The evolving role of chemokines and their receptors in acute allograft rejection

Nicholas G. Inston and Paul Cockwell

Department of Nephrology and Renal Transplantation, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK

Keywords: acute allograft rejection; chemokines; chemokine receptors; graft survival; renal transplantation

Introduction

In renal transplantation, the occurrence of one or more episodes of acute allograft rejection (AAR) is a major determinant of graft survival [1]. Most episodes of AAR are caused by cell-mediated processes and require the infiltration of alloactivated T cells into the engrafted organ. These cells are characterized by the expression of surface markers indicating a memory (CD45RO+) and/or activated (CD25+) phenotype [2,3], which develop subsequent to T-cell receptor (TCR) interactions with MHC–alloantigen complexes or donor MHC in secondary lymphoid tissue [4]. A further result of this process is the expression of chemokine receptors that direct the trafficking of alloactivated T cells into the graft in response to local production of chemokines, initially by resident cells. There is now deep interest in this area that reflects the recent identification of restricted chemokine–receptor interactions as key functional events in T-cell recruitment and potential therapeutic targets for the prophylaxis of AAR. We discuss this recent evidence and how it relates to our current knowledge of chemokine–receptor expression in human renal transplantation.

T-cell trafficking

The migration of T cells to extravascular sites requires the successful completion of a series of co-ordinated molecular interactions. These processes are common to all trafficking leukocytes [5,6]. First, leukocytes marginated (usually in post-capillary venules) by flow dynamics, roll through transient association and dissociation between glycosylated and sialylated ligands and endothelial cell (EC) surface expressed selectins. This allows leukocytes to sample the EC surface microenvironment where high concentrations of chemokines are sequestered. Chemokines are a superfamily of small proteins that direct leukocyte migration and position [7]. They bind G-protein linked counter-receptors (chemokine receptors) on the leukocyte cell surface to trigger intracellular signalling cascades that rapidly promote the activation of leukocyte integrins such as LFA-1 and VLA-4. Integrins then facilitate firm leukocyte adhesion by binding to super-immunoglobulin counter-receptors (e.g. ICAM-1, VCAM-1) expressed on EC. Adhered cells then transmigrate, across EC junctions and into the extracellular matrix, by directed movement along chemotactic and haptotactic gradients of chemokines and adhesion molecules. In vivo, intravascular flow may be central for this process, as adhered T cells traffic in response to adequate chemokine signals transmitted at pro-migratory (cell contact) zones within a milieu of continuous application of shear flow [8,9]. This process has been termed chemorheotaxis.

T-cell subsets express different patterns of chemokine receptors that modulate recruitment to different organ sites in physiological and inflammatory states. For example, naïve (CD45RA+, CD25-) T cells display chemokine receptors that, on ligation by constitutive chemokines expressed by high endothelial venules, direct their preferential trafficking to secondary lymphoid tissue [10]. At these sites, recruited T cells may encounter antigens, which trigger and sustain T-cell activation. These cells then proliferate into activated (effector) and memory cells and their migratory phenotype changes to one responsive to signals from inducible chemokines produced in inflamed organs. This phenotype may reflect the origin of the antigen encountered and allows T cells to target specific environments in response to local chemotactic signals. For example, the chemokine receptor CCR4 is expressed on a subset of T cells with memory for skin and intestinal antigens and promotes trafficking to skin (in cells co-expressing the E selectin ligand cutaneous lymphocye antigen) and to intestinal mucosa (in cells co-expressing high levels of the integrin {alpha}4ß7), respectively [11]. A ligand for CCR4, the chemokine TARC/CCL17, is preferentially expressed in inflamed skin.

Over 40 inducible chemokines and 20 inducible chemokine receptors have been identified to date [12]. In vitro studies on the responses of activated T cells to inflammatory chemokines suggest substantial redundancy in this system, with multiple chemokines produced at tissue sites binding to multiple receptors on circulating leukocytes [13]. Further, mice with functional deletions in single genes that encode inducible chemokines or their receptors only show mild alterations in defensive functions [1417]. However, there is now increasing evidence of tight specificity of chemokine receptors in defined inflammatory states with deployment of different subsets of cells under firm control. Recent studies show that expression of multiple chemokine receptors allow navigation by leukocytes in a systematic fashion through arrays of multiple chemokines [18] so different chemokine receptor pairs may be necessary for activation, transmigration, tissue migration and retention, respectively. Disease models in knockout mice are now further confirming key roles for individual chemokines and their receptors (see below).

Chemokines and their receptors in human renal transplantation

There have now been studies on the expression of a number of chemokines and chemokine receptors in human renal transplantation that show their increased expression in AAR (see Table 1Go and below). Most of these chemokine–receptor combinations are mononuclear cell targeted or expressed. Detailed reviews of the biology of these molecules have been published elsewhere [12]. Until recently, the significance of these ex vivo studies was difficult to ascertain as both resident renal cells and infiltrating cells are promiscuous sources of chemokines [12,1921], and the pro-inflammatory cytokines that promote their production in vitro are present in the kidney in inflammation in vivo [3]. However, studies in organ transplantation models in knockout animals and with blocking antibodies are now clarifying these observations (see below and Tables 2Go and 3Go). These indicate key roles for the receptors CXCR3 and CCR5 and selected targeting chemokines.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1.  Chemokines and chemokine receptors identified in human renal AAR

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 2.  Chemokine receptor knockout models in allograft rejection

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 3.  Studies using antibodies against chemokines and chemokine receptors in AAR

 

The biology of CXCR3 and CCR5

Studies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis first showed that CXCR3 and CCR5 are of particular importance in the recruitment of activated and memory T cells to inflammatory sites in human inflammation [22]. These receptors are also preferentially expressed on Th1 cells, the dominant Th phenotype in AAR and other cell-mediated immune processes [23]. For CXCR3, virtually all T cells at sites of non-renal human inflammation with prominent mononuclear cell infiltrates are receptor positive. CXCR3 is expressed by up to 40% of freshly isolated peripheral blood T cells, but will only mediate adhesion under conditions of flow and cell migration towards targeting chemokines after cell activation [24,25]. CXCR3 is ligated by the inflammatory non-ELR CXC chemokines CXCL10/IP-10, CXCL9/ Mig and CXCL11/I-Tac [2527], which are differentially produced by multiple cell types, including EC, on activation by IFN-{gamma} and TNF-{alpha} in combination. The expression of CCR5 is closely linked to CXCR3; all T cells that express CCR5 are also CXCR3+, indicating that these cells may be chemoattracted through either receptor [22]. CCR5 is ligated by RANTES/CCL5, MIP-1{alpha}/CCL3 and MIP-1ß/CCL4 to promote the chemoattraction of activated T cells in chemotactic assays [28,29]. Also, analogous with CXCR3, there is little chemoattraction of unstimulated lymphocytes by chemokines active against CCR5. Studies on the chemotactic potential of the supernatant from activated (IFN-{gamma} and TNF-{alpha} treated) PTEC, which is chemokine rich, towards CD3+ T cells confirm this. There is little chemotactic activity towards freshly isolated T cells; however, after activation by TCR ligation and IL-2 treatment there is heavy cell migration. Most of this chemotaxis is mediated through CXCR3 and CCR5, with an additional role for CX3CR1, the CX3CL1/fractalkine receptor [30].

Animal models for CXCR3 and CCR5 and their ligands

In a rat cardiac transplant model, where pre-transplant MHC priming resulted in allograft rejection, there was increased intragraft expression of CXCL10/IP-10 and CXCL9/Mig and infiltration with mononuclear cells expressing CXCR3 [31]. In a murine cardiac model, Kapoor and colleagues [32] showed that both CXCL10/IP-10 and CXCL9/Mig expression was increased from day 2 until the day of rejection (day 8–10) although the infiltrating cellular phenotype was not assessed. In MHC disparate skin allografts, blocking of CXCL9/Mig inhibited T-cell and macrophage migration into the graft [33]. Injection of CXCL9/Mig then restored T-cell infiltration and subsequent rejection.

Hancock and colleagues [34] showed early CXCL10/ IP-10 production (at day 1) by EC in cardiac allografts and isografts, presumably as a result of surgical manipulation and reperfusion injury. There was subsequent amplified expression of CXCL10/IP-10 and sequential expression of CXCL9/Mig and CXCL11/I-Tac in allografts but not isografts [34]. Transplanting cardiac allografts from CXCL10/IP-10 knockouts into wild-type animals had a dramatic effect, with no subsequent development of AAR. This indicates a key role for early induction of CXCL10/IP-10 promoting subsequent production of CXCL9/Mig and CXCL11/I-TAC and the recruitment of alloactivated T cells. The development of this ‘chemokine cascade’ may be dependent on early natural killer (NK) cell recruitment; EC-expressed CXCL10/IP-10 may ligate NK cell CXCR3 to localize these cells within the graft, where they recognize disparate MHC on the surface of EC and other resident cells. Production of IFN-{gamma} and other cytokines by NK cells may then amplify CXCL10/IP-10 production and promote sequential expression of CXCL9/Mig and CXCL11/I-TAC with subsequent recruitment of alloactivated T cells. This is consistent with recent data showing early infiltration of NK cells (by day 1) in a separate animal model of cardiac transplantation [35] and induction of chemokines by resident cells before infiltration of mononuclear cells in an animal model of lupus nephritis [36].

Studies using knockout animals complement these findings, with a mean cardiac allograft survival of 58 days in CXCR3-/- compared with 7 days in the wild-type (CXCR3+/+) [37]. This increased survival was consistent with the histology of the graft, which showed greatly decreased cellular infiltrate and damage compared with controls. Similar effects on graft survival were obtained using an anti-CXCR3 antibody in CXCR3+/+ recipients.

Transplantation models for CCR5 knockouts show less dramatic results but are still highly significant. MHC disparate cardiac allografts transplanted into CCR5-/- mice show a tripling of graft survival, and addition of low-dose cyclosporin results in permanent allograft survival [38]. This demonstrates an important principle for the prophylaxis of AAR; increasing the threshold for T-cell infiltration may dramatically lower the doses of immunosuppression required. However, whilst these models provide major evidence for a role for CXCR3 and CCR5 in AAR, in cardiac allografts chemokine expression in the heart is primarily by EC or infiltrating mononuclear cells, whereas kidneys have a heterogeneous population of resident cells, which express inflammatory chemokines when stimulated. Therefore, use of these knockout animals in studies on renal transplantation would help prove the applicability of this data to other organ systems. More focused ex vivo analyses on the role of CXCR3 in human renal transplantation are also required.

CXCR3 and CCR5 and their ligands in human renal transplantation

Despite the evidence for a role for CXCR3 and its ligands in AAR, there is relatively little data in human renal transplantation. In rejecting human lung allografts, infiltrating T cells express CXCR3 and these cells were highly responsive to CXCL10/IP-10, which was present in large quantities in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of these patients [39]. Romagnani and colleagues [61] have found infiltrating cells expressing CXCR3 in renal allograft rejection with the presence of ligating chemokines, although this data has not yet been published as a full manuscript.

There have been several studies on a role for CCR5 and its ligating chemokines. Segerer and colleagues [40] demonstrated that CCR5+ cells are present in AAR and correlate with the distribution of T cells. Also, CCR5 mRNA localizes to infiltrating mononuclear cells in rejecting human allografts. Recently, Fischereder and colleagues [41] showed that renal transplant recipients homozygous for CCR5{Delta}32, a non-functioning mutant allele of CCR5 with a 32 bp deletion, have significantly longer graft survival than those patients with other genotypes. Interestingly, apart from high resistance of CCR5{Delta}32 homozygotes to HIV infection, these individuals show no obvious phenotype and are otherwise healthy. In the earliest study of chemokine expression in human renal AAR, Pattison and colleagues [42] demonstrated the presence of RANTES/CCL5 (a ligand for CCR5 and CCR1). This chemokine was localized to infiltrating mononuclear cells, tubular epithelium and vascular endothelium; effectors of and targets for injury. More recently, Robertson and colleagues [43] showed predominant basolateral surface expression of CC chemokines in AAR, with significant variation in the levels of MCP-1/CCL and MIP-1ß/CCL4, but not RANTES/CCL5 and MIP-1{alpha}/CCL3 between rejection grades.

CX3CL1/fractalkine

A further chemokine of potential importance in AAR is CX3CL1/fractalkine. Unlike virtually all other chemokines it has a membrane-anchoring domain [44]. In addition, CX3CL1/fractalkine is the only ligand for its targeting receptor (CX3CR1) shown to date. CX3CL1/ fractalkine can promote chemotaxis via a shed soluble domain as well as adhesion when transmembrane bound. CX3CR1 is expressed by NK cells, monocytes and IL-2 activated CD8+ T cells [45]. Recently, Haskell and colleagues [46] have shown that in CX3CR1-/- heterotopic MHC mismatched cardiac transplants there was no difference in graft survival between knockout and wild-type animals; however, on addition of low-dose cyclosporin there was a threefold increase in graft survival. In renal biopsies from patients with AAR we have shown expression of CX3CL1/fractalkine mRNA and protein (by EC and tubular epithelial cells) that correlates with infiltration of mononuclear cells [47]. Supernatant from activated PTEC has some soluble CX3CL1/fractalkine attributable chemotactic activity towards activated T cells [30] and in its transmembrane-bound form may have a role in the retention of mononuclear cells at tubular sites [48].

Other chemokines and their receptors in AAR

Both CCR1 and CCR2 have been implicated in acute AAR, although to a significantly less degree than CXCR3 and CCR5. Mismatched heterotropic cardiac transplants survive twice as long in CCR1-/- mice compared with wild-type mice [49]. In recipients treated with low doses of cyclosporin or anti-CD4 monoclonal antibodies there was prolonged allograft survival and no development of chronic rejection. Two chemokines that ligate CCR1, RANTES/CCL5 and MIP1-ß/CCL4, have been demonstrated in AAR in human renal transplants [42,43]. CCR2-/- recipients of cardiac allografts have a similar phenotype. The ligating chemokines for CCR2 are MCP-1/CCL2, MCP-2/CCL8, MCP-3/CCL7 and MCP-4/CCL13. In renal transplantation, the main role of these molecules may be in directing macrophage infiltration as predominant CCR2 expression is by this cell type; MCP-1/CCL2 and MCP-4/CCL13 expression in AAR in human renal transplants correlate with, and colocalize to, infiltrating macrophages [50,51]. In vitro analyses also indicate that the major role of PTEC-derived MCP-1/CCL2 may be for monocytes/ macrophage rather than T-cell recruitment [52].

Schmouder and colleagues [53] used RT–PCR to study the expression of the CXC chemokine ENA-78/ CXCL5 in acute renal transplant rejection. This is predominately a neutrophil- and monocyte-directed chemokine that targets the receptor CXCR2. They demonstrated increased transcripts of ENA-78/ CXCL5 localized to epithelial cells in vivo with up-regulation of expression by human epithelial cells in vitro when stimulated by IL-1ß. There is also heavy local expression of IL-8/CXCL8 (which targets CXCR1 and CXCR2) in other models of human renal inflammation [54], and elevated levels of this chemokine have been identified in the urine of patients with AAR [55,56]. However, there is little expression of the IL-8/CXCL8 receptors CXCR1 and CXCR2 on freshly isolated or activated T cells [57], so these chemokines are unlikely to have a central role in directing T-cell infiltration. A potential role has also been identified for CXCR4, which is also expressed by infiltrating T cells; however, the biological relevance of this is uncertain as it is expressed by all circulating leukocytes and targeted by SDF-1/CXCL12, a constitutively expressed chemokine important for homeostatic trafficking [58].

Conclusions

Although a number of chemokines and their receptors are up-regulated in AAR, recent studies indicate a key role for CXCR3 and CCR5. Assessment of the applicability of this data to renal transplantation requires further expression studies in humans and analyses of animal models of renal transplantation. If confirmatory, then targeting CXCR3 and/or CCR5-mediated processes in the first few days after transplantation may prevent the early recruitment of NK cells and alloactivated T cells whilst the graft is activated from donor factors and ischaemia re-perfusion injury. This directed approach might allow lower induction and maintenance immunosuppressive therapy and sustain long-term graft survival. Finally, whilst recent studies provide essential insights into the mechanisms that promote AAR, there is little known of the role of chemokines and their receptors in the development of chronic allograft nephropathy.

Notes

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Dr Paul Cockwell, Department of Nephrology and Renal Transplantation, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham B15 2TH, UK. Email: paul.cockwell{at}university\|[hyphen]\|b.wmids.nhs.uk Back

References

  1. Hariharan S, Johnson C, Bresnahan B, Taranto S, McIntosh M, Stablein D. Improved graft survival after renal transplantation in the United States, 1988 to 1996. N Engl J Med2000; 342: 605–612[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Erren M, Arlt M, Willeke P et al. Predictive value of CD45RO positive T-helper lymphocyte subsets for acute cellular rejection during the early phase after kidney transplantation. Transplantation Proc1999; 31: 319–321[ISI][Medline]
  3. Noronha IL, Eberlein-Gonska M, Hartley B, Stephens S, Cameron JS, Waldher R. In situ expression of tumour necrosis factor-alpha, interferon-gamma, and interleukin-2 receptors in renal allograft biopsies. Transplantation1992; 54: 1017–1024[ISI][Medline]
  4. Germain R, Margulies D. The biochemistry and cell biology of antigen processing and presentation. Annu Rev Immunol1993; 11: 403–450[ISI][Medline]
  5. Springer T. Traffic signals for lymphocyte recirculation and leukocyte emigration: the multistep paradigm. Cell1994; 76: 301–314[ISI][Medline]
  6. Springer TA. Traffic signals on endothelium for lymphocyte recirculation and leukocyte emigration. Annu Rev Physiol1995; 57: 827–872[ISI][Medline]
  7. Rossi D, Zlotnik A. The biology of chemokines and their receptors. Annu Rev Immunol2000; 18: 217–242[ISI][Medline]
  8. Cinamon G, Schinder V, Alon R. Shear forces promote lymphocyte migration across vascular endothelium bearing apical chemokines. Nat Immunol2001; 2: 515–522[ISI][Medline]
  9. Luscinskas F, Lim YC, Lichtman A. Wall shear stress: the missing step for T cell transmigration? Nat Immunol2001; 2: 478–480[ISI][Medline]
  10. Gunn M, Tangemann K, Tam C, Cyster J, Rosen S, Williams L. A chemokine expressed in lymphoid high endothelial venules promotes the adhesion and chemotaxis of naive T lymphocytes. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA1998; 95: 258–263[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Campbell J, Haraldsen G, Pan J et al. The chemokine receptor CCR4 in vascular recognition by cutaneous but not intestinal memory cells. Nature1999; 400: 776–780[ISI][Medline]
  12. Murphy P, Baggiolini M, Charo F et al. International Union of Pharmacology. XXII. Nomenclature for chemokine receptors. Pharmacol Rev2000; 52: 145–176[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Mantovani A. The chemokine system: redundancy for robust outputs. Immunol Today1999; 29: 254–257
  14. Boring L, Gosling J, Chensue W, Kunkel SL, Farese RV, Broxmeyer HE, Chara IF. Impaired monocyte migration and reduced Type 1 (Th1) cytokine responses in C-C chemokine receptor 2 knockout mice. J Clin Invest1997; 100: 2552–2561[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Kurihara T, Warr G, Loy J, Bravo R. Defects in macrophage recruitment and host defence in mice lacking the CCR2 chemokine receptor. J Exp Med1997; 186: 1757–1762[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Gerard C, Frossard JL, Bhatia M, Saluja A, Gerard NP, Lu B, Steer M. Targeted disruption of the ß-chemokine receptor CCR1 protects against pancreatitis-associated lung injury. J Clin Invest1997; 100: 2022–2027[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Rothenberg ME, McLean J, Pearlman E, Luster AD, Leder P. Targeted disruption of the chemokine eotaxin partially reduces antigen-induced tissue eosinophilia. J Exp Med1997; 185: 785–790[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Foxman EF, Kunkel EJ, Butcher EC. Integrating conflicting chemotactic signals: the role of memory in leukocyte navigation. J Cell Biol1999; 147; 577–588[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Prodjosudjadi W, Gerritsma JS, Klar-Mohamad N et al. Production and cytokine-mediated regulation of monocyte chemoatractant protein-1 by human proximal tubular epithelial cells. Kidney Int1995; 48: 1477–1486[ISI][Medline]
  20. Cockwell P, Howie AJ, Adu D, Savage COS. In situ analysis of CC chemokine mRNA in human glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int1998; 54: 827–836[ISI][Medline]
  21. Deckers J, van der Woude F, van der Kooij S, Daha M. Synergistic effect of IL-1{alpha}, IFN-{gamma} and TNF-{alpha} on RANTES production by human renal tubular epithelial cells in vitro. J Am Soc Nephrol1998; 9: 194–202[Abstract]
  22. Qin S, Rottman J, Myers P et al. The chemokine receptors CXCR3 and CCR5 mark subsets of T cells associated with certain inflammatory reactions. J Clin Invest1998; 4: 746–754
  23. Bonecchi R, Bianchi G, Bordigon P et al. Differential expression of chemokine receptors and chemotactic responsiveness of Type 1 T helper cells. J Exp Med1998; 187: 129–134[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Loetscher M, Brass N, Messe E, Moser B. Lymphocyte-specific chemokine receptor CXCR3: regulation, chemokine binding and gene localization. Eur J Immunol1998; 28: 3696–3705[ISI][Medline]
  25. Piali L, Weber C, LaRosa G et al. The chemokine receptor CXCR3 mediates rapid and shear resistant-induction of effector T lymphocytes by the chemokines IP-10 and Mig. Eur J Immunol1998; 28: 961–972[ISI][Medline]
  26. Taub D, Lloyd AR, Conlon K et al. Recombinant human interferon-inducible protein 10 is a chemoattractant for human monocytes and T lymphocytes and promotes T cell adhesion to endothelial cells. J Exp Med1993; 177: 1809–1814[Abstract]
  27. Cole K, Strick C, Paradis T et al. Interferon-inducible T cell alpha chemoattractant (I-TAC): a novel non-ELR CXC chemokine with potent activity on activated T cells through selective high affinity binding to CXCR3. J Exp Med1998; 187: 2009–2021[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Schall T, Bacon K, Toy K, Goeddel D. Selective attraction of monocytes and T lymphocytes of the memory phenotype by cytokine RANTES. Nature1990; 347: 751–756[ISI]
  29. Taub DD, Lloyd AR, Conlon K et al. Recombinant human interferon-inducible protein 10 is a chemoattractant for human monocytes and T lymphocytes and promotes T cell adhesion to endothelial cells. J Exp Med1993; 177: 1809–1814[Abstract]
  30. Cockwell P, Calderwood J, Brooks C, Chakravorty S, Savage C. Chemoattraction of T cells expressing CCR5 and CXCR3 by proximal tubular epithelial cell chemokines. Nephrol Dial Transplant2002; in press
  31. Vella JP, Magge C, Vos L et al. Cellular and humoral mechanisms of vascularized allograft rejection induced by indirect recognition of donor MHC allopeptides. Transplantation1999; 67: 1523–1532[ISI][Medline]
  32. Kapoor A, Morita K, Engeman TM et al. Intragraft expression of chemokine gene occurs early during acute rejection of allogeneic cardiac grafts. Transplant Proc2000; 32: 793–795[ISI][Medline]
  33. Koga S, Auerbach MB, Engeman TM, Novick AC, Toma H, Fairchild RL. T cell infiltration into class II MHC-disparate allografts and acute allograft rejection is dependent on the IFN-gamma induced chemokine Mig. J Immunol1999; 163: 4878–4885[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  34. Hancock WW, Gao W, Csizmadia V, Faia K, Shemmeri N, Luster AD. Donor derived IP-10 initiates development of acute allograft rejection. J Exp Med2001; 193: 975–980[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Popoola J, Wood KJ, Sacks SH, Wong W. Infiltration of allografts by natural killer cells precedes t cells: cross talk between the innate and adaptive immune system? Am J Transplant2001; 1 [Supp 1]: 168
  36. Perez de Lema G, Maier H, Nieto E et al. Chemokine expression precedes inflammatory cell infiltration and chemokine receptor and cytokine expression during the initiation of murine lupus nephritis. J Am Soc Nephrol2001; 12: 1369–1382[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Hancock WW, Lu B, Gao W et al. Requirement for the chemokine receptor CXCR3 for acute allograft rejection. J Exp Med2000; 192: 1515–1519[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Gao W, Faia K, King JA, Smiley ST, Hancock WW. Targetting of chemokine receptors CCR2 and CCR5 prolongs murine allograft survival. Transplantation2000; 69: S125
  39. Agostini C, Calbrese F, Rea F et al. CXCR3 and its ligand CXCL10 are expressed by inflammatory cells infiltrating lung allografts and mediate chemotaxis of T cells at sites of rejection. Am J Pathol2001; 158: 1703–1711[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  40. Segerer S, Mack M, Regele H, Kerjaschki D, Schlondorff D. Expression of the C-C chemokine receptor 5 in human kidney diseases. Kidney Int1999; 56: 52–64[ISI][Medline]
  41. Fischereder M, Luckow B, Hocher B et al. CC chemokine receptor 5 and renal-transplant survival. Lancet2001; 357: 1758–1761[ISI][Medline]
  42. Pattison J, Nelson PJ, Huie P et al. RANTES chemokine expression in cell-mediated transplant rejection of the kidney. Lancet1994; 343: 209–211[ISI][Medline]
  43. Robertson H, Morley AR, Talbot D, Callanan K, Kirby JA. Renal allograft rejection-ß chemokine involvement in the development of tubulitis. Transplantation2000; 69: 684–687[ISI][Medline]
  44. Bazan JF, Bacon K, Hardiman G et al. A new class of membrane-bound chemokine with a CX3C motif. Nature1997; 385: 640–644[ISI][Medline]
  45. Fong AM, Robinson L, Steeber DA et al. Fractalkine and CX3CR1 mediate a novel mechanism of leukocyte capture, firm adhesion and activation under physiological flow. J Exp Med1998; 188: 1413–1419[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Haskell C, Hancock W, Salant D et al. Targeted deletion of CX3CR1 reveals a role for fractalkine in cardiac allograft rejection. J Clin Invest2001; 108: 679–688[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. Cockwell P, Girdlestone J, Brooks CJ, Savage COS. Fractalkine expression in human renal inflammation. J Pathol2002; 196: 85–90[ISI][Medline]
  48. Chakravorty SJ, Cockwell P, Girdlestone J, Brookes CJ, Savage COS. Fractalkine expression on human renal tubular epithelial cells: potential role in mononuclear cell adhesion. Clin Exp Immunol2002; in press
  49. Gao W, Topham P, King JA et al. Targeting of the chemokine receptor CCR1 suppresses development of acute and chronic allograft rejection. J Clin Invest2000; 105: 35–44[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  50. Grandaliano G, Gesualdo L, Ranieri E, Monno R, Stallone G, Shena FP. Monocyte chemotactic peptide-1 expression and monocyte infiltration in acute renal transplant rejection. Transplantation1997; 63: 414–420[ISI][Medline]
  51. Chakravorty S, Howie A, Girdlestone J, Gentle D, Savage C. Potential role for monocyte chemoattractant protein-4 (MCP-4) in monocyte/macrophage recruitment in acute renal inflammation. J Pathol2001; 194: 239–246[ISI][Medline]
  52. Kuroiwa T, Schlimgen R, Illei G, McInnes I, Boumpas D. Distinct T cell/renal tubular epithelial cell interactions define different chemokine production: implications for tubulointerstitial injury in chronic glomerulonephritides. J Immunol2000; 164: 3323–3329[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  53. Schmouder RL, Strieter RM, Walz A, Kunkel SL. Epithelial derived neutrophil activating factor 78 production in human renal tubule epithelial cells and in renal allograft rejection. Transplantation1995; 59: 118–124[ISI][Medline]
  54. Cockwell P, Brooks C, Adu D, Savage COS. Interleukin 8: a pathogenetic role in antineutrophil cytoplasmic autoantibody-associated glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int1999; 55: 852–863[ISI][Medline]
  55. Budde K, Waiser J, Ceska M, Katalinic A, Kurzdorfer M, Neumayer HH. Interleukin-8 expression in patients after renal transplantation. Am J Kidney Dis1997; 29: 871–880[ISI][Medline]
  56. Moutabarrik A, Nakanishi I, Kameoka H et al. Interleukin-8 serum and urine concentrations after kidney transplantation. Transplant Int1994; 7: S539–541[Medline]
  57. Qin S, LaRosa G, Campell JJ et al. Expression of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 and interleukin-8 receptors on subsets of T cells: correlation with transendothelial chemotactic potential. Eur J Immunol1996; 26: 640–647[ISI][Medline]
  58. Eitner F, Cui Y, Hudkins KL, Alpers CE. Chemokine receptor (CXCR4) mRNA-expressing leukocytes are increased in human renal allograft rejection. Transplantation1998; 66: 1551–1557[ISI][Medline]
  59. Sibbring JS, Sharma A, McDicken IW, Sells RA, Christmas SE. Localization of C-X-C and C-C chemokines to chemokines to renal tubular epithelial cells in human kidney transplants is not confined to acute cellular rejection. Transplant Immunol1998; 6: 203–208[ISI][Medline]
  60. Segerer S, Cui Y, Eitner F et al. Expression of chemokines and chemokine receptors during human renal transplant rejection. Am J Kidney Dis2001; 37: 518–531[ISI][Medline]
  61. Romagnani P, Lazzeri E, Lasagni L et al. High expression of chemokines interferon-{gamma}-inducible protein of 10 kDa (IP-10), monokine induced by interferon-{gamma} (Mig) and of their receptor (CXCR3) in acute renal rejection. Am J Transplant2001; 1: S343
  62. Segerer S, Mack M, Kain R et al. The duffy antigen receptor for chemokines is up-regulated during acute renal transplant rejection and cresentic glomerulonephritis. Kidney Int2000; 58: 1546–1556[ISI][Medline]
  63. Grone H-J, Weber C, Weber K et al. Met-RANTES reduces vascular and tubular damage during acute renal transplant rejection: blocking monocyte arrest and recruitment. FASEB J1999; 13: 1371–1383[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  64. Robinson LR, Nataraj CC, Thomas DW et al. A role for fractalkine and its receptor (CX3CR1) in cardiac allograft rejection. J Immunol2000; 165: 6067–6072[Abstract/Free Full Text]




This Article
Extract
FREE Full Text (PDF)
Alert me when this article is cited
Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Email this article to a friend
Similar articles in this journal
Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Similar articles in PubMed
Alert me to new issues of the journal
Add to My Personal Archive
Download to citation manager
Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Disclaimer
Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Articles by Inston, N. G.
Articles by Cockwell, P.
PubMed
PubMed Citation
Articles by Inston, N. G.
Articles by Cockwell, P.