Mouse and human liver allografts are unusually prone to spontaneous acceptance, yet the fate of the donor-reactive CD8+ T cells that attack other organs' grafts remains incompletely resolved. Steger et al. (Transplantation, 2008) showed that after mouse liver transplantation a defined H2Kb-reactive CD8+ T-cell clone undergoes near-complete early proliferation followed by numerical decline and silenced in-situ effector-gene transcription, correlating with spontaneous acceptance, while the same clone rejects kidney and heart grafts; paradoxically, liver-graft-infiltrating CD8+ cells still rejected donor skin after transfer to immunodeficient hosts. The authors left open: (1) the alloantigen time frame and load that open the tolerogenic window rather than destructive immunity; (2) whether CD8+ T cells can independently induce lasting tolerance; (3) how donor-reactive CD8+ clones are partitioned among irreversible deletion, functional exhaustion, and reversible anergy, and the permanence and molecular signature of their loss of effector competence; (4) reconciliation of silenced in-situ transcription with retained transfer competence (split anergy). Later work has partially illuminated each thread (antigen-load thresholds and reversibility in hepatocyte-antigen models, partial clonal deletion in humans, persistent exhausted CD8+ cells in tolerant murine grafts) but no study quantitatively resolves the fate partition or its causal sufficiency for liver-graft tolerance, and the alloantigen window in the allograft setting remains undefined.

Background

An allograft is an organ transplanted between genetically unrelated individuals of the same species; it is attacked by alloreactive T cells that recognize donor major histocompatibility complex (MHC) proteins, with CD8+ cytotoxic T cells directly killing donor cells bearing foreign MHC class I. A graft is 'tolerated' when it survives without immunosuppressive drugs, and 'operational tolerance' denotes this state in patients. The liver is exceptional: in many mouse strain combinations (e.g., CBA/Ca recipients of C57BL/10 grafts, a complete MHC mismatch) liver allografts are spontaneously accepted for life, whereas heart and kidney grafts from the same donor are acutely rejected, and roughly half of carefully selected human liver recipients can be weaned off all immunosuppression. Why the liver tolerizes is a longstanding problem.

To study this with single-cell resolution, Steger et al. (2008) used adoptive transfer: defined numbers of BM3 cells, a T-cell receptor (TCR) transgenic CD8+ population that reacts to the donor class I molecule H2Kb, were injected into T-cell-depleted recipient mice before transplantation of donor liver, kidney, or heart grafts. T-cell exhaustion is a state of progressive functional silencing (loss of cytokine production and cytolysis, inhibitory receptors such as PD-1 and TIM-3) driven by chronic antigen stimulation; anergy is reversible unresponsiveness after incomplete activation; deletion (or activation-induced cell death) is physical elimination of the clone. They found that after liver transplantation essentially the whole donor-reactive clone (>93% of cells in spleen) proliferated within 5 days, then declined about sixfold in number with strongly reduced in-graft mRNA for IFN-gamma, perforin, and FasL — a picture of 'exhaustive differentiation' culminating in clonal exhaustion or deletion that correlated with acceptance, while after heart or kidney transplantation much of the clone stayed undivided and rejected the graft. Two observations complicated the deletion reading: purified liver-graft-infiltrating CD8+ cells still rejected donor skin grafts after transfer into immunodeficient mice (retained effector competence), which the authors reconciled by invoking 'split anergy' (cytolytic capacity without cytokine production); and a crude dose threshold existed — 6x10^6 transferred cells rejected kidney grafts while 4x10^6 mostly did not — hinting that the size of the donor-reactive pool and the antigen load it experiences determine outcome. Related work established that high antigen expression by hepatocytes itself drives CD8+ T cells toward exhaustion or deletion, and human liver recipients show partial deletion of donor-reactive T-cell clones detectable by TCRbeta sequencing, but tolerant and non-tolerant patients do not differ cleanly in this measure.

Problem Statement

Under the single objective of establishing the CD8-intrinsic mechanistic account of spontaneous liver-allograft tolerance, determine, in the mouse liver-transplantation setting defined by Steger et al. (2008) (CBA/Ca recipients of fully allogeneic C57BL/10 grafts reconstituted with defined numbers of H2Kb-reactive CD8+ T cells) and in human liver recipients where feasible: (1) the quantitative parameters of alloantigen exposure - the time frame after transplantation and the load, meaning both the size of the donor-reactive CD8+ pool and the amount of donor antigen presented - that steer early hyperactivation of donor-reactive CD8+ T cells toward productive tolerance rather than destructive immunity, i.e., the tolerogenic window that the source's two-point dose threshold (6x10^6 vs 4x10^6 cells) only sketches; (2) whether donor-reactive CD8+ T cells can, by themselves and independent of other leukocyte populations (donor-derived passenger leukocytes, CD4+ regulatory cells, liver-derived soluble factors), actively induce lasting donor-specific tolerance, as opposed to being passively exhausted or deleted; (3) the fate partition of donor-reactive CD8+ clones in liver recipients among irreversible deletion, functional exhaustion, and reversible anergy - quantifying the fraction of the clone undergoing each fate, the molecular signature distinguishing the states, the permanence of the loss of effector competence, and the relative contributions of activation-induced cell death versus the non-deleted functional silencing (functional exhaustion and reversible anergy, each reported separately); and (4) reconcile the observation that donor-reactive CD8+ cells within accepted liver grafts show silenced in-situ effector-gene transcription (IFN-gamma, perforin, FasL) yet retain the ability to reject donor tissue after adoptive transfer to a permissive host (split anergy), by relating transcriptional, protein, and functional readouts measured in situ and after transfer. These four questions are linked facets of one objective: they jointly specify how the fate of the donor-reactive CD8+ clone, and the alloantigen exposure that drives it, produce acceptance of liver grafts where the same clone rejects heart and kidney grafts. The objective is resolved only when these four sub-questions are jointly addressed: each is independently posed, yet no single sub-question alone resolves it. The human-recipient component ('where feasible') is optional and applies only where the relevant human data exist, whereas the mouse liver-transplantation setting of Steger et al. (2008) is required. Within sub-question (3), the per-fate fraction, the state-distinguishing molecular signature, the permanence of the loss of effector competence, and the relative contributions of activation-induced cell death versus the non-deleted functional silencing (functional exhaustion and reversible anergy, each reported separately) are jointly required.

References

  1. Steger U, Denecke C, Sawitzki B, Karim M, Jones ND, Wood KJ. Exhaustive differentiation of alloreactive CD8+ T cells: critical for determination of graft acceptance or rejection. Transplantation 2008;85(9):1339-1347. doi:10.1097/TP.0b013e31816dd64a. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0b013e31816dd64a
  2. Tay SS, Lu B, Sierro F, Benseler V, McGuffog CM, Bishop GA, Cowan PJ, McCaughan GW, Dwyer KM, Bowen DG, Bertolino P. Differential migration of passenger leukocytes and rapid deletion of naive alloreactive CD8 T cells after mouse liver transplantation. Liver Transplantation 2013;19(11):1224-1235. doi:10.1002/lt.23720. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.23720
  3. Cunningham EC, Sharland AF, Bishop GA. Liver transplant tolerance and its application to the clinic: can we exploit the high dose effect? Clinical and Developmental Immunology 2013;2013:419692. doi:10.1155/2013/419692. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/419692
  4. Cunningham EC, Tay SS, Wang C, Rtshiladze M, Wang Z, McGuffog C, Cubitt J, McCaughan GW, Alexander IE, Bertolino P, Sharland AF, Bowen DG, Bishop GA. Gene therapy for tolerance: high-level expression of donor major histocompatibility complex in the liver overcomes naive and memory alloresponses to skin grafts. Transplantation 2013;95(1):70-77. doi:10.1097/TP.0b013e318278d39a. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0b013e318278d39a
  5. Tay SS, Wong YC, McDonald DM, Wood NA, Roediger B, Sierro F, McGuffog C, Alexander IE, Bishop GA, Gamble JR, Weninger W, McCaughan GW, Bertolino P, Bowen DG. Antigen expression level threshold tunes the fate of CD8 T cells during primary hepatic immune responses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 2014;111(25):E2540-E2549. doi:10.1073/pnas.1406674111. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1406674111
  6. Ochel A, Cebula M, Riehn M, Hillebrand U, Lipps C, Schirmbeck R, Hauser H, Wirth D. Effective intrahepatic CD8+ T-cell immune responses are induced by low but not high numbers of antigen-expressing hepatocytes. Cellular and Molecular Immunology 2016;13(6):805-815. doi:10.1038/cmi.2015.80. https://doi.org/10.1038/cmi.2015.80
  7. Wong YC, McCaughan GW, Bowen DG, Bertolino P. The CD8 T-cell response during tolerance induction in liver transplantation. Clinical and Translational Immunology 2016;5(10):e102. doi:10.1038/cti.2016.53. https://doi.org/10.1038/cti.2016.53
  8. Savage TM, Shonts BA, Lau S, Obradovic A, Robins H, Shaked A, Shen Y, Sykes M. Deletion of donor-reactive T cell clones after human liver transplant. American Journal of Transplantation 2020;20(2):538-545. doi:10.1111/ajt.15592. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.15592
  9. Sanchez-Fueyo A, Markmann JF. Immune exhaustion and transplantation. American Journal of Transplantation 2016;16(7):1953-1957. doi:10.1111/ajt.13702. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.13702
  10. Thorp EB, Stehlik C, Ansari MJ. T-cell exhaustion in allograft rejection and tolerance. Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation 2015;20(1):37-42. doi:10.1097/MOT.0000000000000153. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOT.0000000000000153
  11. Jiang Y, Que W, Zhu P, Li XK. The role of diverse liver cells in liver transplantation tolerance. Frontiers in Immunology 2020;11:1203. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2020.01203. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.01203
  12. Que W, Ueta H, Hu X, Morita-Nakagawa M, Fujino M, Ueda D, Tokuda N, Huang WY, Guo W, Zhong L, Li XK. Temporal and spatial dynamics of immune cells in spontaneous liver transplant tolerance. iScience 2023;26(9):107691. doi:10.1016/j.isci.2023.107691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.107691
  13. Angeletti A, Cantarelli C, Riella LV, Fribourg M, Cravedi P. T-cell exhaustion in organ transplantation. Transplantation 2022;106(3):489-499. doi:10.1097/TP.0000000000003851. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000003851
  14. Yokose T, Szuter ES, Rosales I, Guinn MT, Liss AS, Baba T, Ruddy DA, Piquet M, Azzi J, Cosimi AB, Russell PS, Madsen JC, Colvin RB, Alessandrini A. Dysfunction of infiltrating cytotoxic CD8+ T cells within the graft promotes murine kidney allotransplant tolerance. Journal of Clinical Investigation 2024;134(16):e179709. doi:10.1172/JCI179709. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI179709
  15. Peters AL, DePasquale EAK, Begum G, Roskin KM, Kotliar M, Barski A, Salomonis N, Shi T, Ranganathan S, Woodle ES, Hildeman DA. Single-cell transcriptional landscape of liver transplant rejection reveals tissue persistence of clonally expanded, treatment-resistant T cells. American Journal of Transplantation 2025;25(11):2345-2360. doi:10.1016/j.ajt.2025.08.004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajt.2025.08.004
  16. Singh A, Herman A, Dey D, Menge S, Singh S, Tran A, Matson AW, Mourad A, Rangarajan P, Masuria R, Sato N, Vadnais S, Rao JS, Singh G, Graham ML, Ramachandran S, Hering BJ. Allospecific splenic Tr1 cells drive effector T cell exhaustion through up-regulated Areg-EGFR signaling to promote transplant tolerance. Science Advances 2026;12(2):eaea0567. doi:10.1126/sciadv.aea0567. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aea0567
  17. Wang Y, Wu Y, Shen Y, Chen Y, Zhao Y, Zeng X, He K. The multifaceted landscape of T cell exhaustion in organ transplantation: from molecular mechanisms (epigenetics, transcription, metabolism) to induction strategies. Genes & Diseases 2026;13(5):101965. doi:10.1016/j.gendis.2025.101965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gendis.2025.101965
  18. Knioła E, Foroncewicz B, Lerut J, Pączek L, Mucha K. Induction of clinical operational tolerance through immunosuppression minimization: less is more? Liver International 2026;46(6):e70659. doi:10.1111/liv.70659. https://doi.org/10.1111/liv.70659
  19. Emond JC, Griesemer AD. Tolerance in clinical liver transplantation: the long road ahead. Hepatology 2016;65(2):411-413. doi:10.1002/hep.28862. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.28862