Click here to load reader
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
27
Figure 7.: Significantly higher frequencies of recent thymic/marrow emigrants (RTEs/RMEs) in TrED
recipients versus PTCy treated animals and GVHD controls early post-HSCT. A HSCT utilizing a B6
à BALB/c donor/recipient mouse model involving a complete MHC mismatch was performed on day 0.
Lethally irradiated (8.5 Gy) BALB/c mice received 5x106 TCD B6-RAG2p-GFP BM cells and spleen cells
from expanded (TL1A-Ig/IL-2; TrED group) or untreated B6-FoxP3rfp (GVHD and PTCy group) donor mice
adjusted to contain 1.1x106 total T cells. Cyclophosphamide was given on day 3 and 4 post-HSCT at 80
mg/kg ip. RTEs/RMEs were analyzed in PB by flow cytometry three weeks post HSCT (BM: n = 2; GVHD:
n = 5; PTCy and TrED n = 8). (A) Significantly higher frequencies of CD4+ and CD8+ RTEs as well as CD19+
B cells (RMEs) are detected in TrED recipients compared to PTCy treated animals and GVHD controls.
Data are expressed as means ± SEM and were analyzed by a two-tailed unpaired t test. *p
28
Supplemental Figure 3.: Treg assessment in blood three and four weeks post-HSCT. (A) Percent
Foxp3+ Tregs out of total CD4+ T cells (upper graphs) as well as Treg / CD4 ratios (lower graphs) are
shown for day 21 (left) and 30 (right). Data are shown as mean ± SEM; ANOVA with Bonferroni correction
was applied for multiple comparisons on day 21. Data are expressed as means ± SEM and were analyzed
by a two-tailed unpaired t test on day 30. *p
29
are significant differences detectable in DN3 (CD44-CD25+) and DN4 (CD44-CD25-) subtypes between
the TrED and the PTCy group (n = 6). Data are expressed as means ± SEM and were analyzed by a
two-tailed unpaired t test. *p
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
% T
re g
/ C D
4+
d d
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
% T
re g
/ C D
4+
No n-
ex pa
nd ed
Ex pa
nd ed No
n-
ex pa
nd ed
Ex pa
nd ed
******A B
Supplemental Figure 1: Wolf et al.
6 14 22 30 38 46 54 62 70 78 86 94
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
W ei
gh t i
n %
6 14 22 30 38 46 54 62 70 78 86 94
0
2
4
6
8
10
C lin
ic al
S co
re
0 20 40 60 80 10 0
12 0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Pe rc
en t s
ur vi
va l
GVHD PTCy TrED
ns
Supplemental Figure 2: Wolf et al.
A B C
Days post-HSCT Days post-HSCT Days post-HSCT
Supplemental Figure 3: Wolf et al. Day 21 Day 30
GV HD
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Tr eg
GV HD
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Tr eg
BM donor T cell donor Recipient
*
GV HD
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
5
10
15
20
% T
re g
/ T ot
al C
D 4+
GV HD
PT Cy
Tr ED
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Tr eg
/ To
ta l C
D 4+
ra tio
GV HD
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
5
10
15
20
% T
re g
/ T ot
al C
D 4+
GV HD
PT Cy
Tr ED
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Tr eg
/ To
ta l C
D 4+
ra tio
ns
ns ***
*** ***
**
ns
ns
A
B
Supplemental Figure 4: Wolf et al.
GVHD PTCy TrED
Lu ng
GV HD
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
1
2
3
4
P at
ho lo
gi ca
l S co
re **
****
C
0
10
20
30
40
50
0
10
20
30
40
50
0
10
20
30
40
50
0
10
20
30
40
50
0
5
10
15
0
5
10
15
% C
D 8
/ L ym
ph oc
yt es
%
C D
4 / L
ym ph
oc yt
es
Day 30 Day 60 Day 90
Naïve cells (CD62hiCD44lo) Memory cells (CD62loCD44hi) Remaining cells
Supplemental Figure 5: Wolf et al.
***
****
*
**
ns
**
Stats shown for naïve cells only
GV HD
PT Cy
TrE D
PT Cy
TrE D
PT Cy
TrE D
DN 1 (CD44+/CD25-) DN 2 (CD44+/CD25+) DN 3 (CD44-/CD25+) DN 4 (CD44-/CD25-)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
D N
1 - D
N 4
*
** A B
Supplemental Figure 6: Wolf et al.
PT Cy
TrE D
PT Cy
TrE DD
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
D N
1 - D
N 4
ns
ns
BM
GV HD
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
10
20
30
40
50
% C
D 4
R TE
s
BM
GV HD
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
10
20
30
% C
D 8
R TE
s
BM
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
10
20
30
40
50
% C
D 8
R TE
s
CD4 CD8 CD19A
B
BM
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
20
40
60
80
% C
D 4
R TE
s
**
Supplemental Figure 7: Wolf et al.
BM
GV HD
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
20
40
60
80
% C
D 19
R M
E s
BM
PT Cy
Tr ED
0
20
40
60
80
% C
D 19
R M
Es