These results, we decided to split the 1516647 allogeneic recipients into three groups for future analysis: allogeneic MOCK, allogeneic MCMV IE1 negative and allogeneic MCMV IE1 positive.Immediate early 1 (IE1) gene expression as indicator of MCMV reactivationCMV reactivation does not occur in all patients after allogeneic HCT and has been associated with both the presence of acute GVHD and related immunosuppressive therapy. CMV positive patients receiving HCT from a CMV negative donor are at highest risk due to the lack of CMV directed donor memory T cells, which can account for some protective immunity after HCT. Recipients in our model fall into this high risk group for MCMV reactivation, despite no further immunosuppression being given for evolving GVHD. Therefore, CMV reactivation may have occurred in all animals or at different time points during the follow-up period. To assess the contribution of MCMV reactivation to GVHD pathology, we aimed to identify those allogeneic animals active virus at time of analysis by using MCMV IE1 expression in the spleen as a discriminating marker as described in Materials and Methods [24]. IE1 transcripts were not detectable in the mock-infected allogeneic group, whereas they were seen in halfPulmonary and hepatic injury is aggravated in allogeneic recipients expressing MCMV IEHistopathologic changes in the lung were observed in all three allogeneic groups at day +100 after HCT, predominantly presenting as perivascular lymphocytic inflammation and lymphocytic peri-bronchiolitis, but not consistent with the four major patterns of CMV infection of the lung: diffuse interstitial pneumonititis, hemorraghic pneumonia, CMV inclusions associated with minimal inflammation or military pattern. When comparing allogeneic mock treated animals with MCMV latent IE1 negative recipients, pathology scores did not statistically differ. In contrast, IE1 positivity was associated with a significant increase in pulmonary injury when compared to mock controls and with a statistically non-significant increase when compared to IE1 negative recipients (AKT inhibitor 2 supplier figure 4A ). Lung pathology in MCMV latent IE1+ allogeneic recipients correlated with elevation of total BAL cells counts and of CD4+ but not of CD8+ T cell countsCMV and GVHDFigure 3. Reactivation of MCMV in latently infected mice. Viral gene IE1 expression was assessed by PCR splenic DNA at day+100 after transplant. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0061841.g(figure 4D ). Exacerbation of GVHD related changes was also seen in the liver of MCMV IE1+ allogeneic recipients (figure 5A?C), whereas no GVHD related injury was found in the colon (figure 5D). Importantly, findings suggestive or characteristic for MCMV disease were not found in either 
organ. No differences in histopathology were seen between Fruquintinib site syngeneic groups (data not shown).Lung pathology was associated with increased pulmonary IFNg protein levels (p = 0.0366) as well as trending increases in TNF, CXCL1 and CXCL9 (figure 6A ). In the liver, no difference was seen for CXCL1 and CXCL9, while IFNg trended to be higher and TNF was significantly elevated in the MCMV IE1+ allogeneic recipients (p = 0.0163) (figure 6 E ). Consistent with pathology findings, no differences were seen for cyto- or chemokine expression in the colon (figure 6I ).DiscussionReactivation of CMV from latency results in significant morbidity and mortality in patients after allogeneic HCT. The molecular mechanism by which this occurs is not clear. Previous work has.These results, we decided to split the 1516647 allogeneic recipients into three groups for future analysis: allogeneic MOCK, allogeneic MCMV IE1 negative and allogeneic MCMV IE1 positive.Immediate early 1 (IE1) gene expression as indicator of MCMV reactivationCMV reactivation does not occur in all patients after allogeneic HCT and has been associated with both the presence of acute GVHD and related immunosuppressive therapy. CMV positive patients receiving HCT from a CMV negative donor are at highest risk due to the lack of CMV directed donor memory T cells, which can account for some protective immunity after HCT. Recipients in our model fall into this high risk group for MCMV reactivation, despite no further immunosuppression being given for evolving GVHD. Therefore, CMV reactivation may have occurred in all animals or at different time points during the follow-up period. To assess the contribution of MCMV reactivation to GVHD pathology, we aimed to identify those allogeneic animals active virus at time of analysis by using MCMV IE1 expression in the spleen as a discriminating marker as described in Materials and Methods [24]. IE1 transcripts were not detectable in the mock-infected allogeneic group, whereas they were seen in halfPulmonary and hepatic injury is aggravated in allogeneic recipients expressing MCMV IEHistopathologic changes in the lung were observed in all three allogeneic groups at day +100 after HCT, predominantly presenting as perivascular lymphocytic inflammation and lymphocytic peri-bronchiolitis, but not consistent with the four major patterns of CMV infection of the lung: diffuse interstitial pneumonititis, hemorraghic pneumonia, CMV inclusions associated with minimal inflammation or military pattern. When comparing allogeneic mock treated animals with MCMV latent IE1 negative recipients, pathology scores did not statistically differ. In contrast, IE1 positivity was associated with a significant increase in pulmonary injury when compared to mock controls and with a statistically non-significant increase when compared to IE1 negative recipients (figure 4A ). Lung pathology in MCMV latent IE1+ allogeneic recipients correlated with elevation of total BAL cells counts and of CD4+ but not of CD8+ T cell countsCMV and GVHDFigure 3. Reactivation of MCMV in latently infected mice. Viral gene IE1 expression was assessed by PCR splenic DNA at day+100 after transplant. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0061841.g(figure 4D ). Exacerbation of GVHD related changes was also seen in the liver of MCMV IE1+ allogeneic recipients (figure 5A?C), whereas no GVHD related injury was found in the colon (figure 5D). Importantly, findings suggestive or characteristic for MCMV disease were not found in either organ. No differences in histopathology were seen between syngeneic groups (data not shown).Lung pathology was associated with increased pulmonary IFNg protein levels (p = 0.0366) as well as trending increases in TNF, CXCL1 and CXCL9 (figure 6A ). In the liver, no difference was seen for CXCL1 and CXCL9, while IFNg trended to be higher and TNF was significantly elevated in the MCMV IE1+ allogeneic recipients (p = 0.0163) (figure 6 E ). Consistent with pathology findings, no differences were seen for cyto- or chemokine expression in the colon (figure 6I ).DiscussionReactivation of CMV from latency results in significant morbidity and mortality in patients after allogeneic HCT. The molecular mechanism by which this occurs is not clear. Previous work has.