The occurrence and distribution of distinct receptors for three C3 fragments on purified human blood lymphocytes were studied by rosette formation. Indicator cells were bovine, chicken, or sheep erythrocytes (E) bearing up to 100,000 molecules of human C3b (EC3b) without antibody. EC3b was converted to C3bi-bearing-E (EC3bi) with purified C3b inactivator (factor I) and beta1H (factor H), and to C3d-bearing E (EC3d) by treatment of EC3bi with trypsin. Using bovine E (Eb) as indicators, approximately 11% of the lymphocytes bound EbC3b, 6% bound EbC3bi and 2% bound EbC3d. Fractionation of the lymphocytes by adsorption to monolayers of C3-fragment-bearing Eb or by rosetting indicated that most of the cells with receptors for C3b were distinct from those having receptors for C3bi and/or C3d. Cells from two lymphoblastoid cell lines (Raji and Daudi) formed strong rosettes with EC3b, which were weak. 51Cr-labeled E was used as a target in antibody, C3-fragment-bearing E was not lysed by the lymphocytes. However, at suboptimal concentrations of IgG enhancing capacity of the fragments occurred in the order of C3bi greater than C3d greater than C3b. In addition, C3-fragment-bearing cells inhibited the lysis of antibody-coated cells not concluded that target cell bound C3 fragments enhance ADCC by improving contact between target cells and those effector cells which have C3 receptors. Cell-bound C3 effector cells. It is proposed that certain lymphocytes are capable of interacting with C3bi in addition to C3b and C3d and that C3bi and C3d have a greater regulatory effect on their cytolytic function than C3b.
Interaction of target cell-bound C3bi and C3d with human lymphocyte receptors. Enhancement of antibody-mediated cellular cytotoxicity.
- Views Icon Views
- PDF LinkPDF
- Share Icon Share
- Search Site
H Perlmann, P Perlmann, R D Schreiber, H J Müller-Eberhard; Interaction of target cell-bound C3bi and C3d with human lymphocyte receptors. Enhancement of antibody-mediated cellular cytotoxicity.. J Exp Med 1 June 1981; 153 (6): 1592–1603. doi: https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.153.6.1592
Download citation file: