To this end, we incubated T cells with a KPT 330 conditioned medium from activated HSCs and then determined αCD3/CD28-induced T cell proliferation. Under these conditions, we did not observe any veto effect (Fig. 5A). Using a Transwell system, we found that HSCs required physical contact with T cells to exert their inhibitory effect (Fig. 5B). Also, antibody-mediated neutralization experiments showed no contribution of IL-6, IL-10, or transforming

growth factor β (TGF-β) to the HSC veto effect (Supporting Fig. 4). Furthermore, HSCs needed to be viable to have veto function, and glutaraldehyde-fixed HSCs failed to have any effect on T cell proliferation (Fig. 5C). This suggests that a reciprocal interaction between HSCs and T cells is required for the veto function. The requirement for physical interactions led us to investigate the involvement of the adhesion molecule CD54 in the inhibitory function of HSCs. CD54 is critical for mediating interactions with T cells and is dynamically regulated during these interactions.24 We observed that CD54 was up-regulated on HSCs upon contact with αCD3/CD28-stimulated T cells (Fig. 6A). To demonstrate that CD54 was involved in the veto effect, we employed HSCs from CD54 knockout animals or blocked CD54 with specific antibodies. In both situations, we observed an abrogation of the third-party inhibitory effect of HSCs on T cell proliferation

(Fig. 6B) and cytokine expression (Fig. 6C). There selleck screening library was no difference between CD54+/+ and CD54−/− HSCs with respect to

the acquisition of an activated phenotype (Fig. 6D); this confirms that CD54 expression is the critical parameter for the HSC-mediated veto function. Another adhesion molecule, CD106, which is constitutively expressed on HSCs,13 contributed in a minor way to the HSC veto effect (Supporting Fig. 5). These results raised the question whether the CD54 expression levels directly correlated with the veto function. Quantifying the absolute numbers of CD54 learn more molecules per cell by flow cytometry with a well-established bead-based calibration method, we observed that activated HSCs on day 7 after isolation expressed twice as many CD54 molecules in comparison with freshly isolated HSCs (Fig. 6E), and this directly correlated with their veto function (Fig. 4A). As expected, primary murine hepatocytes as well as the hepatocyte cell line αML had lower CD54 expression levels on a per cell basis in comparison with primary murine HSCs (Fig. 6E), and they consequently lacked the veto function (Fig. 3A,B). To demonstrate that the CD54 expression levels were critical for third-party inhibition, we increased CD54 expression in αML by transfection. Figure 6F shows that CD54-transfected αML gained some inhibitory ability with respect to αCD3/CD28-driven T cell proliferation. This small increase in the inhibitory capacity may have been due to the relatively small increase in CD54 expression levels after transfection (Supporting Fig. 6).