SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • anergy;
  • IgE-facilitated antigenpresentation;
  • interleukin-10;
  • modified allergens;
  • recombinant allergens;
  • specific immunotherapy;
  • tolerance

Allergic diseases basically are immunologic disorders related to the activation of a distinct cytokine pattern in T cells, including increased secretion of certain allergic inflammatory cytokines, particularly IL-4, IL-5, and/or IL-13 ( 1–3). Whereas the symptoms of immediate and late-type allergic reactions can be ameliorated by various pharmacologic treatments, allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) represents the only curative approach for specific type I allergy ( 4–9). SIT is most efficient in allergy to insect venoms and allergic rhinitis ( 4–9). However, the mechanism by which SIT achieves clinical improvement remained unclear until recently. A rise in allergen-blocking IgG antibodies, particularly of the IgG4 class ( 10, 11), the generation of IgE-modulating CD8+ T cells, and a reduction in the number of mast cells and eosinophils and release of mediators ( 12–14) were found to be associated with successful SIT. Furthermore, SIT was found to be associated with a decrease in IL-4 and IL-5 production by CD4+ T cells, and, in some cases, with a shift toward increased IFN-γ production ( 9, 15–22). However, it appeared that the induction of an unresponsive or anergic state in peripheral T cells and the reactivation of the response by cytokines from the tissue microenvironment are basic intermediate key steps in the mechanism of SIT ( 15–17). Thus, conditions of the immunologic microenvironment and production of cytokines by tissue cells may finally determine whether SIT will be successful or unsuccessful. Therefore, for successful and safe SIT, allergen variants should be created of which recognition sites for T cells remain intact, whereas binding sites for IgE antibodies are removed. Intact T-cell epitopes are required to enable the induction of specific T-cell tolerance or anergy against the antigen/allergen. Not only are the antibody or B-cell epitopes a prerequisite for elicitation of adverse reactions, but IgE antibodies also focus the allergen efficiently onto antigen-presenting B cells, which present it to T cells in a way that favors development of a Th2-dominated cytokine pattern.

A model especially suited for studies of human cellular and molecular mechanisms, regulating specific allergy and normal immunity provides the immune response to bee venom (BV) ( 15–19, 23–29). BV phospholipase A2 (PLA) represents the major antigen and allergen of BV, and SIT with whole BV (BV-SIT) or short PLA peptides representing immunodominant T-cell epitopes (PLA-PIT) was applied successfully.

Allergen concentration and affinity of antigenic peptide to MHC-II and TcR molecules govern the generation ofdistinct T-cell cytokine profiles

  1. Top of page
  2. Allergen concentration and affinity of antigenic peptide to MHC-II and TcR molecules govern the generation ofdistinct T-cell cytokine profiles
  3. The induction of specific anergy in peripheral T cellsand reactivation of T cells are intermediate keysteps in SIT
  4. T-cell anergy in SIT results from initial IL-10 production by specific T cells
  5. Specific IgE and IgG4 antibody regulation by SIT and PIT
  6. The effect of IL-10 on mast cells and eosinophils in allergic inflammation
  7. Mechanisms of differential regulation of specific isotype responses by conformational allergen variants
  8. Conclusions
  9. References

By using a panel of PLA-specific human T-cell clones, it was demonstrated that the secretion of both absolute and relative amounts of cytokines and distinct cytokine patterns depend on the concentration of the antigen added to the cultures. Typically, a 10–50 times lower threshold amount of antigen was required for the induction of IL-4 than for IFN-γ. Increasing antigen concentrations favored IFN-γ production by T cells, whereas IL-4 decreased at high antigen doses ( 25). The same was true for Th2 clones, but at much higher antigen concentrations. Accordingly, cytokine patterns do not necessarily represent stable phenotypes and can be modulated by the dose of antigen. Low antigen concentration and suboptimal antigenic peptide-binding capacity of MHC-II molecules generate weak T-cell activation, an IL-4-dominated Th2 cytokine pattern, and IgE antibodies. Thus, at the same antigen concentration, individuals with high affinity to immunogenic peptides display a higher density of MHC-II/antigen complexes on the APC surface and induce stronger T-cell activation, generating sufficient IFN-γ to suppress IgE ( 27). Therefore, the cytokine-regulating forces may be driven by an individual's HLA-class II type and the strength of epitope binding in an APC/peptide/T-cell interaction. The modulation of T-cell cytokine pattern by the dose of antigen represents a driving force in differential IgE and IgG antibody formation, resulting in either allergy or immunoprotection ( 26, 28, 29).

That indeed the strength of antigen binding by the MHC II-peptide-TcR complex governs T-cell activation and cytokine production is supported by recent studies on altered peptide ligands (APL) ( 26, 30). The effect of a particular amino-acid substitution on cytokine secretion may result from affinity changes of the peptide ligand to the MHC class II molecule. Exposure of T cells to APL induces a state of specific unresponsiveness or anergy, as defined by abrogated proliferation and cytokine synthesis on antigen re-challenge. Indeed, the cytokine changes resulting from a single amino-acid mutation in an antigenic PLA peptide increased the IgG4 production significantly and skewed the ratio of specific IgE:IgG4 antibodies toward normal immunity ( 30). Most remarkably, this demonstrates that physicochemical properties of immunologic reactions are fundamental in generation of distinct states of T-cell activation, cytokine patterns, and finally development of either disease or normal immunity ( 24, 27, 30). Such regulatory effects of allergen concentration on cytokine secretion may also reflect a physiologic mechanism in SIT in which repeatedly high allergen doses are injected over a longer period of time ( 24, 26, 28, 29).

The induction of specific anergy in peripheral T cellsand reactivation of T cells are intermediate keysteps in SIT

  1. Top of page
  2. Allergen concentration and affinity of antigenic peptide to MHC-II and TcR molecules govern the generation ofdistinct T-cell cytokine profiles
  3. The induction of specific anergy in peripheral T cellsand reactivation of T cells are intermediate keysteps in SIT
  4. T-cell anergy in SIT results from initial IL-10 production by specific T cells
  5. Specific IgE and IgG4 antibody regulation by SIT and PIT
  6. The effect of IL-10 on mast cells and eosinophils in allergic inflammation
  7. Mechanisms of differential regulation of specific isotype responses by conformational allergen variants
  8. Conclusions
  9. References

The immunologic mechanism of SIT was investigated in BV-SIT ( 15, 16) and further elucidated in PLA-PIT ( 19) with a mixture of three peptides representing the immunodominant T-cell epitopes PLA45–62, PLA82–92, and PLA113–124. In both BV-SIT and PLA-PIT, successfully treated patients developed specific T-cell unresponsiveness to the entire PLA allergen as well as the three T-cell-epitope-containing peptides. After 60 days of treatment, the specific proliferative T-cell response and secretion of the Th2 type cytokines IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13, as well as the Th1 cytokines IL-2 and IFN-γ, were suppressed. The PPD or TT control responses were not affected by these treatments, indicating that the suppressive effect of SIT and PIT was specific to the allergen.

The induction of an anergic state in Th2 cells is an active biochemical process, associated with increased levels of basal tyrosine kinase activity, cytokine production, and CD25 upregulation. It is related to alterations in the TcR-mediated signaling pathway. The anergized Th2 cells failed to respond to anti-CD3 stimulation with increased tyrosine phosphorylation of p56lck and ZAP70 kinases. In addition, intra-cellular calcium flux, observed in untreated Th2 cells in response to anti-CD3 mAb, was absent in anergic Th2 cells ( 31).

The abrogated proliferative response was fully restored by antigen stimulation of anergic T cells in the presence of IL-2 or IL-15. The full capacity of IL-2 and IFN-γ secretion was also recovered by this cytokine treatment. In contrast, specific stimulation in the presence of IL-4 induced IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13, and therefore recovered a Th2 cytokine pattern typical of an allergic response. IL-2 and IL-15 basically display the same immunologic properties. However, while IL-2 is produced by activated T cells, most immunologically active cells, except T cells, secrete IL-15 ( 15, 17). Consequently, microenvironmental cytokines from the tissue recover and regulate T cells from SIT-induced anergy ( 15, 17). They can generate distinct Th0/Th1 cytokine patterns associated with successful therapy and normal immunity, or reactivate Th2 cells, supporting the persistence of the respective allergic response. Thus, successful SIT may be difficult to achieve in an established polyspecific allergy and atopy, and such treatment has to be applied at an early stage of the disease.

Decreased T-cell proliferative responses in SIT were demonstrated in allergy to ragweed, cat dander, and grass pollen ( 32–34). In mice, antigenic peptides of house-dust-mite and cat allergen were shown to induce anergy in T cells ( 35, 36), and recent studies with T-cell peptides of Fel d 1 clearly indicated peripheral tolerance induction in T cells by PIT of cat allergy ( 22, 37). In a recent study, T-cell epitope peptides of cat allergen were shown to initiate a T-cell-dependent late asthmatic reaction, without the requirement for an early IgE/mast-cell-dependent response, in sensitized asthmatic subjects ( 38).

T-cell anergy in SIT results from initial IL-10 production by specific T cells

  1. Top of page
  2. Allergen concentration and affinity of antigenic peptide to MHC-II and TcR molecules govern the generation ofdistinct T-cell cytokine profiles
  3. The induction of specific anergy in peripheral T cellsand reactivation of T cells are intermediate keysteps in SIT
  4. T-cell anergy in SIT results from initial IL-10 production by specific T cells
  5. Specific IgE and IgG4 antibody regulation by SIT and PIT
  6. The effect of IL-10 on mast cells and eosinophils in allergic inflammation
  7. Mechanisms of differential regulation of specific isotype responses by conformational allergen variants
  8. Conclusions
  9. References

The anergized cells showed suppressed PLA-specific T-cell proliferative and cytokine responses that could also be reconstituted by ex vivo neutralization of endogenous IL-10. This indicates that IL-10 is actively involved in development of anergy in specific T cells ( Fig. 1). Whereas in both BV-SIT and PLA-PIT the antigen- and peptide-induced proliferative responses and Th1 and Th2 cytokine production decreased, the IL-10 production simultaneously increased and reached maximal levels after 4 weeks, when the specific anergy was fully established. The cellular origin of IL-10 was demonstrated by intracytoplasmic IL-10 staining in PBMC and co-expression of cellular surface markers ( 16). Intracellular IL-10 significantly increased after 7 days of SIT in the antigen-specific T-cell population and activated CD4+ T cells. After 4 weeks of SIT, intracytoplasmic IL-10 was also increased in monocytes and B cells, suggesting an autocrine action of T-cell-secreted IL-10 as a pivotal step in the induction phase of T-cell anergy and its maintenance by IL-10-producing APC and nonspecific bystander T cells ( 16). Interestingly, the same features of anergy were found in T cells of healthy beekeepers, who had been previously stung by high numbers of bees. Like allergic patients after BV-SIT, these naturally an-ergized individuals show increased numbers of IL-10-producing CD4+ CD25+ T cells and monocytes. Neutralization of endogenous IL-10 in PBMC cultures from these individuals fully reconstituted the proliferative T-cell response and cytokine production ( 16).

image

Figure 1. Immunologic mechanisms of SIT. Continuous treatment with high doses of allergen establishes specific anergy in peripheral T cells. This state is characterized by suppressed proliferative and T-cell-cytokine responses and simultaneous increase in IL-10 production. IL-10 suppresses specific T cells in an autocrine fashion. It also suppresses specific IgE and enhances IgG4 production. In consequence, activation, priming, and survival of allergic inflammatory effector cells are down-regulated. The anergic T cells can be reactivated by cytokines from the tissue microenvironment. In successful SIT, anergic T cells recover by the influence of microenvironmental IL-2 and/or IL-15 to produce Th0/Th1 cytokines. In an atopic individual, IL-4 may reconstitute a Th2 cytokine pattern and reactivate an allergic response.

Download figure to PowerPoint

IL-10 is a major regulatory cytokine of inflammatory responses and a general inhibitor of proliferative and cytokine responses in both Th1 and Th2 cells ( 39–46). IL-10 is released by Th1- and Th2-type lymphocytes, mononuclear phagocytes, and NK cells ( 40–43). In vitro, the inhibitory effect of IL-10 in T cells was observed exclusively in APC-dependent systems, but not in T cells stimulated by solid-phase-bound anti-CD3 ( 41, 44, 45, 47). This is because IL-10 blocks CD28-dependent costimulatory signaling pathways in T cells. IL-10 initiates peripheral T-cell anergy by blocking tyrosine phosphorylation of CD28 and subsequently the CD28 costimulatory signal. It appears that the CD28 is directly linked with the IL-10 receptor on T cells and coprecipitates with either mAb. In consequence, IL-10 inhibits the initial step of the CD28 costimulatory signaling pathway, the association of p85 phosphatidyl-inositol 3-kinase with CD28. This prevents binding of p110 phosphatidyl-inositol 3-kinase to CD28 and activation of the subsequent signaling cascade. Thus, inhibition of accessory molecule signaling may explain peptide-ligand-induced specific anergy in APC-free T cells ( 30, 31). In addition, IL-10 action at the level of cytokine gene transcription and inhibition of cytokine mRNA accumulation has been demonstrated ( 48, 49).

Beside the SIT and PIT of BV allergy, evidence for induction of peripheral T-cell anergy was recently obtained in the SIT of wasp-venom allergy, grass-pollen asthma, conjunctivitis, and rhinitis ( 21, 33, 34, 50, 51). Furthermore, downregulated T-cell responses were reported in the PIT of cat allergy ( 22). Moreover, SIT-induced IL-10 increase was demonstrated also in wasp allergy, grass-pollen-allergic asthma, and the nasal immunotherapy of weed-induced allergic rhinitis ( 21, 50, 51). In mice, IL-10 administration before allergen treatment induced antigen-specific T-cell tolerance and established peripheral T-cell anergy ( 52). Recently, IL-10-derived regulatory CD4+ T cells, producing IL-10, but not IL-2 and IL-4, which suppressed the antigen-specific T-cell response, and prevented antigen-induced murine colitis, were identified in man and in mice ( 53).

Specific IgE and IgG4 antibody regulation by SIT and PIT

  1. Top of page
  2. Allergen concentration and affinity of antigenic peptide to MHC-II and TcR molecules govern the generation ofdistinct T-cell cytokine profiles
  3. The induction of specific anergy in peripheral T cellsand reactivation of T cells are intermediate keysteps in SIT
  4. T-cell anergy in SIT results from initial IL-10 production by specific T cells
  5. Specific IgE and IgG4 antibody regulation by SIT and PIT
  6. The effect of IL-10 on mast cells and eosinophils in allergic inflammation
  7. Mechanisms of differential regulation of specific isotype responses by conformational allergen variants
  8. Conclusions
  9. References

The serum levels of specific IgE and IgG4 antibodies delineate allergic and normal immunity to allergen. Whereas peripheral anergy was demonstrated in specific T cells, the capacity of B cells to produce specific IgE and IgG4 antibodies was not abolished. In fact, specific serum levels of both isotypes increased during the early phase of treatment. However, the increase in specific IgG4 was more pronounced and the ratio of specific IgE to IgG4 decreased by 10-fold within a few weeks ( 15). Furthermore, the in vitro production of PLA-specific IgE and IgG4 antibodies by PBMC changed in parallel to the serum levels of specific isotypes. A similar change in specific isotype ratio was observed in the SIT of various allergies. Moreover, IL-10 that was induced and increasingly secreted during SIT appears to counterregulate antigen-specific IgE and IgG4 antibody synthesis. It is a potent suppressor of both total and PLA-specific IgE, while IgG4 formation is simultaneously increased ( 16, 17). Thus, IL-10 not only generates anergy in T cells but also regulates specific isotype formation and skews the specific response from an IgE- to an IgG4-dominated phenotype.

The effect of IL-10 on mast cells and eosinophils in allergic inflammation

  1. Top of page
  2. Allergen concentration and affinity of antigenic peptide to MHC-II and TcR molecules govern the generation ofdistinct T-cell cytokine profiles
  3. The induction of specific anergy in peripheral T cellsand reactivation of T cells are intermediate keysteps in SIT
  4. T-cell anergy in SIT results from initial IL-10 production by specific T cells
  5. Specific IgE and IgG4 antibody regulation by SIT and PIT
  6. The effect of IL-10 on mast cells and eosinophils in allergic inflammation
  7. Mechanisms of differential regulation of specific isotype responses by conformational allergen variants
  8. Conclusions
  9. References

Although the final decrease in IgE antibody levels and IgE-mediated skin sensitivity normally requires several years of treatment, most patients are protected against bee stings already at an early stage of BV-SIT. Increase of allergen-specific IgG4 antibodies, blocking IgE-binding to the allergen, may explain only the late phase of protection by SIT. However, in the early phase of SIT, a decrease in histamine and sulfidoleukotriene release from basophils may be of more relevance. This decreased basophilic mediator releasability ( 54) can be attributed to suppression of cytokines in anergic T cells. There is clear evidence that effector cells of the allergic inflammation (mast cells, basophils, and eosinophils) require T-cell cytokines for priming, survival, and activity. In addition, IL-10 was shown to reduce TNF-α GM-CSF and IL-6 generation from mouse bone-marrow and rat peritoneal mast cells ( 55). Moreover, IL-10 downregulates eosinophil function and activity and suppresses IL-5 production by human resting Th0 and Th2 clones ( 45, 46, 56). It inhibits endogenous GM-CSF production and CD40 expression by activated eosinophils and enhances eosinophil cell death ( 57, 58) ( Fig. 1).

Mechanisms of differential regulation of specific isotype responses by conformational allergen variants

  1. Top of page
  2. Allergen concentration and affinity of antigenic peptide to MHC-II and TcR molecules govern the generation ofdistinct T-cell cytokine profiles
  3. The induction of specific anergy in peripheral T cellsand reactivation of T cells are intermediate keysteps in SIT
  4. T-cell anergy in SIT results from initial IL-10 production by specific T cells
  5. Specific IgE and IgG4 antibody regulation by SIT and PIT
  6. The effect of IL-10 on mast cells and eosinophils in allergic inflammation
  7. Mechanisms of differential regulation of specific isotype responses by conformational allergen variants
  8. Conclusions
  9. References

Antigen presentation by different types of APC promotes development of CD4+ Th subsets with distinct cytokine patterns ( 59, 60). An intact three-dimensional structure and specific antigen recognition are pivotal in the development of distinct T-cell cytokine profiles by preferential usage of particular APC. Whereas specific B cells most efficiently present conformational intact antigen already at low concentrations, APC utilizing phagocytosis or pinocytosis for antigen uptake, such as monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells, internalize allergen molecules independently of their structural features ( 18, 23, 59–61) ( Fig. 2). It has been shown that IgE bound to CD23 on B cells may be used to focus antigen to T cells ( 62–64). Both the high-affinity receptor for IgE (FcεRI) and the low-affinity FcεRII (CD23) may play a role in IgE-mediated antigen presentation ( 64–70). This mechanism operates selectively at very low doses of allergen, being focused and presented to CD4+ T cells ( 68, 70). Consequently, blocking IgG antibodies, induced by SIT of birch-pollen allergy, inhibited the IgE-facilitated antigen presentation ( 70).

image

Figure 2. Difference in antigen presentation and immune response by native and modified allergens. Native allergens can degranulate mast cells and basophils and utilize an IgE-mediated antigen presentation, which leads to increased Th2 cytokine and IgE production. In contrast, modified allergens lacking IgE-binding sites utilize phagocytic or pinocytic antigen-uptake mechanisms by dendritic cells (D) and monocytes/macrophages (Mac), generating a balanced Th0/Th1-like cytokine pattern by T cells, and resulting in normalized isotype production by memory B cells. Ag: allergen.

Download figure to PowerPoint

In addition, antigen capture by surface IgE and signal transduction were shown to be crucial in the elicitation of specific IgE responses ( 71). Indeed, PLA which expressed the correct tertiary structure, and which was recognized by IgE and IgG antibodies from bee-sting-allergic patients, induced high IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 production in PBMC cultures. In contrast, nonrefolded recombinant (r) or native (n) PLA and chemically reduced and alkylated PLA induced higher IFN-γ and IL-2 production and proliferation ( 18). Differences in proliferation and cytokine patterns among correctly folded and nonrefolded PLA resulted from conformation-dependent involvement of different types of APC. Antigen-presenting B cells and monocytes recognized PLA in its natural conformation, stimulated Th2-type cytokines, and induced IgE antibodies. Nonrefolded or altered PLA was recognized, processed, and presented exclusively by CD14+ cells (monocytes), and it induced, mainly by increased IL-12 secretion, a Th1-dominated cytokine profile leading to IgG4 production ( 18). The increased activation of monocytes/macrophages was further substantiated by their enhanced IL-1β secretion. The possibility that production of particular cytokine patterns and immunoglobulin isotypes was influenced by the enzymatic activity of PLA was excluded by using enzymatically inactive H34Q point-mutated refolded rPLA ( 18, 72).

These findings demonstrate the decisive role of specific antigen recognition by different APC, depending on structural features and the existence of conformational B-cell epitopes (Fig. 2). Various approaches to avoid IgE binding to allergen and corresponding antigen presentation have been applied. Chemically modified allergen variants, with low IgE-binding properties, are already in clinical practice ( 73–85). However, genetic engineering of allergens clearly represents the future ( 86–99) ( Table 1).

Table 1.  Strategies to modify allergens in past and for future SIT
Chemical modification of allergens
 Mineral oil precipitation (73)
 Alum precipitation (74)
 Urea denaturation (75)
 Polyethylene glycol precipitation (76, 77)
 Poly-D-glutamic acid:D-lysine conjugation (78)
 Formaldehyde/glutaraldehyde conjugations (79–83)
 Anhydride conjugation of allergens (84)
 Potassium cyanate treatment (85)
Modification of B-cell epitopes
 Site-directed mutagenesis of amino acids in B-cell epitopes (86–91)
 Deletion of amino acids in B-cell epitopes (88, 89)
Modification of allergen conformation
 Unrefolded recombinant allergens (18)
 Reduction and alkylation of cysteine residues (18)
 Site-directed mutagenesis of the cysteine residues (89, 92, 93)
Hypoallergenic allergen fragments (94–97)
Hypoallergenic allergen oligomers (96–99)
T-cell-epitope peptides and altered peptide ligands (19, 22, 30, 37)

Conclusions

  1. Top of page
  2. Allergen concentration and affinity of antigenic peptide to MHC-II and TcR molecules govern the generation ofdistinct T-cell cytokine profiles
  3. The induction of specific anergy in peripheral T cellsand reactivation of T cells are intermediate keysteps in SIT
  4. T-cell anergy in SIT results from initial IL-10 production by specific T cells
  5. Specific IgE and IgG4 antibody regulation by SIT and PIT
  6. The effect of IL-10 on mast cells and eosinophils in allergic inflammation
  7. Mechanisms of differential regulation of specific isotype responses by conformational allergen variants
  8. Conclusions
  9. References

Induction of specific anergy in peripheral T cells by IL-10 and subsequent reactivation of distinct cytokine patterns by cytokines from the tissue microenvironment are key events in the immunologic mechanisms of SIT. These mechanisms have implications which may reach beyond specific allergy treatment, and induction of specific anergy may be of importance also in autoimmunity and transplantation. It can foster tumor growth, parasite survival, and AIDS development. The immunologic key steps of SIT and PIT are depicted in Fig. 1. Both SIT and PIT generate IL-10, which in an autocrine way of action induces specific anergy in peripheral T cells. Both types of treatment decrease the antigen-specific IgE:IgG4 ratio in peripheral blood. The reactivation and modulation of distinct cytokine patterns in anergic T cells suggest a pivotal role of microenvironmental cytokines in the development of SIT. T-cell-secreted cytokines are essential for the priming, survival, and activity of inflammatory effector cells. Therefore, specific T-cell reactivity is directly involved in the pathogenesis of allergic inflammation. IL-10 not only induces anergy in T cells but also inhibits the activation of inflammatory reactions by mast cells and eosinophils. Finally, the generation of new Th2-type cells secreting allergic inflammatory cytokine patterns can be suppressed by administration of high allergen doses inducing IFN-γ-dominated cytokine patterns.

Various attempts have been made to increase the success of SIT and decrease its risk of side-effects. The availability of recombinant allergen technology will permit excellent standardization of allergen preparations for clinical use. The aim of allergen modification is to decrease the allergenicity while retaining its immunogenicity ( 100). This could be achieved by destroying conformational B-cell epitopes and simultaneously preserving linear T-cell epitopes in allergens. Fig. 2 demonstrates the different ways of antigen presentation and immune response by native and modified allergens. Native allergens utilize IgE-facilitated antigen presentation, leading to increases in production of Th2 cytokines. High amounts of IL-4 and IL-13 produced by classical allergens induce higher IgE production, whereas high IL-5 production leads to eosinophil activation and increased eosinophil life span. Because of severe side-effects, the high doses required for successful SIT may not be reached with native allergen extracts. For example, they cannot be used in anaphylactogenic food and in latex allergy. In contrast, modified allergens lacking IgE-binding sites or effector cell degranulation do not employ IgE-mediated antigen presentation (100). They utilize phagocytic or pinocytic antigen-uptake mechanisms, which induce a balanced Th0/Th1-like cytokine pattern by T cells, resulting in lower IgE and higher IgG production by memory B cells. Bypassing IgE and targeting T cells by modified allergens enables administration of higher doses to induce Th2-type T-cell tolerance without risk of anaphylaxis.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Allergen concentration and affinity of antigenic peptide to MHC-II and TcR molecules govern the generation ofdistinct T-cell cytokine profiles
  3. The induction of specific anergy in peripheral T cellsand reactivation of T cells are intermediate keysteps in SIT
  4. T-cell anergy in SIT results from initial IL-10 production by specific T cells
  5. Specific IgE and IgG4 antibody regulation by SIT and PIT
  6. The effect of IL-10 on mast cells and eosinophils in allergic inflammation
  7. Mechanisms of differential regulation of specific isotype responses by conformational allergen variants
  8. Conclusions
  9. References
  • 1
    Mosmann TR & Sad S. The expanding universe of T-cell subsets: Th1, Th2 and more. Immunol Today 1996;17:142 146.
  • 2
    Romagnani S. Lymphokine production by human T cells in disease states. Annu Rev Immunol 1994;12:227 257.
  • 3
    Paul WE & Seder RA. Lymphocyte responses and cytokines. Cell 1994;76:241 251.
  • 4
    Bousquet J, Lockey RF, Malling H-J. WHO position paper. Allergen immunotherapy: therapeutic vaccines for allergic diseases. Allergy 1998;53 Suppl 44:1 42.
  • 5
    Müller U & Mosbech H. Position paper. Immunotherapy with Hymenoptera venoms. Allergy 1993;48 Suppl 14:36 46.
  • 6
    Müller UR, Hebling A, Berchtold E. Immunotherapy with honeybee venom and yellow jacket venom is different regarding efficacy and safety. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1992;89:529 535.
  • 7
    Walker SM, Varney VA, Gaga M, Jacobson MR, Durham SR. Grass pollen immunotherapy: efficacy and safety during a 4 year follow-up study. Allergy 1995;50:405 413.
  • 8
    Varney VA, Gaga M, Frew AJ. Usefulness of immunotherapy in patients with severe summer hay fever uncontrolled by anti-allergic drugs. BMJ 1991;302:489 500.
  • 9
    Durham SR, Walker SM, Varga E-V, et al. Long-term clinical efficacy of grass-pollen immunotherapy. N Engl J Med 1999;341:468 475.
  • 10
    Reid MJ, Moss RB, Hsu YP, Kwasnicki JM, Commerford TM, Nelson BL. Seasonal asthma in northern California: allergic causes and efficacy of immunotherapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1986;78:590 600.
  • 11
    Wetterwald A, Skvaril F, Müller U, Blaser K. Isotypic and idiotypic characterization of anti-bee venom phospholipase A2 antibodies. Arch Allergy Appl Immunol 1985;77:195 197.
  • 12
    Varney VA, Hamid QA, Gaga M, et al. Influence of grass pollen immunotherapy on cellular infiltration and cytokine mRNA expression during allergen-induced late-phase cutaneous responses. J Clin Invest 1993;92:644 651.
  • 13
    Creticos PS, Franklin Adkinson N Jr, Kagey-Sabotka A, et al. Nasal challenge with ragweed in hay fever patients: effect of immunotherapy. J Clin Invest 1983;76:2247 2253.
  • 14
    Rak S, Rowhagen O, Venge P. The effect of immunotherapy on bronchial hyperresponsiveness and eosinophil cationic protein in pollen allergic patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1988;82:470 480.
  • 15
    Akdis CA, Akdis M, Blesken T, et al. Epitope specific T cell tolerance to phospholipase A2 in bee venom immunotherapy and recovery by IL-2 and IL-15 in vitro. J Clin Invest 1996;98:1676 1683.
  • 16
    Akdis CA, Blesken T, Akdis M, Wüthrich B, Blaser K. Role of IL-10 in specific immunotherapy. J Clin Invest 1998;102:98 106.
  • 17
    Akdis CA & Blaser K. IL-10 induced anergy in peripheral T cell and reactivation by microenvironmental cytokines: two key steps in specific immunotherapy. FASEB J 1999;13:603 609.
  • 18
    Akdis CA, Blesken T, Wymann D, Akdis M, Blaser K. Differential regulation of human T-cell cytokine patterns and IgE and IgG4 responses by conformational antigen variants. Eur J Immunol 1998;28:914 925.
  • 19
    Müller UR, Akdis AC, Fricker M, et al. Successful immunotherapy with T-cell epitope peptides of bee venom phospholipase A2 induces specific T cell anergy in bee sting allergic patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1998;101:747 754.
  • 20
    Jutel M, Pichler WJ, Skrbic D, Urwyler A, Dahinden C, Müller UR. Bee venom immunotherapy results in decrease of IL-4 and IL-5 and increase of IFN-γ secretion in specific allergen stimulated T cell cultures. J Immunol 1995;154:4178 4194.
  • 21
    Bellinghausen I, Metz G, Enk AH, Christmann S, Knop J, Saloga J. Insect venom immunotherapy induces interleukin-10 production and a Th2-to-Th1 shift, and changes surface marker expression in venom-allergic subjects. Eur J Immunol 1997;27:1131 1139.
  • 22
    Marcotte GV, Braun CM, Norman PS, et al. Effects of peptide therapy on ex vivo T cell responses. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1998;101:506 513.
  • 23
    Akdis CA, Blesken T, Akdis M, et al. Induction and differential regulation of bee venom phospholipase A2-specific human IgE and IgG4 antibodies in vitro requires allergen-specific and non-specific activation of T and B cells. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1997;99:345 352.
  • 24
    Carballido JM, Carballido-Perrig N, Kägi MK, et al. T-cell epitope specificity in human allergic and non-allergic subjects to bee venom phospholipase A2. J Immunol 1993;150:3582 3591.
  • 25
    Carballido JM, Faith A, Carballido-Perrig N, Blaser K. The intensity of T cell receptor engagement determines the cytokine pattern of human allergen-specific Th cells. Eur J Immunol 1997;27:515 521.
  • 26
    Blaser K, Carballido JM, Faith A, Crameri R, Akdis CA. Determinants and mechanisms of human immune response to bee venom phospholipase A2. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 1998;117:1 10.
  • 27
    Carballido JM, Carballido-Perrig N, Oberli-Schraemmli A, Heusser CH, Blaser K. Regulation of IgE and IgG4 responses by allergen-specific T-cell clones to bee venom phospholipase A2in vitro. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1994;93:758 767.
  • 28
    Blaser K. T cell and B-cell epitopes in bee venom phospholipase A2: antigen-dose dependent cytokine ratios regulate specific IgE and IgG antibody responses . In: SchneiderE, editor. Peptides in immunology. New York: John Wiley, 1996:93 101.
  • 29
    Blaser K. Allergen-dose dependent cytokine production regulates specific IgE and IgG antibody production. In: SehonA, HayGlassKT, KraftD, editor. Advances in experimental medicine and biology. New York: Plenum Press, 1996:295 303.
  • 30
    Faith A, Akdis CA, Akdis M, Joss A, Wymann D, Blaser K. An altered peptide ligand specifically inhibits Th2 cytokine synthesis by abrogating TCR signaling. J Immunol 1999;162:1836 1842.
  • 31
    Faith A, Akdis CA, Akdis M, Simon H-U, Blaser K. Defective TCR stimulation in anergized type 2 T helper cells correlates with abrogated p56lck and ZAP-70 tyrosine kinase activities. J Immunol 1997;159:53 60.
  • 32
    Secrist H, Chelen CJ, Wen Y, Marshall JD, Umetsu DT. Allergen immunotherapy decreases interleukin 4 production in CD4 T cells from allergic individuals. J Exp Med 1993;178:2123 2130.
  • 33
    Creticos PS. Immunological changes associated with immunotherapy. In: GreenbergerPA, editor. Immunotherapy of IgE-mediated disorders. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1992:13 37.
  • 34
    Greenstein JL, Morgenstern JP, LaRaia J, et al. Ragweed immunotherapy decreases T cell reactivity to recombinant Amb a 1 [Abstract]. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1992;89:322.
  • 35
    Hoyne GF, O'hehir R, Wraith DC, Thomas WR, Lamb JR. Inhibition of T cell and antibody responses to house dust mite allergen by inhalation of the dominant T-cell epitope in naive and sensitized mice. J Exp Med 1993;178:1783 1788.
  • 36
    Briner T, Kou M, Keating K, Rogers B, Greenstein J. Peripheral T cell tolerance induced in naive and primed mice by subcutaneous injection of peptides from the major cat allergen Fel d I. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1993;90:7608 7612.
  • 37
    Norman P, Ohmann Jl Jr, Long AA, et al. Treatment of cat allergy with T cell reactive peptides. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1996;154:1623 1628.
  • 38
    Haselden BM, Kay AB, Larche M. Immunoglobulin E-independent major histocompatibility complex-restricted T cell peptide epitope-induced late asthmatic reactions. J Exp Med 1999;189:1885 1894.
  • 39
    Fiorentino DF, Bond MW, Mosmann TR. Two types of mouse T helper cell IV. Th2 clones secrete a factor that inhibits cytokine production by Th1 clones. J Exp Med 1989;170:2081 2095.
  • 40
    Fiorentino DF, Zlotnik A, Mosmann TR, Howard M, O'garra A. IL-10 inhibits cytokine production by activated macrophages. J Immunol 1991;147:3815 3822.
  • 41
    De Waal Malefyt R, Abrams J, Bennett B, Figdor CG, De Vries JE. Interleukin 10 (IL-10) inhibits cytokine synthesis by human monocytes: an autoregulatory role of IL-10 produced by monocytes. J Exp Med 1991;174:1209 1220.
  • 42
    Hsu DH, Moore KW, Spits H. Differential effects of interleukin-4 and -10 on interleukin-2 induced interferon-γ synthesis and lymphokine activated killer activity. Int Immunol 1992;4:563 569.
  • 43
    Del Prete G, De Carli M, Almerigogna F, Giudizi MG, Biagiotti R, Romagnani S. Human IL-10 is produced by both type 1 helper (Th1) and type 2 helper (Th2) T cell clones and inhibits their antigen-specific proliferation and cytokine production. J Immunol 1993;150:353 356.
  • 44
    Zuany-Amorim C, Haile S, Leduc D, et al. Interleukin-10 inhibits antigen-induced cellular recruitment into the airways of sensitized mice. J Clin Invest 1995;95:2644 2651.
  • 45
    Zuany-Amorim C, Creminon C, Nevers MC, Nahori M-A, Vergaftig BB, Pretolani M. Modulation by IL-10 of antigen-induced IL-5 generation, and CD4+ T lymphocyte and eosinophil infiltration into the mouse peritoneal cavity. J Immunol 1996;157:377 384.
  • 46
    Schandane L, Alonso-Vega C, Willems F, et al. B7/CD28-dependent IL-5 production by human resting T cells is inhibited by IL-10. J Immunol 1994;152:4368 4374.
  • 47
    Ding L & Shevach EM. IL-10 inhibits mitogen-induced T cell proliferation by selectively inhibiting macrophage co-stimulatory function. J Immunol 1992;148:3133 3139.
  • 48
    Wang P, Wu P, Siegel MI, Egan RW, Billah MM. IL-10 inhibits transcription of cytokine genes in human peripheral blood mononuclear cells. J Immunol 1994;153:811 816.
  • 49
    Bogdan C, Paik J, Vodovotz Y, Nathan C. Contrasting mechanisms for suppression of macrophage cytokine release by transforming growth factor-β and interleukin-10. J Biol Chem 1992;267:23301 23310.
  • 50
    Gaglani B, Borish B, Bartelson BL, Bucheimer A, Keller L, Nelson HS. Nasal immunotherapy in weed-induced allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1997;79:259 265.
  • 51
    Ippoliti F, Ragno V, Del Nero A, McEwen N, McEwen H, Businco L. Effect of preseasonal enzyme potentiated desensitization on plasma IL-6 and IL-10 of grass pollen-sensitive asthmatic children. Allerg Immunol (Paris) 1997;29:123 125.
  • 52
    Enk AH, Saloga J, Becker D, Mohamadzadeh M, Knop J. Induction of hapten-specific tolerance by interleukin 10 in vivo. J Exp Med 1994;179:1397 1402.
  • 53
    Groux H, O'garra A, Bigler M, et al. A CD4+ T-cell subset inhibits antigen-specific T-cell responses and prevents colitis. Nature 1997;389:737 742.
  • 54
    Jutel M, Müller UM, Fricker M, Rihs S, Pichler W, Dahinden C. Influence of bee venom immunotherapy on degranulation and leukotriene generation in human blood basophils. Clin Exp Allergy 1996;26:112 118.
  • 55
    Marshall JS, Leal-Berumen I, Nielsen L, Glibetic M, Jordana M. Interleukin (IL)-10 inhibits long-term IL-6 production but not preformed mediator release from rat peritoneal mast cells. J Clin Invest 1996;97:1122 1128.
  • 56
    Pretolani M & Goldman M. IL-10: a potential therapy for allergic inflammation? Immunol Today 1997;18:277 280.
  • 57
    Takanaski S, Nonaka R, Xing Z, O'byrne P, Dolovich J, Jordana M. Interleukin 10 inhibits lipopolysaccharide-induced survival and cytokine production by human peripheral blood eosinophils. J Exp Med 1994;180:711 715.
  • 58
    Ohkawara Y, Lim KG, Glibetic M, et al. CD40 expression by human peripheral blood eosinophils. J Clin Invest 1996;97:1761 1766.
  • 59
    DeKruyff RH, Fang Y, Umetsu DT. IL-4 synthesis by in vivo primed keyhole limpet hemocyanin specific CD4+ T cells. I. Influence of antigen concentration and antigen-presenting cell type. J Immunol 1992;149:3468 3476.
  • 60
    Secrist H, DeKruyff RH, Umetsu DT. Interleukin-4 production by CD4+ T cells from allergic individuals is modulated by antigen concentration and antigen-presenting cell type. J Exp Med 1995;181:1081 1089.
  • 61
    Pierce SK, Morris JF, Grusby MJ, et al. Antigen-presenting function of B lymphocytes. Immunol Rev 1988;106:149 180.
  • 62
    Kehry MR & Yamashita LC. Low-affinity IgE receptor (CD23) function on mouse B cells: role in IgE-dependent antigen focusing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1989;86:7556 7560.
  • 63
    Van Der Heijden FL, Van Neerven RJJ, Van Katwijk M, Bos JD, Kapsenberg ML. Serum IgE-facilitated allergen presentation in allergic disease. J Immunol 1993;150:3643 3647.
  • 64
    Maurer D, Ebner C, Reininger B, et al. The high affinity IgE receptor (FcεRI) mediates IgE-dependent allergen presentation . J Immunol 1995;154:6285 6289.
  • 65
    Stigl G & Maurer D. IgE-mediated allergen presentation via Fc epsilon RI on antigen-presenting cells. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 1997;113:24 29.
  • 66
    Maurer D & Stigl G. Immunoglobulin E-binding structures on antigen-presenting cells present in skin and blood. J Invest Dermatol 1995;104:707 710.
  • 67
    Mudde GC, Van Reijsen FC, Boland GJ, De Gast GC, Bruijnzeel PLB, Bruijnzeel-Koomen CAFM. Allergen presentation by epidermal Langerhans’ cells from patients with atopic dermatitis is mediated by IgE. Immunology 1990;69:335 341.
  • 68
    Santamaria Babi LF, Bheekha R, Van Reijsen FC, et al. Antigen focusing by specific monomeric immunoglobulin E bound to CD23 on Epstein-Barr virus-transformed B cells. Human Immunol 1993;37:23 30.
  • 69
    Pirron U, Schlunck T, Prinz JC, Rieber EP. IgE-dependent antigen focusing by human B lymphocytes is mediated by the low-affinity receptor for IgE. Eur J Immunol 1990;20:1547 1551.
  • 70
    Van Neerven RJJ, Wikborg T, Lund G, et al. Blocking antibodies induced by specific allergy vaccination prevent the activation of CD4+ T cells by inhibiting serum IgE-facilitated allergen presentation. J Immunol 1999;163:2944 2952.
  • 71
    Achatz G, Nitschke L, Lamers MC. Effect of transmembrane and cytoplasmic domains of IgE on the IgE response. Science 1977;276:409 411.
  • 72
    Wymann D, Akdis CA, Blesken T, Akdis M, Crameri R, Blaser K. Enzymatic activity of soluble phospholipase A2 does not affect the specific IgE, IgG4 and cytokine responses in bee sting allergy. Clin Exp Allergy 1998;28:839 849.
  • 73
    Norman PS, Winkenwerder WL, D'lugoff BC. Controlled evaluations of repository therapy in ragweed hay fever. J Allergy 1967;39:82 88.
  • 74
    Norman PS, Winkenwerder WL, Lichtenstein LM. Trials of alum-precipitated pollen extracts in the treatment of hay fever. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1972;59:31 36.
  • 75
    Ishizaka K, Okudaira H, King TP. Immunogenic properties of modified antigen E. II. Ability of urea denaturated antigen and polypeptide chain to prime T-cells specific for antigen E. Eur J Immunol 1975;114:110 115.
  • 76
    Lee WY & Sehon AH. Abrogation of reaginic antibodies with modified proteins. Nature 1977;267:618 620.
  • 77
    Juniper EF, O'connor J, Roberts RS, Hargreave FE. A two year study of Pegalgen (a polyethylene glycol modified ragweed extract) in ragweed rhinoconjunctivitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1983;71:119.
  • 78
    Butterfield JH, Gleich GJ, Yunginger JW, Zimmerman EM, Reed CE. Immunotherapy with short ragweed fraction A: d-glutamic acid: d-lysine polymer in ragweed hay fever . J Allergy Clin Immunol 1981;67:272 276.
  • 79
    Marsh DG, Norman PS, Roebber M, Lichtenstein LM. Studies on allergoids from naturally occurring allergens. III. Preparation of ragweed pollen allergoids by aldehyde modification in two steps. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1981;68:449 459.
  • 80
    Grammer LC, Shaughnessy MA, Patterson R. Modified forms of allergen immunotherapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1985;76:397 401.
  • 81
    Meriney KD, Kothari H, Chinoy P, Grieco HM. The clinical and immunological efficacy of immunotherapy with modified ragweed extract (allergoid) for ragweed hay fever. Ann Allergy 1986;56:34 39.
  • 82
    Bousquet J, Braquemond P, Feinberg J, Guérin B, Maasch HJ, Michel FB. Specific IgE response with a standardized allergen or allergoid in grass pollen allergy. Ann Allergy 1986;56:456 459.
  • 83
    Bousquet J, Frank E, Hejjaoui A, Maasch HJ, Michel FB, Soussana M. Double blind, placebo controlled immunotherapy with high-molecular-weight, formalinized allergoid in grass pollen allergy. Int Arch Allergy Appl Immunol 1987;82:550 552.
  • 84
    Ćirković TD, Bukilica MN, Gavrović MD, Vujčić ZM, Petrović S, Jankov RM. Physicochemical and immunologic characterization of low-molecular weight allergoids of Dactylis glomerata pollen proteins. Allergy 1999;45:128 134.
  • 85
    Passalacqua G, Albano M, Fregonese L, et al. Randomized controlled trial of local allergoid immunotherapy on allergic inflammation in mite-induced rhinoconjunctivitis. Lancet 1998;351:629 632.
  • 86
    Ferreira F, Ebner C, Kramer B, et al. Modulation of IgE reactivity of allergens by site-directed mutagenesis: potential use of hypoallergenic variants for immunotherapy. FASEB J 1998;12:231 242.
  • 87
    Ferreira F, Hirtenlehner K, Jilek A, et al. Dissection of immunoglobulin E and T lymphocyte reactivity of isoforms of the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1: potential use of hypoallergenic isoforms for immunotherapy. J Exp Med 1996;183:599 608.
  • 88
    Schramm G, Kahlert H, Suck R, et al. “Allergen engineering”: variants of the timothy grass pollen allergen Phl p 5b with reduced IgE-binding capacity but conserved T cell reactivity. J Immunol 1999;162:2406 2414.
  • 89
    Hakkart GAJ, Aalberse RC, Van Ree R. Epitope mapping of the house-dust-mite allergen Der p 2 by means of site-directed mutagenesis. Allergy 1998;53:165 172.
  • 90
    Burks AW, King N, Bannon GA. Modification of a major peanut allergen leads to loss of IgE-binding. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 1999;118:313 314.
  • 91
    Shin D, Compadre CM, Maleki SJ, et al. Bichemical and structural analysis of the IgE-binding sites on Ara h 1, an abundant and highly allergenic peanut protein. J Biol Chem 1998;273:13753 13759.
  • 92
    Olsson S, Van Hage-Hamsten M, Whitley P. Contribution of disulphide bonds to antigenicity of Lep d 2, the major allergen of the dust mite Lepidoglyphus destructor. Mol Immunol 1998;35:1017 1023.
  • 93
    Yasue M, Yokota T, Fukada M, et al. Hyposensitization to allergic reaction in rDer f 2-sensitized mice by the intranasal administration of a mutant of rDer f 2, C8/119S. Clin Exp Immunol 1998;113:1 9.
  • 94
    Vrtala S, Hirtenlehner K, Vangelista L, et al. Conversion of the major birch pollen allergen, Bet v 1, into two nonanaphylactic T-cell epitope-containing fragments: candidates for a novel form of specific immunotherapy. J Clin Invest 1997;99:1673 1681.
  • 95
    Zeiler T, Taivainen A, Rytksnen M, et al. Recombinant allergen fragments as candidate preparations for allergen immunotherapy. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1997;100:721 727.
  • 96
    Van Hage-Hamsten M, Kronqvist M, Zetterström O, et al. Skin test evaluation of genetically engineered hypoallergenic derivatives of the major birch pollen allergen, Bet v 1: results obtained with a mix of two recombinant Bet v 1 fragments and recombinant Bet v 1 trimer in a Swedish population before the birch pollen season. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1999;104:969 977.
  • 97
    Pauli G, Purohit A, Oster J-P, et al. Comparison of genetically engineered hypoallergenic rBet v 1 derivatives with rBet v 1 wild type by skin prick and intradermal testing: results obtained in a French population. Clin Exp Allergy 2000 (in press).
  • 98
    Vrtala S, Hirtenlehner K, Susani M, et al. Genetic engineering of recombinant hypoallergenic oligomers of the major birch pollen allergen, Bet v 1: candidates for specific immunotherapy. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 1999;118:218 219.
  • 99
    Nopp A, Hallden G, Lundahl J, et al. Genetically engineered hypoallergenic derivatives of the major birch pollen allergen, Bet v 1, induce less eosinophilic activity in skin chamber fluids collected from birch pollen allergic patients than rBet v 1 wild type. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2000 (in press).
  • 100
    Akdis CA & Blaser K. Regulation of specific immune responses by chemical and structural modifications of allergens. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2000 121 (in press).