Immunological pathways of rejection in sensitized recipients

  • Kathryn J. Wood
Part of the Transplantation and Clinical Immunology book series (TRAC, volume 29)


In allotransplantation the common causes of sensitization are blood transfusion, pregnancy and rejection of an allograft. An additional route of sensitization that should not be overlooked is the potential crossreactivity of T cells responding to enviromental antigens or pathogens that may be able to cross react with alloantigens expressed by the antigen presenting cells (APC) within an organ graft. In this situation the T cells of the host would be sensitized to the alloantigens of the organ donor even though the donor alloantigens themselves had not been encountered previously. The frequency of crossreactive T cells present in a recipient and their contribution to the rejection of allografts is extremely difficult to assess with the tools currently available.


Cardiac Allograft Hyperacute Rejection Rejection Response Rejection Process Organ Graft 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Kissmeyer-Nielsen F, Olsen S, Petersen V, Fjeldborg O. Hyperacute rejection of kidney allografts, associated with pre-existing humoral antibodies against donor cells. Lancet 1966; 2: 662–665.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jordan S, Yap H, Sakai R, Alfonso P, Fitchman M. Hyperacute rejection mediated by anti-vascular endothelial cell antodies with a negative myocyte cross match. Transplantation 1988; 46: 585–587.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Medawar P. A second study of the behaviour and fate of skin homografts in rabbits. J. Anat. 1945; 79: 157–176.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Austyn J, Wood K. Principles of cellular and molecular immunology. Oxford University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wood K, Sachs D. Chimersim and transplantation tolerance: cause and effect. Immunol. Today 1996; 12: 584–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Larsen C, Morris P, Austyn J. Migration of dendritic leukocytes form cardiac allografts into host spleens: a novel pathway for initiation of rejection. J. Exp. Med. 1990; 171: 307–314.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Larsen C, Steinman R, Witmer-Pack M, Morris P, Austyn J. Migration and maturation of Langerhans cells in skin transplants and expiants. J. Exp. Med. 1990; 172: 1483–1493.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shoskes D, Wood K. Indirect presentation of MHC antigens in transplantation. Immunol. Today 1994; 15: 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rolstad B, Ford WL. Immune responses of rats deficient in thymus-derived lymphocytes to strong transplantation antigens (Ag-B). Graft versus host activity, allograft rejection and the factor of immunisation. Transplantation 1974; 17: 405–415.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rygaard J. Skin grafts in nude mice. Ann. Intern. Med. 1974; 82: 93–104.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hall BM, Dorsch S, Roser B. The cellular basis of allograft rejection in vivo. I. The cellular requirements for first-set rejection of heart grafts. J. Exp. Med. 1978; 148: 878–889.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lechler RI, Batchelor JR. Restoration of immunogenicity to passenger cell-depleted kidney allografts by the addition of donor strain dendritic cells. J. Exp. Med. 1982; 155: 31–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Austyn JM, Steinman RM. The passenger leukocyte — a fresh look. Transplant. Rev. 1988; 2: 139–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Loveland BE, Hogarth PM, Ceredig R, McKenzie IFC. Cells mediating graft rejection in the mouse. I. Lyt-1 cells mediate skin graft rejection. J. Exp. Med. 1981; 153: 1044–1057.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dallman MJ, Mason DW, Webb M. The roles of host and donor cells in the rejection of skin allografts by T cell deprived rats injected with syngeneic T cells. Eur. J. Immunol. 1982; 12: 511–518.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mosmann TR, Schumacher JH, Street NF et al. Diversity of cytokine synthesis and function of mouse CD4+ T cells. Immunol. Rev. 1991; 123: 209–229.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schwartz RH. Costimulation of T lymphocytes: the role of CD28, CTLA-4, and B7/BB1 in interleukin-2 production and immunotherapy. Cell 1992; 71: 1065–1068.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Krummel M, Allison J. CD28 and CTLA-4 have opposing effects on the response of T cells to stimulation. J. Exp. Med. 1995; 182: 459–465.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dallman MJ, Wood KJ, Hamano K et al. Cytokines in transplantation tolerance. Immunol. Rev. 1993; 133: 5–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dallman MJ, Larsen CP, Morris PJ. Cytokine gene transcription in vascularised organ grafts: analysis using semiquantitative polymerase chain reaction. J. Exp. Med. 1991; 174: 493–496.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hisatake G, Hammond E, Ives M, Griffith J, Shelby J, Eichwald EJ. Hyperacute rejection of the transplanted mouse heart. Transplantation 1989; 47: 996–1000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Parker W, Saadi S, Lin S, Holzenecht Z, Bustos M, Platt J. Transplantation of discordant xenografts: a challenge revisited. Immunol. Today 1996; 17: 373–384.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Inaba K, Steinman RM. Resting and sensitized T lymphocytes exihibit distinct stimulatory requirements for growth and lymphokine release. J. Exp. Med. 1984; 160: 1711–1735.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Marelli-Berg F, Hargreaves R, Carmichael P, Dorling A, Lombardi G, Lechler R. Major histocompatibility complex class II-expressing endothelial cells induce allospecific nonresponsiveness in naive T cells. J. Exp. Med. 1996; 183: 1603–1612.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kundig T, Shahinian A, Kawai K et al. Duration of TCR stimulation determines costimulatory requirement of T cells. Immunity 1996; 5: 41–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hancock WW, Distefano R, Braun P, Schweizer RT, Tilney NL, Kupiec-Weglinski JW. Cyclosporine and anti-interleukin 2 receptor monoclonal antibody therapy supress accelerated rejection of rat cardiac allografts through different effector mechanisms. Transplantation 1990; 49:416–421.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mantovani A, Bussolino F, Introna M. Cytokine regulation of endothelial cell function: from molecular level to the bedside. Immunol. Today 1997; 18: 231–240.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Madsen JC, Peugh WN, Wood KJ, Morris PJ. The effect of anti-L3T4 monoclonal antibody on first-set rejection of murine cardiac allografts. Transplantation 1987; 44: 849–852.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Madsen JC, Wood KJ, Morris PJ. Effects of anti-L3T4 and anti-Lyt2 monoclonal antibody therapy on cardiac allograft survival in presensitised recipients. Transplant. Proc. 1989; 21: 1022.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kathryn J. Wood

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations