Cells (May 2024)

Defining Human Regulatory T Cells beyond FOXP3: The Need to Combine Phenotype with Function

  • Chelsea Gootjes,
  • Jaap Jan Zwaginga,
  • Bart O. Roep,
  • Tatjana Nikolic

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/cells13110941
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 11
p. 941

Abstract

Read online

Regulatory T cells (Tregs) are essential to maintain immune homeostasis by promoting self-tolerance. Reduced Treg numbers or functionality can lead to a loss of tolerance, increasing the risk of developing autoimmune diseases. An overwhelming variety of human Tregs has been described, based on either specific phenotype, tissue compartment, or pathological condition, yet the bulk of the literature only addresses CD25-positive and CD127-negative cells, coined by naturally occurring Tregs (nTregs), most of which express the transcription factor Forkhead box protein 3 (FOXP3). While the discovery of FOXP3 was seminal to understanding the origin and biology of nTregs, there is evidence in humans that not all T cells expressing FOXP3 are regulatory, and that not all Tregs express FOXP3. Namely, the activation of human T cells induces the transient expression of FOXP3, irrespective of whether they are regulatory or inflammatory effectors, while some induced T cells that may be broadly defined as Tregs (e.g., Tr1 cells) typically lack demethylation and do not express FOXP3. Furthermore, it is unknown whether and how many nTregs exist without FOXP3 expression. Several other candidate regulatory molecules, such as GITR, Lag-3, GARP, GPA33, Helios, and Neuropilin, have been identified but subsequently discarded as Treg-specific markers. Multiparametric analyses have uncovered a plethora of Treg phenotypes, and neither single markers nor combinations thereof can define all and only Tregs. To date, only the functional capacity to inhibit immune responses defines a Treg and distinguishes Tregs from inflammatory T cells (Teffs) in humans. This review revisits current knowledge of the Treg universe with respect to their heterogeneity in phenotype and function. We propose that it is unavoidable to characterize human Tregs by their phenotype in combination with their function, since phenotype alone does not unambiguously define Tregs. There is an unmet need to align the expression of specific markers or combinations thereof with a particular suppressive function to coin functional Treg entities and categorize Treg diversity.

Keywords