no history of clinical infection). When added to autologous leishmania infected macrophages these T cells cause parasite death and secretion of large amounts of interferon-gamma and lymphotoxin. CD8+ T suppressor cells predominate in patients with no protective immunity (visceral leishmaniasis patients). When added to autologous peripheral blood mononuclear cells isolated after successful treatment, these T cells inhibit interferon-gamma secretion and proliferation and increase interleukin-6 and interleukin-10 secretion. A soluble factor(s) generated by antigen or phytohemagglutinin stimulation of leishmania-specific CD4+ helper T cells from skin-test positive adults killed CD8+ T cells but not CD4+ helper T cells when added to culture media. Soluble factors generated by antigen stimulation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from skin-test positive adults prevented CD8+ suppressor T cell mediated increases in interleukin-10 secretion. These findings suggest that antigen stimulation of CD4+ helper T cells results in production of cytokines that kill or down regulate CD8+ T suppressor cells. Once the leishmania infection has been eliminated and leishmania antigens are gone, CD8+ T suppressor cells down-regulate CD4+ T helper cells. Isolation of cytokines that inhibit and kill CD8+ T suppressor cells might be useful in treating diseases that involve immune suppression such as leishmaniasis, AIDS, and certain cancers. References

Holaday B, Pompeu M, Jeronimo S, Texeira M, Sousa A, Vasconcelos W, Pearson R, Abrams J, Locksley R (1993). “Potential Role for Interleukin-10 in Immunosuppression Associated with Kala Azar”. Journal of Clinical Investigation 92: 2626-2632.

Holaday B (1999). “Immunotherapy for Visceral Leishm,aniasis: Ability of Factors Produced during Anti_leishmania Responses of Skin Test Positive Adults to Inhibit Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cell Activities Associated with Visceral Leishmaniasis”. Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 94: 55-66. PMID: 10029912

BettieHoladay (talk) 22:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC) BettieHoladay July 11, 2011

I think that the definitions (their basic origins and proposed roles, not their molecular biology, that can be left for other sections) between TH3 (and other subsets) and Treg suppressor T cells must be clearly explained, as the former subsets are hardly or not mentioned at all. It should also be pointed out that the term "regulatory" is applied to suppressor T cells, but in reality effector T cells also regulate helper T cell responses. The terms are particularly confusing considering the TH1/TH2 model. Volantares 09:34, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Th3 and Tr1 are just names for cell subsets that people generate in vitro. It's just a name. They may, or may not, have any relevance in vivo. I think the evidence from the IBD models is that IL-10, TGF-beta and CTLA-4 are all required for full Treg function, to greater or lesser extent. Treg are a heterogenous population which can, under different conditions, produce a wide range of cytokines. The Th1/Th2/Th17/Treg paradigm is fairly sound - each with their own transcription factor, method of differentation and key cytokines - but the Tr1 and Th3 subtypes are a little shakier. Kantokano 18:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

While your point about in vivo relevance is not unimportant, the current literature simply isn't capable of synthesizing those in vitro models of alternative "suppressor" populations -- thus far, the population that has the most evidence for in vivo, physiologic, and clinical application is the FoxP3+ Treg. This does not necessarily discount, or exclude the existence of Th3 or Tr1 cells, but those models simply aren't supported as well by in vivo work. I might also remind of the transwell experiments from the Shevach lab, which still support cell-contact as a necessary mechanism for classically defined Treg suppression in vitro. Jbarin 04:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be better for the flow of the article for it to start on with a "these are the subsets identified" section, and then continue on to the CD4+Foxp3+ Treg, which are by far the best-characterised and make up the majority of the article anyway. I'd also like to say in terms of nomenclature, "regulatory" takes preference over "supressor", so it might be better to stick to regulatory throughout. Although I'm willing to have someone argue, I haven't come across many papers or conferences with "T supressor" in the title. Kantokano 15:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

(reply to message above by 207.6.160.178):

RESPONSE MOVED TO IP'S TALK PAGE: User_talk:207.6.160.178

Chrisch 06:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Development
Written in article: "Neonatal thymectomy at three days of age in mice results in autoimmunity, suggesting that the thymus has an important role in the generation of Treg cells." That sentence makes no sense. Of course the thymus plays an important role in the generation of Tregs, like in all T cells. However, in the very first line: Neonatal thymectomy results in autoimmunity due to the lack of negative selection of non-selfreactive T cells. This is not Treg cell specific but T cell specific in general. I would suggest to just leave that sentence out since it does not contribute to the "development" chapter or begin with a sentence like: "All T cells mature in the thymus." No thymus, no T cells. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.76.181.77 (talk) 16:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand what you're saying, but you are missing the point slightly - it's the timing that's critical. No thymus=no T cells, true, but the mice that are thymectomised at three days have T cells, but lack Tregs. It's to do with the strange way that the thymus develops, that Treg don't start to appear until 3days of age, and aren't about until 3 weeks, whereas conventional T cells are there from birth. --Kantokano (talk) 05:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

"The critical role regulatory T cells play within the immune system is evidenced by the severe autoimmune syndrome that results from a genetic deficiency in regulatory T cells."
There are environmental factors involved here too. See Hygiene Hypothesis.

- While Hygiene (capital H) continues to be a favored explanation of the contribution of environment to autoimmunity, this falls outside the scope of this article. The contribution of Tregs to control of autoimmunity need not be in any way exclusive with that of environment factors. Try appending it to Autoimmunity, in the way Allergy invokes it. Jbarin 09:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I think the definitive experiment is with Scurfy or Foxp3-knockout mice - those mice develop fatal autoimmunity within a matter of weeks, where littermates or cagemates don't. Same goes for IPEX individuals. Kantokano 15:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Molecular characterization
I just looked at the Molecualr characterization section, so I don't know for others, but this one definately need copy editing. I'm not a native English speaker, but sentences like "Regulatory T cells are also identified by their high levels of CD25 and CD4 expression, while also expressing low levels of CD127", or phrases like "response to a pathogens" don't sound correct to me. And besides, high CD4 and CD25 expression in the cells is described in the first paragraph of this section, so why start the next paragraph with "cells are also identified by their high levels of CD25 and CD4"? Independovirus (talk) 08:41, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I tidied it up a little but it still needs work. Foxp3 has been shown to be expressed on some activated non-tregs recently so the second part of the paragraph may be wrong.gearoidmm (talk) 18:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation?
Based on the term's meaning and the fact that this article includes one occurrence of the string "T-reg" and another of the string "Treg," I'm guessing that treg is prounounced in two syllables, kinda like "tea bag," rather than in a single syllable, more like "tread." Am I right? I think the lead ought to specify the proununciation for us unwashed: the few among Wikipedia's readership who aren't immunologists. Even given WP:NOT, such a scrap of lexical assistance could scarce be considered amiss.—PaulTanenbaum (talk) 20:14, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Tregs and Implications for Cancer
I think that this page needs to expand on Tregs and the implications they have for cancers and immunotherapy. I am also planning on editing the wikipedia lead section to include recent research about Tregs and cancer.

Curiel, Tyler J. "Tregs and rethinking cancer immunotherapy." The Journal of clinical investigation 117.5 (2007): 1167-1174.

Curiel, Tyler J. "Regulatory T cells and treatment of cancer." Current opinion in immunology 20.2 (2008): 241-246.

Li, Hui, et al. "Increased prevalence of regulatory T cells in the lung cancer microenvironment: a role of thymic stromal lymphopoietin." Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy 60.11 (2011): 1587-1596.

Karanikas, Vaios, et al. "Foxp3 expression in human cancer cells." J Transl Med 6.19 (2008): 1-8.

Lin, Wan-Wan, and Michael Karin. "A cytokine-mediated link between innate immunity, inflammation, and cancer." The Journal of clinical investigation 117.5 (2007): 1175-1183. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Immacarle14 (talk • contribs) 06:00, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

vimentinas the mechanical regulator of Treg activation
In 2018 A study from Oxford (McDonald-Hyman) in coordination with a consortium of other academic institutions, proved that the distal pole complex, or DPC, of Tregs is made of vimentin. Inside Tregs, the DPC is responsible for their switch from inactive to active, functional states, enabling formation of the immune synapse and Tregs immune dampening function. The authors proved that vimentin modulation could regulate (control) this switch, and could achieve efficacy endpoints in in vivo models of myasthenia Gravis, an autoimmune disease known to be based on an insufficient Treg response. From these data, the authors concluded that vimentin regulates the status of Tregs, and that vimentin "is a translational relevant" target for therapeutic intervention to  activate Tregs to treat conditions of immune imbalance such as autoimmune disease.

This structural biology has been validated in multiple studies, and has been visually demonstrated in a new paper (Li 2021), but remains little recognized relative to its important implications as a novel mechanism in  Autoimmune disease. One company, Aluda pharmaceuticals, has demonstrated a vimentin targeting small molecule can ActivateT regs in this manner and published results in a peer reviewed journal. Dbsbd1260 (talk) 04:12, 1 January 2022 (UTC)