Skip to main content
Oxford Open Immunology logoLink to Oxford Open Immunology
. 2024 Jun 14;5(1):iqae006. doi: 10.1093/oxfimm/iqae006

The emerging role of effector functions exerted by tissue-resident memory T cells

Norifumi Iijima 1,
PMCID: PMC11213632  PMID: 39193473

Abstract

The magnitude of the effector functions of memory T cells determines the consequences of the protection against invading pathogens and tumor development or the pathogenesis of autoimmune and allergic diseases. Tissue-resident memory T cells (TRM cells) are unique T-cell populations that persist in tissues for long periods awaiting re-encounter with their cognate antigen. Although TRM cell reactivation primarily requires the presentation of cognate antigens, recent evidence has shown that, in addition to the conventional concept, TRM cells can be reactivated without the presentation of cognate antigens. Non-cognate TRM cell activation is triggered by cross-reactive antigens or by several combinations of cytokines, including interleukin (IL)-2, IL-7, IL-12, IL-15 and IL-18. The activation mode of TRM cells reinforces their cytotoxic activity and promotes the secretion of effector cytokines (such as interferon-gamma and tumor necrosis factor-alpha). This review highlights the key features of TRM cell maintenance and reactivation and discusses the importance of effector functions that TRM cells exert upon being presented with cognate and/or non-cognate antigens, as well as cytokines secreted by TRM and non-TRM cells within the tissue microenvironment.

Keywords: Tissue-resident, memory T cells, reactivation, effector function, cognate antigen recognition, non-cognate antigen recognition, infection, autoimmune diseases, allergic diseases, tumor progression

Introduction

Secondary lymphoid organs (SLOs) are well-organized tissues for immunocompetent cells to initiate differentiation into effector cells, to combat against blood-borne pathogens, and transport antigens from the tissues. SLOs includes the spleen, lymph nodes (LNs), Peyer’s patches, tonsils, mucosal-associated lymphoid tissues, and adenoids. The distribution of lymphocytes, mainly T and B cells, in SLOs optimizes their interaction with foreign antigens that drain to the SLOs via the blood or lymphatics [1]. To this end, antigen-captured dendritic cells (DCs) from tissues are required to migrate into SLOs, or antigen-loaded SLO-resident DCs must enter T- or B-cell follicles in SLOs to maximize the activation of lymphocytes in SLOs [1]. In addition to immune cells, non-hematopoietic stromal cells construct microanatomical niches in SLOs to maximize immune responses and the differentiation into effector cells. This implies that all the immune cells and stromal cells are appropriately prearranged for lymphocyte activation and differentiation within the framework of the small compartments of SLOs [2, 3].

In contrast to SLOs, peripheral tissues containing barrier tissues (eye, mouth, lung, skin, stomach/intestine, and genitourinary tract), and non-barrier tissues (brain, liver, and kidney) are not sophisticated to educate antigen-unexperienced cells to differentiate into effector cells, except for tertiary lymphoid organs [4, 5]. The human body comprises various cells, tissues, and organs, each playing a specific role in maintaining stability and life. The internal environment of the body is maintained at a constant level despite various internal and external stimuli. However, owing to some causes (external factors, such as stress or infection), the balance of the internal environment of the body is disrupted, and health cannot be maintained. Therefore, major illnesses can be avoided by quickly stopping abnormalities at the forefront of internal causes and infections. Focusing on frontline defense in the body, it has been known for more than three decades that many lymphocytes are localized in peripheral tissues [6, 7]. In particular, the number of antigen-experienced memory T cells (TM cells) is approximately 1–3 × 1010 cells in the skin, lung, and intestinal tissues, compared with the number of 0.5 × 1010 cells or 20 × 1010 cells in the blood or SLOs, respectively [7–10]. Furthermore, the functional and phenotypic characteristics of TM cells in each tissue are entirely distinct from those in the blood or SLOs, exhibiting tissue-specific gene signatures [11–13].

Most T cells in human blood are naïve T cells that are not sensitized to antigens and express CD45RA [14]. However, instead of CD45RA, CD45RO+ T cells have also been detected in the blood. These T cells are antigen-experienced T cells. Early in the immune response, CD45RA+ T cells are rapidly converted into CD45RO+ T cells, which are effector T cells (TE cells) [15]. Furthermore, a group of CD45RO+ cells was found to be maintained for long periods as TM cells, with two subsets in humans, as defined in 1991 [16]: effector memory T cells (TEM cells) and central memory T cells (TCM cells), each with predicted distinct phenotypes and functions based on the surface markers expressed on these TM cells. TCM cells patrol the blood and SLOs via the chemokine receptors CD62L (L-selectin) and C-C chemokine receptor (CCR)7. When stimulated, TCM cells have a strong proliferative capacity and can differentiate into short-lived effector cells and TEM cells [17].

In contrast, CCR7 TEM cells do not exhibit such molecular mechanisms and express distinct cell surface markers, including cutaneous lymphocyte-associated antigen (CLA), C-X-C chemokine receptor (CXCR)3, and CCR5 [16]. Therefore, it was thought that all TEM cells continuously migrated to the peripheral tissues and returned to the bloodstream, and it is now conceivable that TEM cells can be divided into two groups: those cells that express homing molecules such as the chemokine receptor CX3CR1, and CX3CR1dim cells in humans and mice [18, 19]. The subset that can migrate to peripheral tissues is the CX3CR1dim TM cells, which refers to TPM cells, and CX3CR1hi TEM cells are thought to exert effector functions in systemic infections [19]. Both types of TM cells respond quickly to stimuli and produce various effector molecules but have limited proliferative capacity.

Until approximately the year 2000, it had been conceivable that a small proportion of TM cell subsets could migrate to peripheral tissues as TEM cells. Moreover, it was also extremely difficult to detect a minor population of TM cells using flow cytometry in peripheral tissues containing CD45- cells, such as epithelial cells, fibroblasts, and endothelial cells, compared with SLOs, which contain approximately 90% immune cells. For this reason, most studies have used immunohistochemical analyses to evaluate the distribution of multiple types of immune cells in tissues. Thus, prior to detailed analysis of TM cells in tissues, many of the mechanisms of TM cell differentiation from TE cells in SLOs, such as the spleen and LNs in mice and peripheral blood in humans, have been elucidated using flow cytometry [20–22].

As methods have been developed to prepare single-cell suspensions from tissues using various enzymes, it has become clear that many antigen-presenting cells (APCs) and TE cells are localized in a wide variety of tissues [10, 23–25]. In terms of TM cells in tissues, Masopust et al. detected antigen-specific CD8+ TM cells in various murine tissues at least 5 weeks after viral infection [26]. In addition, the frequency of CD8+ TE cells was higher in tissues than in SLOs. Simultaneously, Hogan et al. reported similar findings for antigen-specific CD4+ T cells in the murine lungs [27]. CD43hiCD69hiCD44hiCD4+ T cells that accumulated in the bronchoalveolar lavage protected against secondary viral infection.

Almost two decades ago, Clark et al. published a pioneering report suggesting that far more T cells than expected are localized in human skin tissues and contribute significantly to the defense against pathogens and tumors [8]. Many CLA+ and CCR4+ TM cells have been isolated from human skin tissue, using the skin explant culture system [10]. Furthermore the migration of these TM cells out of skin explants was controlled by chemoattractants, highlighting the importance of T-cell-mediated immunity in the skin [10]. These findings predicted that the TM cells localized in the skin could become resident cells.

In 2004, Klonowski et al. demonstrated the long-term retention of antigen-specific CD69hiCD8+ T cells in the brain and intestinal tissues following viral infection using the technique of parabiotic surgery, which shares blood circulation between two mice [28]. These results initially indicate the long-term maintenance of TM cells in various tissues. Later, Gebhardt et al. demonstrated the presence of tissue-resident memory T cells (TRM cells) in the skin and dorsal root ganglia after cutaneous herpes simplex virus (HSV) infection following skin surgery or dorsal root ganglia transplantation [29]. These results confirmed that TM cells localized in tissues become resident cells.

TRM, TEM, and TPM cells all have the propensity to enter tissues. Therefore, a detailed study of their precursors is essential for distinguishing them. In the early phase of primary infection or reinfection in mice, KLRG1-ZNF683/homolog of B-lymphocyte-induced maturation protein 1 (Blimp-1) in T cells (Hobit)+ TRM cell precursors in peripheral blood may be derived from CX3CR1dim TE or CX3CR1dim TM cells [30–32]. However, in human peripheral blood, TCM cells highly express CLA, which enters skin tissue. Therefore, TCM cells also can differentiate into TRM cells in skin tissues [33]. In this case, specific factors such as chemokines must push the button for TCM cells to infiltrate peripheral tissues and differentiate into TRM cells.

TRM cell precursors can access peripheral tissues, but sphingosine-1-phosphate receptors (S1PR) 1 and 5 expression and the high sphingosine-1-phosphate gradient between tissues and lymphatic vessels cause them to return to murine circulation for continued surveillance [34]. Furthermore, CCR7 expression on TEM cells in mice appears to be a switch for exit from the tissue into the afferent lymph [35, 36].

Over the past decade, numerous studies have been published on the phenotypic, functional, and molecular characteristics of TM cells that localize to tissues for long periods; we refer to the reader to other reviews for details of reports on the differentiation mechanisms of TRM cells [37, 38]. In this review, we discuss why some memory T-cell subsets are programmed to be retained in peripheral tissues for long periods. The most plausible possibility is that TRM cells play a specific role in the frontline defense against invading pathogens. However, tissue-specific autoimmune diseases may be regulated by the state of TRM cells that recognize their antigens. Therefore, understanding the mechanism of TRM cell function and identifying transcription factors and cell surface receptors for tissue retention of TRM cells, and their effector functions following reactivation of TRM cells , e.g. by pathogen reinfection, will greatly contribute to the development of new therapeutic interventions. Among them, targeting the effector functions of TRM cells is a strong strategy for such interventions. Herein, we outline the role of TRM effector functions in infectious diseases, autoimmunity, and cancer and discuss potential strategies to target TRM cells to prevent and treat human diseases.

Cytolytic and non-cytolytic functions of TRM cells

Cytolytic functions of TRM cells

Fundamental knowledge of cytotoxic cell function is based on the secretion of lytic granules carrying several cytotoxic proteins [perforin-1 (Prf1), granulysin, and proteolytically active granzymes (Gzms)] formed as a glycoprotein shell based on thrombospondin-1 and serglycin, named by supramolecular attack particles and multivesicular bodies containing Fas ligand (FasL) [39–41]. Cytotoxic T cells (CTLs) and natural killer (NK) cells can exert a cytolytic effector function to eliminate target cells, such as virus-infected or tumor cells [39].

Upon interaction of the T-cell receptor (TCR) with specific antigens presented on major histocompatibility (MHC) class I expressed on target cells, CD8+ CTLs release Prf1, Gzms, and FasL toward the target cells. Prf1 creates pores in the plasma membrane of the target cells, allowing Gzms to enter the cytoplasm. Subsequently, intracellular Gzms trigger numerous signaling cascades that lead to cell death. During these steps, CD8+ CTLs promote a more powerful effector function by sequentially introducing cytotoxic effector molecules into their lytic granules [42].

In contrast to CTLs, γδT cells exhibit more efficient cytotoxic function without MHC-restricted mechanism [43]. To eliminate target cells, γδT cells utilize the interaction of costimulatory molecules, such as NKG2D, which is an activating receptor expressed on cytotoxic cells in the absence of TCR recognition [43]. NKG2D recognizes NKG2D ligands, including the MHC class I polypeptide-related sequences A and B (MICA and MICB, respectively), which are expressed upon stress, damage, or cell transformation.

NKG2D is expressed by a subset of γδT cells, CD8+ CTLs, and NK cells. Compared with γδT cells and CD8+ CTL, NK cells do not express antigen-specific receptors, whereas NK cells recognize the downregulation of MHC class I expression or the upregulation of several NK receptors, such as NKG2D ligands on damaged cells to secrete lytic granules. Furthermore, NK cells engage death receptors on the target cells via tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, FasL, and TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL), whose killing is slower than that mediated by lytic granules. Similar to γδT cells, NK cells can rapidly secrete lytic granules upon the recognition of virus-infected cells or tumor cells [44].

In addition, some of innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) secrete cytotoxic granules. In humans, CD127-CD94+ NK cells are cytotoxic, whereas CD127+CD94- ILC1, ILC2, ILC3, and lymphoid tissue inducer cells are not cytotoxic [45]. Recently identified CD127+CD94+ ILCs are analogous to conventional ILC3 in terms of phenotypic and functional features and gene signatures in mice [46]. However, this population carries lytic granules, including Gzms and granulysins and exhibits cytotoxicity in response to interleukin (IL)-12 treatment. Furthermore, an increase in CD127+CD94+ cytotoxic ILCs was observed in patients with Crohn’s diseases [47].

In peripheral tissues and internal organs, a subset of γδT cells, ILCs, NK cells, CD4+ TM cells, and CD8+ TM cells become a tissue-resident population [37, 48–50]. In a microenvironment that barely retains residual antigens, CD8+ TRM cells dampen the transcriptional levels of cytolytic molecules, including Prf1 and Gzms, before reinfection [51], which is potentially mediated by tumor growth factor (TGF)-β signaling [52]. However, following reinfection with lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) in mice, perforin-mediated cytotoxicity of CD8+ TRM cells contributes to viral clearance in brain tissues [53], suggesting that CD8+ TRM cells preserve lytic granules that contain cytotoxic effector molecules and then rapidly secrete them following the reinfection. Recent evidence has demonstrated that CD8+ TRM cells in the murine liver, small intestine and cervix maintain the expression of cytotoxic molecules (GzmB, GzmK, FasL and TRAIL) [54, 55], whereas a lower frequency of CD8+ TRM and CD4+ TRM cells, which maintain GzmB, was observed in the female reproductive tract following LCMV infection [56]. In addition, GzmC was detected inside skin CD8+ TRM cells before reinfection with vaccinia virus (VACV) in mice, and an immediate increase in GzmC and other Gzms was induced following CD8+ TRM reactivation [57].

Although both CTLs and NK cells carry lytic granules that contain cytotoxic molecules to kill target cells, NK cells trigger the death of CD4+ T cells, followed by limiting the CD8+ T-cell response instead of killing virus-infected cells in a murine model of LCMV infection, but not mouse cytomegalovirus (MCMV) infection [58, 59]. Similarly, NK cell depletion increases the number of liver-resident CD8+ TRM cells in a murine model of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection [60]. In addition, the mechanism of limiting the CD8+ TRM response was mediated by the upregulation of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PDL1), but not other NK cell-related receptors in liver-resident NK cells. Therefore, cytokine-activated liver-resident NK cells can negatively affect the CD8+ TRM response in mice and humans [60]. Collectively, TRM cells play a central role in protecting against pathogen reinfection, suggesting that the recognition of virus-infected cells through MHC molecules with cognate antigens is a critical step in ensuring pathogen clearance.

Considering the mode of the cytotoxic granule secretion from cells, CTLs and NK cells exhibit effector functions with strikingly distinct dynamics of calcium influx regulation. NK cells require short-term contact with target cells to kill them, whereas CTLs need to establish long-term contact to stabilize their interaction with target cells [61]. Furthermore, CTLs eliminate target cells by providing repeated pulses of sublethal hits until the target cells trigger death [62], suggesting that CTLs require much more time for elimination. TE cells exert the highest cytotoxic activity, which is correlated with the secretion of lytic granules, including cytotoxic effector molecules [63]. In contrast, both TCM and TEM cells exhibited low cytotoxicity. On the other hand, CD45RA+ TEM cells (TRMRA cells) have been demonstrated to express Prf-1 and GzmB and are poised to kill target cells without activation in humans [64]. By comparison, human lung CD103+CD8+ TRM cells maintained a large amount of GzmB mRNA without retaining proteins [65]. Although the mechanism of the rapid secretion of lytic granules in TRM cells remains unclear, CD8+ TRM cells, but not CD8+ TEM cells, trigger the exocytosis of cytotoxic granules within 4 h of activation with cognate antigens in mice [54], suggesting that the ability to exhibit immediate cytotoxic function in CD8+ TRM cells is transcriptionally regulated by a specific mechanism.

The transcription factor Hobit controls Gzm B expression in CD8+ TE cells in mice and humans [54]. In addition, Hobit contributes to the maintenance of GzmB and TRAIL production in CD8+ TRM cells and CD69 expression on CD8+ TRM cells in the murine liver and small intestine [30, 54] (Table1). Unlike these tissues, Blimp-1, rather than Hobit, is necessary for CD8+ TRM establishment in murine respiratory tissues [66], and CD69+CD8+ TRM cells maintain a high expression level of GzmB, suggesting that the cytotoxic activity of CD69+CD8+ TRM cells is regulated in a Hobit-independent manner. In murine skin tissue, Hobit expression was significantly elevated in CD8+ TRM cells, liver NKT, and NK cells [67]. Both Hobit and Blimp-1 affect the expression of CCR7, Krüppel-like factor 2 (KLF2), CD69, S1PR1, and cytotoxic molecules, including GzmB and TRAIL [67]. Furthermore, in humans, Hobit expression is higher in blood TM cells than in brain CD8+ TRM cells [68] and lung CD4+ TRM cells [69]. With respect to Hobit+ TM cells in the blood, Hobit+CD8+ TE cells can differentiate into TRM cells in the liver, kidney, and small intestine [31]. Therefore, the requirement of Hobit and Blimp-1 for TRM cell differentiation likely depends on the microenvironment of peripheral tissues.

Table 1.

Transcription factors involved in the regulation of TRM differentiation and function in mice and humans

Type of TRM cells Species Location of TRM cells in vivo or state of TRM-like cells in vitro Transcription factor (TF) expressed in TRM cells Molecules or function controlled by TF or their impact on TRM differentiation/survival References
CD8 + TRM cells Human
  • Skin

  • Differentiation of TRM-like CD8 + T cells in vitro

Runx2, Runx3 Contribute to cytolytic function (GzmA and GzmB) and upregulate CD49a expression during TRM differentiation [72, 73]
  • Colon

  • Differentiation of TRM-like CD8 + T cells in vitro

Ahr Promote TRM differentiation and upregulate GzmB [74]
Renal cell carcinoma Bhlhe40 Potentially promote TRM differentiation and cytokine production [75]
Differentiation of TRM-like CD8 + T cells in vitro Bcl11b
  • Upregulate the expression of CD69, CD49a, CD56, CD161, CD117, and NCR1

  • Downregulate the expression of CD62L and CCR7

[76]
Cervix Hobit Expression in TRM cells is associated with GzmB and GNLY expression. [55]
Lung Notch-1, RBPJ, JAG2, ZEB2 Contribute to TRM survival [65]
Bhlhe40 Promote TRM differentiation and cytokine production? [75]
NFATc1 Potentially contribute to cytolytic function [77]
CD4 + TRM cells Human Lung Hobit Persistence of cytolytic function [78]
HOPX Potentially upregulate GzmA and GzmB expression [78]
CD103 + CD4 + TRM cells Human Lung Hobit, PRDM1, BATF, IRF4, EGR2, RBPJ ZEB2 (mRNA levels) Contribute to TRM survival [69]
CD4 + TRM (Th17) cells Human c-Maf c-MafhiIL-10 + Th17 cells in the presence of IL-27 upregulate CD69, CXCR6 and CTLA4. [79]
CD8 + TRM cells Mouse Intestinal tissues Hobit
  • Upregulate the expression of GzmB and TRAIL

  • Downregulate the expression of CCR7, KLF2 and Tcf1

[54, 67]
Id2, Id3 Upregulate the production of IFN-γ, TNF-α and CD107a [80]
Bcl11b (Upstream of Tcf1 and Blimp-1) Upregulate the expression of Ahr and the production of IFN-γ [76]
Tcf1
  • Upregulate the expression of Id3 and the production of IFN-γ and TNF-α

  • Downregulate the expression of Blimp-1

[80]
Ahr Promote TRM differentiation and upregulate GzmB [74]
Runx3 Promote TRM differentiation and upregulate GzmB [70]
Lung Bhlhe40 Promote TRM differentiation and upregulate the production of IFN-γ, TNF-α and CD107a [75]
Blimp-1 Promote TRM differentiation and upregulate CD69, CXCR6, and CD103 [66]
NFATc1 Potentially contribute to cytolytic function [77]
EGR2 Control Notch-1 expression for TRM differentiation [81]
Runx3 Promote TRM differentiation and homeostasis [70]
CD8 + TRM cells Mouse Skin Runx3 Promote TRM differentiation, residency, and upregulation of PD-1, Tim-3, and GzmB [70, 71]
T-bet (Reduced expression) Contribute to IL-15-mediated survival [82]
CD8 + TRM (TRM1) cells Hobit, Blimp-1 Promote TRM differentiation and upregulate CD103, CD69, CD49a and GzmB [67, 83]
T-bet Promote CD8 + TRM1 differentiation [83]
CD8 + TRM (TRM17) cells c-Maf Promote TRM survival and upregulate IL-7R and ICOS expression [83]
Rorγt Promote CD8 + TRM17 differentiation [83]
CD8 + TRM cells Liver Hobit Upregulate GzmB and TRAIL [54]
Kidney Runx3, Hobit, Blimp-1 Promote TRM differentiation [67, 70]
Salivary gland Runx3 Promote TRM differentiation [70]
CD4 + TRM (Th1) cells Mouse Colon Hobit Promote TRM differentiation and potentially contribute to cytolytic function [84]
Blimp-1 Promote TRM differentiation and potentially contribute to cytolytic function [84]
CD4 + TRM (Th1) cells Lung T-bet Downregulate CD103 and CXCR3 expression [85]
CD4 + TRM (Th2) cells
  • GATA3

  • Hobit↓Blimp-1↓RUNX3↓

Contribute to produce IL-5 and IL-13 [86]
CD4 + TRM (TRH) cells Bcl6 Contribute to produce IL-21 [87]
CD4 + TRM (TRH) cells Bhlhe40 Potentially contribute to IFN-γ production [88]
CD103 + CD4 + TRM cells Notch-1, RBPJ Necessary for TRM cells to survive [69]

Runx3 is highly expressed in CD8+ TRM cells in the small intestine, salivary gland, skin and kidney of mice (Table 1) [70, 71]. Depletion of Runx3 in CD8+ TRM cells clearly demonstrate that this transcription factor is crucial for the long-term maintenance of CD8+ TRM cells [70] (Table 1). Furthermore, overexpression of Runx3 in CD8+ TE cells increase GzmB expression, suggesting that CD8+ TRM cells require Runx3 for GzmB production during differentiation. In the skin of mice, Runx3 is likely to promote TGF-β responsiveness in CD8+ TRM cells for long-term maintenance [71] (Table 1).

As another transcription factor related to cytotoxic effector functions, NFATc1 regulates cytoskeletal reorganization, CD103 expression and cytotoxic organelle polarization in murine CD8+ TE cells [77, 89]. Furthermore, NFATc1 is required for the differentiation of CD8+ TRM cells [77]. Following the treatment with anti-PD-1 antibody, NFATc1 is upregulated in TRM cells, possibly contributing to the exertion of cytolytic activity [77].

In the case of CD4+ TM cells, Hobit is also highly expressed in human CD4+CD27-CD28- TE cells and TRMRA cells, especially in human cytomegalovirus-specific CD4+ CTLs, but not in influenza A virus (IAV)- or Epstein-Barr virus-specific CD4+ T cells [90]. Similar to human CX3CR1+CD8+ TEM cells, Hobit+CX3CR1+CD4+ CTLs maintain their cytotoxic effector functions for a long period. In addition, the frequency of CD103+CD4+ TRM cells in human lung airway tissue was associated with the severity of asthma. CD103+CD4+ TRM cells retain high levels of GzmA and GzmB [78] (Table 1), suggesting that the CD103+ population is cytolytic CD4+ TRM cells. In murine colon tissue, Hobit is also upregulated in CD4+ TRM cells but not in CD4+ TEM cells, whereas the association of Hobit with cytotoxic activity in CD4+ TRM cells remains unclear [84]. Another transcription factor related to the cytotoxic function of TRM cells is the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (Ahr), which is controlled by Bcl11b and expressed in CD8+ TRM cells. It affects the expression of Prf1 and GzmB in CD8+ TRM cells in intestinal tissues of mice and humans (Table 1) [74, 76].

Collectively, a variety of immune cells carrying cytotoxic granules (TRM cells, γδT cells, NK cells, and ILCs) are distributed in the microenvironment of peripheral tissues. These cells are thought to share roles depending on the microenvironmental conditions, and work to eliminate foreign substances and maintain homeostasis. However, excessive inflammation and other external factors may make it difficult to maintain the normal function of these cells.

Non-cytolytic functions of TRM cells

Cytokine production from TRM cells

The critical function of TRM cells is widely known to be a rapid effector function, including the secretion of cytotoxic effector molecules and cytokine production following TCR restimulation with cognate antigens in tissues. For instance, in the case of mucosal HSV-2 infection in mice, both CD4+ TRM cells and CD8+ TRM cells immediately produce IFN-γ within a day of reinfection, followed by elimination of infected cells to prevent viral dissemination into neuronal tissue [91, 92] and recruitment of memory B cells from the blood circulation [93], whereas reinfection with an irrelevant virus failed to produce IFN-γ from TRM cells [91], suggesting that cognate antigen presentation is required for the rapid secretion of cytokines from TRM cells. Consistent with this evidence, the upregulation of nuclear receptor subfamily 4 group A member 1, which is downstream of TCR signaling, in TRM cells was observed in the lung tissues of mice on the day of reinfection with IAV [94].

Furthermore, the injection of cognate peptides into mucosal tissues where TRM cells are localized, triggers the rapid secretion of IFN-γ, which triggers chemokine secretion and upregulation of vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 on endothelial cells, activation of innate immune cells, recruitment of memory B cells, and increased vascular permeability in tissues to reinforce protection against invading pathogens [95–99]. Therefore, cytokines secreted by TRM cells can act on infected cells and have indirect effects that broadly enhance the protective function of other immune cells and non-immune cells in the microenvironment.

The transcription factor T-bet is the master regulator of IFN-γ and is sufficient for the induction of IFN-γ expression in CD4+ TE cells [100]. On the other hand, IFN-γ secretion by CD8+ TE cells is also mediated by Eomesodermin expression [101]. In TRM cells, T-bet is expressed at lower levels than in TE cells [85] and is also required for IL-15-mediated survival of CD103+CD8+ TRM cells in the skin of mice (Table 1) [82]. In contrast, Bcl11b is also involved in the secretion of IFN-γ and TNF-α in CD8+ TRM cells of intestinal tissues in mice [76]. Knockdown of Id2 and Id3 in CD8+ TRM cells in the small intestine of mice increases the frequency of CD11b+ T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin domain 3 (Tim-3)+ subsets, whereas the subsets with cytokine-producing capacity (IFN-γ, TNF-α, and CD107a) are decreased [80].

Bhlhe40 appears to be involved in the survival and functionality of pulmonary CD8+ TRM cells in mice and humans [75]. Bhlhe40 triggers the expression of multiple genes related to mitochondria, leading to oxidative phosphorylation and mitochondrial fitness [75]. Since Bhlhe40 controls both IL-10 and IFN-γ production in TE cells [102, 103], it is likely that Bhlhe40 expressed in TRM cells also regulates cytokine production, but the exact role of Bhlhe40 in TRM cell function remains to be determined.

In contrast to IFN-γ production from TRM cells, cognate antigen-dependent IL-5 and IL-13 production from GATA3+CD4+ TRM cells in the lung parenchyma of mice augments eosinophil activation through up- and downregulation of CD11b and CD62L, respectively, leading to mucus metaplasia and airway hyper-responsiveness [86, 104, 105]. In contrast, circulating memory Th2 cells infiltrate the lung parenchyma and initiate perivascular inflammation to promote recruitment of eosinophils and CD4+ T cells [86, 106].

In addition to tissue-resident Th1 and Th2 cells, IL-21-producing programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1)hiFR4hiCD4+ T cells become a resident population in the lungs of mice, called tissue-resident helper T cells (TRH cells) [87, 88]. IL-21+CD4+ TRH cells are localized in inducible bronchus–associated lymphoid tissue (iBALT) in mouse lung tissue and are required to inhibit cell death of a subset of CD8+ TRM cells that require MHC class I recognition for their retention [88]. In particular, Bcl6 expression in CD4+ TRH cells is critical for long-term maintenance through regulation of KLF2, IL-21, ICOS and IL-4 [87, 88].

Involvement of local antigens in the maintenance of long-term TRM cell functions

To perform effector functions in tissues, TRM cells must adapt to diverse microenvironments and establish long-term retention. It is widely accepted that CD103+CD8+ TRM cells do not require local antigens for their maintenance [107], In particular, CD103 expression on CD8+ TRM cells in the murine skin epidermis is independent of local antigen presentation [108]. In addition, the TCR responsiveness of CD103+CD8+ TRM cells in the salivary glands, female reproductive tract (FRT), and small intestine of mice is dispensable for long maintenance periods [109].

In the early phase of infection, local antigens are not required to recruit TE cells, but they augment the differentiation of TRM cells from TE cells in mouse tissues [110, 111]. In addition, the expression of CD69, CXCR6, and CD103 on TRM cells is dependent on local antigen recognition [110–114]. Upregulating these typical TRM cell markers requires interactions with local antigens during the early phase of TRM cell differentiation. However, the need for the continuous recognition of local antigens to maintain the expression of these markers depends on tissue features. In contrast to the TCR-independent retention of CD8+ TRM cells in the salivary gland, FRT, and small intestine of mice [109], persistent antigen retention in alveolar macrophages contributes to the long-term maintenance of CD8+ TRM cells in murine lung tissues [115]. Furthermore, the persistence of local antigens from the IAV in the lungs of mice dictates the functional and phenotypic features of CD8+ TRM cells. Following IAV infection, virus-derived nucleoprotein (NP) was detected at higher levels than polymerase acidic (PA) protein in the lung tissue several weeks after virus clearance [116, 117]. In line with antigen persistence, NP366-374-specific CD8+ TRM cells, but not PA224-233-specific CD8+ TRM cells, require MHC class I recognition and CD28 signaling for their maintenance [118]. In contrast, both of these CD8+ TRM cells require TGFβ receptor (TGFβR) signaling for their retention [118].

Similar to CD103+CD8+ TRM cells, the retention of CD103+CD4+ TRM cells also requires TGF-βR signaling to maintain human epithelial layers [119]. In the human skin, approximately 50% of CD69+ TM cells localized in the epidermis are CD103+CD4+ T cells, and in the dermis, nearly 40% of CD69+ TM cells are CD103-CD4+ T cells. This is the first study to demonstrate that TRM cells also exist in vivo in humans and that most of these CD52-CD69+ TM cells are resistant to depletion of CD52+ circulating T cells following treatment with alemtuzumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds to CD52. This indicates that the remaining TM cells in the skin are genuine TRM cells [119]. In addition, TRM cells in the skin preserve their ability to produce multiple cytokines, including IFN-γ, IL-17, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), and IL-22.

In contrast, CD103+CD4+ T cells have also been detected in human peripheral blood and lymph [120]. Furthermore, CD103+CD4+ TM cells in the blood are transcriptionally similar to CD103+CD4+ TRM cells in the skin. These TM cells, by contrast, do not express CD69. Therefore, the authors argued that CD69 downregulation from various CD103+CD4+ TRM cells in the skin tends to recirculate into the blood circulation in a xenograft animal model [120]. However, human skin TRM cells with the ability to recirculate into the blood circulation were IL-13+, IL-22+, or GM-CSF+ TM cells, but not IFN-γ+, IL-17+, or IL-4+ TM cells, suggesting that recirculatory capacity varies among TM cell subsets. Another independent study reported that CD103+CLA+CD4+ TM cells highly express GATA3 and produce IL-13, which is consistent with a previous study [121].

Compared with CD103+ TRM cells, most CD103- TRM cells are localized to the lamina propria in mucosal tissues [122] or to the dermis in the skin [119]. The retention mechanism of CD103-CD8+ TRM cells is likely to be distinct from that of CD103-CD8+ TRM cells in terms of dependence on TGF-β signaling. CD103-CD8+ TRM cells require CXCR3 to cluster with CXCR1+ APCs for long-term tissue maintenance [122]. Thus, the retention signal may be provided by CXCR1+ APCs, even though the stimulation with antigens is independent of CD103 expression.

The requirement for the interaction of MHC class II expressed on APCs for the retention of CD103-CD8+ TRM cells remains unclear; however tissue-resident TRH cells, but not PSGL1+CD4+ TRM cells require MHC class II antigen presentation in murine lungs [87]. The largest population of TRH cells is localized in B-cell clusters of iBALT in the lung, suggesting that MHC class II presentation on B cells is involved in the maintenance of TRH cells.

The situation in the tumor microenvironment (TME) and organ transplantation differs from that of pathogen infection. In tumor-bearing tissues, continuous antigens derived from cancer cells modulate the features of TRM cells [123]. Tumor-specific CD8+ T cells, a lineage of stem progenitors, infiltrate tumors and establish residency with the exhaustion phenotype. Thus, continuous stimulation with tumor antigens augments Tox expression in CD8+ T cells in humans [124]. However, exhausted T cells retain the expression of TRM cell markers. Therefore, the molecular mechanisms of the retention of TM cells are distinct from that of the exhaustion.

In contrast, the long-term persistence of TRM cell populations following transplantation, as observed in the human skin, lungs, kidneys, and intestines, is associated with the development of graft-versus-host disease [72, 125–127, 128]. In mouse chronic kidney allograft rejection models, CD8+ TRM cells are maintained through cognate antigen recognition and the IL-15 signaling pathway [129, 130]. In renal allografts, CD8+ TRM cells are polyfunctional but not exhausted because they remain Tim-3 negative, although cognate antigens on MHC class I of CD11c+ APCs are chronically presented to these CD8+ TRM cells [130]. Based on the findings of the tissue residency of TRM cells in the model of tumor implantation and allograft transplantation, it is conceivable that chronic antigen presentation in tissues contributes to the maintenance of multifunctional TRM cells unless the amount of cognate antigens is increased, such as the proliferation of cancer cells expressing MHC class I loaded with tumor antigens, or immune evasion strategies, such as release of immunosuppressive IL-10 or downregulation of MHC class I loaded with tumor antigens, are established in the tumor microenvironment [131].

Protective roles of tissue-resident memory T cells

Effector functions of TRM cells to combat reinfection with viruses

For approximately two decades, TM cells distributed in the peripheral tissues of mice and humans have been shown to produce effector cytokines (IFN-γ, TNF-α, GM-CSF, etc.) and cytotoxic granules (Prf1 and Gzms) [8, 26, 27, 132, 133]. In addition, local and mucosal immunization routes are superior in protecting against invading viral infection compared with systemic immunization [134–138]. Therefore, it has been suggested that TM cells continuously infiltrate or persist as tissue residents in immunized tissues. A previous study demonstrated the possible retention of TM cells in some peripheral tissues of mice, including the brain, peritoneal cavity, and intestinal lamina propria [28]. Using the parabiotic technique to share the blood circulation, transplantation or the prime and pull strategy, CD8+ TRM cells have been experimentally identified, mainly in the epidermis and epithelial layer of mucosal tissues [29, 92, 139]. Furthermore, these cells have been shown to confer superior protection against rechallenge with LCMV [140], HSV-1 [29, 108], and VACV [139].

In contrast, most CD4+ T cells are distributed in the dermis (skin) or the lamina propria (mucosal tissues), suggesting that the mechanism for CD4+ TRM cells for retention is different from that of CD8+ TRM cells localized in the epidermis. In the case of genital herpes infection, attenuated HSV-2 immunization induces the formation of CD4+ T-cell clusters (MLC) beneath the lamina propria of genital tissues in mice [91, 141]. MLC formation is critical for rapid protection against genital HSV-2 rechallenge [91]. MLCs consist of many CD4+ TRM cells and CD11b+ APCs, including macrophages and DCs, and a small number of CD8+ TRM cells without PNAd+ high endothelial venules (HEVs). Furthermore, similar structures in which MLCs retain CD4+ TRM cells are formed in murine skin dermis around hair follicles following HSV-1 skin infection [142].

In contrast to MLC formation, iBALT is generated in the lung tissue of mice following intranasal IAV infection [4]. The iBALT contains T-cell areas, including CD4+ TRM cells, CD4+ TRH cells, and CD8+ TRM cells, and B-cell follicles, including CD21+ follicular DCs, with PNAd+ HEVs. Protection mediated by IFN-γ+CD4+ TRM cells is superior to that mediated by circulating CD4+ TM cells against IAV reinfection [85, 143]. In murine lung iBALT, IL-21-producing TRH cells contribute to B cell immunity and local CD8+ T-cell help [87, 88]. The retention of PSGL1+ TRM cells does not require antigen presentation, whereas FR4+ TRH cells require cognate antigen presentation by CD20+ memory B cells for long-term maintenance [87].

Taken together, both CD4+ and CD8+ TRM cells have been shown to contribute to protection against a variety of viral infections, including HSV-1, HSV-2, LCMV, MCMV, IAV, and VACV, particularly at the site of infection [29, 91, 139, 143].

Effector functions of TRM cells to combat reinfection with bacteria or fungi

Following Listeria monocytogenes (L. monocytogenes) reinfection, α4β7+CD8+ TRM cells in the intestinal tissues of mice play a role in suppressing the bacterial load [144]. In lung Yersinia pestis infections, both CD4+ and CD8+ TRM cells are required to confer protection against reinfection in an IFN-γ and IL-17-dependent manner [145]. CD4+ TRM cells are also essential for protection against lung infection by the intracellular bacterium M. tuberculosis in mice [146]. CD4+ T cells in the lung parenchyma are superior to CD4+ T cells in the lung vasculature in protecting against M. tuberculosis infections. In addition, mucosal immunization provides CD4+ TRM cell-mediated protection against pulmonary M. tuberculosis infection in mice [147–149].

Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium (S. typhi) is a virulent foodborne pathogen that infects humans and animals. S. typhi infection is initiated by the ingestion of contaminated food or water, which allows S. typhi to penetrate the intestinal epithelium and cause gastrointestinal disease. Immunization with a live vaccine strain of S. typhi generates IFN-γ-producing CD4+ TRM cells that contribute to the protection against virulent Salmonella infection in mice [150].

In the case of urogenital infection, Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Escherichia coli (E. coli) are among the most common bacterial infections in humans. Following CT infection, lymphoid aggregates form beneath the genital epithelium, similar to MLC formation in the vaginal tissue of mice following attenuated HSV-2 immunization [151]. However, despite the presence of CD4+ T-cell clusters in the lamina propria of the genital tissues of mice, TRM cells in these clusters do not appear to be required for protection against reinfection with CT [152]. In contrast to MLC formation which is composed of Th1 cells but not FoxP3+ regulatory T cells after attenuated HSV-2 immunization, intravaginal UV-inactivated CT immunization or CT infection in mice and humans results in a higher ratio of IL-10-producing FoxP3+ regulatory T cells and a lower ratio of IFN-γ-producing CD4+ TRM cells in genital tissues [153–155], suggesting a lack of contribution to TRM cell-mediated protection in genital tissues after CT secondary challenge. These data suggest that the quality of MLC formation following CT infection is of a distinct nature from that following attenuated HSV-2 immunization.

TRM cells also accumulated in an antigen-dependent manner in the bladder tissue of mice following E. coli infection [111]. Both CD4+ and CD8+ TRM cells protect against reinfection with E. coli, but the mechanism of TRM cell-mediated inhibition of bacterial growth remains unclear.

Murine skin infection with Candida albicans results in the predominant development of IL-17-producing CD4+ TRM cells that mediate protective immunity [156]. Intravital imaging shows two distinct populations of CD4+ TRM cells with different migratory and functional properties. With respect to extracellular bacteria, CD4+ TRM cells also mediate protection against Streptococcus pneumoniae colonization through the generation of IL-17-producing CD4+ TRM cells [157].

Effector functions of TRM to combat reinfection with parasites

Similar to viral and bacterial infections, protection against parasite reinfection is associated with the functions of both CD4+ and CD8+ TRM cells [158–160]. Although primary infection with parasites, including Plasmodium berghei ANKA, followed by chloroquine treatment generates CD4+ and CD8+ TRM in the brain tissue of mice [161], it remains unclear whether these TRM cells are protective against reinfection. To generate TRM cells as a preventive vaccine strategy, prime and trap DNA vaccination, prime and target vaccination, and mRNA vaccines have been used to successfully generate TRM cells with functional properties in the liver of mice [162–165].

Prime and target vaccinations aims to generate many TRM cells in the liver [162]. Poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid)protein-loaded nanoparticles or viral vectors were administered intravenously. Cluster formation of antigen-specific CD8+ TRM cells with hepatocytes is associated with protective immunity. In general, mRNA vaccination does not establish TRM cells in tissues. However, combining mRNA immunization with αGarCer, an adjuvant, to activate NKT cells generated liver TRM cells [164]. Furthermore, TRM cells confer protection against sporozoite infection in mice. In contrast, lipid nanoparticle (LNP)-based mRNA vaccines trigger TRM cells in the liver, contributing to protection against liver-stage malarial infection [165].

Role of TRM in tumor progression

Tumor development in peripheral tissues is a multistep process in which genetic alterations cause cells to divide, survive, and die in an uncontrolled manner. In contrast to the protective role of TRM cells in infectious diseases, the requirement of TRM cells for antitumor immunity has long been unclear. However, recent studies have demonstrated that TRM cells play an essential role in antitumor immunity in various tumors using animal models [70, 123, 166–168]. In human studies, the abundance of TRM cells in the TME is likely associated with the prognosis and beneficial clinical outcomes in patients with malignancies [169–173].

Diverse heterogeneity of memory T cells, including exhausted T cells (TEX) cells, follicular helper T cells (TFH), Th1 cells, TNFRSF9+ Treg cells, and TRM cells, has been observed in the TME of humans [124, 174]. The heterogeneity of the TEX cells was particularly noteworthy. Based on the results of a comprehensive gene analysis of TEX and TRM cells around the TME, it is highly likely that the suppression of TEX cell differentiation and accumulation of TRM cells play an important role in patient prognosis [124]. TRM cells can prevent tumor develpment by constantly monitoring and eliminating transformed cells. However, once malignancy develops, tumor cells overwhelm the functions of TRM cells and tumor-infiltrating T cells and deprive them of nutrition in the microenvironment, followed by the expansion of TEX cell subsets. Tumor cells remove lipid uptake by CD103+ TRM cells, which require lipid metabolism for survival. Consequently, CD103+ TRM cells disappear around the human TME, whereas the survival of CD103- TRM cells is not affected by tumor growth. Thus, tumor growth deprives CD103+ TRM cells of their lipid metabolism [175].

In addition to cancer immunosurveillance of TRM cells in the TME, TRM cells develop in distant tumor tissues, including LNs, prior to tumor metastasis and can protect against tumor dissemination in mice and humans [176–178]. Although the CXCR6-mediated retention of TRM cells is required for inhibition of tumor progression, how TRM cells block tumor metastasis remains unclear.

TRM cell development is associated with tertiary lymphoid structures (TLSs) generated around the TME, which correlate with a positive prognosis in patients with cancer. In a variety of tumors, including gastric cancer and lung adenocarcinoma, the frequency of TRM cells within TLSs in patients was significantly higher than that of TRM cells outside TLSs and was positively correlated with patient outcomes [173, 179, 180]. In particular, mature TLSs comprise T-cell clusters containing TN, TEM, CXCL13+ TFH, and TRM cells, with DC and CD20+ B-cell follicles organized by CD21+ follicular DCs and germinal center B cells. The ratio of mature TLSs is positively correlated with favorable prognosis in patients with cancer [5, 181–183]. In addition, TRM cells outside the TLSs contribute to the inhibition of tumor progression [180].

Several studies have shown that treatment with an anti-PD-1 antibody increases TRM cells in the TME by inducing proliferation and promoting the expression of fatty acid binding proteins 4 and 5 in TRM cells, leading to an increase in lipid metabolism in TRM cells, and preventing TRM cell dysfunction by tumor growth in mice and humans [170, 175, 184, 185]. An efficient engineering method for inducing TRM cells rather than accumulating TEX cells in the TME, would be a promising new intervention for future cancer immunotherapy.

Pathogenic roles of tissue-resident memory T cells

Although TRM cells are critical for the rapid protection against infectious agents, uncontrolled TRM cells may negatively affect the microenvironment. In addition to infectious diseases, CD4+ and CD8+ TRM cells have been observed in various pathological conditions, including psoriasis, allergic asthma, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and other inflammation-related diseases in mice and humans [186–189].

The condition in which protective TRM cells generate pathogenic TRM cells

Functionally dysregulated TRM cells have been observed in several infectious and non-infectious diseases in both humans and animal models. As shown in various animal models and humans, TRM cells express inhibitory molecules, such as PD-1, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA4), and TIM-3, to varying degrees [68, 130, 190]. Despite expressing inhibitory molecules, TRM cells exert their effector functions following pathogen invasion, suggesting that these TRM cells are not terminally dysfunctional. However, although the levels of cytokine production (IFN-γ and TNF-α) in CD8+ TRM cells in murine lungs increased after PDL1 blockade, the inhibition caused tissue injury and persistent fibrosis [118], suggesting that the inhibitory molecules expressed on TRM cells control pathogenicity. In addition, the factor ‘age’ is involved in the dysfunction of CD8+ TRM cells, contributing to chronic inflammation and fibrosis, regardless of the high expression of PD-1 on CD8+ TRM cells in aged mice [191].

Although the following evidence does not show that protective TRM cells directly transform into pathogenic TRM cells, protective TRM cells trigger the activation of bystander TRM cells, causing tissue damage and inflammation. HBV-specific CD8+ TRM cells in the human liver are critical for controlling chronic HBV infections [192]. However, in the liver microenvironment, along with HBV-specific CD8+ TRM cells, non-specific CD8+ TRM cells cause apoptosis in hepatoma cells in an MHC class I-independent manner [193], suggesting that chronic inflammation induced by the battle between HBV-specific CD8+ TRM cells and HBV-infected cells leads to deleterious tissue damage. Likewise, non-specific CXCR6+CD8+ TRM cells bearing similar functional features in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) mice and patients with NASH kill hepatocytes through P2X7 purinergic receptors, but not through MHC class I recognition [194].

Aspergillus fumigatus colonizes the lungs of patients with chronic respiratory diseases and fibrosis. In these patients, A. fumigatus-specific CD4+ T cells in the lungs showed elevated IL-17A production [195]. Following repeated exposure to A. fumigatus-derived antigens, long-term resident CD4+ T cells trigger massive inflammation and fibrosis by secreting IL-4, IL-5, IL-13, IL-17A, and IFN-γ in animal models [196], suggesting that the chronic persistence of antigens in the lungs causes CD4+ TRM cells to continue to secrete excessive amounts of cytokines. Thus, the inhibitory molecules on CD4+ TRM cells may be dysfunctional or may not be expressed on CD4+ TRM cells. In this case, however, CD103+ regulatory T cells contribute to the suppression of chronic inflammation mediated by CD4+ TRM cells.

Effector functions of TRM cells on the pathology of skin diseases

For the induction of skin diseases, TRM cells are strongly correlated with the outcome of disease progression. Furthermore, the functional features of TRM cells differ from those of individual skin diseases [197]. Psoriasis is a chronic and recurrent autoimmune disorder mediated by IL-17A+IL-22+ TRM cells, which trigger inflammation. Both CD49a+ and CD49a-CD103+CD8+ TRM cells accumulate in psoriatic areas [198, 199], and increases in these TRM cell subsets have also been reported in the liver of patients with autoimmune hepatitis [200]. In particular, CD49a-CD103+CD8+ TRM cells are the major producers of proinflammatory IL-17A. In contrast, CD49a+CD103+CD8+ TRM cells have potent cytotoxic functions in the secretion of Prf1 and GzmB. Similar to CD8+ TRM cells, skin CD4+ TRM cells play a role in the relapse of psoriasis in humans. IL-22, produced by CD4+ TRM cells, affects the survival, proliferation, and differentiation of keratinocytes by producing antimicrobial proteins and chemokines [201].

In vitiligo, the skin microenvironment is completely different from that in psoriasis. Vitiligo is defined as the presence of prominent, irregular white patches on the skin triggered by CD8+ T cells that abnormally target melanocytes for elimination. Melanocytes in patients with vitiligo have a diminished ability to regulate cellular insults, making them more susceptible to external factors such as organic chemicals and UV exposure [202]. Therefore, a variety of immune cells are attracted to and activated by inflammatory cytokines released upon exposure to these stimuli [203]. Furthermore, the production of CXCR3 ligands mediated by IFN-γ secretion is essential for the recruitment of autoreactive CD8+ T cells in vitiligo in animal models and humans and is associated with the development and severity of the diseases [204–206]. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors blocked IFN signaling, resulting in the reversal of the disease state, while treatment with these inhibitors appeared to have no effect on the number of TRM cells [207]. Therefore, future studies must examine in detail the functional differences in TRM cells, including their ability to produce cytokines.

Effector functions of TRM cells on the pathology of respiratory diseases

Exposure to inhaled allergens, including a house dust mites and diesel exhaust particles, generates Th2 memory cells that contribute to airway inflammation. Among Th2 memory cells located in lung tissue, Th2-type TRM cells accumulate in the lung parenchyma for a long period in mice and humans [86, 105, 208]. Th2 TRM cells proliferate near the airways and induce mucus transformation, airway hyperresponsiveness, and the activation of airway eosinophils through the rapid secretion of IL-5 and IL-13. In patients with asthma, the number of CD103+CD4+ TRM cells with cytotoxicity and proinflammatory cytokines increases with disease severity [78].

Effector functions of TRM cells on the pathology of intestinal diseases

IBD is a group of two diseases (including Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis) caused by progressive inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract. The number of CD103+CD4+ and CD103+CD8+ TRM cells is increased in the gut tissues of patients with IBD [84]. In particular, the presence of CD103+CD4+ TRM cells strongly correlates with the clinical relapses of IBD. Furthermore, a unique population of CD161+CD103+CD4+ TRM cells that exert robust effector functions without TCR engagement, has been found in the intestinal tissues of patients with Crohn’s disease [209]. Depletion of TRM cell precursors remarkably suppresses the inflammation caused by dextran sodium sulfate colitis in mice [30].

The mechanism of exhibiting effector functions of TRM cells following reinfection or reactivation

The presence of TRM cells in peripheral tissues has a significant effect on protection against microbial reinfection and the development of autoimmune diseases, tumors, and allergic responses [37, 190]. The rapid response of TRM cells to secondary infections or exposure to the same antigen has a significant impact on human wellness, as they are most effective in eliminating local infections or initiating inflammatory responses. Therefore, elucidating the mechanisms by which TRM cells exert their effector functions and the mechanism by which TRM cells are retained and maintained in tissues is crucial for developing new preventive and therapeutic interventions and therapeutics to control diseases that are detrimental to human health.

Two distinct pathways are needed for TRM cells to exhibit their effector function. One is the pathway through which TRM cells recognize antigens via TCR and then reactivate them. In the other pathway, TRM cells are reactivated by receiving cytokine signals through receptors. Thus, the function of TRM cells is likely to be largely influenced by environmental factors in peripheral tissues. Another important question is why a large number of TRM cells localize to various tissues even though innate immune cells without TCRs also localize to many peripheral tissues that produce the same cytokines and chemokines as TRM cells.

TRM cell reactivation following antigen presentation

Upon microbial infection in tissues, DCs capture antigens and upregulate costimulatory molecules and CCR7 to enter draining LNs (DLNs); in the DLNs, DCs specifically activate naïve T cells and B cells to promote their differentiation into effector cells [210]. In the case of TM cells, the recall response is thought to be mediated by the direct recognition of antigens presented on MHC classes I and II upregulated on infected cells in vitro [211] or by CD4+ T-cell help in vivo [212]. The mechanism by which TM cells are activated by antigens presented on parenchymal cells is supported by the evidence that TM cells are more readily activated than TN cells.

However, CD11c+ DCs were shown to be involved in the efficient reactivation of TEM cells or TRM cells following systemic microbial reinfection with L. monocytogenes, LCMV, and vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) in mice [94, 213]. In contrast, the requirement for CD11c+ DCs in mucosal tissues for the recall response of TRM cells after IAV infection is limited. In this case, both hematopoietic cell-derived APCs, including DCs and macrophages, and non-hematopoietic cells, such as epithelial and endothelial cells, present viral antigens to CD8+ TRM cells in murine lung tissues following IAV reinfection [94], suggesting that CD8+ TRM cells directly recognize almost all cells infected with the IAV. However, the effector mechanisms of CD8+ TRM cells that lead to the elimination of virus-infected cells remain obscure.

Given that the secondary response of TRM cells is initiated by recognition of cognate antigens presented on APCs, antigen-specific TCRs can potentially recognize multiple peptide epitopes [214]. Following infection with the primary pathogen, T cells bearing TCRs are primed against epitopes. Subsequently, some differentiated TM cells can cross-react with peptides presented on APCs after the second microbe [215]. In severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-1 survivors, immunization with the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine augmented SARS-CoV-1-specific T-cell responses, suggesting the possibility of cross-reactivity. In addition to SARS-CoV-1 infection, other cases of human coronavirus infection, the virus that causes colds, especially in children during the winter season, could generate human coronavirus-specific TRM cells in the lung tissue. Indeed, in SARS-CoV-2-naïve individuals, TRM cells reactive to SARS-CoV-2 antigens were abundant in the lungs [216], suggesting that cross-reactive TRM cells protect against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Using the mouse model of an inducible antigen expression on keratinocytes instead of infection, skin Langerhans cells can capture the keratinocyte-derived inducible antigens and present them to CD103+CD8+ TRM cells in the epidermis [217]. Thereafter, CD103+CD8+ TRM cells robustly produce IFN-γ to recruit leukocytes, including inflammatory monocytes and neutrophils, to the dermal tissues. These findings suggest that the dysfunction and functional modification of APCs associated with microbial infection or the tumor microenvironment, rather than simple antigen expression in tissues, largely affect the ability of TRM cells to exert effector functions.

Comparing the functions of cytotoxic activity and cytokine secretion, cytotoxic activity requires cell-to-cell interaction in a confined space [218], whereas the function of cytokine secretion is that cytokines are initially secreted by cell-to-cell interactions, but the spreading effect of cytokine secretion can widely affect the surrounding environment. For instance, IFN-γ secreted by TE cells contributes to the protection against intracellular pathogens. Following TCR engagement, IFN-γ secreted from TM cells acts on the infected cells. Furthermore, IFN-γ spreads from the interaction site with APCs or infected cells and reaches concentrations sufficient to activate IFN-γ signaling pathways in distant cells [219].

Considering the effector functions of TRM cells, at the site of infection, such as skin and mucosal tissues, both infected cells and/or APCs present antigens to TRM cells. Later, in addition to its cytotoxic activity, the rapid secretion of IFN-γ acts immediately on infected cells and diffuses from the site of infected cells and/or antigen-presenting APCs to distant infected cells to prevent dissemination to other tissues. This action of cytokines produces a wide variety of effects on non-infected cells, including the activation of innate immune cells and endothelial cells. Injection of cognate antigens into mucosal tissues in mice or mucosal viral infection activates TRM cells to rapidly produce IFN-γ. This IFN-γ secretion leads to increased production of CXCR3 ligands and upregulation of vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 from CD31+ endothelial cells [96, 97]. Subsequently, a wide variety of immune cells, including TM cells, B cells, NK cells, and APCs, infiltrate the tissues of mice [92, 93, 96]. In addition, administrating cognate antigens or recombinant IFN-γ to mucosal tissues also attracts the entry of antibodies from the circulation [95, 220].

Regarding the fate of reactivated TRM cells, the majority of CD103+CD8+ TRM cells proliferate massively and remain at the site of reactivation upon skin HSV infection [221], whereas the cytokine-producing capacity of CD103+CD8+ TRM cells is largely inhibited by TGF-β signaling in mice [52]. In contrast, reactivated CD103+CD8+ TRM cells also proliferate following LCMV challenge, but eventually leave the site of reactivation [222, 223]. On the other hand, CD103+CD8+ TRM cells show the retention and limited expansion following the rechallenge with VSV or mucosal Yersinia pseudotuberculosis infection in mice [224, 225]. Instead, CD103-CD8+ TRM cells trigger massive proliferation after Yersinia reinfection and have a higher cytokine-producing capacity than CD103+CD8+ TRM cells [224]. Based on the fate mapping studies, CD103-CD8+ TRM cells are not derived from CD103+CD8+ TRM cells, suggesting that CD103+CD8+ TRM cells are not the memory pool for CD103-CD8+ TRM cells.

The types of effector functions that TRM cells can perform are determined by the nature of the invading pathogen and the characteristics of the tissue APCs. If reactivated TRM cells are retained in tissues, future studies are awaited to determine how TRM cells suppress effector functions after performing effector functions to eliminate pathogens in tissues, and under what conditions, such as infection, they can exhibit effector functions. In addition, the protective function of CD103+ TRM cells in the epithelium against infection, tumor development, and autoimmune diseases, other than the functional capacity they exert, such as cytokine secretion, compared with the role of CD103- TRM cells in the lamina propria against microbial infection [225], is a subject for future research.

TRM cell reactivation independent of antigen presentation

In numerous experimental settings of microbial infection, TRM cells at the site of infection are undoubtedly necessary for rapid and complete protection against reinfection compared with circulating TM cells [29, 91, 108, 139, 143, 155]. For TRM cells to perform their effector function after microbial rechallenge, they must be activated by antigen-specific TCRs to eliminate invading pathogens. TRM cells also contribute to the prevention of invasion by unrelated microorganisms; however, TRM cell activation via recognition of cognate antigens prior to infection is essential [226].

In addition to TCR-mediated activation of TRM cells, TCR-independent activation of TRM cells has also been demonstrated in some situations in mice and humans. Both CD103+ and CD103-CD8+ TRM cells in the lung tissue produce IFN-γ following the inhalation of unrelated bacterial antigens (in vivo and in vitro) or the addition of recombinant IL-12 and IL-18 (in vitro) [227]. Furthermore, CD8+ TRM cells contribute to the inhibition of the bacterial load in lung tissue in a TCR-independent manner [227], whereas the relative contribution of the effector function of TCR-unrelated CD8+ TRM cells compared with that of antigen-specific CD8+ TRM cells remains unclear. Similar to CD8+ TRM cells in the lung tissue, helminth-specific CD4+ TRM cells in the peritoneal cavity, but not in the small intestine of mice, can produce IL-5 and IL-13 upon treatment with IL-33 and IL-7 in a TCR-independent manner [159]. In this case, adoptively transferred CD4+ TRM cells from the peritoneal cavity reduced helminth fecundity; however, the involvement of the TCR-independent function of CD4+ TRM cells remains obscure.

In addition to the protective function of TRM cells against infectious agents, TRM cells in peripheral tissues exert effector functions in a TCR-independent manner under pathological conditions. In human skin, CD49a+CD103+CD8+ TRM cells have higher cytotoxic activity by secreting Prf1 and GzmB without TCR engagement following treatment with IL-2 or IL-15 than CD49a-CD103+CD8+ TRM cells [199]. Furthermore, TCR-mediated stimulation has an additive effect on the cytotoxic function of TRM cells after IL-15 treatment, suggesting that both TCR-mediated and TCR-independent stimulation of TRM cells exacerbate the pathogenesis of skin diseases.

The frequency of CD49a+CD103+CD8+ TRM cells secreting Prf1 and GzmB was increased in the vitiligo lesions of patients, suggesting that the production of IL-2 or IL-15 is enriched in the environment of vitiligo areas. In contrast, the cytotoxicity of CD49a+CD103+CD8+ TRM cells was relatively inferior to that of CD49a-CD103+CD8+ TRM cells in the skin tissues of patients with psoriasis. In terms of cytokine production, both CD49a+ and CD49a-CD103+CD8+ TRM cells produced high levels of IFN-γ but not IL-17A in vitiligo patients, whereas CD49a+ and CD49a-CD103+CD8+ TRM cells produced high levels of IFN-γ and IL-17A, respectively, in patients with psoriasis [199, 201]. The secretion of IFN-γ and IL-17A by CD103+CD8+ TRM cells requires TCR engagement.

JAK inhibitors have been shown to restore vitiligo in mice without affecting the number of TRM cells [207]. This finding suggests that cytokine-activated TRM cells cause the pathogenesis of vitiligo; as in patients with alopecia areata, overproduction of IL-2 or IL-15 by non-TRM cells somehow activates NKG2D expression on CD103+CD8+ TRM-like cells to secrete Prf1 and GzmB in a TCR-independent manner [228]. Subsequently, the activated antigen-specific CD103+CD8+ TRM cells destroy melanocytes via TCR-dependent cytotoxic activity (Fig. 2).

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Potential mechanism of exerting effector functions mediated by TRM and TVM cells under pathological conditions. Design with BioRender (https://www.biorender.com).

In the intestinal tissues of patients with IBD, CD4+ TRM cells drive the clinical relapses of IBD, including Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis [30]. In particular, CD161+CD103+CD4+ TRM cells secrete IFN-γ in a TCR-independent manner following treatment with IL-7, IL-15, IL-12, and IL-18 [209]. IFN-γ produced by activated CD4+ TRM cells plays a pivotal role in the induction of epithelial cell death in humans. In addition to CD161+CD103+CD4+ TRM cells, CD127+ ILC1 cells are observed to accumulate in the damaged intestinal tissue of patients with Crohn’s disease. Non-cytolytic CD127+ ILC1 cells can produce IFN-γ following treatment with IL-12 and IL-18 [229], whereas NK cells fail to exert effector functions, including IFN-γ secretion and cytotoxic activity, in patients with Crohn’s disease [230]. Therefore, the TCR-independent mechanism of IFN-γ-mediated cytotoxicity by TRM cells and ILC1 cells contributes to the pathogenesis of IBD, whereas the division of roles in pathogenesis by these cells and the involvement of TCR-dependent cytotoxic granules by TRM cells remain unclear.

Regarding the effector functions of antigen-specific TM cells against unrelated antigens, the existence of memory phenotype T cells independent of previous pathogen exposure, “virtual memory T cells; TVM”, is emerging in mice and humans [231, 232, 233]. TN cells are likely to develop into CD44hiCD62L+ TVM cells in line with the expression of CD5 in mice [234]. Furthermore, IL-15 is required to develop and protect TVM cells against the infections caused by unrelated pathogens. In humans, CD45RA+Eomes+KIR+NKG2A+ T cells produce IFN-γ in response to IL-12 and IL-18 [234]. Furthermore, a similar subset of TVM cells has been detected in the skin of patients with alopecia areata [228].

In contrast to TN cells, TVM cells are a heterogeneous population that express CXCR3, CXCR5, CCR5, and CCR2. Within the TVM cell population, both CCR2+ TVM and CCR2- TVM cells infiltrate the lung tissue of mice within one day of IAV infection [235]. Moreover, CCR2+ TVM cells show superior protection against unrelated bacterial infections compared with CCR2- TVM cells and TN cells, but the mechanism by which CCR2+ TVM cells act directly or helps other types of immune cells remains unclear (Fig. 1). In contrast to the effector function of CCR2+ TVM cells in the early phase of infection, CCR2- TVM cells have a higher capacity to differentiate into CD103+ CD69+ TRM cells in the lung tissue than TN cells. The mechanism by which CCR2- TVM-derived TRM cells exert their effector function against infection, the tumor microenvironment, and inflammatory conditions remains unclear (Fig. 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Potential mechanism of exerting effector functions mediated by TRM and TVM cells under pathogen reinfection. Design with BioRender (https://www.biorender.com).

Conclusion

In healthy individuals, TRM cells that develop in peripheral tissues are an important subset responsible for immune surveillance by recognizing cognate antigens presented to MHC molecules without error in the peripheral tissues, which is the first line of defense. This sophisticated regulation of the antigen recognition mechanism is probably why immunosuppression and excessive inflammation do not occur. However, when excessive inflammation or chronic diseases caused by pathogens, autoimmune responses, or allergic reactions develop in peripheral tissues, the widespread release of various inflammatory molecules and cytokines into the tissue microenvironment is likely to significantly affect TRM cell function by receiving their signals.

As representative examples of TCR-independent reactivation of T cells, CD49a+CD8+ TRM cells in the skin tissue of patients with vitiligo, CD161+CD103+CD4+ TRM cells in the intestinal tissue of patients with Crohn’s disease, and KIR+NKG2A+NKG2D+CD8+ TVM cells in patients with alopecia areata can exert cytotoxic functions, including the secretion of Prf1 and Gzms, and the production of IFN-γ [199, 209, 228]. Subsequent antigen-specific reactivation of TRM cells may amplify secondary immune responses. These pathogenic T cells mimic NK-like behavior. However, dysregulated T cells appear to target non-specific cells expressing activating ligands such as NKG2D and NKG2A and cytokine receptors such as TNFR and IFN-γR regardless of MHC class I expression, distinct from NK cells, which target only cells expressing activating ligands with MHC class I downregulation (Fig. 2). Similar pathological conditions have been observed in the gut tissues of patients with celiac disease. Activation status of gluten-specific CD4+ T cells in the lamina propria and cytolytic CD8+ intestinal intraepithelial lymphocytes (IELs) are associated with the pathogenesis of this disease. Although the tissue residency of these pathogenic T cells remains obscure, CD8+ IELs exert cytolytic functions similar to those of NK cells in a TCR-independent manner in humans [236, 237].

The homeostatic microenvironment of peripheral tissues should be maintained for TRM cells to function properly. Once the homeostasis of the microenvironment is disrupted, not only are antigen non-specific T cells such as TVM cells activated, but TRM cells are also activated in a non-specific manner. Additionally, if TRM cells respond to cognate antigens, the disease status may be further exacerbated (Fig. 2).

Contrary to the role of TRM cells in pathological conditions, TRM cells are a pivotal element of the immune defense of peripheral tissues against invading pathogens [37, 238, 239]. In addition, considering the functional properties of TVM cells following immunization to target the infiltration of TRM cells, the accumulation of TVM cells may help combat the spread of microbes (Fig.1). In the case of MLC formed in the genital tissues of mice following attenuated HSV-2 immunization, approximately 30% of TRM cells express TCRVβ1, which can produce IFN-γ in an antigen-specific manner [91], whereas the phenotype of the remaining TRM cells is largely unknown. Similarly, MLC-like formation has also been detected in the intestinal tissue of mice following Y. pseudotuberculosis infection [122]. Therefore, MLCs that develop in the genital or intestinal mucosa may also harbor tissue-resident TVM cells [225].

In contrast, the activation of tissue-resident TVM cells may create a pro-inflammatory state in the tissue microenvironment following pathogen invasion (Fig. 2). Subsequently, these TVM cell subsets may terminate the silent status of autoantigen-specific T cells and induce their activation, thereby allowing these T cells to cause tissue damage. The activation of tissue-resident TVM cells could explain one of the mechanisms by which microbial infections influences the development of autoimmune diseases.

Acknowledgements

I apologize to the many scientists whose work I was not able to mention due to space limitations. I also thank Elsevier Language Editing Services for editing of this manuscript.

Data availability

There is no data associated with this review.

Authors’ contributions

Norifumi Iijima (Conceptualization [lead], Funding acquisition [lead], Project administration [lead], Software [lead], Supervision [lead], Visualization [lead], Writing—original draft [lead], Writing—review & editing [lead])

Funding

This work is supported by the Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) (JP19fm0208011), Grant-in-Aid for Research Activity Start-up (16H07504), Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) (18H02857), Grant-in-Aid for Challenging Research (Exploratory)(19K22645) & (Pioneering)(21K18275), the Uehara Memorial Foundation, the Takeda Science Foundation, and the Mochida Memorial Foundation for Medical and Pharmaceutical Research.

Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  • 1. Cruz de Casas P, Knopper K, Dey Sarkar R. et al. Same yet different—how lymph node heterogeneity affects immune responses. Nat Rev Immunol 2023;24:358–74. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Zheng D, Bhuvan T, Payne NL. et al. Secondary lymphoid organs in mesenchymal stromal cell therapy: more than just a filter. Front Immunol 2022;13:892443. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Alexandre YO, Mueller SN.. Splenic stromal niches in homeostasis and immunity. Nat Rev Immunol 2023;23:705–19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Moyron-Quiroz JE, Rangel-Moreno J, Kusser K. et al. Role of inducible bronchus associated lymphoid tissue (iBALT) in respiratory immunity. Nat Med 2004;10:927–34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Sautes-Fridman C, Petitprez F, Calderaro J. et al. Tertiary lymphoid structures in the era of cancer immunotherapy. Nat Rev Cancer 2019;19:307–25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Trepel F. Number and distribution of lymphocytes in man: A critical analysis. Klin Wochenschr 1974;52:511–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Ganusov VV, De Boer RJ.. Do most lymphocytes in humans really reside in the gut? Trends Immunol 2007;28:514–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Clark RA, Chong B, Mirchandani N. et al. The vast majority of CLA+ T cells are resident in normal skin. J Immunol 2006;176:4431–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Purwar R, Campbell J, Murphy G. et al. Resident memory T cells (T(RM)) are abundant in human lung: diversity, function, and antigen specificity. PLoS One 2011;6:e16245. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Clark RA, Chong BF, Mirchandani N. et al. A novel method for the isolation of skin resident T cells from normal and diseased human skin. J Invest Dermatol 2006;126:1059–70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Kumar BV, Ma W, Miron M. et al. Human tissue-resident memory T cells are defined by core transcriptional and functional signatures in lymphoid and mucosal sites. Cell Rep 2017;20:2921–34. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Sathaliyawala T, Kubota M, Yudanin N. et al. Distribution and compartmentalization of human circulating and tissue-resident memory T cell subsets. Immunity 2013;38:187–97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Poon MML, Caron DP, Wang Z. et al. Tissue adaptation and clonal segregation of human memory T cells in barrier sites. Nat Immunol 2023;24:309–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Michie CA, McLean A, Alcock C. et al. Lifespan of human lymphocyte subsets defined by CD45 isoforms. Nature 1992;360:264–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Early E, Reen DJ.. Rapid conversion of naive to effector T cell function counteracts diminished primary human newborn T cell responses. Clin Exp Immunol 1999;116:527–33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Sallusto F, Lenig D, Forster R. et al. Two subsets of memory T lymphocytes with distinct homing potentials and effector functions. Nature 1999;401:708–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Kaech SM, Wherry EJ, Ahmed R.. Effector and memory T-cell differentiation: implications for vaccine development. Nat Rev Immunol 2002;2:251–62. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Zwijnenburg AJ, Pokharel J, Varnaitė R. et al. Graded expression of the chemokine receptor CX3CR1 marks differentiation states of human and murine T cells and enables cross-species interpretation. Immunity 2023;56:1955–74 e10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Gerlach C, Moseman EA, Loughhead SM. et al. The chemokine receptor CX3CR1 defines three antigen-experienced CD8 T cell subsets with distinct roles in immune surveillance and homeostasis. Immunity 2016;45:1270–84. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Belz GT, Kallies A.. Effector and memory CD8+ T cell differentiation: toward a molecular understanding of fate determination. Curr Opin Immunol 2010;22:279–85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Chang JT, Wherry EJ, Goldrath AW.. Molecular regulation of effector and memory T cell differentiation. Nat Immunol 2014;15:1104–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Kaech SM, Cui W.. Transcriptional control of effector and memory CD8+ T cell differentiation. Nat Rev Immunol 2012;12:749–61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Iijima N, Linehan MM, Saeland S. et al. Vaginal epithelial dendritic cells renew from bone marrow precursors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007;104:19061–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Ishikawa H, Li Y, Abeliovich A. et al. Cytotoxic and interferon gamma-producing activities of gamma delta T cells in the mouse intestinal epithelium are strain dependent. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1993;90:8204–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Borkowski TA, Letterio JJ, Mackall CL. et al. A role for TGFbeta1 in langerhans cell biology. Further characterization of the epidermal Langerhans cell defect in TGFbeta1 null mice. J Clin Invest 1997;100:575–81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Masopust D, Vezys V, Marzo AL. et al. Preferential localization of effector memory cells in nonlymphoid tissue. Science 2001;291:2413–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Hogan RJ, Zhong W, Usherwood EJ. et al. Protection from respiratory virus infections can be mediated by antigen-specific CD4(+) T cells that persist in the lungs. J Exp Med 2001;193:981–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Klonowski KD, Williams KJ, Marzo AL. et al. Dynamics of blood-borne CD8 memory T cell migration in vivo. Immunity 2004;20:551–62. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Gebhardt T, Wakim LM, Eidsmo L. et al. Memory T cells in nonlymphoid tissue that provide enhanced local immunity during infection with herpes simplex virus. Nat Immunol 2009;10:524–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Parga-Vidal L, Taggenbrock R, Beumer-Chuwonpad A. et al. Hobit and Blimp-1 regulate T(RM) abundance after LCMV infection by suppressing tissue exit pathways of T(RM) precursors. Eur J Immunol 2022;52:1095–111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Parga-Vidal L, Behr FM, Kragten NAM. et al. Hobit identifies tissue-resident memory T cell precursors that are regulated by Eomes. Sci Immunol 2021;6:eabg3533. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Mackay LK, Rahimpour A, Ma JZ. et al. The developmental pathway for CD103(+)CD8+ tissue-resident memory T cells of skin. Nat Immunol 2013;14:1294–301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Matos TR, Gehad A, Teague JE. et al. Central memory T cells are the most effective precursors of resident memory T cells in human skin. Sci Immunol 2022;7:eabn1889. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Skon CN, Lee JY, Anderson KG. et al. Transcriptional downregulation of S1pr1 is required for the establishment of resident memory CD8+ T cells. Nat Immunol 2013;14:1285–93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Bromley SK, Thomas SY, Luster AD.. Chemokine receptor CCR7 guides T cell exit from peripheral tissues and entry into afferent lymphatics. Nat Immunol 2005;6:895–901. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Debes GF, Arnold CN, Young AJ. et al. Chemokine receptor CCR7 required for T lymphocyte exit from peripheral tissues. Nat Immunol 2005;6:889–94. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Rotrosen E, Kupper TS.. Assessing the generation of tissue resident memory T cells by vaccines. Nat Rev Immunol 2023;23:655–65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Yang K, Kallies A.. Tissue-specific differentiation of CD8(+) resident memory T cells. Trends Immunol 2021;42:876–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. de Saint Basile G, Menasche G, Fischer A.. Molecular mechanisms of biogenesis and exocytosis of cytotoxic granules. Nat Rev Immunol 2010;10:568–79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Lettau M, Janssen O.. Intra- and extracellular effector vesicles from human T and NK cells: same-same, but different? Front Immunol 2021;12:804895. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Balint S, Muller S, Fischer R. et al. Supramolecular attack particles are autonomous killing entities released from cytotoxic T cells. Science 2020;368:897–901. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Cassioli C, Baldari CT.. The expanding arsenal of cytotoxic T cells. Front Immunol 2022;13:883010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. O'Neill K, Pastar I, Tomic-Canic M. et al. Perforins expression by cutaneous gamma delta T cells. Front Immunol 2020;11:1839. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Lopez JA, Jenkins MR, Rudd-Schmidt JA. et al. Rapid and unidirectional perforin pore delivery at the cytotoxic immune synapse. J Immunol 2013;191:2328–34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Vivier E, Artis D, Colonna M. et al. Innate lymphoid cells: 10 years on. Cell 2018;174:1054–66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Krabbendam L, Heesters BA, Kradolfer CMA. et al. Identification of human cytotoxic ILC3s. Eur J Immunol 2021;51:811–23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Krabbendam L, Heesters BA, Kradolfer CMA. et al. CD127+ CD94+ innate lymphoid cells expressing granulysin and perforin are expanded in patients with Crohn's disease. Nat Commun 2021;12:5841. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Schuster IS, Andoniou CE, Degli-Esposti MA.. Tissue-resident memory NK cells: Homing in on local effectors and regulators. Immunol Rev 2024;323:54–60. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Zakeri N, Hall A, Swadling L. et al. Characterisation and induction of tissue-resident gamma delta T-cells to target hepatocellular carcinoma. Nat Commun 2022;13:1372. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Gasteiger G, Fan X, Dikiy S. et al. Tissue residency of innate lymphoid cells in lymphoid and nonlymphoid organs. Science 2015;350:981–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Mintern JD, Guillonneau C, Carbone FR. et al. Cutting edge: Tissue-resident memory CTL down-regulate cytolytic molecule expression following virus clearance. J Immunol 2007;179:7220–4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Christo SN, Evrard M, Park SL. et al. Discrete tissue microenvironments instruct diversity in resident memory T cell function and plasticity. Nat Immunol 2021;22:1140–51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Steinbach K, Vincenti I, Kreutzfeldt M. et al. Brain-resident memory T cells represent an autonomous cytotoxic barrier to viral infection. J Exp Med 2016;213:1571–87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Kragten NAM, Behr FM, Vieira Braga FA. et al. Blimp-1 induces and Hobit maintains the cytotoxic mediator granzyme B in CD8 T cells. Eur J Immunol 2018;48:1644–62. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Peng T, Phasouk K, Bossard E. et al. Distinct populations of antigen-specific tissue-resident CD8+ T cells in human cervix mucosa. JCI Insight 2021;6:e149950 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Beura LK, Fares-Frederickson NJ, Steinert EM. et al. CD4(+) resident memory T cells dominate immunosurveillance and orchestrate local recall responses. J Exp Med 2019;216:1214–29. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Lujan RA, Pei L, Shannon JP. et al. Widespread and dynamic expression of granzyme C by skin-resident antiviral T cells. Front Immunol 2023;14:1236595. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Waggoner SN, Cornberg M, Selin LK. et al. Natural killer cells act as rheostats modulating antiviral T cells. Nature 2011;481:394–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Lang PA, Lang KS, Xu HC. et al. Natural killer cell activation enhances immune pathology and promotes chronic infection by limiting CD8+ T-cell immunity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012;109:1210–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Diniz MO, Schurich A, Chinnakannan SK. et al. NK cells limit therapeutic vaccine-induced CD8(+)T cell immunity in a PD-L1-dependent manner. Sci Transl Med 2022;14:eabi4670. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Deguine J, Breart B, Lemaitre F. et al. Intravital imaging reveals distinct dynamics for natural killer and CD8(+) T cells during tumor regression. Immunity 2010;33:632–44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Weigelin B, Friedl P.. T cell-mediated additive cytotoxicity—death by multiple bullets. Trends Cancer 2022;8:980–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Wolint P, Betts MR, Koup RA. et al. Immediate cytotoxicity but not degranulation distinguishes effector and memory subsets of CD8+ T cells. J Exp Med 2004;199:925–36. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Hamann D, Baars PA, Rep MH. et al. Phenotypic and functional separation of memory and effector human CD8+ T cells. J Exp Med 1997;186:1407–18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Hombrink P, Helbig C, Backer RA. et al. Programs for the persistence, vigilance and control of human CD8(+) lung-resident memory T cells. Nat Immunol 2016;17:1467–78. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Behr FM, Kragten NAM, Wesselink TH. et al. Blimp-1 Rather Than Hobit Drives the Formation of Tissue-Resident Memory CD8(+) T Cells in the Lungs. Front Immunol 2019;10:400. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Mackay LK, Minnich M, Kragten NA. et al. Hobit and Blimp1 instruct a universal transcriptional program of tissue residency in lymphocytes. Science 2016;352:459–63. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Smolders J, Heutinck KM, Fransen NL. et al. Tissue-resident memory T cells populate the human brain. Nat Commun 2018;9:4593. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Oja AE, Piet B, Helbig C. et al. Trigger-happy resident memory CD4(+) T cells inhabit the human lungs. Mucosal Immunol 2018;11:654–67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Milner JJ, Toma C, Yu B. et al. Runx3 programs CD8(+) T cell residency in non-lymphoid tissues and tumours. Nature 2017;552:253–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Fonseca R, Burn TN, Gandolfo LC. et al. Runx3 drives a CD8(+) T cell tissue residency program that is absent in CD4(+) T cells. Nat Immunol 2022;23:1236–45. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Strobl J, Pandey RV, Krausgruber T. et al. Long-term skin-resident memory T cells proliferate in situ and are involved in human graft-versus-host disease. Sci Transl Med 2020;12:eabb7028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Zitti B, Hoffer E, Zheng W. et al. Human skin-resident CD8(+) T cells require RUNX2 and RUNX3 for induction of cytotoxicity and expression of the integrin CD49a. Immunity 2023;56:1285–302 e7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Dean JW, Helm EY, Fu Z. et al. The aryl hydrocarbon receptor cell intrinsically promotes resident memory CD8(+) T cell differentiation and function. Cell Rep 2023;42:111963. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Li C, Zhu B, Son YM. et al. The transcription factor Bhlhe40 programs mitochondrial regulation of resident CD8(+) T cell fitness and functionality. Immunity 2019;51:491–507e7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76. Helm EY, Zelenka T, Cismasiu VB. et al. Bcl11b sustains multipotency and restricts effector programs of intestinal-resident memory CD8(+) T cells. Sci Immunol 2023;8:eabn0484. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Heim L, Friedrich J, Engelhardt M. et al. NFATc1 promotes antitumoral effector functions and memory CD8(+) T-cell differentiation during non-small cell lung cancer development. Cancer Res 2018;78:3619–33. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Herrera-De La Mata S, Ramirez-Suastegui C, Mistry H. et al. Cytotoxic CD4(+) tissue-resident memory T cells are associated with asthma severity. Medicine 2023;4:875–97.e8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Aschenbrenner D, Foglierini M, Jarrossay D. et al. An immunoregulatory and tissue-residency program modulated by c-MAF in human T(H)17 cells. Nat Immunol 2018;19:1126–36. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Milner JJ, Toma C, He Z. et al. Heterogenous populations of tissue-resident CD8(+) T cells are generated in response to infection and malignancy. Immunity 2020;52:808–24e7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Du N, Kwon H, Li P. et al. EGR2 is critical for peripheral naive T-cell differentiation and the T-cell response to influenza. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014;111:16484–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Mackay LK, Wynne-Jones E, Freestone D. et al. T-box transcription factors combine with the cytokines TGF-beta and IL-15 to control tissue-resident memory T cell fate. Immunity 2015;43:1101–11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83. Park SL, Christo SN, Wells AC. et al. Divergent molecular networks program functionally distinct CD8(+) skin-resident memory T cells. Science 2023;382:1073–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84. Zundler S, Becker E, Spocinska M. et al. Hobit- and Blimp-1-driven CD4(+) tissue-resident memory T cells control chronic intestinal inflammation. Nat Immunol 2019;20:288–300. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85. Laidlaw BJ, Zhang N, Marshall HD. et al. CD4+ T cell help guides formation of CD103+ lung-resident memory CD8+ T cells during influenza viral infection. Immunity 2014;41:633–45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86. Rahimi RA, Nepal K, Cetinbas M. et al. Distinct functions of tissue-resident and circulating memory Th2 cells in allergic airway disease. J Exp Med 2020;217:e20190865. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87. Swarnalekha N, Schreiner D, Litzler LC. et al. T resident helper cells promote humoral responses in the lung. Sci Immunol 2021;6:eabb6808 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88. Son YM, Cheon IS, Wu Y. et al. Tissue-resident CD4(+) T helper cells assist the development of protective respiratory B and CD8(+) T cell memory responses. Sci Immunol 2021;6:eabb6852. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89. Klein-Hessling S, Muhammad K, Klein M. et al. NFATc1 controls the cytotoxicity of CD8(+) T cells. Nat Commun 2017;8:511. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90. Oja AE, Vieira Braga FA, Remmerswaal EB. et al. The transcription factor Hobit identifies human cytotoxic CD4(+) T cells. Front Immunol 2017;8:325. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91. Iijima N, Iwasaki A.. T cell memory. A local macrophage chemokine network sustains protective tissue-resident memory CD4 T cells. Science 2014;346:93–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92. Shin H, Iwasaki A.. A vaccine strategy that protects against genital herpes by establishing local memory T cells. Nature 2012;491:463–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93. Oh JE, Iijima N, Song E. et al. Migrant memory B cells secrete luminal antibody in the vagina. Nature 2019;571:122–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94. Low JS, Farsakoglu Y, Amezcua Vesely MC. et al. Tissue-resident memory T cell reactivation by diverse antigen-presenting cells imparts distinct functional responses. J Exp Med 2020;217:e20192291 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95. Rosato PC, Lotfi-Emran S, Joag V. et al. Tissue-resident memory T cells trigger rapid exudation and local antibody accumulation. Mucosal Immunol 2023;16:17–26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96. Schenkel JM, Fraser KA, Beura LK. et al. T cell memory. Resident memory CD8 T cells trigger protective innate and adaptive immune responses. Science 2014;346:98–101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97. Schenkel JM, Fraser KA, Vezys V. et al. Sensing and alarm function of resident memory CD8(+) T cells. Nat Immunol 2013;14:509–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98. Menares E, Galvez-Cancino F, Caceres-Morgado P. et al. Tissue-resident memory CD8(+) T cells amplify anti-tumor immunity by triggering antigen spreading through dendritic cells. Nat Commun 2019;10:4401. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99. Glennie ND, Volk SW, Scott P.. Skin-resident CD4+ T cells protect against Leishmania major by recruiting and activating inflammatory monocytes. PLoS Pathog 2017;13:e1006349. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100. Szabo SJ, Kim ST, Costa GL. et al. A novel transcription factor, T-bet, directs Th1 lineage commitment. Cell 2000;100:655–69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101. Pearce EL, Mullen AC, Martins GA. et al. Control of effector CD8+ T cell function by the transcription factor Eomesodermin. Science 2003;302:1041–3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102. Yu F, Sharma S, Jankovic D. et al. The transcription factor Bhlhe40 is a switch of inflammatory versus antiinflammatory Th1 cell fate determination. J Exp Med 2018;215:1813–21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103. Lin CC, Bradstreet TR, Schwarzkopf EA. et al. IL-1-induced Bhlhe40 identifies pathogenic T helper cells in a model of autoimmune neuroinflammation. J Exp Med 2016;213:251–71. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104. Turner DL, Goldklang M, Cvetkovski F. et al. Biased generation and in situ activation of lung tissue-resident memory CD4 T cells in the pathogenesis of allergic asthma. J Immunol 2018;200:1561–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105. Hondowicz BD, An D, Schenkel JM. et al. Interleukin-2-dependent allergen-specific tissue-resident memory cells drive asthma. Immunity 2016;44:155–66. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106. Endo Y, Hirahara K, Iinuma T. et al. The interleukin-33-p38 kinase axis confers memory T helper 2 cell pathogenicity in the airway. Immunity 2015;42:294–308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107. Thom JT, Weber TC, Walton SM. et al. The salivary gland acts as a sink for tissue-resident memory CD8(+) T cells, facilitating protection from local cytomegalovirus infection. Cell Rep 2015;13:1125–36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108. Mackay LK, Stock AT, Ma JZ. et al. Long-lived epithelial immunity by tissue-resident memory T (TRM) cells in the absence of persisting local antigen presentation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012;109:7037–42. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109. Wijeyesinghe S, Beura LK, Pierson MJ. et al. Expansible residence decentralizes immune homeostasis. Nature 2021;592:457–62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110. Khan TN, Mooster JL, Kilgore AM. et al. Local antigen in nonlymphoid tissue promotes resident memory CD8+ T cell formation during viral infection. J Exp Med 2016;213:951–66. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111. Rousseau M, Lacerda Mariano L, Canton T. et al. Tissue-resident memory T cells mediate mucosal immunity to recurrent urinary tract infection. Sci Immunol 2023;8:eabn4332. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112. Takamura S, Yagi H, Hakata Y. et al. Specific niches for lung-resident memory CD8+ T cells at the site of tissue regeneration enable CD69-independent maintenance. J Exp Med 2016;213:3057–73. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113. Wein AN, McMaster SR, Takamura S. et al. CXCR6 regulates localization of tissue-resident memory CD8 T cells to the airways. J Exp Med 2019;216:2748–62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114. Heim TA, Lin Z, Steele MM. et al. CXCR6 promotes dermal CD8 (+) T cell survival and transition to long-term tissue residence. bioRxiv 2023;02(14):528487. [Google Scholar]
  • 115. Lobby JL, Uddback I, Scharer CD. et al. Persistent antigen harbored by alveolar macrophages enhances the maintenance of lung-resident memory CD8(+) T cells. J Immunol 2022;209:1778–87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116. Ballesteros-Tato A, Leon B, Lee BO. et al. Epitope-specific regulation of memory programming by differential duration of antigen presentation to influenza-specific CD8(+) T cells. Immunity 2014;41:127–40. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117. Kim TS, Hufford MM, Sun J. et al. Antigen persistence and the control of local T cell memory by migrant respiratory dendritic cells after acute virus infection. J Exp Med 2010;207:1161–72. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118. Wang Z, Wang S, Goplen NP. et al. PD-1(hi) CD8(+) resident memory T cells balance immunity and fibrotic sequelae. Sci Immunol 2019;4:eaaw1217 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119. Watanabe R, Gehad A, Yang C. et al. Human skin is protected by four functionally and phenotypically discrete populations of resident and recirculating memory T cells. Sci Transl Med 2015;7:279ra39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120. Klicznik MM, Morawski PA, Hollbacher B. et al. Human CD4(+)CD103(+) cutaneous resident memory T cells are found in the circulation of healthy individuals. Sci Immunol 2019;4:eaav8995. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121. Strobl J, Gail LM, Kleissl L. et al. Human resident memory T cells exit the skin and mediate systemic Th2-driven inflammation. J Exp Med 2021;218:e20210417. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122. Bergsbaken T, Bevan MJ.. Proinflammatory microenvironments within the intestine regulate the differentiation of tissue-resident CD8(+) T cells responding to infection. Nat Immunol 2015;16:406–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123. Gavil NV, Scott MC, Weyu E. et al. Chronic antigen in solid tumors drives a distinct program of T cell residence. Sci Immunol 2023;8:eadd5976. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124. Zheng L, Qin S, Si W. et al. Pan-cancer single-cell landscape of tumor-infiltrating T cells. Science 2021;374:abe6474. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125. de Leur K, Dieterich M, Hesselink DA. et al. Characterization of donor and recipient CD8+ tissue-resident memory T cells in transplant nephrectomies. Sci Rep 2019;9:5984. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126. Snyder ME, Moghbeli K, Bondonese A. et al. Modulation of tissue resident memory T cells by glucocorticoids after acute cellular rejection in lung transplantation. J Exp Med 2022;219:e20212059. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127. de Almeida GP, Lichtner P, Eckstein G. et al. Human skin-resident host T cells can persist long term after allogeneic stem cell transplantation and maintain recirculation potential. Sci Immunol 2022;7:eabe2634. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 128. Snyder ME, Finlayson MO, Connors TJ. et al. Generation and persistence of human tissue-resident memory T cells in lung transplantation. Sci Immunol 2019;4:eaav5581. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129. Abou-Daya KI, Tieu R, Zhao D. et al. Resident memory T cells form during persistent antigen exposure leading to allograft rejection. Sci Immunol 2021;6:eabc8122. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 130. Tieu R, Zeng Q, Zhao D. et al. Tissue-resident memory T cell maintenance during antigen persistence requires both cognate antigen and interleukin-15. Sci Immunol 2023;8:eadd8454. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131. Labani-Motlagh A, Ashja-Mahdavi M, Loskog A.. The tumor microenvironment: a milieu hindering and obstructing antitumor immune responses. Front Immunol 2020;11:940. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132. Cauley LS, Cookenham T, Miller TB. et al. Cutting edge: virus-specific CD4+ memory T cells in nonlymphoid tissues express a highly activated phenotype. J Immunol 2002;169:6655–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 133. Zhu J, Hladik F, Woodward A. et al. Persistence of HIV-1 receptor-positive cells after HSV-2 reactivation is a potential mechanism for increased HIV-1 acquisition. Nat Med 2009;15:886–92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134. Patel A, Zhang Y, Croyle M. et al. Mucosal delivery of adenovirus-based vaccine protects against Ebola virus infection in mice. J Infect Dis 2007;196 (Suppl 2):S413–20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135. Mapletoft JW, Latimer L, Babiuk LA. et al. Intranasal immunization of mice with a bovine respiratory syncytial virus vaccine induces superior immunity and protection compared to those by subcutaneous delivery or combinations of intranasal and subcutaneous prime-boost strategies. Clin Vaccine Immunol 2010;17:23–35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 136. Gallichan WS, Rosenthal KL.. Long-term immunity and protection against herpes simplex virus type 2 in the murine female genital tract after mucosal but not systemic immunization. J Infect Dis 1998;177:1155–61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 137. Vincent AL, Ma W, Lager KM. et al. Efficacy of intranasal administration of a truncated NS1 modified live influenza virus vaccine in swine. Vaccine 2007;25:7999–8009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 138. Liu L, Zhong Q, Tian T. et al. Epidermal injury and infection during poxvirus immunization is crucial for the generation of highly protective T cell-mediated immunity. Nat Med 2010;16:224–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139. Jiang X, Clark RA, Liu L. et al. Skin infection generates non-migratory memory CD8+ T(RM) cells providing global skin immunity. Nature 2012;483:227–31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 140. Hofmann M, Pircher H.. E-cadherin promotes accumulation of a unique memory CD8 T-cell population in murine salivary glands. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011;108:16741–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141. Iijima N, Linehan MM, Zamora M. et al. Dendritic cells and B cells maximize mucosal Th1 memory response to herpes simplex virus. J Exp Med 2008;205:3041–52. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 142. Collins N, Jiang X, Zaid A. et al. Skin CD4(+) memory T cells exhibit combined cluster-mediated retention and equilibration with the circulation. Nat Commun 2016;7:11514. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 143. Teijaro JR, Turner D, Pham Q. et al. Cutting edge: Tissue-retentive lung memory CD4 T cells mediate optimal protection to respiratory virus infection. J Immunol 2011;187:5510–4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 144. Sheridan BS, Pham QM, Lee YT. et al. Oral infection drives a distinct population of intestinal resident memory CD8(+) T cells with enhanced protective function. Immunity 2014;40:747–57. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145. Singh AK, Majumder S, Wang X. et al. Lung resident memory T cells activated by oral vaccination afford comprehensive protection against Pneumonic Yersinia pestis infection. J Immunol 2023;210:259–70. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 146. Sakai S, Kauffman KD, Schenkel JM. et al. Cutting edge: control of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection by a subset of lung parenchyma-homing CD4 T cells. J Immunol 2014;192:2965–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 147. Counoupas C, Ferrell KC, Ashhurst A. et al. Mucosal delivery of a multistage subunit vaccine promotes development of lung-resident memory T cells and affords interleukin-17-dependent protection against pulmonary tuberculosis. NPJ Vaccines 2020;5:105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 148. Florido M, Muflihah H, Lin LCW. et al. Pulmonary immunization with a recombinant influenza A virus vaccine induces lung-resident CD4(+) memory T cells that are associated with protection against tuberculosis. Mucosal Immunol 2018;11:1743–52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 149. Perdomo C, Zedler U, Kuhl AA. et al. Mucosal BCG vaccination induces protective lung-resident memory T cell populations against Tuberculosis. mBio 2016;7:e01686–16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 150. Benoun JM, Peres NG, Wang N. et al. Optimal protection against Salmonella infection requires noncirculating memory. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2018;115:10416–21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 151. Morrison SG, Morrison RP.. In situ analysis of the evolution of the primary immune response in murine Chlamydia trachomatis genital tract infection. Infect Immun 2000;68:2870–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 152. Labuda JC, Pham OH, Depew CE. et al. Circulating immunity protects the female reproductive tract from Chlamydia infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2021;118:e2104407118. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 153. Faal N, Bailey RL, Jeffries D. et al. Conjunctival FOXP3 expression in trachoma: do regulatory T cells have a role in human ocular Chlamydia trachomatis infection? PLoS Med 2006;3:e266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 154. Marks E, Tam MA, Lycke NY.. The female lower genital tract is a privileged compartment with IL-10 producing dendritic cells and poor Th1 immunity following Chlamydia trachomatis infection. PLoS Pathog 2010;6:e1001179. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 155. Stary G, Olive A, Radovic-Moreno AF. et al. VACCINES. A mucosal vaccine against Chlamydia trachomatis generates two waves of protective memory T cells. Science 2015;348:aaa8205. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 156. Park CO, Fu X, Jiang X. et al. Staged development of long-lived T-cell receptor alphabeta T(H)17 resident memory T-cell population to Candida albicans after skin infection. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2018;142:647–62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 157. O'Hara JM, Redhu NS, Cheung E. et al. Generation of protective pneumococcal-specific nasal resident memory CD4(+) T cells via parenteral immunization. Mucosal Immunol 2020;13:172–82. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 158. Fernandez-Ruiz D, Ng WY, Holz LE. et al. Liver-Resident Memory CD8(+) T Cells Form a Front-Line Defense against Malaria Liver-Stage Infection. Immunity 2016;45:889–902. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 159. Steinfelder S, Rausch S, Michael D. et al. Intestinal helminth infection induces highly functional resident memory CD4(+) T cells in mice. Eur J Immunol 2017;47:353–63. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 160. Thawer SG, Horsnell WG, Darby M. et al. Lung-resident CD4(+) T cells are sufficient for IL-4Ralpha-dependent recall immunity to Nippostrongylus brasiliensis infection. Mucosal Immunol 2014;7:239–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 161. Ghazanfari N, Gregory JL, Devi S. et al. CD8(+) and CD4(+) T cells infiltrate into the brain during Plasmodium berghei ANKA infection and form long-term resident memory. J Immunol 2021;207:1578–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 162. Gola A, Silman D, Walters AA. et al. Prime and target immunization protects against liver-stage malaria in mice. Sci Transl Med 2018;10:eaap9128. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 163. Olsen TM, Stone BC, Chuenchob V. et al. Prime-and-Trap malaria vaccination to generate protective CD8(+) liver-resident memory T cells. J Immunol 2018;201:1984–93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 164. Ganley M, Holz LE, Minnell JJ. et al. mRNA vaccine against malaria tailored for liver-resident memory T cells. Nat Immunol 2023;24:1487–98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 165. Nakamae S, Miyagawa S, Ogawa K. et al. Induction of liver-resident memory T cells and protection at liver-stage malaria by mRNA-containing lipid nanoparticles. Front Immunol 2023;14:1116299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 166. Nizard M, Roussel H, Diniz MO. et al. Induction of resident memory T cells enhances the efficacy of cancer vaccine. Nat Commun 2017;8:15221. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 167. Rosato PC, Wijeyesinghe S, Stolley JM. et al. Virus-specific memory T cells populate tumors and can be repurposed for tumor immunotherapy. Nat Commun 2019;10:567. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 168. Park SL, Buzzai A, Rautela J. et al. Tissue-resident memory CD8(+) T cells promote melanoma-immune equilibrium in skin. Nature 2019;565:366–71. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 169. Oja AE, Piet B, van der Zwan D. et al. Functional heterogeneity of CD4(+) tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes with a resident memory phenotype in NSCLC. Front Immunol 2018;9:2654. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 170. Banchereau R, Chitre AS, Scherl A. et al. Intratumoral CD103+ CD8+ T cells predict response to PD-L1 blockade. J Immunother Cancer 2021;9:e002231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 171. Savas P, Virassamy B, Ye C, et al. ; Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab). Single-cell profiling of breast cancer T cells reveals a tissue-resident memory subset associated with improved prognosis. Nat Med 2018;24:986–93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 172. Ida S, Takahashi H, Kawabata-Iwakawa R. et al. Tissue-resident memory T cells correlate with the inflammatory tumor microenvironment and improved prognosis in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol 2021;122:105508. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 173. Zhao H, Wang H, Zhao Y. et al. Tumor-resident T cells, associated with tertiary lymphoid structure maturity, improve survival in patients with stage III lung adenocarcinoma. Front Immunol 2022;13:877689. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 174. Gu-Trantien C, Loi S, Garaud S. et al. CD4(+) follicular helper T cell infiltration predicts breast cancer survival. J Clin Invest 2013;123:2873–92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 175. Lin R, Zhang H, Yuan Y. et al. Fatty acid oxidation controls CD8(+) tissue-resident memory T-cell survival in gastric adenocarcinoma. Cancer Immunol Res 2020;8:479–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 176. Christian LS, Wang L, Lim B. et al. Resident memory T cells in tumor-distant tissues fortify against metastasis formation. Cell Rep 2021;35:109118. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 177. Pizzolla A, Keam SP, Vergara IA. et al. Tissue-resident memory T cells from a metastatic vaginal melanoma patient are tumor-responsive T cells and increase after anti-PD-1 treatment. J Immunother Cancer 2022;10: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 178. Natsuki S, Tanaka H, Nishiyama M. et al. Prognostic relevance of tumor-resident memory T cells in metastatic lymph nodes of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Sci 2023;114:1846–58. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 179. Mori T, Tanaka H, Deguchi S. et al. Clinical efficacy of nivolumab is associated with tertiary lymphoid structures in surgically resected primary tumors of recurrent gastric cancer. PLoS One 2022;17:e0262455. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 180. Mori T, Tanaka H, Suzuki S. et al. Tertiary lymphoid structures show infiltration of effective tumor-resident T cells in gastric cancer. Cancer Sci 2021;112:1746–57. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 181. Rodriguez AB, Engelhard VH.. Insights into tumor-associated tertiary lymphoid structures: novel targets for antitumor immunity and cancer immunotherapy. Cancer Immunol Res 2020;8:1338–45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 182. Munoz-Erazo L, Rhodes JL, Marion VC. et al. Tertiary lymphoid structures in cancer—considerations for patient prognosis. Cell Mol Immunol 2020;17:570–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 183. Cabrita R, Lauss M, Sanna A. et al. Tertiary lymphoid structures improve immunotherapy and survival in melanoma. Nature 2020;577:561–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 184. Blanc C, Hans S, Tran T. et al. Targeting resident memory T cells for cancer immunotherapy. Front Immunol 2018;9:1722. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 185. Xiao Z, Yan R, Liu H. et al. Preventive treatment with PD-1 antibody increases tissue-resident memory T cells infiltration and delays esophageal carcinogenesis. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2023;16:669–79. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 186. Tokura Y, Phadungsaksawasdi P, Kurihara K. et al. Pathophysiology of skin resident memory T cells. Front Immunol 2020;11:618897. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 187. Emmanuel T, Mistegard J, Bregnhoj A. et al. Tissue-resident memory T cells in skin diseases: A systematic review. Int J Mol Sci 2021;22:9004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 188. Lefevre MA, Vocanson M, Nosbaum A.. Role of tissue-resident memory T cells in the pathophysiology of allergic contact dermatitis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2021;21:355–60. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 189. Lyu Y, Zhou Y, Shen J.. An overview of tissue-resident memory T cells in the intestine: From physiological functions to pathological mechanisms. Front Immunol 2022;13:912393. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 190. Yenyuwadee S, Sanchez-Trincado Lopez JL, Shah R. et al. The evolving role of tissue-resident memory T cells in infections and cancer. Sci Adv 2022;8:eabo5871. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 191. Goplen NP, Wu Y, Son YM. et al. Tissue-resident CD8(+) T cells drive age-associated chronic lung sequelae after viral pneumonia. Sci Immunol 2020;5:eabc4557. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 192. Pallett LJ, Davies J, Colbeck EJ. et al. IL-2(high) tissue-resident T cells in the human liver: Sentinels for hepatotropic infection. J Exp Med 2017;214:1567–80. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 193. Luxenburger H, Neumann-Haefelin C.. Liver-resident CD8+ T cells in viral hepatitis: not always good guys. J Clin Invest 2023;133:e165033. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 194. Dudek M, Pfister D, Donakonda S. et al. Auto-aggressive CXCR6(+) CD8 T cells cause liver immune pathology in NASH. Nature 2021;592:444–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 195. Jolink H, de Boer R, Hombrink P. et al. Pulmonary immune responses against Aspergillus fumigatus are characterized by high frequencies of IL-17 producing T-cells. J Infect 2017;74:81–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 196. Ichikawa T, Hirahara K, Kokubo K. et al. CD103(hi) T(reg) cells constrain lung fibrosis induced by CD103(lo) tissue-resident pathogenic CD4 T cells. Nat Immunol 2019;20:1469–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 197. Ryan GE, Harris JE, Richmond JM.. Resident memory T cells in autoimmune skin diseases. Front Immunol 2021;12:652191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 198. Kurihara K, Fujiyama T, Phadungsaksawasdi P. et al. Significance of IL-17A-producing CD8(+)CD103(+) skin resident memory T cells in psoriasis lesion and their possible relationship to clinical course. J Dermatol Sci 2019;95:21–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 199. Cheuk S, Schlums H, Gallais SI. et al. CD49a expression defines tissue-resident CD8(+) T cells poised for cytotoxic function in human skin. Immunity 2017;46:287–300. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 200. You Z, Li Y, Wang Q. et al. The clinical significance of hepatic CD69(+) CD103(+) CD8(+) resident-memory T cells in autoimmune hepatitis. Hepatology 2021;74:847–63. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 201. Cheuk S, Wiken M, Blomqvist L. et al. Epidermal Th22 and Tc17 cells form a localized disease memory in clinically healed psoriasis. J Immunol 2014;192:3111–20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 202. Baldini E, Odorisio T, Sorrenti S. et al. Vitiligo and autoimmune thyroid disorders. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2017;8:290. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 203. Toosi S, Orlow SJ, Manga P.. Vitiligo-inducing phenols activate the unfolded protein response in melanocytes resulting in upregulation of IL6 and IL8. J Invest Dermatol 2012;132:2601–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 204. Boniface K, Jacquemin C, Darrigade AS. et al. Vitiligo skin is imprinted with resident memory CD8 T cells expressing CXCR3. J Invest Dermatol 2018;138:355–64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 205. Rashighi M, Agarwal P, Richmond JM. et al. CXCL10 is critical for the progression and maintenance of depigmentation in a mouse model of vitiligo. Sci Transl Med 2014;6:223ra23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 206. Strassner JP, Rashighi M, Ahmed Refat M. et al. Suction blistering the lesional skin of vitiligo patients reveals useful biomarkers of disease activity. J Am Acad Dermatol 2017;76:847–55 e5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 207. Azzolino V, Zapata L Jr, Garg M. et al. Jak inhibitors reverse vitiligo in mice but do not deplete skin resident memory T cells. J Invest Dermatol 2021;141:182–4 e1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 208. Vieira Braga FA, Kar G, Berg M. et al. A cellular census of human lungs identifies novel cell states in health and in asthma. Nat Med 2019;25:1153–63. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 209. Yokoi T, Murakami M, Kihara T. et al. Identification of a unique subset of tissue-resident memory CD4(+) T cells in Crohn's disease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2023;120:e2204269120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 210. Lopez-Bravo M, Ardavin C.. In vivo induction of immune responses to pathogens by conventional dendritic cells. Immunity 2008;29:343–51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 211. Hershberg RM, Framson PE, Cho DH. et al. Intestinal epithelial cells use two distinct pathways for HLA class II antigen processing. J Clin Invest 1997;100:204–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 212. Janssen EM, Lemmens EE, Wolfe T. et al. CD4+ T cells are required for secondary expansion and memory in CD8+ T lymphocytes. Nature 2003;421:852–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 213. Zammit DJ, Cauley LS, Pham QM. et al. Dendritic cells maximize the memory CD8 T cell response to infection. Immunity 2005;22:561–70. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 214. Zehn D, Lee SY, Bevan MJ.. Complete but curtailed T-cell response to very low-affinity antigen. Nature 2009;458:211–4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 215. Adamo S, Gao Y, Sekine T. et al. Memory profiles distinguish cross-reactive and virus-specific T cell immunity to mpox. Cell Host Microbe 2023;31:928–36 e4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 216. Diniz MO, Mitsi E, Swadling L. et al. Airway-resident T cells from unexposed individuals cross-recognize SARS-CoV-2. Nat Immunol 2022;23:1324–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 217. Kamenjarin N, Hodapp K, Melchior F. et al. Cross-presenting Langerhans cells are required for the early reactivation of resident CD8(+) memory T cells in the epidermis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2023;120:e2219932120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 218. Filali L, Puissegur MP, Cortacero K. et al. Ultrarapid lytic granule release from CTLs activates Ca(2+)-dependent synaptic resistance pathways in melanoma cells. Sci Adv 2022;8:eabk3234. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 219. Muller AJ, Filipe-Santos O, Eberl G. et al. CD4+ T cells rely on a cytokine gradient to control intracellular pathogens beyond sites of antigen presentation. Immunity 2012;37:147–57. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 220. Iijima N, Iwasaki A.. Access of protective antiviral antibody to neuronal tissues requires CD4 T-cell help. Nature 2016;533:552–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 221. Park SL, Zaid A, Hor JL. et al. Local proliferation maintains a stable pool of tissue-resident memory T cells after antiviral recall responses. Nat Immunol 2018;19:183–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 222. Fonseca R, Beura LK, Quarnstrom CF. et al. Developmental plasticity allows outside-in immune responses by resident memory T cells. Nat Immunol 2020;21:412–21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 223. Beura LK, Mitchell JS, Thompson EA. et al. Intravital mucosal imaging of CD8(+) resident memory T cells shows tissue-autonomous recall responses that amplify secondary memory. Nat Immunol 2018;19:173–82. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 224. von Hoesslin M, Kuhlmann M, de Almeida GP. et al. Secondary infections rejuvenate the intestinal CD103(+) tissue-resident memory T cell pool. Sci Immunol 2022;7:eabp9553. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 225. Fung HY, Teryek M, Lemenze AD. et al. CD103 fate mapping reveals that intestinal CD103(-) tissue-resident memory T cells are the primary responders to secondary infection. Sci Immunol 2022;7:eabl9925. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 226. Ariotti S, Hogenbirk MA, Dijkgraaf FE. et al. T cell memory. Skin-resident memory CD8(+) T cells trigger a state of tissue-wide pathogen alert. Science 2014;346:101–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 227. Ge C, Monk IR, Pizzolla A. et al. Bystander activation of pulmonary Trm cells attenuates the severity of bacterial pneumonia by enhancing neutrophil recruitment. Cell Rep 2019;29:4236–44 e3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 228. Seok J, Cho SD, Lee J. et al. A virtual memory CD8(+) T cell-originated subset causes alopecia areata through innate-like cytotoxicity. Nat Immunol 2023;24:1308–17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 229. Bernink JH, Peters CP, Munneke M. et al. Human type 1 innate lymphoid cells accumulate in inflamed mucosal tissues. Nat Immunol 2013;14:221–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 230. Zaiatz Bittencourt V, Jones F, Tosetto M. et al. Dysregulation of metabolic pathways in circulating natural killer cells isolated from inflammatory bowel disease patients. J Crohns Colitis 2021;15:1316–25. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 231. Kedl RM, White JT.. Foreign antigen-independent memory-phenotype CD4(+) T cells: a new player in innate immunity? Nat Rev Immunol 2018;18:1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 232. Kawabe T, Zhu J, Sher A.. Foreign antigen-independent memory-phenotype CD4(+) T cells: a new player in innate immunity? Nat Rev Immunol 2018;18:1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 233. White JT, Cross EW, Kedl RM.. Antigen-inexperienced memory CD8(+) T cells: where they come from and why we need them. Nat Rev Immunol 2017;17:391–400. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 234. White JT, Cross EW, Burchill MA. et al. Virtual memory T cells develop and mediate bystander protective immunity in an IL-15-dependent manner. Nat Commun 2016;7:11291. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 235. Hou S, Shao T, Mao T. et al. Virtual memory T cells orchestrate extralymphoid responses conducive to resident memory. Sci Immunol 2021;6:eabg9433. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 236. Meresse B, Chen Z, Ciszewski C. et al. Coordinated induction by IL15 of a TCR-independent NKG2D signaling pathway converts CTL into lymphokine-activated killer cells in celiac disease. Immunity 2004;21:357–66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 237. Meresse B, Curran SA, Ciszewski C. et al. Reprogramming of CTLs into natural killer-like cells in celiac disease. J Exp Med 2006;203:1343–55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 238. Carbone FR. Unique properties of tissue-resident memory T cells in the lungs: implications for COVID-19 and other respiratory diseases. Nat Rev Immunol 2023;23:329–35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 239. Lund JM, Hladik F, Prlic M.. Advances and challenges in studying the tissue-resident T cell compartment in the human female reproductive tract. Immunol Rev 2023;316:52–62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

There is no data associated with this review.


Articles from Oxford Open Immunology are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES