Immunobiology and Molecular Characteristics of Peritoneal Exudate Cytotoxic T Lymphocytes (PEL), Their In Vivo IL-2-Dependent Blasts and IL-2-Independent Cytolytic Hybridomas

  • Gideon Berke
  • Dalia Rosen
  • Denise Ronen
  • Barbara Schick


Major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-restricted cytolytic T lymphocytes (CTL) are generated in response to allogeneic tissues (normal and malignant), tumors (autologous and syngeneic), viruses, and certain bacteria and self-antigens. CTL can be derived directly from spleen or lymph nodes after immunization, but these cells often require a secondary in vitro stimulation (Cerottini and Brunner. 1974). Peritoneal exudate CTL (PEL), collected during or shortly after a primary intraperitoneal (i.p.) immunization of rats and mice with allogeneic or irradiated syngeneic tumors, usually yield a highly potent, specific population of CTL (Berke et al., 1972a, 1972b, 1972c; Fishelson and Berke, 1978; Schick and Berke, 1977; Berke and Schick, 1980). Generation of PEL can be augmented by, but does not require, a secondary stimulation in vivo or in vitro.


Tumor Immunity Peritoneal Exudate Ascites Tumor Peritoneal Exudate Cell Lytic Granule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Amos DB (1960): Possible relations between the cytotoxic effects of isoantibody and host cell function. Ann NY Acad Sci 87: 273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amos DB (1962): The use of simplified systems as an aid to the interpretation of mechanisms of graft rejection. Prog Allergy 6: 648Google Scholar
  3. Amos DB, Wakefield JD (1959): Growth of ascites tumor cells in diffusion chambers. II. Lysis and growth inhibition by diffusible isoantibody. J Natl Cancer Inst 22: 1077Google Scholar
  4. Andersson LC, Häyry P (1975): Clonal isolation of alloantigen-reactive T cells and characterization of their memory. Transplant Rev 25: 121Google Scholar
  5. Baker P, Weiser RS, Jutila J, Evans CA, Blandau RJ (1962): Mechanisms of tumor homograft rejection: The behavior of Sarcoma I ascites tumor in the A/Jax and C57BL/6K mouse. Ann NY Acad Sci 101: 46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berke G (1980): Interaction of cytotoxic T lymphocytes and target cells Prog Allergy 27: 69–133Google Scholar
  7. Berke G (1989): Functions and mechanisms of lysis induced by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes and natural killer cells. In: Fundamental Immunol. Paul WE ed. Raven Press. pp 735–764Google Scholar
  8. Berke G (1993): Direct contact of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte receptors with target cell membrane determinants induces a prulytic rise of [CA’]i in the target that triggers disintegration. In this volume p. 194Google Scholar
  9. Berke G, Amos DB (1973): Mechanism of lymphocyte-mediated cytolysis: The LMC cycle and its role in transplantation immunity. Transplant Rev 17: 71–107Google Scholar
  10. Berke G, Rosen D (1987a): Are lytic granules, and perforin I thereof, involved in lysis induced by in vivo primed, peritoneal exudate CTL? Transplant Proc 19: 412–416Google Scholar
  11. Berke G, Rosen D (1987b): Circular lesions detected on membranes of target cells lysed by antibody and complement or natural killer (spleen) cells but not by in vivo primed cytolytic T lymphocytes. In: Membrane Mediated Cytotoxicity, Bonavida B, Collier RJ, eds. (UCLA Symposia, Park City), 1986, New York: Alan Liss, pp. 367–378Google Scholar
  12. Berke G, Rosen D (1988): Highly lytic in vivo primed CTL devoid of lytic granules and BLT-esterase activity acquire these constituents in the presence of T cell growth factors upon blast transformation in vivo. J Immunol 141: 1429–1436Google Scholar
  13. Berke G, Schick B (1980): Tumor immunity in the peritoneal cavity. Cont Top. Immunobiol. 10: 297–315 Berke G, Gabison D, Feldman M (1975): The frequency of effector cells in populations containing cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Eur J Immunol 5: 813–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Berke G, Schick B (1980): Tumor immunity in the peritoneal cavity. Cont Top. Immunobiol. 10: 297–315 Berke G, Gabison D, Feldman M (1975): The frequency of effector cells in populations containing cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Eur J Immunol 5: 813–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Berke G, Sullivan KA, Amos DB (1972b): Rejection of ascites tumor allograft. II. A pathway for cell-mediated tumor destruction in vitro by peritoneal exudate lymphoid cells. J Exp Med 136: 1594–1604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Berke G, Sullivan KA, Amos DB (1972c): Tumor immunity in vitro: Destruction of a mouse ascites tumor through a cycling pathway Science 177: 433–434Google Scholar
  17. Cerottini J-C, Brunner KT (1974): Cell-mediated cytotoxicity, allograft rejection and tumor immunity. Adv Immunol 18: 67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Denizot F, Brunet J-F, Roustan P, Harper K, Suzan M, Luciani M-F, Mattéi M-G, Golstein P (1989): Novel structures CTLA-2 alpha and CTLA-2 beta expressed in mouse activated T cells and mast cells and homologous to cysteine proteinase proregions. Eur J Immunol 19: 631–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Denizot F, Wilson A, Battye F, Berke G, Shortman KGoogle Scholar
  20. ): Clonal expansion of T cells: A cytotoxic T cell response in vivo that involves precursor cell proliferation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 83: 6089–6092Google Scholar
  21. Dennert G, Anderson C, Prochazka G (1987): High activity of Nx-benzyloxycarbonyl-L-lysine thiobenzyl ester serine esterase and cytolytic perforin in cloned cell lines is not demonstrable in in-vivo-induced cytotoxic effector cells. Proc Nall Acad Sci USA 184: 5004–5008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fishelson Z, Berke G (1978): T lymphocyte-mediated cytolysis: Dissociation of the binding from the lytic mechanism of the effector cells. J Immunol 120: 1121–1126Google Scholar
  23. Gorer D (1956): Some recent work on tumor immunity. Adv Cancer Res 4: 149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hashimoto Y, Sudo H (1968): Studies on acquired transplantation resistance. III. Cytocidal effect of sensitized peritoneal lymphocytic cells of Donryu rats against the target Yoshida sarcoma cells in vitro. Gann 59: 7Google Scholar
  25. Hashimoto Y, Ishidate M, Takaku M (1965): Studies on acquired transplantation resistance. II. Action of peritoneal exudate cells of Donryu rats immune to the tumor against Yoshida sarcoma. Gann 56: 23Google Scholar
  26. Henkart PA (1985): Mechanisms of lymphocyte-mediated cytotoxicity. Ann Rev Immunol 3: 31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Herberman RB (1974): Cell-mediated immunity to tumor cells. Adv Cancer Res 19: 207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hurt SN, Berke G, Clark WR (1979): A rapid method for generating cytotoxic effector cells in vivo. J Immunol Methods 28: 321–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kalina M, Berke G (1976): Contact regions of cytotoxic T lymphocyte-target cell conjugates. Cell Immunol 25: 41–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaufmann Y, Berke G (1980): Enucleated cytotoxic T lymphocytes bind specifically to target cells in vitro. Transplantation 29: 374–378Google Scholar
  31. Kaufmann Y, Berke G (1981): Cell surface glycoproteins of cytotoxic T lymphocytes induced in vivo and in vitro. J Immunol 126: 1443–1446Google Scholar
  32. Kaufmann Y, Berke G (1983): Monoclonal cytotoxic T lymphocyte hybridoma capable of specific killing activity, antigenic responsiveness and inducible interleukin(s) secretion. J Immunol 131: 50–56Google Scholar
  33. Kaufmann Y, Berke G, Eshhar Z (1981a): Cytotoxic T lymphocyte hybridomas that mediate specific tumor cell lysis in vitro. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78: 2502–2506 Kaufmann Y, Berke G, Eshhar Z (1981b): Functional cytotoxic T lymphocyte hybridomas. Transplant Proc 13: 1170–1174Google Scholar
  34. Krähenbühl O, Tschopp J (1991): Perform-induced pore formation. Immunol Today 12: 399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lotze MT, Finn OJ (1990): Recent advances in cellular immunology: Implications for immunity to cancer. Imm Today 11: 190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Martz E (1987): LFA-1 and other accessory molecules functioning in adhesions of T and B lymphocytes. Hum Immunol 18: 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Moscovitch M, Kaufmann Y, Berke G (1984): Memory CTL-hybridoma: A model system to analyze the anamnestic response of CTL. J Immunol 133: 2369–2374Google Scholar
  38. Nagler-Anderson C, Allbritton NL, Verret CR, Eisen HN (1988): A comparison of the cytolytic properties of murine primary CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes and cloned cytotoxic T cell lines. Immunol Rev 103: 111–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Patt HM, Straube RL (1956): Measurement and nature of ascites tumor growth. Ann NY Acad Sci 63: 728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Podack ER, Hengartner H, Lichtenheld M (1991): A central role of perform in cytolysis? Ann Rev Immunol 9: 129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schick B, Berke G (1977): Activity of tumor-associated lymphoid cells at short intervals after administration of irradiated syngeneic and allogeneic tumor cells. J Immunol 118: 986Google Scholar
  42. Straube RL, Hill MS, Patt HM (1955): Vascular permeability and ascites tumor growth. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 2: 49Google Scholar
  43. Wagner H, Röllinghoff M, Nossal GJV (1973): T cell-mediated immune responses induced in vitro: A probe of allograft and tumor immunity. Transplant Rev 17: 3Google Scholar
  44. Zagury D, Bernard J, Thierness N, Feldman M, Berke G (1975): Isolation and characterization of individual functionally reactive cytotoxic T lymphocytes: Conjugation, killing and recycling at the single cell level. Eur J Immunol 5: 818–822Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Birkhäuser Boston 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gideon Berke
  • Dalia Rosen
  • Denise Ronen
  • Barbara Schick

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations