Skip to main content

"How do NK cells know not to kill RBCs?"

I was recently asked about the surveillance system present within immunity which operates to kill virally infected cells by lack of MHC expression, and why this same system doesn't destroy red blood cells (RBC), which lack MHC.

One function of Natural Killer (NK) cells is to destroy cells infected by viruses, which have a mechanism of evading T-cell killing by down-regulating MHC class I expression. MHC class I molecules are expressed on every cell in the body apart from RBCs; a lack of expression is detected by NK cells which act to destroy the cell. However, RBC remain unharmed.

SEM of NK cells
Red Blood Cells




                        V.S






Like everyone else I assumed the almighty google would provide me with the answer to my friends question, so I typed in my query and the only relevant link was to a 'yahoo answers' page, which answered a succinctly phrased question which I've used to entitle this blog entry. Unfortunately the answer just stated that 'NK cells don't kill RBC as they recognise them as self'. This is obviously the case as RBC exist in healthy individuals without any hassle from NK cells... but WHY???

So far, the only explanation I've come across from trauling the literature is the expression of a molecule known as CD47. The presence of this molecule allows RBCs to be recognised as self by NK cells through ligation of SIRP1alpha. This signalling provides an inhibitory kill signal to NK cells.

If anyone has any more knowledge on this subject, or the 'official' answer, please let me know!

Comments

  1. Inquisitive 3 January 2016 at 01:19

    It does not happen as our red cells (unlike rabbits which is why we use them for alternate pathway CH50 testing) contain many membrane inhibitors or regulators of complement activation such as MCP, DAF or CD55 and most importantly CD 59 or homologous restriction factor. The last CD 59 inhibits C9 induced pore formation and protects us from hemolysis even when the RBC's are amidst CD8 and NK cells. The same CD 59 also inhibits perforin from attacking our RBC. In fact C9 and perforin are members of the innate immune system and are homologous. Thus, RBC and self proteins (such as vasculature, renal, synovium) are protected from C9 as well as perforin-granzyme complex. Granzyme-perforin mediated effects on RBC's by CD8 cells, which are class I restricted, are abrogated by similar mechanism

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unknown20 December 2019 at 09:37

    As I think and believe that the NK have both inhibitory and activating receptors and as I believe also that the nucleated self-cells having an inhibitory ligand which is MHC1 while RBCs lack of it by the same way they lack an activation ligand.
    But I also believe on the presence of Cd47 as a self-marker.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Rudolf Virchow

Following on from my visit to the Huntarian museum in London, which documented anatomical specimens in innumerable jars, I visited the German equivalent in Berlin - The Medizinhistorisches Museum on Charite University campus. As expected from the guide books and hype from my Deutsch colleagues, the exhibit is truly fascinating with some morbid sections which warrant the over 16s certification. It is these specimens that are naturally off-putting to some (as evolution dictates innate disgust at abnormality) which are incredibly fascinating documents of life trying to survive regardless of aberrant genetics. Naturally one feels a sadness when viewing some specimens, especially due to the young age of the subject, but regardless, scientific intrigue overrides in this astounding museum. In a section of the museum devoted to eminent German scientists I read about Rudolf Virchow, and whilst reading the short summary next to a compilation of his belongings in a cabinet, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

"Henry... how many mummified bodies do you have?"

I saw an advert on the tube today for the latest installment at the Welcome Trust called 'Things': a public exhibit where people are encouraged to bring along a "thing"... simple enough, however I didn't think it had the pull of the previous exhibition called 'SKIN'. Much better I'm sure you'd agree. The SKIN exhibition documented numerous objet d'peau including a section on "dermographism": carving into your own skin. I shared an anecdote with my friend about people in school we knew who used to scratch (harmlessly) their latest crush onto their arm with a compass as a sign of childish devotion. When we strolled further around the exhibits we came across a picture of one of these school friends, had they been in a 1920s French lunatic asylum. Pictured was an inmate who had carved the name of her condition into her back in 6inch high gashes. We paused, not only due to the sheer specticle, but also to question why she chose such an ina...
Post a Comment
Read more