Allergen specificity of IgG4-expressing B cells in patients with grass pollen allergy undergoing immunotherapy - 29/08/12
Abstract |
Background |
Serum IgG4 responses to allergen immunotherapy are well documented as blocking allergen binding to receptor-bound IgE on antigen-presenting cells and effector cells, but the molecular characteristics of treatment-induced IgG4, particularly in relation to expressed antibody, are poorly defined.
Objectives |
We aimed to clone and express recombinant IgG4 from patients receiving grass pollen immunotherapy using single B cells to obtain matched heavy- and light-chain pairs.
Methods |
IgG4+ B cells were enriched from blood samples taken from 5 patients receiving grass pollen immunotherapy. Matched heavy- and light-chain variable-region sequences were amplified from single IgG4+ B cells. Variable regions were cloned and expressed as recombinant IgG4. Binding analysis of grass pollen–specific IgG4 was performed by using surface plasmon resonance. Functional assays were used to determine IgE blocking activity. In a separate experiment grass pollen–specific antibodies were depleted from serum samples to determine the proportion of grass pollen–specific IgG4 within total IgG4.
Results |
Depletion of grass pollen–specific antibodies from serum led to a modest reduction in total IgG4 levels. Matched heavy- and light-chain sequences were cloned from single IgG4+ B cells and expressed as recombinant IgG4. We identified an IgG4 that binds with extremely high affinity to the grass pollen allergen Phl p 7. Furthermore, we found that a single specific mAb can block IgE-mediated facilitated allergen presentation, as well as IgE-mediated basophil activation.
Conclusion |
Although increases in IgG4 levels cannot be wholly accounted for within the allergen-specific fraction, allergen immunotherapy might result in the production of high-affinity allergen-specific blocking IgG4.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Key words : Immunotherapy, IgG4, Phl p 7, blocking antibody
Abbreviations used : CDR, FWR, HBS, ISU, SPR
Plan
Supported by a grant from Asthma UK (S.R.D. and H.J.G.) and a fellowship from the London Law Trust (L.K.J.). The authors acknowledge financial support from the Department of Health through a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre award to Guy’s & St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King’s College London and King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. |
|
Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: A. J. Beavil has received research support from Asthma UK and the Medical Research Council UK. S. R. Durham has received lecture fees from ALK-Abelló and Merck, has received consultancy fees from Circassia, has received research support from Novartis and ALK-Abelló, has provided legal consultation/expert witness testimony for Merck, and is on the Immune Tolerance Network National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Steering Committee. The rest of the authors declare that they have no relevant conflicts of interest. |
Vol 130 - N° 3
P. 663 - septembre 2012 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?