Suppr超能文献

在首次大流行期间,COVID-19 病例的家庭接触者中轻度 COVID-19 患者的协调固有和 T 细胞免疫应答。

Coordinated innate and T-cell immune responses in mild COVID-19 patients from household contacts of COVID-19 cases during the first pandemic wave.

机构信息

Translational Research Unit, National Institute for Infectious Diseases Lazzaro Spallanzani-IRCCS, Rome, Italy.

Local Public Health Office, Azienda Sanitaria Locale (ASL) Roma 1, Rome, Italy.

出版信息

Front Immunol. 2022 Jul 27;13:920227. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.920227. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To better define the immunopathogenesis of COVID-19, the present study aims to characterize the early immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection in household contacts of COVID-19 cases. In particular, innate, T- and B-cell specific responses were evaluated over time.

METHODS

Household contacts of COVID-19 cases screened for SARS-CoV-2 infection by nasopharyngeal swab for surveillance purposes were enrolled (T0, n=42). Of these, 28 subjects returned for a follow-up test (T1). The innate response was assessed by detecting a panel of soluble factors by multiplex-technology in plasma samples. Cell-mediated response was evaluated by measuring interferon (IFN)-γ levels by ELISA in plasma harvested from whole-blood stimulated with SARS-CoV-2 peptide pools, including spike (S), nucleocapsid (N) and membrane (M) proteins. The serological response was assessed by quantifying anti-Receptor-Binding-Domain (RBD), anti-Nucleocapsid (N), whole virus indirect immunofluorescence, and neutralizing antibodies.

RESULTS

At T0, higher levels of plasmatic IFN-α, IL-1ra, MCP-1 and IP-10, and lower levels of IL-1β, IL-9, MIP-1β and RANTES were observed in subjects with positive swab compared to individuals with a negative one (p<0.05). Plasmatic IFN-α was the only cytokine detectable in subjects with positive SARS-CoV-2 swabs with high accuracy for swab score positivity (0.93, p<0.0001). Among subjects with positive swabs, significant negative correlations were found among the RT-PCR cycle threshold values reported for genes S and N and IFN-α or IP-10 levels. At T0, the IFN-γ T-cell specific response was detected in 50% (5/10) of subjects with positive swab, while anti-RBD/anti-N antibodies showed a positivity rate of 10% (1/10). At T1, the IFN-γ T-cell specific response was detected in most of the confirmed-infection subjects (77.8%, 7/9), whereas the serological response was still observed in a minority of them (44.4%, 4/9). Overall, the swab test showed a moderate concordance with the T-cell response (78.6%, k=0.467), and a scarce concordance with the serological one (72.9%, k=0.194).

CONCLUSIONS

Plasmatic IFN-α and the IFN-γ T-cell specific response appear early even in the absence of seroconversion, and show a greater positivity rate than the serological response in household contacts with positive swab.

摘要

目的

为了更好地阐明 COVID-19 的免疫发病机制,本研究旨在描述 COVID-19 病例的家庭接触者中对 SARS-CoV-2 感染的早期免疫反应。特别是,评估了固有免疫、T 细胞和 B 细胞的特异性反应随时间的变化。

方法

对因监测目的而通过鼻咽拭子筛查 SARS-CoV-2 感染的 COVID-19 病例的家庭接触者进行了研究(T0,n=42)。其中,28 名受试者返回进行了随访测试(T1)。通过多重技术检测血浆样本中一系列可溶性因子来评估固有免疫反应。通过 ELISA 测量用 SARS-CoV-2 肽池(包括刺突(S)、核衣壳(N)和膜(M)蛋白)刺激全血后血浆中干扰素(IFN)-γ水平来评估细胞介导的反应。通过定量检测受体结合域(RBD)、核衣壳(N)、全病毒间接免疫荧光和中和抗体来评估血清学反应。

结果

在 T0 时,与拭子阴性的个体相比,拭子阳性的个体的血浆 IFN-α、IL-1ra、MCP-1 和 IP-10 水平更高,而 IL-1β、IL-9、MIP-1β 和 RANTES 水平更低(p<0.05)。在拭子阳性的个体中,可检测到 IFN-α 是唯一一种具有高拭子评分阳性准确性的细胞因子(0.93,p<0.0001)。在拭子阳性的个体中,S 和 N 基因的 RT-PCR 循环阈值报告值与 IFN-α 或 IP-10 水平之间存在显著的负相关。在 T0 时,在 50%(5/10)的拭子阳性个体中检测到 IFN-γ T 细胞特异性反应,而 RBD/抗 N 抗体的阳性率为 10%(1/10)。在 T1 时,在大多数确诊感染的个体中检测到 IFN-γ T 细胞特异性反应(77.8%,7/9),而少数个体仍存在血清学反应(44.4%,4/9)。总体而言,拭子检测与 T 细胞反应的一致性中等(78.6%,k=0.467),与血清学反应的一致性较差(72.9%,k=0.194)。

结论

即使没有血清转换,血浆 IFN-α 和 IFN-γ T 细胞特异性反应也会较早出现,并且在拭子阳性的家庭接触者中,其阳性率高于血清学反应。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/780a/9364317/e2882fdcda50/fimmu-13-920227-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验