Next Article in Journal
Vaccine Delivery Methods into the Future
Previous Article in Journal
Intranasal Vaccination Affords Localization and Persistence of Antigen-Specific CD8+ T Lymphocytes in the Female Reproductive Tract
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:

Direct Delivery of Antigens to Dendritic Cells via Antibodies Specific for Endocytic Receptors as a Promising Strategy for Future Therapies

Laboratory of DC-Biology, Department of Dermatology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, University Hospital Erlangen, Hartmannstr. 14, Erlangen 91052, Germany
Centre d’Immunologie de Marseille-Luminy, Aix Marseille Université, INSERM-CNRS, Marseille-Luminy 13288, France
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vaccines 2016, 4(2), 8;
Received: 19 February 2016 / Revised: 15 March 2016 / Accepted: 18 March 2016 / Published: 28 March 2016


Dendritic cells (DCs) are the most potent professional antigen presenting cells and are therefore indispensable for the control of immunity. The technique of antibody mediated antigen targeting to DC subsets has been the basis of intense research for more than a decade. Many murine studies have utilized this approach of antigen delivery to various kinds of endocytic receptors of DCs both in vitro and in vivo. Today, it is widely accepted that different DC subsets are important for the induction of select immune responses. Nevertheless, many questions still remain to be answered, such as the actual influence of the targeted receptor on the initiation of the immune response to the delivered antigen. Further efforts to better understand the induction of antigen-specific immune responses will support the transfer of this knowledge into novel treatment strategies for human diseases. In this review, we will discuss the state-of-the-art aspects of the basic principles of antibody mediated antigen targeting approaches. A table will also provide a broad overview of the latest studies using antigen targeting including addressed DC subset, targeted receptors, outcome, and applied coupling techniques.

1. Introduction

One of the crucial abilities of the immune system is the distinction between self- and pathogen-derived antigens. Professional antigen presenting cells, especially Dendritic cells (DCs), not only present engulfed and processed self- and foreign antigens as peptide MHC complexes (pMHC) on their surface, they also reflect their environment by the surface expression status of co-stimulatory molecules (e.g., CD80 (B7-1), CD86 (B7-2)), activation markers (CD40, CD83), and the secretion level of cytokines (e.g., IL-12) and chemokines [1,2]. Thus, the presentation of pathogen-derived peptides in an inflammatory context allows for the induction of protective immune responses against the invading pathogen, while the presentation of (self-)antigens in a non-inflammatory context maintains peripheral tolerance [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. These capabilities define DCs as one of the key players within the immune system.

2. Pattern Recognition Receptors

Germline-encoded pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) enable DCs to detect danger signals such as conserved pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) or other shared structures of various pathogens like fungi, bacteria, helminthes, and viruses (reviewed in [10,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]). Triggering of PRRs, which are also expressed on a variety of other immune cells, can lead to the uptake of pathogens or pathogen-derived material and/or to cell activation [12,23,24]. Besides nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain proteins (NOD) or retinoic acid inducible gene 1-like receptors (RIG-I), two prominent PRR family members are Toll like receptors (TLRs) and C type lectin receptors (CLRs, Clec) [22].
TLRs are type I integral membrane glycoproteins and well characterized members of the PRR family. They are localized in the plasma membrane (TLRs 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 11) or in endosomal compartments (TLRs 3, 7, 8, 9) [14,25,26]. The endosomal TLRs are responsible for sensing nucleic acids such as bacterial or viral RNAs and DNAs, while the TLRs of the plasma membrane are able to recognize pathogen-derived sugars, lipoproteins, protozoa, or fungal cell wall components. TLR ligand recognition leads to signal transduction, transcription factor activation, and finally DC maturation including upregulation of co-stimulatory molecules and secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines [22,27]. The recognition of PAMPs is guided by leucine-rich repeats, while the cytoplasmic Toll/IL-1 receptor (TIR) domain is responsible for downstream signaling [15].
CLRs are a diverse family of calcium dependent molecules situated in the cellular plasma-membrane. They can be distinguished into type I (DEC205, MMR) and type II transmembrane proteins (almost all other CLRs), displaying the N-terminus either outside or inside the cell, respectively. By their carbohydrate recognition domain (CRD), CLRs are able to sense self- and non-self-sugar side chains of proteins such as N-glycans, O-glycans, and glycosphingolipid motifs [28]. The specificity for mannose enables the detection of viruses, fungi, and mycobacteria, while the specificity for fucose allows for the recognition of certain bacteria and helminths. Moreover, glucan structures are expressed by mycobacteria and fungi [29,30]. CLRs are capable to not only bind the sugar side chains; they also trigger endocytosis of the bound material. This process can then lead to processing and presentation of antigens as peptide-MHC complexes on the DC surface. In dependency of the intracellular signaling motif, which can be an inhibitory ITIM (immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibitory motif) or activating ITAM (immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activating motif), binding of a natural ligand to the CLR can induce either inhibiting or activating signaling pathways in the cell, respectively. The latter ones (in combination with TLR signaling or outside type I interferon) are important for a full DC maturation and presentation of antigens under inflammatory conditions [14,26,29].
Besides the recognition of pathogens, DCs are also capable to sense, take up, process, and present self-antigens derived from apoptotic cells, cell debris, or damaged cells, which are recognized as damage–associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) [31,32,33]. This detection and uptake is implemented by the expression of scavenger receptors as well as CLRs, as shown for Clec9A [34]. Due to defective ribosomal products (DRIPs), which are derived from short lived, aborted, or mis-folded proteins, also self-peptides can be presented on the DC surface [35]. The presentation of self-peptides is necessary to counterbalance potential auto-reactive T cells, which might have escaped negative selection processes in the thymus. T cells, which interact with self-peptides complexed to MHC molecules on immature/semi-mature DCs under steady-state conditions undergo anergic mechanisms (unresponsiveness) or will be deleted. Therefore, antigen presentation by steady-state DCs is an important checkpoint for the maintenance of peripheral tolerance. This control might be accompanied by the help of regulatory T cells [5,6,7,36,37].
Overall, the ability of effective antigen uptake, processing, and presentation as well as the regulation of immunogenic and tolerogenic immune responses renders DCs as promising candidate cells for immunotherapeutic approaches [38,39,40,41,42,43].

3. Monocyte-Derived DCs in Immunotherapeutic Approaches

As DCs are essential for the presentation of antigenic peptides to T cells and thereby enabling them to elicit potent antigen-specific immune responses to pathogens and tumor cells, the idea of utilizing DCs for cancer treatment has already emerged several years ago [43,44]. One fundamental initial discovery for current therapeutic approaches was that human peripheral blood monocytes could be differentiated into monocyte-derived DCs (moDCs) by a combination of growth factors and cytokines, namely GM-CSF (granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor) and IL-4 (Interleukin 4) (Figure 1a) [45,46,47,48,49].
In vitro differentiated moDCs share many similarities with primary DCs found in human peripheral blood, indicated by their potential to activate and differentiate naïve T cells into effector T cells [50]. This is especially effective, when they are matured with single maturation stimuli (e.g., αCD40 antibody, TLR ligands, including LPS, pIC, or CpG) or maturation cocktails (IL-1β, PGE2, IL-6, TNFα) [45,46,48,49,51,52,53]. In recent years, moDCs have been generated for self-vaccination of otherwise incurable tumor patients [54]. Importantly, the production of therapeutic moDCs needs to be conducted under good manufacturing practice (GMP) conditions, including their differentiation from blood monocytes. These cells are then loaded with antigenic peptides [42,51,54,55,56,57], soluble proteins [58], or tumor lysates [40,54,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66], or by the transfection of tumor epitope-encoding mRNAs [54,67,68,69,70,71,72,73], DNAs [74,75,76,77], or whole tumor mRNA [40,54,78], accompanied by protocols ensuring a full DC maturation (Figure 1a). This maturation process seems to be a critical step in the production of therapeutic moDCs, as the appropriate time point and the maturation cocktail composition determine the efficiency of the peptide-loaded moDCs to migrate into the patients’ lymph nodes [41,43,49,79,80,81]. Several studies have been initiated using moDCs in the treatment of (mostly) stage-4 melanoma, prostate, pancreatic, and breast cancer, as well as glioblastoma, where a significantly prolonged overall survival of those patients could be documented [42,49,57,58,59,62,63,68,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88]. Although moDC-based therapies increased the life expectancy of certain types of formerly incurable cancer patients, the response rate is still lower than desired [38,54,56,57,59,64,68,80,81,86,88,89,90,91,92]. Of great interest, treatment with checkpoint inhibitors in combination with antigen-loaded moDCs might further increase the overall survival rate. Future clinical studies will be indispensable to clarify the efficacy of this new combinatorial therapeutic approach [93,94,95].

4. Delivery of Antigens to DC Subsets by Usage of Recombinant Antibodies

Besides therapeutic approaches utilizing moDCs, other approaches in tumor vaccination strategies have been considered in human trials and preclinical models [96], such as immunization with tumor peptides [97,98,99,100,101,102], tumor-derived DNA [103,104], glycan-modified tumor antigens [105], liposomes [106,107,108], or even by injection of whole tumor lysates [109,110,111]. As described before, antigens can be provided to DCs by various techniques such as RNA or DNA electroporation, injection of soluble proteins, nanoparticles, liposomes, or long peptides. However, not all of these techniques can be used to specifically address antigens to DCs directly in vivo. Also the delivery of antigenic peptides by loading DCs with long peptides is not DC or antigen-presenting cell (APC) specific and bears the risk of the unintentional induction of tolerance to pathogen-derived antigens [112]. The usage of undirected nanoparticles or liposomes most likely target highly phagocytically active macrophages rather than DCs. Therefore, a more DC-specific antigen delivery technique is required. In consideration of those less specific antigen delivery techniques, the idea arose that a selective delivery of antigens to antigen presenting cells in vivo would be favorable for a better immune response against the targeted antigen without unwanted spreading of antigens, the need of cell isolation, cell manipulation, or in vitro moDC generation [9,43,44]. The last three points seem to be of critical importance, as DCs are very sensitive to experimental manipulations demonstrated by immediate changes in the DC activation status and phenotype in culture systems, thus no longer reflecting their natural in vivo phenotype [2,4,113]. Moreover, the newest findings suggest that moDCs should be rather allocated to the family of monocytes than to DCs [50]. Especially, this last issue might be important to understand the difficulties observed with moDC-based therapies, as monocytes themselves are less efficient than DCs in the activation of T cells upon peptide MHC (pMHC) complex presentation [114]. Thus, a directed delivery of antigens to the APCs in the most appropriate tissue might harbor the possibility of a better specificity on the one hand, but also a broader therapeutic application as needed for the treatment of infectious diseases, cancer, and autoimmune diseases on the other hand.
A precise delivery of antigens into DCs in vivo requires knowledge on the expression of endocytic receptors and the targeted DC subset. Today, mainly two strategies for a specific transport of antigens to DCs in vivo are discussed. Both take advantage of the specific binding of an antibody to an endocytic receptor on the DC surface, ensuring the delivery of the cargo into the antigen-processing machinery (Figure 1b). However, these two approaches differ in the entities coupled to these antibodies. One possibility is to couple them to nanoparticles or to liposomes containing the antigen of choice, which has been thoroughly reviewed elsewhere [115,116,117]. The second strategy is also known as antibody mediated antigen targeting and will be discussed in more detail in this review (Figure 1b, Table 1). Besides its endocytic capacity, the chosen receptor should only be expressed on professional APCs, such as DCs. Otherwise the distribution of the antigen among many different cells might lead to tolerogenic reactions, e.g., the induction of regulatory T cells. For this purpose, endocytic receptors naturally detecting pathogens, such as C type lectin receptors, have emerged as promising targeting receptors.
Once an endocytic candidate receptor has been selected and antibodies have been generated and tested, the antigen of choice can be coupled to these specific antibodies. This coupling process can either be accomplished by chemical linking of the antibody to the antigen to be delivered, or by production of a recombinant antibody-antigen fusion construct. For the production of these recombinant fusion constructs, the variable regions of the parental antibody are cloned by conventional methods or by using a phage display library. There are several advantages in using recombinant antigen-coupled antibodies in comparison to chemically conjugated antibodies. One important fact is the knowledge of the exact number of antigen molecules coupled. Second, it is more feasible to control the endotoxin concentrations by using an antibody-antigen cloning strategy. Another major advance is the possibility to genetically modify the targeting antibodies. In this way it is possible to not only optimize the production of the antibody itself, but to also modify its host compatibility (by humanization), its solubility (by changing amino acid composition), its fixation of complement components (by changing the glycosylation sites), its binding to Fc receptors (by changing glycosylation or using Fab or scFvs (single chain Fvs)), and finally also its dimerization tendencies [118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125]. These facts allow for commercial GMP-compatible upscaling of the production of an antigen targeting antibody. Another research tool might be to utilize biotinylated antibodies together with Streptavidin-coupled antigens as recently demonstrated [126].

5. Antigen Targeting Receptors

5.1. DC Subsets

Several distinct DC subsets have been described in lymphoid and non-lymphoid organs of mouse and man. Depending on their localization, their cell surface marker and transcription factor expression, as well as their migratory potential, DCs can be roughly distinguished into plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs) and conventional (classical) DCs. The latter can be further separated into resident and migratory DCs [11,50,127]. In mice, pDCs express low to absent levels of CD11c and MHC class II, but high levels of B220, Bst-2, and Siglec-H. Interestingly, CCR9 (CDw199) has become a marker for the distinction of CCR9 negative mature and CCR9 positive immature pDCs [128,129]. pDCs are able to produce high amounts of type I interferon upon virus encounter or TLR9 stimulation [130,131,132,133,134,135,136]. Despite this strong ability to boost the initiation of an immune response, the role of pDCs in antigen presentation is under current debate [21,137,138,139,140,141,142,143,144,145,146].
In contrast to pDCs, murine conventional DCs are prone to present antigens to naïve CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Resident conventional DCs are localized in lymphoid organs such as lymph nodes, spleen, or Peyer’s patches and can be distinguished by the expression of CD11c and MHC class II in combination with CD8, CD11b, CD172a (SIRPα), and XCR1 into CD11c+MHC-IIhiCD11b-CD8+XCR1+ (further referred to as resident CD8+ DCs) and CD11c+MHC-IIhiCD11b+CD8SIRPα+ DCs (further referred to as resident CD8 DCs) [3,147,148]. Non-lymphoid migratory DCs are localized in non-lymphoid tissues and can be distinguished by the expression of CD103, CD207, and CD11b, which is also true for skin DCs [11,127,149]. They are highly positive for MHC class II and are––especially after antigen uptake and maturation––able to migrate from their respective peripheral tissues into lymphoid tissues, preferentially into draining lymph nodes (e.g., dermal dendritic cells [148,150]).
In humans, DCs can be distinguished into CD1c+ DCs, CD141+ DCs, and pDCs. The functional specialization of human DC subsets is under great debate and current knowledge has been reviewed elsewhere [151,152,153,154,155,156].

5.2. Antigen Targeting to DCs and DC Subsets by Utilizing C Type Lectin Receptors

The identification of endocytic receptors specifically expressed by certain DC subsets of mice and the generation of recombinant murine DC subset-specific antigen targeting antibodies made it possible to target antigens to single DC subsets in mice in vivo [3,8,157,158,159,160]. In this section, we focused on several important examples. However, due to space constraints we were unable to discuss all receptors and all studies using a specific receptor and have therefore included a table with a more comprehensive list of citations (Table 1).
The first proof-of-principle was provided by utilizing a specific C type lectin receptor antibody for DEC205 (Ly-75, DEC-205, CD205). DEC205 is harboring 10 carbohydrate recognition domains and has a molecular weight of 205 kDa [161]. This receptor was shown to be highly expressed on resident CD8+ DCs and thymic epithelial cells [148,153,161]. Some studies also propose a weak expression on B cells, T cells, and granulocytes [114,162,163,164]. Importantly, upon antigen encounter, mimicked by the usage of chimeric receptors, it has been demonstrated that DEC205 internalizes and recycles very efficiently via MHC-II positive cellular compartments back to the surface [165]. The natural ligand of DEC205 remains still to be found, but some studies suggest apoptotic and necrotic material as well as CpG motifs as consecutive ligands [166,167,168]. A recent study also suggested the plasminogen activator Pla of Yersinia pestis as a potential receptor ligand responsible for the bacterial dissemination [169]. Another C type lectin receptor, the Dendritic Cell Inhibitory Receptor 2 (DCIR2, antibody clone 33D1, Clec4A, CD367), is exclusively expressed by resident CD8 splenic DCs in mice [3,170,171,172]. In humans, a relative of DCIR2 (DCIR) can be found on all blood DC subsets, monocytes, and granulocytes [170,173,174]. The natural ligand for DCIR has not yet been found, however there are studies suggesting a possible role in recognizing HIV glycoproteins [175,176,177]. Upon antibody binding to human DCIR, Meyer-Wentrup, et al. demonstrated that DCIR is internalized into endosomal/lysosomal compartments and was able to induce T cell responses [143].
As the receptors DEC205 and DCIR2 have often been used in comparative studies, we summarized these results in the following section. By in vivo antigen targeting of murine resident CD8 DCs in comparison to targeting of CD8+ DCs with antigen-carrying DCIR2 (33D1) or DEC205 antibodies, it became possible to preferentially induce either CD4+ or CD8+ T cell responses in vivo, respectively [3]. These experiments indicated that targeting CD8+ DCs is an efficient way to induce cross-presentation, whereas targeting of CD8 DCs is superior for processing and presentation of antigens through the traditional MHC class II pathway. The findings further suggested that this was not due to the receptor that was targeted, but rather due to an intrinsic difference in the MHC presentation capacities of the DC subsets under steady-state conditions [3,7,8,157,200].
Subsequent studies demonstrated that antigen targeting via the DEC205 or the DCIR2 receptor does not only lead to an expansion of transferred antigen-specific T cells in the beginning, but also to their depletion after several days. This was indicated by experiments, in which low doses of antibodies were administrated in the absence of co-stimulatory stimuli leading to the induction of peripheral tolerance under the control of regulatory T cells. These regulatory responses were very efficient as mice were protected from type 1 diabetes, experimental autoimmune arthritis, and experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) [3,7,8,157,187,191,194,195,197,198,200,236].
It was also shown that DEC205 or DCIR2 antibodies can be utilized under immunostimulatory conditions to induce protective cellular and humoral responses in vivo needed for the fight against pathogens and malignancies [3,170,179,180,182]. This has, for example, been shown for Yersenia pestis [182], Plasmodium yoelii [180], dengue virus [171], HIV [183,237], the cancer/testis antigen 1A (known as CTAG1A or NY-ESO-1), or the Her2/neu breast cancer antigen in a protective model with NT2.5 tumor cells [189]. Interestingly, Neubert, et al. could demonstrate the induction of both protective and therapeutic anti-tumor responses in a murine melanoma model, which was independent of the initially targeted DC subset [179].
Furthermore, other receptors, mainly belonging to the C type lectin family, and their corresponding antibodies have been used for the induction of immune responses against various pathogens and cancer types in vivo. Here, we will present the most prominent studies in closer detail.
Human DC-specific intercellular adhesion molecule 3-grabbing non-integrin (DC-SIGN, Clec4L, CD209) has been demonstrated to recognize a variety of sugar residues including mannose residues on HIV virus particles. DC-SIGN is naturally expressed on moDCs, macrophages, and liver epithelial cells [238,239,240]. Importantly, a true homologue of human DC-SIGN has not been identified in mice yet, thus making it difficult to dissect functional aspects of DC-SIGN in vivo. The nearest homologues regarding ligand specificity are SIGN-R1 and SIGN-R3, which are both members of a family of eight different SIGN-Rs [241,242,243]. However, it has also become evident that the underlying signaling cascades differ in mice and humans [241]. To better understand, whether DC-SIGN might be useful for the delivery of antigens in humans, an interesting mouse model was generated expressing the human DC-SIGN molecule under the control of the CD11c promoter [244]. Although utilizing the CD11c promoter, which is not selectively active in DCs, might not be the best choice, the authors found the uptake of antigens via the DC-SIGN receptor to mainly induce Th2 immunity and regulatory responses [29,245]. Others observed potent CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses in vivo and in vitro [219,220,221,232]. In a primate model with Macacca fascicularis it could also be shown that antigen targeting antibodies directed against macaque DC-SIGN were uptaken into myeloid APCs and Kupffer cells of the liver [222].
The member 9A of the C type lectin family (Clec9A, DNGR-1, CD370) is highly expressed on conventional CD8+ or CD103+ DCs and their precursors, but also weakly on pDCs in mice. In humans, Clec9A expression was found on CD103+ intestinal and CD141+ DCs [209,211,246,247,248,249,250,251]. Studies using targeting antibodies coupled with the model antigen ovalbumin showed the generation of potent cytotoxic CD8+ T cell responses and the reduction of tumor load in an intravenous injection model of the pseudo-metastasing ovalbumin expressing melanoma cells [209]. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that this strategy is also suitable for eliciting CD4+ T cell as well as antibody responses [210,211,212]. Importantly, the phenotype of the differentiated T cells is completely dependent on the applied adjuvant and antibody dosage. In more detail, the injection under non-inflammatory conditions led to the generation of a regulatory T cell response. Interestingly, in dependency of the administered adjuvant, the co-injection with poly(I:C) induced Th1 responses, while co-administration of Curdlan elicited Th17 responses [210]. Another not further investigated finding is that targeting of Clec9A seems to be especially suitable for the differentiation of naïve CD4+ T cells into follicular T helper cells (Bcl6+CXCR5+PD-1+CH2D1A+IL-21+ICOS+) [212]. However, the mechanism of this process is not clear yet.
The macrophage mannose receptor (MMR, recently also MR, Clec13D, CD206) is not only expressed on macrophages, endothelial cells, and smooth muscle cells of the trachea, but also on mature and immature moDCs and on human peripheral blood CD1c+ DCs in vivo [206,252,253]. Studies taking advantage of MMR-specific antibodies coupled to tumor antigens, such as pmel17 (pre-melanosome protein 17, also known as gp100) and hCG-β (human chorionic gonadotropin β) induced an MHC-I and MHC-II presentation and an antigen-specific T cell proliferation [224,225,226]. Another study focused on the tumor antigen NY-ESO1, which was similarly coupled to an MMR antibody. Here, the authors demonstrated a pronounced CD8+ cytotoxic T cell response [206] suggesting that the chosen antigen might influence the resulting immune response.
The lectin-like oxidized low-density lipoproteine receptor 1 (LOX-1, Clec8A) is a receptor for heat-shock proteins (e.g., Hsp70 [230]) and apoptotic cellular fragments. It is an important player in immunological reactions to these proteins and apoptotic material and is also expressed on DCs [230,232]. The potency of LOX-1 was first demonstrated by targeting of the model antigen ovalbumin via a recombinant antibody to LOX-1. Interestingly, the authors found that the induced immune responses led to a rejection of the ectopically ovalbumin expressing lymphoma cell line E.G7 in vivo [230,232]. The analyses of antigen-specific CD4+ T cell responses revealed cytokine secretion of IL-2, IFNγ, and TNFα when the T cells were re-stimulated with antigen loaded bone marrow derived DCs (BMDCs) [230]. Recently, LOX-1 antigen targeting was approved for a study in rhesus macaques, in which the induction of influenza virus neutralizing antibodies was demonstrated after administration of hemagglutinin coupled LOX-1-specific targeting antibodies in vivo [231].
A further interesting targeting molecule is the ITAM-containing receptor Dectin-1, also known as Clec7A. Dectin-1 can bind β-glucans and is therefore important for the uptake of yeast and yeast-derived particles (Zymosan). The molecule is reported to be expressed on murine cDCs, Langerhans’ cells (LCs), and in lower amounts also on murine pDCs [17,18,254,255]. In humans Dectin-1 can be found on all monocyte populations as well as macrophages, DCs, neutrophils, B cells, and eosinophils [17,18,256]. Data demonstrated that in macrophages the endocytosis via Dectin-1 is independent of Syk activity, while ligand recognition in murine DCs triggers Syk and CARD9 activation [257]. This results in the transcription of innate immune response genes [258]. Notably, Dectin-1 can shuffle bound soluble proteins into the cell, while the receptor recycles back to the cell surface. An antibody specific for Dectin‑1 coupled to ovalbumin has been demonstrated to induce not only CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses, but also ovalbumin-specific antibody responses [215]. The same group has further investigated the expression of Dectin-1 in more detail and found it present on CD11c+MHC-IIhiCD11b+CD8CD4 DCs, which is, however, in contrast to previous reports showing expression also on CD11c+MHC-IIhiCD11b+CD8CD4+ DCs [259]. In contrast to murine studies, the delivery of the antigens hemagglutinin, flu-M1, or MART-1 to Dectin-1 on moDCs led to an activation of the targeted moDCs, the expansion of flu-M1 as well as MART-1-specific T cells, but also to a re-stimulation of memory Th17 cells. Besides CD4+ T cell responses, Dectin-1 targeting was also promoting the differentiation of naïve CD8+ T cells into flu-M1-specific cytotoxic CD8+ T cells [216,217].
Langerin (CD207 or Clec4K) is a key marker molecule of Langerhans’ cells. Langerin is not only found on epidermal Langerhans’ cells, but also on migratory Langerhans’ cells and some dermal DC subsets, as well as on migratory DCs in lymph nodes [260]. As the receptor is especially present on those cell subsets, it attracted scientists to study the function of those cell subsets in the initiation of immune responses, as Langerin is involved in antigen recognition and uptake. The expression of Langerin is also connected to the presence of Birbeck granules [261]. The targeting of antigens via targeting antibodies to Langerin-expressing cells, including Langerhans’ cells, but also CD103+CD207+ dermal DCs and CD8+ lymph node resident DCs, has been demonstrated to induce CD8+ and CD4+ T cell responses to ovalbumin and p24 of HIV after in vivo injection into naïve C57Bl/6 mice [178,184]. In contrast to this, Langerin targeting has been shown by Flacher, et al. to induce cross-tolerance in a B16F10-ova expressing tumor model, even when it is used in vivo with a strongly activating TLR ligand such as Imiquimod [218]. The same group also reported that ovalbumin targeting to Langerin was not inducing CD4+ or CD8+ T cell responses in contrast to DEC205 targeting to Langerhans’ cells [202]. Recently, also Idoyaga, et al. demonstrated Langerhans’ cells to induce tolerance without any co-stimulation to the MOG peptide in an EAE model [172], thereby suggesting a rather tolerogenic role after Langerin-specific antigen uptake.
Additionally, the direct targeting of antigens to pDCs using specifically expressed C type lectins has been evaluated by taking advantage of antibodies specific for Siglec-H, which is a highly endocytotically active receptor found on pDCs and pDC precursors [234]. Zhang, et al. also demonstrated Siglec-H targeting to be effective in the induction of naïve CD8+ T cell responses by combining a chemically coupled Siglec-H-ova conjugate and the TLR stimulus CpG [234]. By using a genetically coupled Siglec-H antibody without any co-stimulation Loschko, et al. demonstrated the potency of this method in inhibiting T cell dependent autoimmune reactions in an EAE model with MOG peptide as antigen [141].
Another promising and interesting receptor for antigen targeting is the C type lectin-like receptor DC asialoglycoprotein receptor (DC-ASGPR, Clec10A, MGL, CD301) mainly expressed on immature DCs and granulocytes, but not on monocytes [262]. Antigen targeting of hemagglutinin with recombinant antibodies to DC-ASGPR on IFNα-matured human moDCs did not only induce an antigen-specific CD4+ T cell proliferation, but also their predominant differentiation into IL-10 producers and to a lesser extend also IL-2 and IFNγ [232]. This was true for the coupling of auto-antigens, such as prostate specific antigen (PSA) as well as foreign antigens, e.g., hemagglutinin (HA) [232].

5.3. Other Receptors Used for Antigen Delivery to APCs

The strategy of using antigen coupled antibodies against specifically expressed surface endocytic receptors is not limited to C type lectin receptors. In fact, all receptors that fulfill important criteria, such as expression pattern, endocytic activity, routing to different compartments, as well as availability of suitable antibodies, can potentially be utilized. In the next section, we will provide some examples of other non C type lectin and non lectin-like receptors, which have been utilized in a range of studies. Due to space constraints we could not discuss all possible candidates, but rather tried to discuss the most common and interesting examples. Also the targeting via Fc receptors using immune complexes will not be part of this review, as this strategy is not specific for a certain target receptor, but rather for a group of receptors dictating the outcome of this technique.
MHC-II is the molecule responsible for the presentation of antigenic self and foreign peptides to CD4+ T cells. It is constitutively expressed at high levels on all professional antigen presenting cells, such as DCs and B cells. Castro, et al. utilized different antibodies for various receptors, e.g., CD11c, MHC-II, and DEC205 to compare their efficiencies in antigen targeting. They chemically coupled the model antigen ovalbumin to these antibodies and measured the expansion of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, as well as the cytotoxic activity of the generated CD8+ T cells in vivo [227]. White, et al. also showed an ovalbumin-specific antibody response after targeting ovalbumin to MHC-II, though it was weaker than utilizing CD11c or CD18 as targeting receptor [208]. Dickgreber, et al. and also some other groups tested the usefulness of this receptor for antigen delivery to professional antigen presenting cells, even though it is not a receptor known to be highly endocytic. In contrast to using an antibody specific for MHC-II, they used the modified bacterial superantigen M1 (a modified version of the superantigen streptococcal mitogenic exotoxin Z-2 that binds to MHC class II molecules, but cannot directly stimulate T cells) and coupled it chemically to the model antigen ovalbumin. In addition to the cross-presentation of this antigen by all splenic DC subsets, they could demonstrate a delayed tumor growth of ovalbumin expressing melanoma cells in a therapeutic model [229].
CD11c, also known as ITGAX, is an alpha integrin highly expressed on murine cDCs, which can also be found to lower extends on other cells of the immune system, such as monocytes, macrophages, a subset of B cells, and pDCs. As CD11c has been regarded as a DC-specific receptor for a long time, scientists started to use it for antigen-delivery purposes. In 2000, Wang, et al. demonstrated fast antibody responses to polyclonal goat-anti-hamster antibodies complexed to a hamster-anti-CD11c antibody measured by goat-specific antibodies in the serum of intra-dermally vaccinated mice [263]. Later, the group of Glennie used a CD11c-specific antibody chemically coupled to ovalbumin. Targeting an anti CD11c antibody to CD11c positive cells led to the induction of strong CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses, with the latter able to efficiently lyse ovalbumin expressing lymphoma cells (EL4) [227]. The final proof of effectiveness was provided by the group of Guo by taking advantage of a single chain Fv-specific for CD11c and coupled to the breast cancer tumor antigen Her2/neu in combination with the co-stimulatory TLR ligand CpG. They could not only demonstrate the protective and therapeutic properties of this strategy by using Her2/neu expressing tumor cells, but also the delayed onset of tumor growth in a spontaneous mammary carcinoma mouse model [228].
Another molecule used for the delivery of antigens especially to pDCs is Bst-2 (CD317), also known as PDCA-1, tetherin, or HM1.24, which, in the steady-state, is restricted to this cell type within the murine immune system [264]. However, in dependency of the inflammatory stimulus, Bst-2 is downregulated on pDCs but upregulated on other cell types, such as classical DCs and plasma cells [265]. Sapoznikov, et al. used a Bst-2-specific F(ab’)2-ova construct to deliver antigens to pDCs in vivo and showed an expansion of ovalbumin-specific transgenic CD8+ T cells, which was 1000 times less efficient than DEC205-ova targeting to CD8+ DCs. Interestingly, they could also show the induction of CD4+ transgenic T cell proliferation by lymph node pDCs, but not by splenic DCs [235]. Along with this, Loschko, et al. demonstrated—by targeting with Bst-2 specific whole antibodies mutated in their Fc region—that pDCs induced an efficient expansion of antigen-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Moreover, immune responses in naïve animals indicated a potent induction of specific antibody and T cell responses, with strong protective capacities demonstrated by challenging with a vaccinia-ova virus and in a s.c. B16F10-ova melanoma model [142].
The Scavenger receptor CD36 is an important receptor for antigen detection and uptake into a variety of phagocytically active cells, such as macrophages and DCs. Further, CD36 was also described to be expressed on a subset of B cells in the murine spleen. Interestingly, it is only present to a higher extend on murine CD8+ DCs of the spleen, but not on CD8 DCs, monocytes, pDCs, or skin DCs [233]. In 2008, Tagliani, et al. demonstrated that CD36 might be a useful targeting receptor. This was demonstrated by delivery of ovalbumin antigen into murine CD8+ DCs by using a single chain Fv fusion protein with a dimerizing γ1-CH3 unit. The authors found that targeting of CD36 led to the induction of CD4+ and CD8+ antigen-specific T cells, but also to induction of cytotoxic CD8+ T cells as well as the differentiation of naïve B cells into ovalbumin-specific antibody producing plasma cells [233]. Recently, Pugholm, et al. demonstrated that targeting of CD36 led to the secretion of IL-4 and antibody responses without the administration of co-stimulatory agents in vitro and in vivo. They also reported these responses to be independent of the injection route (s.c./i.v./i.p) [266].

6. Conclusions

In the last decades, DCs have been recognized as professional antigen presenting cells indispensable for the control of the immune system. Many murine studies have utilized antibody mediated delivery of antigens to various kinds of endocytic receptors of DCs both in vitro and in vivo, and have demonstrated select DC subsets to be important for the induction of different immune responses. However, the actual influence of the respective receptor targeted on shaping the immune response still needs to be determined. One major pitfall of some of the antigen targeting studies is the chemical conjugation of antigens to the antibodies, which makes it difficult to calculate the precise antigen load per antibody. Another drawback for the correct interpretation of some of the results is the underestimated influence of the potential Fc receptor mediated binding of the targeting antibodies. Moreover, expression and function of some of the described endocytic receptors in humans and other animal models, the identities of the antigen presenting cell populations as well as their abilities to regulate immune responses is not completely understood yet [11,153,251,267]. Solving the above-mentioned pitfalls will further accelerate the transfer of this technique of a specific induction of immune responses into the human system. This will help to develop strategies of both therapeutic as well as protective treatments of various kinds of human pathologies.


We would like to apologize to all those colleagues whose important contributions could not be cited directly due to space restrictions. This work was partly supported by the German Research Foundation (DU548/2-1, CRC643, CRC1181, RTG1962, RTG1660 to Diana Dudziak), the Bavarian Genome Research Network (BayGene) to Diana Dudziak, an intramural ELAN grant to Gordon F. Heidkamp (DE-14-10-17-1-Heidkamp), IZKF/ELAN grant to Christian H.K. Lehmann (IZKF-J54), and an IZKF grant to Diana Dudziak (IZKF-A65).

Author Contributions

Christian H.K. Lehmann and Diana Dudziak wrote the manuscript. Lukas Heger, Gordon F. Heidkamp, Anna Baranska, Jennifer J. Lühr, and Alana Hoffmann contributed to the writing and revision of the manuscript. Lukas Heger, Christian H.K. Lehmann, and Gordon F. Heidkamp prepared the table. Lukas Heger prepared the figure.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


  1. Sharpe, A.H.; Freeman, G.J. The B7-CD28 superfamily. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2002, 2, 116–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Steinman, R.M. Dendritic cells: Understanding immunogenicity. Eur. J. Immunol. 2007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Dudziak, D.; Kamphorst, A.O.; Heidkamp, G.F.; Buchholz, V.R.; Trumpfheller, C.; Yamazaki, S.; Cheong, C.; Liu, K.; Lee, H.W.; Park, C.G.; et al. Differential antigen processing by dendritic cell subsets in vivo. Science 2007, 315, 107–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Steinman, R.M.; Hawiger, D.; Liu, K.; Bonifaz, L.; Bonnyay, D.; Mahnke, K.; Iyoda, T.; Ravetch, J.; Dhodapkar, M.; Inaba, K.; et al. Dendritic cell function in vivo during the steady state: A role in peripheral tolerance. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 2003, 987, 15–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Steinman, R.M.; Hawiger, D.; Nussenzweig, M.C. Tolerogenic dendritic cells. Ann. Rev. Immunol. 2003, 21, 685–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Steinman, R.M.; Nussenzweig, M.C. Avoiding horror autotoxicus: The importance of dendritic cells in peripheral T cell tolerance. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 351–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Yamazaki, S.; Dudziak, D.; Heidkamp, G.F.; Fiorese, C.; Bonito, A.J.; Inaba, K.; Nussenzweig, M.C.; Steinman, R.M. CD8+ CD205+ splenic dendritic cells are specialized to induce Foxp3+ regulatory T cells. J. Immunol. 2008, 181, 6923–6933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Hawiger, D.; Inaba, K.; Dorsett, Y.; Guo, M.; Mahnke, K.; Rivera, M.; Ravetch, J.V.; Steinman, R.M.; Nussenzweig, M.C. Dendritic cells induce peripheral T cell unresponsiveness under steady state conditions in vivo. J. Exp. Med. 2001, 194, 769–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Hammad, H.; Lambrecht, B.N. Dendritic cells and airway epithelial cells at the interface between innate and adaptive immune responses. Allergy 2011, 66, 579–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Joffre, O.; Nolte, M.A.; Sporri, R.; Reis e Sousa, C. Inflammatory signals in dendritic cell activation and the induction of adaptive immunity. Immunol. Rev. 2009, 227, 234–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Merad, M.; Sathe, P.; Helft, J.; Miller, J.; Mortha, A. The dendritic cell lineage: Ontogeny and function of dendritic cells and their subsets in the steady state and the inflamed setting. Ann. Rev. Immunol. 2013, 31, 563–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Banchereau, J.; Steinman, R.M. Dendritic cells and the control of immunity. Nature 1998, 392, 245–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Shortman, K.; Liu, Y.J. Mouse and human dendritic cell subtypes. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2002, 2, 151–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Akira, S.; Uematsu, S.; Takeuchi, O. Pathogen recognition and innate immunity. Cell 2006, 124, 783–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Bowie, A.; O’Neill, L.A. The interleukin-1 receptor/toll-like receptor superfamily: Signal generators for pro-inflammatory interleukins and microbial products. J. Leukoc. Biol. 2000, 67, 508–514. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  16. Brencicova, E.; Diebold, S.S. Nucleic acids and endosomal pattern recognition: How to tell friend from foe? Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Cambi, A.; Figdor, C.G. Dual function of C-type lectin-like receptors in the immune system. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2003, 15, 539–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Figdor, C.G.; van Kooyk, Y.; Adema, G.J. C-type lectin receptors on dendritic cells and langerhans cells. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2002, 2, 77–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Ottenhoff, T.H.; Bevan, M.J. Host-pathogen interactions. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 2004, 16, 439–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Segura, E.; Villadangos, J.A. Antigen presentation by dendritic cells in vivo. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 2009, 21, 105–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Swiecki, M.; Colonna, M. The multifaceted biology of plasmacytoid dendritic cells. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2015, 15, 471–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Takeuchi, O.; Akira, S. Pattern recognition receptors and inflammation. Cell 2010, 140, 805–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Pufnock, J.S.; Cigal, M.; Rolczynski, L.S.; Andersen-Nissen, E.; Wolfl, M.; McElrath, M.J.; Greenberg, P.D. Priming CD8+ T cells with dendritic cells matured using TLR4 and TLR7/8 ligands together enhances generation of CD8+ T cells retaining CD28. Blood 2011, 117, 6542–6551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Shen, H.; Tesar, B.M.; Walker, W.E.; Goldstein, D.R. Dual signaling of MyD88 and trif is critical for maximal TLR4-induced dendritic cell maturation. J. Immunol. 2008, 181, 1849–1858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Delamarre, L.; Holcombe, H.; Mellman, I. Presentation of exogenous antigens on major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I and MHC class II molecules is differentially regulated during dendritic cell maturation. J. Exp. Med. 2003, 198, 111–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Kaufmann, S.H. The contribution of immunology to the rational design of novel antibacterial vaccines. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2007, 5, 491–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Bowie, A.G.; Unterholzner, L. Viral evasion and subversion of pattern-recognition receptor signalling. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2008, 8, 911–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Varki, A.; Etzler, M.E.; Cummings, R.D.; Esko, J.D. Discovery and classification of glycan-binding proteins. In Essentials of Glycobiology, 2nd ed.; Varki, A., Cummings, R.D., Esko, J.D., Freeze, H.H., Stanley, P., Bertozzi, C.R., Hart, G.W., Etzler, M.E., Eds.; Cold Spring Harbor: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  29. Geijtenbeek, T.B.; Gringhuis, S.I. Signalling through C-type lectin receptors: Shaping immune responses. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2009, 9, 465–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Van Kooyk, Y.; Rabinovich, G.A. Protein-glycan interactions in the control of innate and adaptive immune responses. Nat. Immunol. 2008, 9, 593–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Giraldi-Guimaraes, A.; de Freitas, H.T.; Coelho Bde, P.; Macedo-Ramos, H.; Mendez-Otero, R.; Cavalcante, L.A.; Baetas-da-Cruz, W. Bone marrow mononuclear cells and mannose receptor expression in focal cortical ischemia. Brain Res. 2012, 1452, 173–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Hoque, R.; Malik, A.F.; Gorelick, F.; Mehal, W.Z. Sterile inflammatory response in acute pancreatitis. Pancreas 2012, 41, 353–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Mathew, A.; Lindsley, T.A.; Sheridan, A.; Bhoiwala, D.L.; Hushmendy, S.F.; Yager, E.J.; Ruggiero, E.A.; Crawford, D.R. Degraded mitochondrial DNA is a newly identified subtype of the damage associated molecular pattern (DAMP) family and possible trigger of neurodegeneration. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2012, 30, 617–627. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  34. Sancho, D.; Joffre, O.P.; Keller, A.M.; Rogers, N.C.; Martinez, D.; Hernanz-Falcon, P.; Rosewell, I.; Reis e Sousa, C. Identification of a dendritic cell receptor that couples sensing of necrosis to immunity. Nature 2009, 458, 899–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Anton, L.C.; Yewdell, J.W. Translating drips: MHC class I immunosurveillance of pathogens and tumors. J. Leukoc. Biol. 2014, 95, 551–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Lutz, M.B.; Schuler, G. Immature, semi-mature and fully mature dendritic cells: Which signals induce tolerance or immunity? Trends Immunol. 2002, 23, 445–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Schwartz, R.H. Acquisition of immunologic self-tolerance. Cell 1989, 57, 1073–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Copier, J.; Bodman-Smith, M.; Dalgleish, A. Current status and future applications of cellular therapies for cancer. Immunotherapy 2011, 3, 507–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Keler, T.; He, L.; Ramakrishna, V.; Champion, B. Antibody-targeted vaccines. Oncogene 2007, 26, 3758–3767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Osada, T.; Nagaoka, K.; Takahara, M.; Yang, X.Y.; Liu, C.X.; Guo, H.; Roy Choudhury, K.; Hobeika, A.; Hartman, Z.; Morse, M.A.; et al. Precision cancer immunotherapy: Optimizing dendritic cell-based strategies to induce tumor antigen-specific t-cell responses against individual patient tumors. J. Immunother. 2015, 38, 155–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Palucka, K.; Banchereau, J. Cancer immunotherapy via dendritic cells. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2012, 12, 265–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Schuler, P.J.; Harasymczuk, M.; Visus, C.; Deleo, A.; Trivedi, S.; Lei, Y.; Argiris, A.; Gooding, W.; Butterfield, L.H.; Whiteside, T.L.; et al. Phase I dendritic cell p53 peptide vaccine for head and neck cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2014, 20, 2433–2444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Tacken, P.J.; Figdor, C.G. Targeted antigen delivery and activation of dendritic cells in vivo: Steps towards cost effective vaccines. Semin. Immunol. 2011, 23, 12–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Steinman, R.M.; Banchereau, J. Taking dendritic cells into medicine. Nature 2007, 449, 419–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Jonuleit, H.; Kuhn, U.; Muller, G.; Steinbrink, K.; Paragnik, L.; Schmitt, E.; Knop, J.; Enk, A.H. Pro-inflammatory cytokines and prostaglandins induce maturation of potent immunostimulatory dendritic cells under fetal calf serum-free conditions. Eur. J. Immunol. 1997, 27, 3135–3142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Romani, N.; Koide, S.; Crowley, M.; Witmer-Pack, M.; Livingstone, A.M.; Fathman, C.G.; Inaba, K.; Steinman, R.M. Presentation of exogenous protein antigens by dendritic cells to T cell clones. Intact protein is presented best by immature, epidermal langerhans cells. J. Exp. Med. 1989, 169, 1169–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Sallusto, F.; Cella, M.; Danieli, C.; Lanzavecchia, A. Dendritic cells use macropinocytosis and the mannose receptor to concentrate macromolecules in the major histocompatibility complex class II compartment: Downregulation by cytokines and bacterial products. J. Exp. Med. 1995, 182, 389–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Sallusto, F.; Lanzavecchia, A. Efficient presentation of soluble antigen by cultured human dendritic cells is maintained by granulocyte/macrophage colony-stimulating factor plus interleukin 4 and downregulated by tumor necrosis factor alpha. J. Exp. Med. 1994, 179, 1109–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Schuler-Thurner, B.; Schultz, E.S.; Berger, T.G.; Weinlich, G.; Ebner, S.; Woerl, P.; Bender, A.; Feuerstein, B.; Fritsch, P.O.; Romani, N.; et al. Rapid induction of tumor-specific type 1 T helper cells in metastatic melanoma patients by vaccination with mature, cryopreserved, peptide-loaded monocyte-derived dendritic cells. J. Exp. Med. 2002, 195, 1279–1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Guilliams, M.; Bruhns, P.; Saeys, Y.; Hammad, H.; Lambrecht, B.N. The function of fcgamma receptors in dendritic cells and macrophages. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2014, 14, 94–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. de Vries, I.J.; Lesterhuis, W.J.; Scharenborg, N.M.; Engelen, L.P.; Ruiter, D.J.; Gerritsen, M.J.; Croockewit, S.; Britten, C.M.; Torensma, R.; Adema, G.J.; et al. Maturation of dendritic cells is a prerequisite for inducing immune responses in advanced melanoma patients. Clin. Cancer Res. 2003, 9, 5091–5100. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  52. Dhodapkar, M.V.; Krasovsky, J.; Steinman, R.M.; Bhardwaj, N. Mature dendritic cells boost functionally superior CD8(+) t-cell in humans without foreign helper epitopes. J. Clin. Investig. 2000, 105, 9–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Mahnke, K.; Schmitt, E.; Bonifaz, L.; Enk, A.H.; Jonuleit, H. Immature, but not inactive: The tolerogenic function of immature dendritic cells. Immunol. Cell Biol. 2002, 80, 477–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Schuler, G. Dendritic cells in cancer immunotherapy. Eur. J. Immunol. 2010, 40, 2123–2130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Fong, L.; Brockstedt, D.; Benike, C.; Wu, L.; Engleman, E.G. Dendritic cells injected via different routes induce immunity in cancer patients. J. Immunol. 2001, 166, 4254–4259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Jonuleit, H.; Giesecke-Tuettenberg, A.; Tuting, T.; Thurner-Schuler, B.; Stuge, T.B.; Paragnik, L.; Kandemir, A.; Lee, P.P.; Schuler, G.; Knop, J.; et al. A comparison of two types of dendritic cell as adjuvants for the induction of melanoma-specific t-cell responses in humans following intranodal injection. Int. J. Cancer. 2001, 93, 243–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Oshita, C.; Takikawa, M.; Kume, A.; Miyata, H.; Ashizawa, T.; Iizuka, A.; Kiyohara, Y.; Yoshikawa, S.; Tanosaki, R.; Yamazaki, N.; et al. Dendritic cell-based vaccination in metastatic melanoma patients: Phase ii clinical trial. Oncol. Rep. 2012, 28, 1131–1138. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  58. Tada, F.; Abe, M.; Hirooka, M.; Ikeda, Y.; Hiasa, Y.; Lee, Y.; Jung, N.C.; Lee, W.B.; Lee, H.S.; Bae, Y.S.; et al. Phase I/II study of immunotherapy using tumor antigen-pulsed dendritic cells in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Int. J. Oncol. 2012, 41, 1601–1609. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  59. Ardon, H.; Van Gool, S.W.; Verschuere, T.; Maes, W.; Fieuws, S.; Sciot, R.; Wilms, G.; Demaerel, P.; Goffin, J.; Van Calenbergh, F.; et al. Integration of autologous dendritic cell-based immunotherapy in the standard of care treatment for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: Results of the HGG-2006 phase I/II trial. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2012, 61, 2033–2044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Celluzzi, C.M.; Falo, L.D., Jr. Physical interaction between dendritic cells and tumor cells results in an immunogen that induces protective and therapeutic tumor rejection. J. Immunol. 1998, 160, 3081–3085. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  61. Chang, A.E.; Redman, B.G.; Whitfield, J.R.; Nickoloff, B.J.; Braun, T.M.; Lee, P.P.; Geiger, J.D.; Mule, J.J. A phase I trial of tumor lysate-pulsed dendritic cells in the treatment of advanced cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2002, 8, 1021–1032. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  62. El Ansary, M.; Mogawer, S.; Elhamid, S.A.; Alwakil, S.; Aboelkasem, F.; Sabaawy, H.E.; Abdelhalim, O. Immunotherapy by autologous dendritic cell vaccine in patients with advanced HCC. J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2013, 139, 39–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Gao, D.; Li, C.; Xie, X.; Zhao, P.; Wei, X.; Sun, W.; Liu, H.C.; Alexandrou, A.T.; Jones, J.; Zhao, R.; et al. Autologous tumor lysate-pulsed dendritic cell immunotherapy with cytokine-induced killer cells improves survival in gastric and colorectal cancer patients. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e93886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Hunyadi, J.; Andras, C.; Szabo, I.; Szanto, J.; Szluha, K.; Sipka, S.; Kovacs, P.; Kiss, A.; Szegedi, G.; Altorjay, I.; et al. Autologous dendritic cell based adoptive immunotherapy of patients with colorectal cancer-a phase I-II study. Pathol. Oncol. Res. 2014, 20, 357–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Matsushita, H.; Enomoto, Y.; Kume, H.; Nakagawa, T.; Fukuhara, H.; Suzuki, M.; Fujimura, T.; Homma, Y.; Kakimi, K. A pilot study of autologous tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccination combined with sunitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J. Immunother. Cancer 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Nouri-Shirazi, M.; Banchereau, J.; Bell, D.; Burkeholder, S.; Kraus, E.T.; Davoust, J.; Palucka, K.A. Dendritic cells capture killed tumor cells and present their antigens to elicit tumor-specific immune responses. J. Immunol. 2000, 165, 3797–3803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Aarntzen, E.H.; Schreibelt, G.; Bol, K.; Lesterhuis, W.J.; Croockewit, A.J.; de Wilt, J.H.; van Rossum, M.M.; Blokx, W.A.; Jacobs, J.F.; Duiveman-de Boer, T.; et al. Vaccination with mRNA-electroporated dendritic cells induces robust tumor antigen-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells responses in stage III and IV melanoma patients. Clin. Cancer Res. 2012, 18, 5460–5470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Dannull, J.; Haley, N.R.; Archer, G.; Nair, S.; Boczkowski, D.; Harper, M.; De Rosa, N.; Pickett, N.; Mosca, P.J.; Burchette, J.; et al. Melanoma immunotherapy using mature DCS expressing the constitutive proteasome. J. Clin. Investig. 2013, 123, 3135–3145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Heiser, A.; Maurice, M.A.; Yancey, D.R.; Wu, N.Z.; Dahm, P.; Pruitt, S.K.; Boczkowski, D.; Nair, S.K.; Ballo, M.S.; Gilboa, E.; et al. Induction of polyclonal prostate cancer-specific CTL using dendritic cells transfected with amplified tumor RNA. J. Immunol. 2001, 166, 2953–2960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Nair, S.K.; Morse, M.; Boczkowski, D.; Cumming, R.I.; Vasovic, L.; Gilboa, E.; Lyerly, H.K. Induction of tumor-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes in cancer patients by autologous tumor RNA-transfected dendritic cells. Ann. Surg. 2002, 235, 540–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Schaft, N.; Wellner, V.; Wohn, C.; Schuler, G.; Dorrie, J. CD8(+) T-cell priming and boosting: More antigen-presenting DC, or more antigen per DC? Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2013, 62, 1769–1780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Schuurhuis, D.H.; Verdijk, P.; Schreibelt, G.; Aarntzen, E.H.; Scharenborg, N.; de Boer, A.; van de Rakt, M.W.; Kerkhoff, M.; Gerritsen, M.J.; Eijckeler, F.; et al. In situ expression of tumor antigens by messenger RNA-electroporated dendritic cells in lymph nodes of melanoma patients. Cancer Res. 2009, 69, 2927–2934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Van Craenenbroeck, A.H.; Smits, E.L.; Anguille, S.; Van de Velde, A.; Stein, B.; Braeckman, T.; Van Camp, K.; Nijs, G.; Ieven, M.; Goossens, H.; et al. Induction of cytomegalovirus-specific T cell responses in healthy volunteers and allogeneic stem cell recipients using vaccination with messenger RNA-transfected dendritic cells. Transplantation 2015, 99, 120–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Bagley, K.C.; Lewis, G.K.; Fouts, T.R. Adjuvant activity of the catalytic a1 domain of cholera toxin for retroviral antigens delivered by genegun. Clin. Vaccine Immunol. 2011, 18, 922–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Condon, C.; Watkins, S.C.; Celluzzi, C.M.; Thompson, K.; Falo, L.D., Jr. DNA-based immunization by in vivo transfection of dendritic cells. Nat. Med. 1996, 2, 1122–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Harrison, R.A.; Richards, A.; Laing, G.D.; Theakston, R.D. Simultaneous genegun immunisation with plasmids encoding antigen and GM-CSF: Significant enhancement of murine antivenom IgG1 titres. Vaccine 2002, 20, 1702–1706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Whiteside, T.L.; Gambotto, A.; Albers, A.; Stanson, J.; Cohen, E.P. Human tumor-derived genomic DNA transduced into a recipient cell induces tumor-specific immune responses ex vivo. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 9415–9420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Vik-Mo, E.O.; Nyakas, M.; Mikkelsen, B.V.; Moe, M.C.; Due-Tonnesen, P.; Suso, E.M.; Saeboe-Larssen, S.; Sandberg, C.; Brinchmann, J.E.; Helseth, E.; et al. Therapeutic vaccination against autologous cancer stem cells with mRNA-transfected dendritic cells in patients with glioblastoma. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2013, 62, 1499–1509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Hammad, H.; Lambrecht, B.N. Dendritic cells and epithelial cells: Linking innate and adaptive immunity in asthma. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2008, 8, 193–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Kissick, H.T.; Sanda, M.G. The role of active vaccination in cancer immunotherapy: Lessons from clinical trials. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 2015, 35, 15–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Nestle, F.O.; Banchereau, J.; Hart, D. Dendritic cells: On the move from bench to bedside. Nat. Med. 2001, 7, 761–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Mayanagi, S.; Kitago, M.; Sakurai, T.; Matsuda, T.; Fujita, T.; Higuchi, H.; Taguchi, J.; Takeuchi, H.; Itano, O.; Aiura, K.; et al. Phase I pilot study of wilms tumor gene 1 peptide-pulsed dendritic cell vaccination combined with gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer. Cancer Sci. 2015, 106, 397–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Mitchell, D.A.; Batich, K.A.; Gunn, M.D.; Huang, M.N.; Sanchez-Perez, L.; Nair, S.K.; Congdon, K.L.; Reap, E.A.; Archer, G.E.; Desjardins, A.; et al. Tetanus toxoid and CCL3 improve dendritic cell vaccines in mice and glioblastoma patients. Nature 2015, 519, 366–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Chodon, T.; Comin-Anduix, B.; Chmielowski, B.; Koya, R.C.; Wu, Z.; Auerbach, M.; Ng, C.; Avramis, E.; Seja, E.; Villanueva, A.; et al. Adoptive transfer of MART-1 T-cell receptor transgenic lymphocytes and dendritic cell vaccination in patients with metastatic melanoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 2014, 20, 2457–2465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Dhodapkar, M.V.; Sznol, M.; Zhao, B.; Wang, D.; Carvajal, R.D.; Keohan, M.L.; Chuang, E.; Sanborn, R.E.; Lutzky, J.; Powderly, J.; et al. Induction of antigen-specific immunity with a vaccine targeting NY-ESO-1 to the dendritic cell receptor DEC-205. Sci. Transl. Med. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Nestle, F.O.; Alijagic, S.; Gilliet, M.; Sun, Y.; Grabbe, S.; Dummer, R.; Burg, G.; Schadendorf, D. Vaccination of melanoma patients with peptide—Or tumor lysate—Pulsed dendritic cells. Nat. Med. 1998, 4, 328–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Poschke, I.; Lovgren, T.; Adamson, L.; Nystrom, M.; Andersson, E.; Hansson, J.; Tell, R.; Masucci, G.V.; Kiessling, R. A phase I clinical trial combining dendritic cell vaccination with adoptive T cell transfer in patients with stage IV melanoma. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2014, 63, 1061–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Thurner, B.; Haendle, I.; Roder, C.; Dieckmann, D.; Keikavoussi, P.; Jonuleit, H.; Bender, A.; Maczek, C.; Schreiner, D.; von den Driesch, P.; et al. Vaccination with MAGE-3A1 peptide-pulsed mature, monocyte-derived dendritic cells expands specific cytotoxic T cells and induces regression of some metastases in advanced stage IV melanoma. J. Exp. Med. 1999, 190, 1669–1678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Aarntzen, E.H.; De Vries, I.J.; Lesterhuis, W.J.; Schuurhuis, D.; Jacobs, J.F.; Bol, K.; Schreibelt, G.; Mus, R.; De Wilt, J.H.; Haanen, J.B.; et al. Targeting CD4(+) T-helper cells improves the induction of antitumor responses in dendritic cell-based vaccination. Cancer Res. 2013, 73, 19–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Engell-Noerregaard, L.; Hansen, T.H.; Andersen, M.H.; Thor Straten, P.; Svane, I.M. Review of clinical studies on dendritic cell-based vaccination of patients with malignant melanoma: Assessment of correlation between clinical response and vaccine parameters. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2009, 58, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Hobo, W.; Strobbe, L.; Maas, F.; Fredrix, H.; Greupink-Draaisma, A.; Esendam, B.; de Witte, T.; Preijers, F.; Levenga, H.; van Rees, B.; et al. Immunogenicity of dendritic cells pulsed with MAGE3, survivin and B-cell maturation antigen mRNA for vaccination of multiple myeloma patients. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2013, 62, 1381–1392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Murthy, V.; Moiyadi, A.; Sawant, R.; Sarin, R. Clinical considerations in developing dendritic cell vaccine based immunotherapy protocols in cancer. Curr. Mol. Med. 2009, 9, 725–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Butterfield, L.H. Cancer vaccines. BMJ 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Mahoney, K.M.; Rennert, P.D.; Freeman, G.J. Combination cancer immunotherapy and new immunomodulatory targets. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2015, 14, 561–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Pizzurro, G.A.; Barrio, M.M. Dendritic cell-based vaccine efficacy: Aiming for hot spots. Front. Immunol. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Melero, I.; Gaudernack, G.; Gerritsen, W.; Huber, C.; Parmiani, G.; Scholl, S.; Thatcher, N.; Wagstaff, J.; Zielinski, C.; Faulkner, I.; et al. Therapeutic vaccines for cancer: An overview of clinical trials. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2014, 11, 509–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Hodi, F.S.; O’Day, S.J.; McDermott, D.F.; Weber, R.W.; Sosman, J.A.; Haanen, J.B.; Gonzalez, R.; Robert, C.; Schadendorf, D.; Hassel, J.C.; et al. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2010, 363, 711–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Lawson, D.H.; Lee, S.; Zhao, F.; Tarhini, A.A.; Margolin, K.A.; Ernstoff, M.S.; Atkins, M.B.; Cohen, G.I.; Whiteside, T.L.; Butterfield, L.H.; et al. Randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of yeast-derived granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) versus peptide vaccination versus GM-CSF plus peptide vaccination versus placebo in patients with no evidence of disease after complete surgical resection of locally advanced and/or stage IV melanoma: A trial of the eastern cooperative oncology group-american college of radiology imaging network cancer research group (e4697). J. Clin. Oncol. 2015, 33, 4066–4076. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  99. Noguchi, M.; Moriya, F.; Suekane, S.; Matsuoka, K.; Arai, G.; Matsueda, S.; Sasada, T.; Yamada, A.; Itoh, K. Phase II study of personalized peptide vaccination for castration-resistant prostate cancer patients who failed in docetaxel-based chemotherapy. Prostate 2012, 72, 834–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Pol, J.; Bloy, N.; Buque, A.; Eggermont, A.; Cremer, I.; Sautes-Fridman, C.; Galon, J.; Tartour, E.; Zitvogel, L.; Kroemer, G.; et al. Trial watch: Peptide-based anticancer vaccines. Oncoimmunology 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Schuster, J.; Lai, R.K.; Recht, L.D.; Reardon, D.A.; Paleologos, N.A.; Groves, M.D.; Mrugala, M.M.; Jensen, R.; Baehring, J.M.; Sloan, A.; et al. A phase ii, multicenter trial of rindopepimut (CDX-110) in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: The act III study. Neuro-Oncology 2015, 17, 854–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Schwartzentruber, D.J.; Lawson, D.H.; Richards, J.M.; Conry, R.M.; Miller, D.M.; Treisman, J.; Gailani, F.; Riley, L.; Conlon, K.; Pockaj, B.; et al. Gp100 peptide vaccine and interleukin-2 in patients with advanced melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011, 364, 2119–2127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. McNeel, D.G.; Dunphy, E.J.; Davies, J.G.; Frye, T.P.; Johnson, L.E.; Staab, M.J.; Horvath, D.L.; Straus, J.; Alberti, D.; Marnocha, R.; et al. Safety and immunological efficacy of a DNA vaccine encoding prostatic acid phosphatase in patients with stage d0 prostate cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2009, 27, 4047–4054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Pavlenko, M.; Roos, A.K.; Lundqvist, A.; Palmborg, A.; Miller, A.M.; Ozenci, V.; Bergman, B.; Egevad, L.; Hellstrom, M.; Kiessling, R.; et al. A phase I trial of DNA vaccination with a plasmid expressing prostate-specific antigen in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2004, 91, 688–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Fehres, C.M.; Kalay, H.; Bruijns, S.C.; Musaafir, S.A.; Ambrosini, M.; van Bloois, L.; van Vliet, S.J.; Storm, G.; Garcia-Vallejo, J.J.; van Kooyk, Y. Cross-presentation through langerin and DC-SIGN targeting requires different formulations of glycan-modified antigens. J. Control. Release 2015, 203, 67–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Mansourian, M.; Badiee, A.; Jalali, S.A.; Shariat, S.; Yazdani, M.; Amin, M.; Jaafari, M.R. Effective induction of anti-tumor immunity using p5 HER-2/neu derived peptide encapsulated in fusogenic DOTAP cationic liposomes co-administrated with CpG-ODN. Immunol. Lett. 2014, 162, 87–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Varypataki, E.M.; van der Maaden, K.; Bouwstra, J.; Ossendorp, F.; Jiskoot, W. Cationic liposomes loaded with a synthetic long peptide and poly(i:C): A defined adjuvanted vaccine for induction of antigen-specific T cell cytotoxicity. AAPS J. 2015, 17, 216–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Wu, Y.L.; Park, K.; Soo, R.A.; Sun, Y.; Tyroller, K.; Wages, D.; Ely, G.; Yang, J.C.; Mok, T. Inspire: A phase III study of the BLP25 liposome vaccine (l-BLP25) in asian patients with unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer. BMC Cancer 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Berd, D. M-vax: An autologous, hapten-modified vaccine for human cancer. Expert Rev. Vaccines 2004, 3, 521–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Hersey, P.; Coates, A.S.; McCarthy, W.H.; Thompson, J.F.; Sillar, R.W.; McLeod, R.; Gill, P.G.; Coventry, B.J.; McMullen, A.; Dillon, H.; et al. Adjuvant immunotherapy of patients with high-risk melanoma using vaccinia viral lysates of melanoma: Results of a randomized trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 2002, 20, 4181–4190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Sondak, V.K.; Liu, P.Y.; Tuthill, R.J.; Kempf, R.A.; Unger, J.M.; Sosman, J.A.; Thompson, J.A.; Weiss, G.R.; Redman, B.G.; Jakowatz, J.G.; et al. Adjuvant immunotherapy of resected, intermediate-thickness, node-negative melanoma with an allogeneic tumor vaccine: Overall results of a randomized trial of the southwest oncology group. J. Clin. Oncol. 2002, 20, 2058–2066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Bijker, M.S.; Melief, C.J.; Offringa, R.; van der Burg, S.H. Design and development of synthetic peptide vaccines: Past, present and future. Expert Rev. Vaccines 2007, 6, 591–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Vremec, D.; O’Keeffe, M.; Wilson, A.; Ferrero, I.; Koch, U.; Radtke, F.; Scott, B.; Hertzog, P.; Villadangos, J.; Shortman, K. Factors determining the spontaneous activation of splenic dendritic cells in culture. Innate Immun. 2011, 17, 338–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Kamphorst, A.O.; Guermonprez, P.; Dudziak, D.; Nussenzweig, M.C. Route of antigen uptake differentially impacts presentation by dendritic cells and activated monocytes. J. Immunol. 2010, 185, 3426–3435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Joshi, M.D.; Unger, W.J.; Storm, G.; van Kooyk, Y.; Mastrobattista, E. Targeting tumor antigens to dendritic cells using particulate carriers. J. Control. Release 2012, 161, 25–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Paulis, L.E.; Mandal, S.; Kreutz, M.; Figdor, C.G. Dendritic cell-based nanovaccines for cancer immunotherapy. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 2013, 25, 389–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  117. Reddy, S.T.; Swartz, M.A.; Hubbell, J.A. Targeting dendritic cells with biomaterials: Developing the next generation of vaccines. Trends Immunol. 2006, 27, 573–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  118. Ducancel, F.; Muller, B.H. Molecular engineering of antibodies for therapeutic and diagnostic purposes. MAbs 2012, 4, 445–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Feige, M.J.; Buchner, J. Principles and engineering of antibody folding and assembly. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2014, 1844, 2024–2031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Lazar, G.A.; Dang, W.; Karki, S.; Vafa, O.; Peng, J.S.; Hyun, L.; Chan, C.; Chung, H.S.; Eivazi, A.; Yoder, S.C.; et al. Engineered antibody fc variants with enhanced effector function. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2006, 103, 4005–4010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Li, F.; Ravetch, J.V. Inhibitory fcgamma receptor engagement drives adjuvant and anti-tumor activities of agonistic CD40 antibodies. Science 2011, 333, 1030–1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Lux, A.; Nimmerjahn, F. Impact of differential glycosylation on IgG activity. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 2011, 780, 113–124. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  123. Nimmerjahn, F.; Ravetch, J.V. Translating basic mechanisms of IgG effector activity into next generation cancer therapies. Cancer Immun. 2012, 12, 13. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  124. Roopenian, D.C.; Akilesh, S. Fcrn: The neonatal fc receptor comes of age. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2007, 7, 715–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Ward, E.S.; Devanaboyina, S.C.; Ober, R.J. Targeting fcrn for the modulation of antibody dynamics. Mol. Immunol. 2015, 67, 131–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Dong, H.; Stanek, O.; Salvador, F.R.; Langer, U.; Morillon, E.; Ung, C.; Sebo, P.; Leclerc, C.; Majlessi, L. Induction of protective immunity against mycobacterium tuberculosis by delivery of esx antigens into airway dendritic cells. Mucosal Immunol. 2013, 6, 522–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Helft, J.; Ginhoux, F.; Bogunovic, M.; Merad, M. Origin and functional heterogeneity of non-lymphoid tissue dendritic cells in mice. Immunol. Rev. 2010, 234, 55–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  128. Hadeiba, H.; Sato, T.; Habtezion, A.; Oderup, C.; Pan, J.; Butcher, E.C. CCR9 expression defines tolerogenic plasmacytoid dendritic cells able to suppress acute graft-versus-host disease. Nat. Immunol. 2008, 9, 1253–1260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Wendland, M.; Czeloth, N.; Mach, N.; Malissen, B.; Kremmer, E.; Pabst, O.; Forster, R. CCR9 is a homing receptor for plasmacytoid dendritic cells to the small intestine. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 6347–6352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  130. Ardavin, C. Origin, precursors and differentiation of mouse dendritic cells. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2003, 3, 582–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  131. Cella, M.; Jarrossay, D.; Facchetti, F.; Alebardi, O.; Nakajima, H.; Lanzavecchia, A.; Colonna, M. Plasmacytoid monocytes migrate to inflamed lymph nodes and produce large amounts of type I interferon. Nat. Med. 1999, 5, 919–923. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  132. Gilliet, M.; Cao, W.; Liu, Y.J. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells: Sensing nucleic acids in viral infection and autoimmune diseases. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2008, 8, 594–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Gregorio, J.; Meller, S.; Conrad, C.; Di Nardo, A.; Homey, B.; Lauerma, A.; Arai, N.; Gallo, R.L.; Digiovanni, J.; Gilliet, M. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells sense skin injury and promote wound healing through type I interferons. J. Exp. Med. 2010, 207, 2921–2930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Rajagopal, D.; Paturel, C.; Morel, Y.; Uematsu, S.; Akira, S.; Diebold, S.S. Plasmacytoid dendritic cell-derived type I interferon is crucial for the adjuvant activity of toll-like receptor 7 agonists. Blood 2010, 115, 1949–1957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Segura, E.; Wong, J.; Villadangos, J.A. Cutting edge: B220+CCR9 dendritic cells are not plasmacytoid dendritic cells but are precursors of conventional dendritic cells. J. Immunol. 2009, 183, 1514–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Siegal, F.P.; Kadowaki, N.; Shodell, M.; Fitzgerald-Bocarsly, P.A.; Shah, K.; Ho, S.; Antonenko, S.; Liu, Y.J. The nature of the principal type 1 interferon-producing cells in human blood. Science 1999, 284, 1835–1837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Chappell, C.P.; Giltiay, N.V.; Draves, K.E.; Chen, C.; Hayden-Ledbetter, M.S.; Shlomchik, M.J.; Kaplan, D.H.; Clark, E.A. Targeting antigens through blood dendritic cell antigen 2 on plasmacytoid dendritic cells promotes immunologic tolerance. J. Immunol. 2014, 192, 5789–5801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  138. Di Pucchio, T.; Chatterjee, B.; Smed-Sorensen, A.; Clayton, S.; Palazzo, A.; Montes, M.; Xue, Y.; Mellman, I.; Banchereau, J.; Connolly, J.E. Direct proteasome-independent cross-presentation of viral antigen by plasmacytoid dendritic cells on major histocompatibility complex class I. Nat. Immunol. 2008, 9, 551–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  139. Flores, M.; Desai, D.D.; Downie, M.; Liang, B.; Reilly, M.P.; McKenzie, S.E.; Clynes, R. Dominant expression of the inhibitory fcgammariib prevents antigen presentation by murine plasmacytoid dendritic cells. J. Immunol. 2009, 183, 7129–7139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Hoeffel, G.; Ripoche, A.C.; Matheoud, D.; Nascimbeni, M.; Escriou, N.; Lebon, P.; Heshmati, F.; Guillet, J.G.; Gannage, M.; Caillat-Zucman, S.; et al. Antigen crosspresentation by human plasmacytoid dendritic cells. Immunity 2007, 27, 481–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Loschko, J.; Heink, S.; Hackl, D.; Dudziak, D.; Reindl, W.; Korn, T.; Krug, A.B. Antigen targeting to plasmacytoid dendritic cells via Siglec-H inhibits Th cell-dependent autoimmunity. J. Immunol. 2011, 187, 6346–6356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  142. Loschko, J.; Schlitzer, A.; Dudziak, D.; Drexler, I.; Sandholzer, N.; Bourquin, C.; Reindl, W.; Krug, A.B. Antigen delivery to plasmacytoid dendritic cells via BST2 induces protective T cell-mediated immunity. J. Immunol. 2011, 186, 6718–6725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Meyer-Wentrup, F.; Benitez-Ribas, D.; Tacken, P.J.; Punt, C.J.; Figdor, C.G.; de Vries, I.J.; Adema, G.J. Targeting DCIR on human plasmacytoid dendritic cells results in antigen presentation and inhibits IFN-alpha production. Blood 2008, 111, 4245–4253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Mouries, J.; Moron, G.; Schlecht, G.; Escriou, N.; Dadaglio, G.; Leclerc, C. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells efficiently cross-prime naive T cells in vivo after TLR activation. Blood 2008, 112, 3713–3722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Reizis, B.; Bunin, A.; Ghosh, H.S.; Lewis, K.L.; Sisirak, V. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells: Recent progress and open questions. Ann. Rev. Immunol. 2011, 29, 163–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  146. Villadangos, J.A.; Schnorrer, P. Intrinsic and cooperative antigen-presenting functions of dendritic-cell subsets in vivo. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2007, 7, 543–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Gurka, S.; Hartung, E.; Becker, M.; Kroczek, R.A. Mouse conventional dendritic cells can be universally classified based on the mutually exclusive expression of XCR1 and sirpalpha. Front. Immunol. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. Miller, J.C.; Brown, B.D.; Shay, T.; Gautier, E.L.; Jojic, V.; Cohain, A.; Pandey, G.; Leboeuf, M.; Elpek, K.G.; Helft, J.; et al. Deciphering the transcriptional network of the dendritic cell lineage. Nat. Immunol. 2012, 13, 888–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Malissen, B.; Tamoutounour, S.; Henri, S. The origins and functions of dendritic cells and macrophages in the skin. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2014, 14, 417–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  150. Langlet, C.; Tamoutounour, S.; Henri, S.; Luche, H.; Ardouin, L.; Gregoire, C.; Malissen, B.; Guilliams, M. CD64 expression distinguishes monocyte-derived and conventional dendritic cells and reveals their distinct role during intramuscular immunization. J. Immunol. 2012, 188, 1751–1760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  151. Durand, M.; Segura, E. The known unknowns of the human dendritic cell network. Front. Immunol. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  152. Guilliams, M.; Ginhoux, F.; Jakubzick, C.; Naik, S.H.; Onai, N.; Schraml, B.U.; Segura, E.; Tussiwand, R.; Yona, S. Dendritic cells, monocytes and macrophages: A unified nomenclature based on ontogeny. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2014, 14, 571–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  153. Heidkamp, G.F.; Lehmann, C.H.K.; Heger, L.; Baransk, A.; Hoffmann, A.; Lühr, J.; Dudziak, D. Functional specialization of dendritic cell subsets. In Encyclopedia of Cell Biology, 1st ed.; Academic Press: Waltham, UK, 2016; pp. 588–604. [Google Scholar]
  154. Palucka, K.; Banchereau, J. Dendritic-cell-based therapeutic cancer vaccines. Immunity 2013, 39, 38–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Reynolds, G.; Haniffa, M. Human and mouse mononuclear phagocyte networks: A tale of two species? Front. Immunol. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  156. Vu Manh, T.P.; Bertho, N.; Hosmalin, A.; Schwartz-Cornil, I.; Dalod, M. Investigating evolutionary conservation of dendritic cell subset identity and functions. Front. Immunol. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  157. Bonifaz, L.C.; Bonnyay, D.P.; Charalambous, A.; Darguste, D.I.; Fujii, S.; Soares, H.; Brimnes, M.K.; Moltedo, B.; Moran, T.M.; Steinman, R.M. In vivo targeting of antigens to maturing dendritic cells via the DEC-205 receptor improves T cell vaccination. J. Exp. Med. 2004, 199, 815–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  158. Lindquist, R.L.; Shakhar, G.; Dudziak, D.; Wardemann, H.; Eisenreich, T.; Dustin, M.L.; Nussenzweig, M.C. Visualizing dendritic cell networks in vivo. Nat. Immunol. 2004, 5, 1243–1250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  159. Shakhar, G.; Lindquist, R.L.; Skokos, D.; Dudziak, D.; Huang, J.H.; Nussenzweig, M.C.; Dustin, M.L. Stable T cell-dendritic cell interactions precede the development of both tolerance and immunity in vivo. Nat. Immunol. 2005, 6, 707–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. Soares, H.; Waechter, H.; Glaichenhaus, N.; Mougneau, E.; Yagita, H.; Mizenina, O.; Dudziak, D.; Nussenzweig, M.C.; Steinman, R.M. A subset of dendritic cells induces CD4+ T cells to produce IFN-gamma by an IL-12-independent but CD70-dependent mechanism in vivo. J. Exp. Med. 2007, 204, 1095–1106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  161. Jiang, W.; Swiggard, W.J.; Heufler, C.; Peng, M.; Mirza, A.; Steinman, R.M.; Nussenzweig, M.C. The receptor DEC-205 expressed by dendritic cells and thymic epithelial cells is involved in antigen processing. Nature 1995, 375, 151–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  162. Inaba, K.; Swiggard, W.J.; Inaba, M.; Meltzer, J.; Mirza, A.; Sasagawa, T.; Nussenzweig, M.C.; Steinman, R.M. Tissue distribution of the DEC-205 protein that is detected by the monoclonal antibody NLDC-145. I. Expression on dendritic cells and other subsets of mouse leukocytes. Cell. Immunol. 1995, 163, 148–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Kraal, G.; Breel, M.; Janse, M.; Bruin, G. Langerhans’ cells, veiled cells, and interdigitating cells in the mouse recognized by a monoclonal antibody. J. Exp. Med. 1986, 163, 981–997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Witmer-Pack, M.D.; Swiggard, W.J.; Mirza, A.; Inaba, K.; Steinman, R.M. Tissue distribution of the DEC-205 protein that is detected by the monoclonal antibody NLDC-145. II. Expression in situ in lymphoid and nonlymphoid tissues. Cell. Immunol. 1995, 163, 157–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  165. Mahnke, K.; Qian, Y.; Knop, J.; Enk, A.H. Induction of CD4+/CD25+ regulatory T cells by targeting of antigens to immature dendritic cells. Blood 2003, 101, 4862–4869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  166. Iyoda, T.; Shimoyama, S.; Liu, K.; Omatsu, Y.; Akiyama, Y.; Maeda, Y.; Takahara, K.; Steinman, R.M.; Inaba, K. The CD8+ dendritic cell subset selectively endocytoses dying cells in culture and in vivo. J. Exp. Med. 2002, 195, 1289–1302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  167. Lahoud, M.H.; Ahmet, F.; Zhang, J.G.; Meuter, S.; Policheni, A.N.; Kitsoulis, S.; Lee, C.N.; O’Keeffe, M.; Sullivan, L.C.; Brooks, A.G.; et al. DEC-205 is a cell surface receptor for CPG oligonucleotides. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 16270–16275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  168. Shrimpton, R.E.; Butler, M.; Morel, A.S.; Eren, E.; Hue, S.S.; Ritter, M.A. CD205 (DEC-205): A recognition receptor for apoptotic and necrotic self. Mol. Immunol. 2009, 46, 1229–1239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  169. Zhang, S.S.; Park, C.G.; Zhang, P.; Bartra, S.S.; Plano, G.V.; Klena, J.D.; Skurnik, M.; Hinnebusch, B.J.; Chen, T. Plasminogen activator Pla of Yersinia pestis utilizes murine DEC-205 (CD205) as a receptor to promote dissemination. J. Biol. Chem. 2008, 283, 31511–31521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  170. Heidkamp, G.F.; Neubert, K.; Haertel, E.; Nimmerjahn, F.; Nussenzweig, M.C.; Dudziak, D. Efficient generation of a monoclonal antibody against the human C-type lectin receptor DCIR by targeting murine dendritic cells. Immunol. Lett. 2010, 132, 69–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  171. Henriques, H.R.; Rampazo, E.V.; Goncalves, A.J.; Vicentin, E.C.; Amorim, J.H.; Panatieri, R.H.; Amorim, K.N.; Yamamoto, M.M.; Ferreira, L.C.; Alves, A.M.; et al. Targeting the non-structural protein 1 from dengue virus to a dendritic cell population confers protective immunity to lethal virus challenge. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  172. Idoyaga, J.; Fiorese, C.; Zbytnuik, L.; Lubkin, A.; Miller, J.; Malissen, B.; Mucida, D.; Merad, M.; Steinman, R.M. Specialized role of migratory dendritic cells in peripheral tolerance induction. J. Clin. Investig. 2013, 123, 844–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  173. Bates, E.E.; Fournier, N.; Garcia, E.; Valladeau, J.; Durand, I.; Pin, J.J.; Zurawski, S.M.; Patel, S.; Abrams, J.S.; Lebecque, S.; et al. APCs express DCIR, a novel C-type lectin surface receptor containing an immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibitory motif. J. Immunol. 1999, 163, 1973–1983. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  174. Klechevsky, E.; Flamar, A.L.; Cao, Y.; Blanck, J.P.; Liu, M.; O’Bar, A.; Agouna-Deciat, O.; Klucar, P.; Thompson-Snipes, L.; Zurawski, S.; et al. Cross-priming CD8+ T cells by targeting antigens to human dendritic cells through DCIR. Blood 2010, 116, 1685–1697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Bloem, K.; Vuist, I.M.; van den Berk, M.; Klaver, E.J.; van Die, I.; Knippels, L.M.; Garssen, J.; Garcia-Vallejo, J.J.; van Vliet, S.J.; van Kooyk, Y. DCIR interacts with ligands from both endogenous and pathogenic origin. Immunol. Lett. 2014, 158, 33–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Jin, W.; Li, C.; Du, T.; Hu, K.; Huang, X.; Hu, Q. DC-SIGN plays a stronger role than DCIR in mediating HIV-1 capture and transfer. Virology 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  177. Lambert, A.A.; Gilbert, C.; Richard, M.; Beaulieu, A.D.; Tremblay, M.J. The C-type lectin surface receptor DCIR acts as a new attachment factor for HIV-1 in dendritic cells and contributes to trans- and cis-infection pathways. Blood 2008, 112, 1299–1307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  178. Idoyaga, J.; Cheong, C.; Suda, K.; Suda, N.; Kim, J.Y.; Lee, H.; Park, C.G.; Steinman, R.M. Cutting edge: Langerin/CD207 receptor on dendritic cells mediates efficient antigen presentation on MHC I and II products in vivo. J. Immunol. 2008, 180, 3647–3650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  179. Neubert, K.; Lehmann, C.H.; Heger, L.; Baranska, A.; Staedtler, A.M.; Buchholz, V.R.; Yamazaki, S.; Heidkamp, G.F.; Eissing, N.; Zebroski, H.; et al. Antigen delivery to CD11c+CD8 dendritic cells induces protective immune responses against experimental melanoma in mice in vivo. J. Immunol. 2014, 192, 5830–5838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  180. Boscardin, S.B.; Hafalla, J.C.; Masilamani, R.F.; Kamphorst, A.O.; Zebroski, H.A.; Rai, U.; Morrot, A.; Zavala, F.; Steinman, R.M.; Nussenzweig, R.S.; et al. Antigen targeting to dendritic cells elicits long-lived T cell help for antibody responses. J. Exp. Med. 2006, 203, 599–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  181. Macho-Fernandez, E.; Cruz, L.J.; Ghinnagow, R.; Fontaine, J.; Bialecki, E.; Frisch, B.; Trottein, F.; Faveeuw, C. Targeted delivery of α-galactosylceramide to CD8α+ dendritic cells optimizes type I NKT cell-based antitumor responses. J. Immunol. 2014, 193, 961–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  182. Do, Y.; Koh, H.; Park, C.G.; Dudziak, D.; Seo, P.; Mehandru, S.; Choi, J.H.; Cheong, C.; Park, S.; Perlin, D.S.; et al. Targeting of LCRV virulence protein from yersinia pestis to dendritic cells protects mice against pneumonic plague. Eur. J. Immunol. 2010, 40, 2791–2796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  183. Trumpfheller, C.; Finke, J.S.; Lopez, C.B.; Moran, T.M.; Moltedo, B.; Soares, H.; Huang, Y.; Schlesinger, S.J.; Park, C.G.; Nussenzweig, M.C.; et al. Intensified and protective CD4+ T cell immunity in mice with anti-dendritic cell HIV gag fusion antibody vaccine. J. Exp. Med. 2006, 203, 607–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  184. Idoyaga, J.; Lubkin, A.; Fiorese, C.; Lahoud, M.H.; Caminschi, I.; Huang, Y.; Rodriguez, A.; Clausen, B.E.; Park, C.G.; Trumpfheller, C.; et al. Comparable T helper 1 (Th1) and CD8 T-cell immunity by targeting HIV gag p24 to CD8 dendritic cells within antibodies to langerin, DEC205, and Clec9A. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 2384–2389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  185. Longhi, M.P.; Trumpfheller, C.; Idoyaga, J.; Caskey, M.; Matos, I.; Kluger, C.; Salazar, A.M.; Colonna, M.; Steinman, R.M. Dendritic cells require a systemic type I interferon response to mature and induce CD4+ Th1 immunity with poly IC as adjuvant. J. Exp. Med. 2009, 206, 1589–1602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  186. Ruane, D.; Chorny, A.; Lee, H.; Faith, J.; Pandey, G.; Shan, M.; Simchoni, N.; Rahman, A.; Garg, A.; Weinstein, E.G.; et al. Microbiota regulate the ability of lung dendritic cells to induce IgA class-switch recombination and generate protective gastrointestinal immune responses. J. Exp. Med. 2016, 213, 53–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  187. Spiering, R.; Margry, B.; Keijzer, C.; Petzold, C.; Hoek, A.; Wagenaar-Hilbers, J.; van der Zee, R.; van Eden, W.; Kretschmer, K.; Broere, F. DEC205+ dendritic cell-targeted tolerogenic vaccination promotes immune tolerance in experimental autoimmune arthritis. J. Immunol. 2015, 194, 4804–4813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  188. Matos, I.; Mizenina, O.; Lubkin, A.; Steinman, R.M.; Idoyaga, J. Targeting antigens to dendritic cells in vivo induces protective immunity. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e67453. [Google Scholar]
  189. Wang, B.; Zaidi, N.; He, L.Z.; Zhang, L.; Kuroiwa, J.M.; Keler, T.; Steinman, R.M. Targeting of the non-mutated tumor antigen HER2/neu to mature dendritic cells induces an integrated immune response that protects against breast cancer in mice. Breast Cancer Res. 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  190. Rampazo, E.V.; Amorim, K.N.; Yamamoto, M.M.; Panatieri, R.H.; Rodrigues, M.M.; Boscardin, S.B. Antigen targeting to dendritic cells allows the identification of a CD4 T-cell epitope within an immunodominant trypanosoma cruzi antigen. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0117778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  191. Mukhopadhaya, A.; Hanafusa, T.; Jarchum, I.; Chen, Y.G.; Iwai, Y.; Serreze, D.V.; Steinman, R.M.; Tarbell, K.V.; DiLorenzo, T.P. Selective delivery of beta cell antigen to dendritic cells in vivo leads to deletion and tolerance of autoreactive CD8+ T cells in nod mice. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 6374–6379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  192. Petzold, C.; Riewaldt, J.; Koenig, T.; Schallenberg, S.; Kretschmer, K. Dendritic cell-targeted pancreatic beta-cell antigen leads to conversion of self-reactive CD4(+) T cells into regulatory T cells and promotes immunotolerance in NOD mice. Rev Diabet. Stud. 2010, 7, 47–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  193. Charalambous, A.; Oks, M.; Nchinda, G.; Yamazaki, S.; Steinman, R.M. Dendritic cell targeting of survivin protein in a xenogeneic form elicits strong CD4+ T cell immunity to mouse survivin. J. Immunol. 2006, 177, 8410–8421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  194. Mukherjee, G.; Geliebter, A.; Babad, J.; Santamaria, P.; Serreze, D.V.; Freeman, G.J.; Tarbell, K.V.; Sharpe, A.; DiLorenzo, T.P. DEC-205-mediated antigen targeting to steady-state dendritic cells induces deletion of diabetogenic CD8(+) T cells independently of PD-1 and PD-L1. Int. Immunol. 2013, 25, 651–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  195. Stern, J.N.; Keskin, D.B.; Kato, Z.; Waldner, H.; Schallenberg, S.; Anderson, A.; von Boehmer, H.; Kretschmer, K.; Strominger, J.L. Promoting tolerance to proteolipid protein-induced experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis through targeting dendritic cells. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107, 17280–17285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  196. Platt, C.D.; Ma, J.K.; Chalouni, C.; Ebersold, M.; Bou-Reslan, H.; Carano, R.A.; Mellman, I.; Delamarre, L. Mature dendritic cells use endocytic receptors to capture and present antigens. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107, 4287–4292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  197. Ring, S.; Maas, M.; Nettelbeck, D.M.; Enk, A.H.; Mahnke, K. Targeting of autoantigens to DEC205(+) dendritic cells in vivo suppresses experimental allergic encephalomyelitis in mice. J. Immunol. 2013, 191, 2938–2947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  198. Ettinger, M.; Gratz, I.K.; Gruber, C.; Hauser-Kronberger, C.; Johnson, T.S.; Mahnke, K.; Thalhamer, J.; Hintner, H.; Peckl-Schmid, D.; Bauer, J.W. Targeting of the hNC16A collagen domain to dendritic cells induces tolerance to human type XVII collagen. Exp. Dermatol. 2012, 21, 395–398. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  199. van Broekhoven, C.L.; Parish, C.R.; Demangel, C.; Britton, W.J.; Altin, J.G. Targeting dendritic cells with antigen-containing liposomes: A highly effective procedure for induction of antitumor immunity and for tumor immunotherapy. Cancer Res. 2004, 64, 4357–4365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  200. Bonifaz, L.; Bonnyay, D.; Mahnke, K.; Rivera, M.; Nussenzweig, M.C.; Steinman, R.M. Efficient targeting of protein antigen to the dendritic cell receptor DEC-205 in the steady state leads to antigen presentation on major histocompatibility complex class I products and peripheral CD8+ T cell tolerance. J. Exp. Med. 2002, 196, 1627–1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  201. Flacher, V.; Tripp, C.H.; Haid, B.; Kissenpfennig, A.; Malissen, B.; Stoitzner, P.; Idoyaga, J.; Romani, N. Skin langerin+ dendritic cells transport intradermally injected anti-DEC-205 antibodies but are not essential for subsequent cytotoxic CD8+ T cell responses. J. Immunol. 2012, 188, 2146–2155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  202. Flacher, V.; Tripp, C.H.; Stoitzner, P.; Haid, B.; Ebner, S.; Del Frari, B.; Koch, F.; Park, C.G.; Steinman, R.M.; Idoyaga, J.; et al. Epidermal Langerhans cells rapidly capture and present antigens from C-type lectin-targeting antibodies deposited in the dermis. J. Investig. Dermatol. 2010, 130, 755–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  203. Flynn, B.J.; Kastenmuller, K.; Wille-Reece, U.; Tomaras, G.D.; Alam, M.; Lindsay, R.W.; Salazar, A.M.; Perdiguero, B.; Gomez, C.E.; Wagner, R.; et al. Immunization with HIV gag targeted to dendritic cells followed by recombinant new york vaccinia virus induces robust T-cell immunity in nonhuman primates. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 7131–7136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  204. Gurer, C.; Strowig, T.; Brilot, F.; Pack, M.; Trumpfheller, C.; Arrey, F.; Park, C.G.; Steinman, R.M.; Munz, C. Targeting the nuclear antigen 1 of Epstein-Barr virus to the human endocytic receptor DEC-205 stimulates protective T-cell responses. Blood 2008, 112, 1231–1239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  205. Bozzacco, L.; Trumpfheller, C.; Siegal, F.P.; Mehandru, S.; Markowitz, M.; Carrington, M.; Nussenzweig, M.C.; Piperno, A.G.; Steinman, R.M. DEC-205 receptor on dendritic cells mediates presentation of HIV gag protein to CD8+ T cells in a spectrum of human MHC I haplotypes. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 1289–1294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  206. Tsuji, T.; Matsuzaki, J.; Kelly, M.P.; Ramakrishna, V.; Vitale, L.; He, L.Z.; Keler, T.; Odunsi, K.; Old, L.J.; Ritter, G.; et al. Antibody-targeted NY-ESO-1 to mannose receptor or DEC-205 in vitro elicits dual human CD8+ and CD4+ T cell responses with broad antigen specificity. J. Immunol. 2011, 186, 1218–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  207. Birkholz, K.; Schwenkert, M.; Kellner, C.; Gross, S.; Fey, G.; Schuler-Thurner, B.; Schuler, G.; Schaft, N.; Dorrie, J. Targeting of DEC-205 on human dendritic cells results in efficient mhc class II-restricted antigen presentation. Blood 2010, 116, 2277–2285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  208. White, A.L.; Tutt, A.L.; James, S.; Wilkinson, K.A.; Castro, F.V.; Dixon, S.V.; Hitchcock, J.; Khan, M.; Al-Shamkhani, A.; Cunningham, A.F.; et al. Ligation of CD11c during vaccination promotes germinal centre induction and robust humoral responses without adjuvant. Immunology 2010, 131, 141–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  209. Sancho, D.; Mourao-Sa, D.; Joffre, O.P.; Schulz, O.; Rogers, N.C.; Pennington, D.J.; Carlyle, J.R.; Reis e Sousa, C. Tumor therapy in mice via antigen targeting to a novel, DC-restricted C-type lectin. J. Clin. Investig. 2008, 118, 2098–2110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  210. Joffre, O.P.; Sancho, D.; Zelenay, S.; Keller, A.M.; Reis e Sousa, C. Efficient and versatile manipulation of the peripheral CD4+ T-cell compartment by antigen targeting to DNGR-1/CLEC9A. Eur. J. Immunol. 2010, 40, 1255–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  211. Caminschi, I.; Proietto, A.I.; Ahmet, F.; Kitsoulis, S.; Shin Teh, J.; Lo, J.C.; Rizzitelli, A.; Wu, L.; Vremec, D.; van Dommelen, S.L.; et al. The dendritic cell subtype-restricted C-type lectin Clec9A is a target for vaccine enhancement. Blood 2008, 112, 3264–3273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  212. Lahoud, M.H.; Ahmet, F.; Kitsoulis, S.; Wan, S.S.; Vremec, D.; Lee, C.N.; Phipson, B.; Shi, W.; Smyth, G.K.; Lew, A.M.; et al. Targeting antigen to mouse dendritic cells via Clec9A induces potent CD4 T cell responses biased toward a follicular helper phenotype. J. Immunol. 2011, 187, 842–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  213. Schreibelt, G.; Klinkenberg, L.J.; Cruz, L.J.; Tacken, P.J.; Tel, J.; Kreutz, M.; Adema, G.J.; Brown, G.D.; Figdor, C.G.; de Vries, I.J. The C-type lectin receptor Clec9A mediates antigen uptake and (cross) presentation by human blood BDCA3+ myeloid dendritic cells. Blood 2012, 119, 2284–2292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  214. Lahoud, M.H.; Proietto, A.I.; Ahmet, F.; Kitsoulis, S.; Eidsmo, L.; Wu, L.; Sathe, P.; Pietersz, S.; Chang, H.W.; Walker, I.D.; et al. The C-type lectin clec12a present on mouse and human dendritic cells can serve as a target for antigen delivery and enhancement of antibody responses. J. Immunol. 2009, 182, 7587–7594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  215. Carter, R.W.; Thompson, C.; Reid, D.M.; Wong, S.Y.; Tough, D.F. Preferential induction of CD4+ T cell responses through in vivo targeting of antigen to dendritic cell-associated C-type lectin-1. J. Immunol. 2006, 177, 2276–2284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  216. Duluc, D.; Joo, H.; Ni, L.; Yin, W.; Upchurch, K.; Li, D.; Xue, Y.; Klucar, P.; Zurawski, S.; Zurawski, G.; et al. Induction and activation of human Th17 by targeting antigens to dendritic cells via Dectin-1. J. Immunol. 2014, 192, 5776–5788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  217. Ni, L.; Gayet, I.; Zurawski, S.; Duluc, D.; Flamar, A.L.; Li, X.H.; O’Bar, A.; Clayton, S.; Palucka, A.K.; Zurawski, G.; et al. Concomitant activation and antigen uptake via human Dectin-1 results in potent antigen-specific CD8+ T cell responses. J. Immunol. 2010, 185, 3504–3513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  218. Flacher, V.; Tripp, C.H.; Mairhofer, D.G.; Steinman, R.M.; Stoitzner, P.; Idoyaga, J.; Romani, N. Murine langerin+ dermal dendritic cells prime CD8+ T cells while langerhans cells induce cross-tolerance. EMBO Mol. Med. 2014, 6, 1191–1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  219. Tacken, P.J.; de Vries, I.J.; Gijzen, K.; Joosten, B.; Wu, D.; Rother, R.P.; Faas, S.J.; Punt, C.J.; Torensma, R.; Adema, G.J.; et al. Effective induction of naive and recall T-cell responses by targeting antigen to human dendritic cells via a humanized anti-DC-SIGN antibody. Blood 2005, 106, 1278–1285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  220. Hesse, C.; Ginter, W.; Forg, T.; Mayer, C.T.; Baru, A.M.; Arnold-Schrauf, C.; Unger, W.W.; Kalay, H.; van Kooyk, Y.; Berod, L.; et al. In vivo targeting of human DC-SIGN drastically enhances CD8(+) T-cell-mediated protective immunity. Eur. J. Immunol. 2013, 43, 2543–2553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  221. Tacken, P.J.; Ginter, W.; Berod, L.; Cruz, L.J.; Joosten, B.; Sparwasser, T.; Figdor, C.G.; Cambi, A. Targeting DC-SIGN via its neck region leads to prolonged antigen residence in early endosomes, delayed lysosomal degradation, and cross-presentation. Blood 2011, 118, 4111–4119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  222. Pereira, C.F.; Torensma, R.; Hebeda, K.; Kretz-Rommel, A.; Faas, S.J.; Figdor, C.G.; Adema, G.J. In vivo targeting of DC-SIGN-positive antigen-presenting cells in a nonhuman primate model. J. Immunother. 2007, 30, 705–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  223. Kretz-Rommel, A.; Qin, F.; Dakappagari, N.; Torensma, R.; Faas, S.; Wu, D.; Bowdish, K.S. In vivo targeting of antigens to human dendritic cells through DC-SIGN elicits stimulatory immune responses and inhibits tumor growth in grafted mouse models. J. Immunother. 2007, 30, 715–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  224. He, L.Z.; Ramakrishna, V.; Connolly, J.E.; Wang, X.T.; Smith, P.A.; Jones, C.L.; Valkova-Valchanova, M.; Arunakumari, A.; Treml, J.F.; Goldstein, J.; et al. A novel human cancer vaccine elicits cellular responses to the tumor-associated antigen, human chorionic gonadotropin beta. Clin. Cancer Res. 2004, 10, 1920–1927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  225. Ramakrishna, V.; Treml, J.F.; Vitale, L.; Connolly, J.E.; O’Neill, T.; Smith, P.A.; Jones, C.L.; He, L.Z.; Goldstein, J.; Wallace, P.K.; et al. Mannose receptor targeting of tumor antigen pmel17 to human dendritic cells directs anti-melanoma T cell responses via multiple HLA molecules. J. Immunol. 2004, 172, 2845–2852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  226. Ramakrishna, V.; Vasilakos, J.P.; Tario, J.D., Jr.; Berger, M.A.; Wallace, P.K.; Keler, T. Toll-like receptor activation enhances cell-mediated immunity induced by an antibody vaccine targeting human dendritic cells. J. Transl. Med. 2007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  227. Castro, F.V.; Tutt, A.L.; White, A.L.; Teeling, J.L.; James, S.; French, R.R.; Glennie, M.J. CD11c provides an effective immunotarget for the generation of both CD4 and CD8 T cell responses. Eur. J. Immunol. 2008, 38, 2263–2273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  228. Wei, H.; Wang, S.; Zhang, D.; Hou, S.; Qian, W.; Li, B.; Guo, H.; Kou, G.; He, J.; Wang, H.; et al. Targeted delivery of tumor antigens to activated dendritic cells via CD11c molecules induces potent antitumor immunity in mice. Clin. Cancer Res. 2009, 15, 4612–4621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  229. Dickgreber, N.; Stoitzner, P.; Bai, Y.; Price, K.M.; Farrand, K.J.; Manning, K.; Angel, C.E.; Dunbar, P.R.; Ronchese, F.; Fraser, J.D.; et al. Targeting antigen to MHC class II molecules promotes efficient cross-presentation and enhances immunotherapy. J. Immunol. 2009, 182, 1260–1269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  230. Delneste, Y.; Magistrelli, G.; Gauchat, J.; Haeuw, J.; Aubry, J.; Nakamura, K.; Kawakami-Honda, N.; Goetsch, L.; Sawamura, T.; Bonnefoy, J.; et al. Involvement of LOX-1 in dendritic cell-mediated antigen cross-presentation. Immunity 2002, 17, 353–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  231. Joo, H.; Li, D.; Dullaers, M.; Kim, T.W.; Duluc, D.; Upchurch, K.; Xue, Y.; Zurawski, S.; Le Grand, R.; Liu, Y.J.; et al. C-type lectin-like receptor LOX-1 promotes dendritic cell-mediated class-switched B cell responses. Immunity 2014, 41, 592–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  232. Li, D.; Romain, G.; Flamar, A.L.; Duluc, D.; Dullaers, M.; Li, X.H.; Zurawski, S.; Bosquet, N.; Palucka, A.K.; Le Grand, R.; et al. Targeting self- and foreign antigens to dendritic cells via DC-asgpr generates IL-10-producing suppressive CD4+ T cells. J. Exp. Med. 2012, 209, 109–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  233. Tagliani, E.; Guermonprez, P.; Sepulveda, J.; Lopez-Bravo, M.; Ardavin, C.; Amigorena, S.; Benvenuti, F.; Burrone, O.R. Selection of an antibody library identifies a pathway to induce immunity by targeting CD36 on steady-state CD8α+ dendritic cells. J. Immunol. 2008, 180, 3201–3209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  234. Zhang, J.; Raper, A.; Sugita, N.; Hingorani, R.; Salio, M.; Palmowski, M.J.; Cerundolo, V.; Crocker, P.R. Characterization of Siglec-H as a novel endocytic receptor expressed on murine plasmacytoid dendritic cell precursors. Blood 2006, 107, 3600–3608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  235. Sapoznikov, A.; Fischer, J.A.; Zaft, T.; Krauthgamer, R.; Dzionek, A.; Jung, S. Organ-dependent in vivo priming of naive CD4+, but not CD8+, T cells by plasmacytoid dendritic cells. J. Exp. Med. 2007, 204, 1923–1933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  236. Price, J.D.; Tarbell, K.V. The role of dendritic cell subsets and innate immunity in the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes and other autoimmune diseases. Front. Immunol. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  237. Ruane, D.; Do, Y.; Brane, L.; Garg, A.; Bozzacco, L.; Kraus, T.; Caskey, M.; Salazar, A.; Trumpheller, C.; Mehandru, S. A dendritic cell targeted vaccine induces long-term HIV-specific immunity within the gastrointestinal tract. Mucosal Immunol. 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  238. Engering, A.; Geijtenbeek, T.B.; van Vliet, S.J.; Wijers, M.; van Liempt, E.; Demaurex, N.; Lanzavecchia, A.; Fransen, J.; Figdor, C.G.; Piguet, V.; et al. The dendritic cell-specific adhesion receptor DC-SIGN internalizes antigen for presentation to T cells. J. Immunol. 2002, 168, 2118–2126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  239. Lai, W.K.; Sun, P.J.; Zhang, J.; Jennings, A.; Lalor, P.F.; Hubscher, S.; McKeating, J.A.; Adams, D.H. Expression of DC-SIGN and DC-SIGNR on human sinusoidal endothelium: A role for capturing hepatitis C virus particles. Am. J. Pathol. 2006, 169, 200–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  240. Segura, E.; Valladeau-Guilemond, J.; Donnadieu, M.H.; Sastre-Garau, X.; Soumelis, V.; Amigorena, S. Characterization of resident and migratory dendritic cells in human lymph nodes. J. Exp. Med. 2012, 209, 653–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  241. Garcia-Vallejo, J.J.; van Kooyk, Y. The physiological role of DC-SIGN: A tale of mice and men. Trends Immunol. 2013, 34, 482–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  242. Park, C.G.; Takahara, K.; Umemoto, E.; Yashima, Y.; Matsubara, K.; Matsuda, Y.; Clausen, B.E.; Inaba, K.; Steinman, R.M. Five mouse homologues of the human dendritic cell C-type lectin, DC-SIGN. Int. Immunol. 2001, 13, 1283–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  243. Powlesland, A.S.; Ward, E.M.; Sadhu, S.K.; Guo, Y.; Taylor, M.E.; Drickamer, K. Widely divergent biochemical properties of the complete set of mouse DC-SIGN-related proteins. J. Biol. Chem. 2006, 281, 20440–20449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  244. Schaefer, M.; Reiling, N.; Fessler, C.; Stephani, J.; Taniuchi, I.; Hatam, F.; Yildirim, A.O.; Fehrenbach, H.; Walter, K.; Ruland, J.; et al. Decreased pathology and prolonged survival of human DC-SIGN transgenic mice during mycobacterial infection. J. Immunol. 2008, 180, 6836–6845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  245. Caparros, E.; Munoz, P.; Sierra-Filardi, E.; Serrano-Gomez, D.; Puig-Kroger, A.; Rodriguez-Fernandez, J.L.; Mellado, M.; Sancho, J.; Zubiaur, M.; Corbi, A.L. DC-SIGN ligation on dendritic cells results in ERK and PI3K activation and modulates cytokine production. Blood 2006, 107, 3950–3958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  246. Bachem, A.; Guttler, S.; Hartung, E.; Ebstein, F.; Schaefer, M.; Tannert, A.; Salama, A.; Movassaghi, K.; Opitz, C.; Mages, H.W.; et al. Superior antigen cross-presentation and XCR1 expression define human CD11c+CD141+ cells as homologues of mouse CD8+ dendritic cells. J. Exp. Med. 2010, 207, 1273–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  247. Crozat, K.; Guiton, R.; Guilliams, M.; Henri, S.; Baranek, T.; Schwartz-Cornil, I.; Malissen, B.; Dalod, M. Comparative genomics as a tool to reveal functional equivalences between human and mouse dendritic cell subsets. Immunol. Rev. 2010, 234, 177–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  248. Jongbloed, S.L.; Kassianos, A.J.; McDonald, K.J.; Clark, G.J.; Ju, X.; Angel, C.E.; Chen, C.J.; Dunbar, P.R.; Wadley, R.B.; Jeet, V.; et al. Human CD141+ (BDCA-3)+ dendritic cells (DCs) represent a unique myeloid DC subset that cross-presents necrotic cell antigens. J. Exp. Med. 2010, 207, 1247–1260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  249. Lundberg, K.; Rydnert, F.; Greiff, L.; Lindstedt, M. Human blood dendritic cell subsets exhibit discriminative pattern recognition receptor profiles. Immunology 2014, 142, 279–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  250. Poulin, L.F.; Salio, M.; Griessinger, E.; Anjos-Afonso, F.; Craciun, L.; Chen, J.L.; Keller, A.M.; Joffre, O.; Zelenay, S.; Nye, E.; et al. Characterization of human DNGR-1+ BDCA3+ leukocytes as putative equivalents of mouse CD8α+ dendritic cells. J. Exp. Med. 2010, 207, 1261–1271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  251. Watchmaker, P.B.; Lahl, K.; Lee, M.; Baumjohann, D.; Morton, J.; Kim, S.J.; Zeng, R.; Dent, A.; Ansel, K.M.; Diamond, B.; et al. Comparative transcriptional and functional profiling defines conserved programs of intestinal DC differentiation in humans and mice. Nat. Immunol. 2014, 15, 98–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  252. Chatterjee, B.; Smed-Sorensen, A.; Cohn, L.; Chalouni, C.; Vandlen, R.; Lee, B.C.; Widger, J.; Keler, T.; Delamarre, L.; Mellman, I. Internalization and endosomal degradation of receptor-bound antigens regulate the efficiency of cross presentation by human dendritic cells. Blood 2012, 120, 2011–2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  253. Keler, T.; Ramakrishna, V.; Fanger, M.W. Mannose receptor-targeted vaccines. Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 2004, 4, 1953–1962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  254. Drummond, R.A.; Brown, G.D. Signalling C-type lectins in antimicrobial immunity. PLoS Pathog. 2013, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  255. Killick, K.E.; Ni Cheallaigh, C.; O’Farrelly, C.; Hokamp, K.; MacHugh, D.E.; Harris, J. Receptor-mediated recognition of mycobacterial pathogens. Cell. Microbiol. 2013, 15, 1484–1495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  256. Willment, J.A.; Marshall, A.S.; Reid, D.M.; Williams, D.L.; Wong, S.Y.; Gordon, S.; Brown, G.D. The human beta-glucan receptor is widely expressed and functionally equivalent to murine Dectin-1 on primary cells. Eur. J. Immunol. 2005, 35, 1539–1547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  257. Ruland, J. CARD9 signaling in the innate immune response. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2008, 1143, 35–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  258. Robinson, M.J.; Sancho, D.; Slack, E.C.; LeibundGut-Landmann, S.; Reis e Sousa, C. Myeloid C-type lectins in innate immunity. Nat. Immunol. 2006, 7, 1258–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  259. Reid, D.M.; Montoya, M.; Taylor, P.R.; Borrow, P.; Gordon, S.; Brown, G.D.; Wong, S.Y. Expression of the beta-glucan receptor, Dectin-1, on murine leukocytes in situ correlates with its function in pathogen recognition and reveals potential roles in leukocyte interactions. J. Leukoc. Biol. 2004, 76, 86–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  260. Romani, N.; Clausen, B.E.; Stoitzner, P. Langerhans cells and more: Langerin-expressing dendritic cell subsets in the skin. Immunol. Rev. 2010, 234, 120–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  261. Valladeau, J.; Ravel, O.; Dezutter-Dambuyant, C.; Moore, K.; Kleijmeer, M.; Liu, Y.; Duvert-Frances, V.; Vincent, C.; Schmitt, D.; Davoust, J.; et al. Langerin, a novel C-type lectin specific to langerhans cells, is an endocytic receptor that induces the formation of birbeck granules. Immunity 2000, 12, 71–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  262. Valladeau, J.; Duvert-Frances, V.; Pin, J.J.; Kleijmeer, M.J.; Ait-Yahia, S.; Ravel, O.; Vincent, C.; Vega, F., Jr.; Helms, A.; Gorman, D.; et al. Immature human dendritic cells express asialoglycoprotein receptor isoforms for efficient receptor-mediated endocytosis. J. Immunol. 2001, 167, 5767–5774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  263. Wang, H.; Griffiths, M.N.; Burton, D.R.; Ghazal, P. Rapid antibody responses by low-dose, single-step, dendritic cell-targeted immunization. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 2000, 97, 847–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  264. Krug, A.; French, A.R.; Barchet, W.; Fischer, J.A.; Dzionek, A.; Pingel, J.T.; Orihuela, M.M.; Akira, S.; Yokoyama, W.M.; Colonna, M. TLR9-dependent recognition of MCMV by IPC and DC generates coordinated cytokine responses that activate antiviral NK cell function. Immunity 2004, 21, 107–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  265. Blasius, A.L.; Giurisato, E.; Cella, M.; Schreiber, R.D.; Shaw, A.S.; Colonna, M. Bone marrow stromal cell antigen 2 is a specific marker of type I IFN-producing cells in the naive mouse, but a promiscuous cell surface antigen following IFN stimulation. J. Immunol. 2006, 177, 3260–3265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  266. Pugholm, L.H.; Petersen, L.R.; Sondergaard, E.K.; Varming, K.; Agger, R. Enhanced humoral responses induced by targeting of antigen to murine dendritic cells. Scand. J. Immunol. 2015, 82, 515–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  267. Maisonnasse, P.; Bouguyon, E.; Piton, G.; Ezquerra, A.; Urien, C.; Deloizy, C.; Bourge, M.; Leplat, J.J.; Simon, G.; Chevalier, C.; et al. The respiratory DC/macrophage network at steady-state and upon influenza infection in the swine biomedical model. Mucosal Immunol. 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Principles of the use of human dendritic cells (DCs) for the treatment of diseases. There are two principal approaches to use DCs for the treatment of patients either by (a) using monocyte-derived DCs (moDCs) or by (b) directly targeting DCs in the patient using DC-targeting antibodies coupled to antigens. (a) For the vaccination of patients with their own moDCs, monocytes are isolated from the blood of the patient and differentiated into moDCs by culturing them in media containing GM-CSF and IL-4 for 5–6 days. Subsequently, cells are loaded with antigens and either matured with adjuvants (e.g., cytokine cocktail consisting of IL-1β, IL-6, TNFα, and PGE2) or kept immature. These cells presenting peptides of the antigen as peptide-MHC complexes on their surface are then transfused back into the patient to induce either an inflammatory T cell response (matured DCs) or tolerance (immature DCs); (b) in an alternative approach, antigens are targeted directly to DCs in vivo by fusion of the antigen to antibodies directed against DC surface molecules. After binding to the DCs, the antibodies are internalized, processed, and presented on MHC class I and II molecules on the DC surface. Analogous to moDCs, the DCs induce an inflammatory T cell response in the presence of adjuvants such as toll like receptor (TLR) ligands or tolerance, if the antibody is injected alone without adjuvant. By usage of antibodies directed against surface molecules selectively expressed on one DC subset (here differentially colored in red, green, and blue), the type of immune response can be further regulated due to different functions of the DC subsets. Templates from Servier Medical Art ( were used and adapted for this figure.
Figure 1. Principles of the use of human dendritic cells (DCs) for the treatment of diseases. There are two principal approaches to use DCs for the treatment of patients either by (a) using monocyte-derived DCs (moDCs) or by (b) directly targeting DCs in the patient using DC-targeting antibodies coupled to antigens. (a) For the vaccination of patients with their own moDCs, monocytes are isolated from the blood of the patient and differentiated into moDCs by culturing them in media containing GM-CSF and IL-4 for 5–6 days. Subsequently, cells are loaded with antigens and either matured with adjuvants (e.g., cytokine cocktail consisting of IL-1β, IL-6, TNFα, and PGE2) or kept immature. These cells presenting peptides of the antigen as peptide-MHC complexes on their surface are then transfused back into the patient to induce either an inflammatory T cell response (matured DCs) or tolerance (immature DCs); (b) in an alternative approach, antigens are targeted directly to DCs in vivo by fusion of the antigen to antibodies directed against DC surface molecules. After binding to the DCs, the antibodies are internalized, processed, and presented on MHC class I and II molecules on the DC surface. Analogous to moDCs, the DCs induce an inflammatory T cell response in the presence of adjuvants such as toll like receptor (TLR) ligands or tolerance, if the antibody is injected alone without adjuvant. By usage of antibodies directed against surface molecules selectively expressed on one DC subset (here differentially colored in red, green, and blue), the type of immune response can be further regulated due to different functions of the DC subsets. Templates from Servier Medical Art ( were used and adapted for this figure.
Vaccines 04 00008 g001
Table 1. Overview of important antigen targeting studies.
Table 1. Overview of important antigen targeting studies.
Targeted PopulationAntibody Type/CouplingUsed AntigenIn Vivo ModelOutcomeRef.
DEC205Murine CD8+ DEC205+ DCsFusion-protein, no FcR-bindingovalbuminTransfer of OT-I and OT-II transgenic T cellsStrong cross-presentation by CD8+ DCs targeted with a DEC205 antibody due to the expression of MHC-I machinery[3]
Transfer of DO11.10 transgenic T cellsTGFβ-dependent induction of FoxP3+ Tregs[7]
Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceInduction of strong CD8+ and weaker CD4+ T cell responses[178]
Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceEx vivo induced OT-I and OT-II T cell proliferation[114]
Transfer of OT-II transgenic T cells into BDCA-2 transgenic C57Bl/6 miceCD4+ T cell proliferation, differentiation, and humoral responses[137]
Ova-expressing B16F10 melanoma cells, protective and therapeutic modelInduction of therapeutic and protective anti-tumor immune responses, ova-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses in naive C57Bl/6 mice, strong ova-specific mixed IgG1/IgG2a antibody response[179]
ovalbumin/ova-NP, circumsporozoite protein (CSP)Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6, B10.BR, and BALB/c mice; transfer of CSP transgenic T cellsInduction of T helper cell responses, induction of high titers of hapten-specific IgG, stronger antibody response in comparison to immunization with irradiated sporozoites[180]
ovalbumin/α-GalCerOva-expressing B16F10 and EG7, transfer of transgenic OT-I cellsDelivery of ova and α-GalCer to CD8+ DCs induces iNKT cell, CD8+ T cell, and protective and therapeutic anti-tumor responses[181]
LcrVLethal aerosol challenge with Y. pestisInduction of LcrV-specific antibody response, poorer survival in comparison to targeting with DCIR2[182]
NS-1 (Dengue virus)Lethal intracranial challenge with DENV2 NGCImproved survival by targeting NS-1 via DEC205 to CD8+ DCs, stronger TH1 response and IFNγ+ T cells[171]
HIV gag p24 and p41Intranasal challenge with vaccinia-gagStrong and broad T cell and antibody response to HIV gag, reduced severity of vaccinia-gag infection[183]
HIV gag p24Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceInduction of IFNγ+ CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses[184]
Immunization of naïve mice in combination with several adjuvantsPoly(I:C) strongest adjuvant, signaling via IFNAR necessary for activation of DCs and induction of CD8+ T cell response[185]
Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceLong-term HIV-specific immunity within the gastrointestinal tract[186]
human cartilage proteoglycan (PG)PG-induced arthritis with transfer of transgenic PG-specific T cellsTargeting PG to DCs induced reduced arthritis score, lower titer of PG-specific IgG1 and IgG2a, and lower proliferation of CD4+ T cells[187]
stress-inducible 1 protein of L. major (LmSTI1a)Intradermal or subcutaneous challenge with L. majorInduction of IFNγ+ CD4+ T cell responses, improved survival after challenge with L. major in BALB/c mice[188]
Her2/neuProtective breast cancer model, injection of NT2.5 tumor cells into FVB/N miceInduction of IFNγ+ CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses, protection in a breast cancer tumor model[189]
Trypanosoma cruzi amastigote surface protein 2 (ASP-2)Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceInduction of IFNγ+ CD4+ T cells, identification of an immunogenic epitope of ASP-2[190]
MimA2Transfer of diabetogenic transgenic AI4 T cells in NOD miceInduction of tolerance to MimA2 due to deletion of the transferred T cells[191]
BDC2.5 mimitope peptide 1040-63/pro-InsulinTransfer of transgenic BDC2.5 T cells in NOD miceInduction of Treg cells by delivery of BDC2.5 mimitope via DEC205, delayed onset of diabetes by delivery of pro-insulin to DCs via DEC205[192]
LACK (L. major)Transfer of LACK-specific transgenic T cellsTargeting DEC205 induces IFNγ+ TH1 cells independent of IL-12, but dependent on CD70[160]
survivinImmunization of naïve mice, depletion of TregsMainly specific T cells against human survivin; depletion of Tregs enhances T cell response against survivin[193]
IGRPImmunization of naïve NOD miceReduced type-I diabetes[194]
PLP(139-151)Immunization of SJL/J mice after transfer of 5B6 transgenic T cellsReduced experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE)[195]
HELTransfer of 3A9 transgenic T cellsT cell tolerance in response to antibody alone, memory response after co-injection of αCD40[8]
Fusion protein, FcR-binding?ovalbuminTransfer of OT-I and OT-II transgenic T cellsEven mature DCs take up antigens via targeting antibodies; induction of OT-I and OT-II T cell activation and proliferation[196]
Fusion-protein, single chain Fvmyelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG)MOG-induced experimental allergic encephalomyelitis (EAE)Induction of protective and therapeutic responses against EAE by targeting MOG to CD8+ DCs[197]
Fusion-protein, single chain FvhNC16A collagen domainImmunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceReduced graft rejection[198]
Single chain Fvova/Plasma membrane vesicles of B16F10-ova cellsVaccination with liposomes or plasma membrane vesicles; i.v. injection of B16F10-ova cells (Lung metastasis model)Antigen can be delivered in liposomes or plasma membrane vesicles via coupled scFv against DEC205 to DCs; reduction of tumor growth due to tumor-specific T cells[199]
Murine DEC205+ LN DCs, CD8+ DEC205+ spleen DCsChemically coupled, FcR-binding?ovalbuminTransfer of OT-I and OT-II transgenic T cells; challenge with MO4-ova and vaccinia-ovaInduction of IFNγ+ memory T cell responses; vaccination induces protection against MO4-ova and vaccinia-ova; in vivo targeting protects in contrast to ex vivo loaded DCs[157]
Murine CD11c+ LN DCsChemically coupled, FcR-binding?ovalbuminTransfer of OT-I transgenic T cellsT cell tolerance in response to antibody alone, memory response after co-injection of αCD40[200]
Murine CD11c+ DCsChemically coupled, FcR-binding?ovalbumin/TNCBDelayed-type hypersensitivity and contact hypersensitivity modelInduction of Tregs, tolerance in DTH and CHS models[165]
Murine dermal and LN DCsFusion protein, no FcR-bindingovalbuminTransfer of target cells in vaccinated miceαDEC205 targets LCs and dermal DCs; induces cytotoxic CD8+ T cell responses independent of Langerin+ DCs (Langerin-DTR mice)[201]
Murine LCs and dermal DCsFusion protein, no FcR-bindingovalbuminNaïve C57Bl/6 miceLCs are targeted by both Langerin and DEC205 antibodies; only DEC205 induces CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses[202]
DEC205+ DCsFusion protein, no FcR-bindingHIV gag p24Immunization of non-human primatesInduction of broad CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses against p24 after targeting of DEC205 in combination with poly ICLC[203]
Human DCsFusion protein, monoclonal humanized antibodyNY-ESO-1Phase I trial with NY-ESO-1 positive patients13/45 patients with stabilized disease, 2/45 with tumor regression; no dose-limiting or grade 3 toxicities reported [85]
Human moDCs, DEC205+ cells in humanized miceFusion protein, FcR-bindingEBNA-1Vaccination of humanized NOG miceActivation of EBNA-1 specific autologous T cells; protection against EBV-infected B cells; induction of EBNA-1-specific T cells in humanized mice[204]
Human moDCsFusion protein, FcR-bindingHIV gag p24-Stronger IFNγ+ CD8+ T cell responses by targeting with DEC205 in comparison to DC-SIGN or MMR[205]
NY-ESO-1-Induction of CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses in PBMCs of NY-ESO-1 seropositive breast cancer patients[206]
Fusion protein, single chain FvMAGE-A3 epitope-Induction of proliferation of TCR-transfected CD4+ T cells[207]
DCIR2Murine CD8 DCIR2+ DCsFusion-protein, no FcR-bindingovalbuminTransfer of OT-I and OT-II transgenic T cellsMainly CD4+ T cell response, stronger expression of MHC-II machinery in CD8 DCs[3]
Ova-expressing B16F10 melanoma cells, protective and therapeutic modelInduction of therapeutic and protective anti-tumor immune responses, ova-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses in naive C57Bl/6 mice, strong ova-specific mixed IgG1/IgG2a antibody response[179]
Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceEx vivo induced OT-I and OT-II T cell proliferation[114]
Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceInduction of mainly CD4+ and weaker CD8+ T cell responses[178]
Murine dermal and LN DCsFusion protein, no FcR-bindingLcrVLethal aerosol challenge with Y. pestisInduction of LcrV-specific antibody response, improved survival after targeting of DCIR2[182]
Murine LCs and dermal DCsFusion protein, no FcR-bindingLACK (L. major)Transfer of LACK-specific transgenic T cellsTargeting DCIR2 induces IFNγ+ TH1 cells dependent on IL-12, but independent of CD70[160]
DEC205+ DCsChemically coupled, Fab-fragmentovalbuminImmunization of naïve C57Bl/6 and BALB/c miceInduction of antibody responses[208]
CD34+-derived LCs, epidermal LCs, CD11c+ blood DCs, blood pDCsFusion protein, no FcR-bindingFluMP/MART-1/HIV gag p24-Induction of IFNγ+ CD8+ T cell responses[174]
Human blood pDCsChemically coupled, FcR-binding?KLH-Proliferation of T cells (not further defined)[143]
Clec9aMurine CD8+ DCsFusion protein, no FcR-bindingHIV gag p24Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceInduction of IFNγ+ CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses [184]
Chemically coupled, FcR-binding?SIINFEKL/epitopes of gp100, TRP-1, TRP-2Challenge with B16-ova cellsProtective and therapeutic responses in B16-ova melanoma model[209]
ova-peptide (323-339)Transfer of OT-II cells in C57Bl/6 miceDifferential polarization of naive CD4+ T cells dependent on the adjuvant[210]
ovalbuminImmunization of naïve miceInduction of antibody response without adjuvant and independent of MyD88-signaling; induction of OT-I and OT-II transgenic T cell proliferation[211]
Murine CD8+ DCsFusion protein, single chain FvovalbuminTransfer of OT-I and OT-II cellsComparable OT-I T cell activation between DEC205 and Clec9a, superior CD4+ T cell responses after targeting of Clec9a[212]
Human blood BDCA-3+ DCsBiotin-labeled KLH, gp110-filled nanoparticles, FcR-binding?KLH/gp100-Induction of KLH+ CD4+ T cell responses, cross-presentation to CD8+ T cells[213]
Clec12aMurine CD8+ DCs and pDCsChemically coupled, FcR-binding?ovalbuminTransfer of OT-I and OT-II cells in C57Bl/6 and CD11c-DTR miceInduction of OT-I and OT-II responses by CD11c+ cells[214]
Dectin-1Murine DN DCsChemically coupled, FcR-binding?ovalbuminImmunization of naïve C57Bl/6 mice, transfer of OT-I and OT-II transgenic T cellsStronger CD4+ T cell response and weaker CD8+ T cell response in comparison to DEC205-targeting; induction of strong antibody response, especially after i.v. injection[215]
Human IFNα moDCsFusion protein, FcR-binding?hemagglutinin-Re-stimulation of memory TH17 cells via antigen-targeting to Dectin-1[216]
Human IL-4 or IFNγ DCsFusion to hIgG4Flu M1, MART-1 (26–35)-Activation of moDCs by Dectin-1 antibody, expansion of Flu M1 spec & MART-1 CD8+ T cells, differentiation of naïve CD8+ T cells into Flu M1-specific[217]
LangerinMurine CD8+ DEC205+ DCsFusion-protein, no FcR-bindingHIV gag p24Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceInduction of IFNγ+ CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses [184]
Murine CD11c+ Langerin+ DCsFusion-protein, no FcR-bindingovalbuminImmunization of naïve C57Bl/6 miceInduction of CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses[178]
Murine LCs and dermal DCsFusion-protein, no FcR-bindingovalbuminB16-ova modelTargeting of LCs with Langerin and Imiquimod led to cross-tolerance and impaired secondary memory response using DEC205 as targeting antibody[218]
Naïve C57Bl/6 miceLCs are targeted by both Langerin and DEC205 antibodies; only DEC205 induces CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses[202]
Murine LCs and dermal DCsFusion-protein, no FcR-bindingMOGpNaïve C57Bl/6 mice, partly transfer of MOG-specific T cellsLangerin+ cells can induce tolerance in vivo[172]
DC-SIGNHuman moDCsChemically coupled, FcR-binding?KLH-Proliferation of T cells[219]
Murine CD11c+ cells expressing hDC-SIGNChemically coupled, FcR-binding?ovalbuminInfection of humanized mice with Listeria monocytogenesVaccination with DC-SIGN-ova protects humanized mice from infection with Listeria monocytogenes[220]
Transfer of OT-I T cells into hDC-SIGN expressing C57Bl/6 miceProlonged antigen residence in early endosomes, delayed lysosomal degradation, and cross-presentation[221]
DC-SIGN+ APCs--Injection of cynomolgus macaqueAPCs in LNs of macaques were targeted[222]
Human DC-SIGN+ cellsChemically coupled (KLH), FcR-binding?; fused scFv (tetanus toxoid peptides)KLH/tetanus toxoid peptidesImmunization of humanized miceInduction of cell proliferation after targeting of KLH to DC-SIGN+ cells; protection after transfer of Raji-cells[223]
MRHuman moDCsFusion-protein, FcR-binding?chorionic gonadotropin β-Induction of autologous T cell responses against CGβ; cytotoxic T cells show lysis against CGβ+ tumor cell lines (HLA-partially matched)[224]
pmel17-Induction of autologous T cell responses against pmel17; cytotoxic T cells show lysis against pmel17+ melanoma cell lines (HLA-partially matched)[225]
chorionic gonadotropin β-TLR ligands boosted cytotoxic T cell response induced by antibody targeting[226]
NY-ESO-1-Antigen targeting to MR induces activation of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells[206]
CD11cMurine CD11c+ cellsChemically coupled, Fab-fragmentovalbuminImmunization of naïve mice; transferof OT-I and OT-II transgenic T cells; EL4 as target cellsCD11c superior in the generation of CD8+ and CD4+ T cells; targeting leads to in vivo lysis of EL4 cells; induces endogenous ova-specific T cells[227]
Immunization of naïve C57Bl/6 and BALB/c miceInduction of antibody responses[208]
Fusion protein, single chain FvHer2/neuChallenge with D2F2/E2 breast cancer cells; spontaneous breast cancer modelInduces protective and therapeutic immune responses against Her2/neu expressing tumor cells; delays tumor growth and onset in a spontaneous breast cancer model[228]
MHC-IIMHC-II+ APCsChemically coupled, Fab-fragmentovalbuminImmunization of naïve C57Bl/6 and BALB/c miceInduction of antibody responses[208]
MHC-II+ APCsChemically coupled, Fab-fragmentovalbuminImmunization of naïve C57Bl/6 and BALB/c miceInduction of antibody responses[208]
Chemically coupled, superantigen M1ovalbuminIn vivo killing assays; challenge with B16F10-ova melanoma cellsCross-presentation by all splenic DC subsets; induces T cell responses with in vivo killing activity; therapeutic response in B16F10-ova melanoma model[229]
LOX-1Not further defined APCs in vivoChemically coupled, FcR-binding?ovalbuminChallenge of C57Bl/6 mice with E.G7 tumor cells expressing ovaTargeting ova to LOX-1 induces protective immune response against E.G7 cells[230]
Macaque blood CD11c+ and CD14+ cellsFusion protein, FcR-binding?hemagglutininImmunization of rhesus macaques; challenge of macaques with InfluenzaInduction of HA-specific antibodies in macaques, higher antibody titer in comparison of Dectin-1 targeting[231]
Human IFNα moDCsFusion protein, FcR-binding?hemagglutinin-LOX-1 targeting induces activation of TH1 cells[232]
DC-ASGPRHuman IFNα moDCsFusion protein, FcR-binding?hemagglutinin-DC-ASGPR targeting induces the secretion of IL-10 by DCs and the polarization/re-stimulation of suppressive IL-10+ T cells[232]
CD36Murine CD8+ DCsFusion protein, scFVovalbuminChallenge of C57Bl/6 mice with E.G7 tumor cells expressing ovaTargeting ova to CD36 induces protective immune response against EG7 tumor cells expressing ova, memory OT-I T cell response without adjuvant[233]
Siglec-HMurine plasmacytoid DCsFusion protein, no FcR-bindingovalbumin, pHEL, pMOGEAELess severe EAE after targeting of MOG to Siglec-H on pDCs, less T cell polarization, lower antibody titers even after injection of an adjuvant[141]
ovalbuminTransfer of OT-II transgenic T cells into BDCA-2 transgenic C57Bl/6 miceCD4+ T cell proliferation, differentiation, and humoral responses[137]
Murine pDCsChemically coupled, FcR-binding?ovalbuminImmunization of naïve mice, boost with Vaccinia virus expressing ovaTargeting ova via Siglec-H to pDCs induces ova-specific CD8+ T cells only when CpG is co-injected[234]
BST-2Murine pDCsFusion protein, no FcR-bindingovalbumin, pHELVaccinia virus expressing ova, B16F10-ova melanoma cellsTargeting ova to pDCs via BST-2 protects against VV-infection and B16F10-ova cells; induces activation of OT-I and OT-II cells as well as antibody titer[142]
Chemically coupled, F(ab)2-fragmentovalbuminTransfer of OT-I and OT-II cellsTargeting of ova to pDCs induces OT-II cell proliferation in lymph nodes but not in spleen[235]
BDCA-2Murine pDCsFusion protein, no FcR-bindingovalbuminTransfer of OT-II transgenic T cells into BDCA-2 transgenic C57Bl/6 miceCD4+ T cell proliferation, differentiation, and humoral responses[137]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lehmann, C.H.K.; Heger, L.; Heidkamp, G.F.; Baranska, A.; Lühr, J.J.; Hoffmann, A.; Dudziak, D. Direct Delivery of Antigens to Dendritic Cells via Antibodies Specific for Endocytic Receptors as a Promising Strategy for Future Therapies. Vaccines 2016, 4, 8.

AMA Style

Lehmann CHK, Heger L, Heidkamp GF, Baranska A, Lühr JJ, Hoffmann A, Dudziak D. Direct Delivery of Antigens to Dendritic Cells via Antibodies Specific for Endocytic Receptors as a Promising Strategy for Future Therapies. Vaccines. 2016; 4(2):8.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lehmann, Christian H. K., Lukas Heger, Gordon F. Heidkamp, Anna Baranska, Jennifer J. Lühr, Alana Hoffmann, and Diana Dudziak. 2016. "Direct Delivery of Antigens to Dendritic Cells via Antibodies Specific for Endocytic Receptors as a Promising Strategy for Future Therapies" Vaccines 4, no. 2: 8.

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop