Tissue Tregs
Panduro M., Benoist C., Mathis D.
Narrative Review, published in Annu Rev Immunol (2016) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Annu Rev Immunol (2016)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 27168246
- PMCID
- PMC4942112
- DOI
- 10.1146/annurev-immunol-032712-095948
- Citations
- 478
Abstract (original English)
The immune system is responsible for defending an organism against the myriad of microbial invaders it constantly confronts. It has become increasingly clear that the immune system has a second major function: the maintenance of organismal homeostasis. Foxp3(+)CD4(+) regulatory T cells (Tregs) are important contributors to both of these critical activities, defense being the primary purview of Tregs circulating through lymphoid organs, and homeostasis ensured mainly by their counterparts residing in parenchymal tissues. This review focuses on so-called tissue Tregs. We first survey existing information on the phenotype, function, sustaining factors, and human equivalents of the three best-characterized tissue-Treg populations-those operating in visceral adipose tissue, skeletal muscle, and the colonic lamina propria. We then attempt to distill general principles from this body of work-as concerns the provenance, local adaptation, molecular sustenance, and targets of action of tissue Tregs, in particular.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.