↓ Skip to main content

CD4+CD25+ Regulatory T Cells: Origin, Function and Therapeutic Potential

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'CD4+CD25+ Regulatory T Cells: Origin, Function and Therapeutic Potential'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 Selection of CD4+CD25+ Regulatory T Cells by Self-Peptides
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 The Role of TCR Specificity in Naturally Arising CD25+ CD4+ Regulatory T Cell Biology
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 Thymic commitment of regulatory T cells is a pathway of TCR-dependent selection that isolates repertoires undergoing positive or negative selection.
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 Selection and Behavior of CD4+ CD25+ T Cells In Vivo: Lessons from T Cell Receptor Transgenic Models
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 Migration Rules: Functional Properties of Naive and Effector/Memory-Like Regulatory T Cell Subsets
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Peripheral Generation and Function of CD4+CD25+ Regulatory T Cells
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 Dendritic Cells: Key Cells for the Induction of Regulatory T Cells?
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Autoimmune Gastritis Is a Well-Defined Autoimmune Disease Model for the Study of CD4+CD25+ T Cell-Mediated Suppression
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Regulatory T Cells in Experimental Colitis
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 Autoimmune Ovarian Disease in Day 3-Thymectomized Mice: The Neonatal Time Window, Antigen Specificity of Disease Suppression, and Genetic Control
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Regulatory T Cells in Transplantation Tolerance
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 CD4+CD25+ Regulatory T Cells in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 Naturally Arising CD25+CD4+ Regulatory T Cells in Tumor Immunity
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 Phenotypic and Functional Differences Between Human CD4+CD25+ and Type 1 Regulatory T Cells
Attention for Chapter 3: Thymic commitment of regulatory T cells is a pathway of TCR-dependent selection that isolates repertoires undergoing positive or negative selection.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

3 Facebook pages


2 Dimensions

Readers on

62 Mendeley
1 CiteULike
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
Thymic commitment of regulatory T cells is a pathway of TCR-dependent selection that isolates repertoires undergoing positive or negative selection.
Chapter number 3
Book title
CD4+CD25+ Regulatory T Cells: Origin, Function and Therapeutic Potential
Published in
Current topics in microbiology and immunology, June 2005
DOI 10.1007/3-540-27702-1_3
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-54-024444-8, 978-3-54-027702-6

Coutinho A, Caramalho I, Seixas E, Demengeot J, A Coutinho, I Caramalho, E Seixas, J Demengeot, A. Coutinho, I. Caramalho, E. Seixas, J. Demengeot


R.W. Compans, M.D. Cooper, T. Honjo, H. Koprowski, F. Melchers, M.B.A. Oldstone, S. Olsnes, M. Potter, P.K. Vogt, H. Wagner, Professor Dr. Bruno Kyewski, Dr. Elisabeth Suri-Payer


The seminal work of Le Douarin and colleagues (Ohki et al. 1987; Ohki et al. 1988; Salaun et al. 1990; Coutinho et al. 1993) first demonstrated that peripheral tissue-specific tolerance is centrally established in the thymus, by epithelial stromal cells (TEC). Subsequent experiments have shown that TEC-tolerance is dominant and mediated by CD4 regulatory T cells (Treg) that are generated intrathymically by recognition of antigens expressed on TECs (Modigliani et al. 1995; Modigliani et al. 1996a). From these and other observations, in 1996 Modigliani and colleagues derived a general model for the establishment and maintenance of natural tolerance (MM96) (Modigliani et al. 1996b), with two central propositions: (1) T cell receptor (TCR)-dependent sorting of emergent repertoires generates TEC-specific Treg displaying the highest TCR self-affinities below deletion thresholds, thus isolating repertoires undergoing positive and negative selection; (2) Treg are intrathymically committed (and activated) for a unique differentiative pathway with regulatory effector functions. The model explained the embryonic/perinatal time window of natural tolerance acquisition, by developmental programs determining (1) TCR multireactivity, (2) the cellular composition in the thymic stroma (relative abundance of epithelial vs hemopoietic cells), and (3) the dynamics of peripheral lymphocyte pools, built by accumulation of recent thymic emigrants (RTE) that remain recruitable to regulatory functions. We discuss here the MM96 in the light of recent results demonstrating the promiscuous expression of tissue-specific antigens by medullary TECs (Derbinski et al. 2001; Anderson et al. 2002; Gotter et al. 2004) and indicating that Treg represent a unique differentiative pathway (Fontenot et al. 2003; Hori et al. 2003; Khattri et al. 2003), which is adopted by CD4 T cells with high avidity for TEC-antigens (Bensinger et al. 2001; Jordan et al. 2001; Apostolou et al. 2002). In the likelihood that autoimmune diseases (AID) result from Treg deficits, some of which might have a thymic origin, we also speculate on therapeutic strategies aiming at selectively stimulating their de novo production or peripheral function, within recent findings on Treg responses to inflammation (Caramalho et al. 2003; Lopes-Carvalho et al., submitted, Caramalho et al., submitted). In short, the MM96 argued that natural tolerance is dominant, established and maintained by the activity of Treg, which are selected upon high-affinity recognition of self-ligands on TECs, and committed intrathymically to a unique differentiative pathway geared to anti-inflammatory and antiproliferative effector functions. By postulating the intrathymic deletion of self-reactivities on hemopoietic stromal cells (THC), together with the inability of peripheral resident lymphocytes to engage in the regulatory pathway, the MM96 simultaneously explained the maintenance of responsiveness to non-self in a context of suppression mediating dominant self-tolerance. The major difficulty of the MM96 is related to the apparent tissue specificity of Treg repertoires generated intrathymically. This difficulty has now been principally solved by the work of Hanahan, Kyewski and others (Jolicoeur et al. 1994; Derbinski et al. 2001; Anderson et al. 2002; Gotter et al. 2004), demonstrating the selective expression of a variety of tissue-specific antigens by TECs, in topological patterns that are compatible with the MM96, but difficult to conciliate with recessive tolerance models (Kappler et al. 1987; Kisielow et al. 1988). While the developmentally regulated multireactivity of TCR repertoires (Gavin and Bevan 1995), as well as the peripheral recruitment of Treg among RTE (Modigliani et al. 1996a) might add to this process, it would seem that the establishment of tissue-specific tolerance essentially stems from the "promiscuous expression of tissue antigens" by TEC. The findings of AID resulting from natural mutations (reviewed in Pitkanen and Peterson 2003) or the targeted inactivation (Anderson et al. 2002; Ramsey et al. 2002) of the AIRE transcription factor that regulates promiscuous gene expression on TECs support this conclusion. The observations on the correlation of natural or forced expression of the Foxp3 transcription factor in CD4 T cells with Treg phenotype and function (Fontenot et al. 2003; Hori et al. 2003; Khattri et al. 2003) provided support for the MM96 contention that Treg represent a unique differentiative pathway that is naturally established inside the thymus. Furthermore, Caton and colleagues (Jordan et al. 2001), as well as several other groups (Bensinger et al. 2001; Apostolou et al. 2002), have provided direct evidence for our postulate that Treg are selected among differentiating CD4 T cells with high affinity for ligands expressed on TECs (Modigliani et al. 1996b). Finally, the demonstration by Caramalho et al. that Treg express innate immunity receptors (Caramalho et al. 2003) and respond to pro-inflammatory signals and products of inflammation (Caramalho et al., submitted) brought about a new understanding on the peripheral regulation of Treg function. Together with the observation that Treg also respond to ongoing activities of "naïve/effector" T cells--possibly through the IL-2 produced in these conditions--these findings explain the participation of Treg in all immune responses (Onizuka et al. 1999; Shimizu et al. 1999; Annacker et al. 2001; Curotto de Lafaille et al. 2001; Almeida et al. 2002; Shevach 2002; Bach and Francois Bach 2003; Wood and Sakaguchi 2003; Mittrucker and Kaufmann 2004; Sakaguchi 2004), beyond their fundamental role in ensuring self-tolerance (e.g., Modigliani et al. 1996a; Shevach 2000; Hori et al. 2003; Sakaguchi 2004; Thompson and Powrie 2004). Thus, anti-inflammatory and anti-proliferative Treg are amplified by signals that promote or mediate inflammation and proliferation, accounting for the quality control of responses (Coutinho et al. 2001). In turn, such natural regulation of Treg by immune responses to non-self may well explain the alarming epidemiology of allergic and AID in wealthy societies (Wills-Karp et al. 2001; Bach 2002; Yazdanbakhsh et al. 2002), where a variety of childhood infections have become rare or absent. Thus, it is plausible that Treg were evolutionarily set by a given density of infectious agents in the environment. With hindsight, it is not too surprising that natural Treg performance falls once hygiene, vaccination, and antibiotics suddenly (i.e., 100 years) plunged infectious density to below some critical physiological threshold. As the immune system is not adapted to modern clean conditions of postnatal development, clinical immunologists must now deal with frequent Treg deficiencies (allergies and AID) for which they have no curative or rational treatments. It is essential, therefore, that basic immunologists concentrate on strategies to selectively stimulate the production, survival, and activity of this set of lymphocytes that is instrumental in preventing immune pathology. We have argued that the culprit of this inability of basic research to solve major clinical problems has been the self-righteousness of recessive tolerance champions, from Ehrlich to some of our contemporaries. It is ironical, however, that none of us--including the heretic opponents of horror autotoxicus--had understood that self-tolerance, or its robustness at least, is in part determined by the frequency and intensity of the responses to non-self. In the evolution of ideas on immunological tolerance, the time might be ripe for some kinds of synthesis. First, conventional theory reduced self-tolerance to negative selection and microbial defense to positive selection, while the MM96 solution was the precise opposite: positive selection of autoreactivities for self-tolerance (Treg) and negative selection (of Treg) for ridding responses. In contrast, it would now appear that positive and negative selection of autoreactive T cells are both necessary to establish either self-tolerance or competence to eliminate microbes, two processes that actually reinforce each other in the maintenance of self-integrity. Second, V-region recognition has generally been held responsible for specific discrimination between what should be either tolerated or eliminated from the organism. In contrast again, it would now seem that both processes of self-tolerance and microbial defense (self/non-self discrimination) also operate on the basis of evolutionarily ancient, germ-line-encoded innate, nonspecific receptors (Medzhitov and Janeway 2000) capable of a coarse level of self/non-self discrimination (Coutinho 1975). It could thus be interesting to revisit notions of cooperativity between V-regions and such mitogen receptors, both in single cell functions (Coutinho et al. 1974) and in the system's evolution (Coutinho 1975, 1980) as well. After all, major transitions in evolution were cooperative (Maynard-Smith and Szathmary 1995).

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 60 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 23%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 6 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 November 2014.
All research outputs
of 6,420,515 outputs
Outputs from Current topics in microbiology and immunology
of 399 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 99,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current topics in microbiology and immunology
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,420,515 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 399 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 99,694 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.