↓ Skip to main content

Gradual Increase of FcγRIIIa/CD16a Expression and Shift toward IFN-γ Secretion during Differentiation of CD56dim Natural Killer Cells

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
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.
Title
Gradual Increase of FcγRIIIa/CD16a Expression and Shift toward IFN-γ Secretion during Differentiation of CD56dim Natural Killer Cells
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01556
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laurie Lajoie, Nicolas Congy-Jolivet, Armelle Bolzec, Gilles Thibault

Abstract

Natural killer (NK) cell effector functions include cytotoxicity and secretion of cytokines such as interferon-γ (IFN-γ). The immature CD56bright subset of human NK cells lacks expression of FcγRIIIa/CD16a, one of the low-affinity immunoglobulin G receptors, or exhibits low-density expression (CD56brightCD16-/dim) and produces IFN-γ in response to cytokine stimulation, whereas the mature CD56dimCD16+ subset is the most cytotoxic one. A further differentiation/maturation of the latter subset according to the gradual loss of NKG2A and/or gain of KIR2DL (CD158a and CD158b) has been demonstrated and the ability to produce IFN-γ in response to activating receptor (AR) co-engagement is gradually acquired during terminal differentiation. In the course of flow cytometry analysis of CD56dim NK cells, we noted a substantial intraindividual heterogeneity of expression of FcγRIIIa. FcγRIIIa is unique among ARs: it does not require the co-engagement of other ARs to induce substantial cytotoxicity or cytokine synthesis in CD56dim cells. We, therefore, investigated whether individual differentiation/maturation of polyclonal CD56dim NK cells defined by expression of NKG2A/KIR2DL is related to FcγRIIIa expression and to the heterogeneity of NK cell responses upon FcγRIIIa engagement. When we analyzed unstimulated CD56dim cells by increasing level of FcγRIIIa expression, we found that the proportion of the more differentiated CD158a,h+ and/or CD158b,j+ cells and that of the less differentiated NKG2A+ cells gradually increased and decreased, respectively. FcγRIIIa engagement by using plate-bound murine anti-CD16 monoclonal antibody (mAb) or rituximab or trastuzumab (two therapeutic mAbs), resulted in donor-dependent partial segregation of IFN-γ-producing and/or degranulating CD56dim cells. Importantly, the proportion of CD158a,h/b,j+ cells and that of NKG2A+ cells was increased and decreased, respectively, IFN-γ-producing cells, whereas these proportions were poorly modified in degranulating cells. Similar results were observed after engagement of ARs by a combination of mAbs targeting NKG2D, NKp30, NKp46, and 2B4. Thus, the gradual increase of FcγRIIIa expression is an important feature of the differentiation/maturation of CD56dim cells and this differentiation/maturation is associated with a shift in functionality toward IFN-γ secretion observed upon both FcγRIIIa-dependent and FcγRIIIa-independent stimulation. The functional heterogeneity related to the differentiation/maturation of CD56dim NK cells could be involved in the variability of the clinical responses observed in patients treated with therapeutic mAbs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Other 3 18%
Unknown 4 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 5 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Computer Science 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 December 2017.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#18,341
of 31,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#266,001
of 445,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#372
of 567 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 445,134 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 567 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.