Search

Introduction: The nonstructural protein 12 (NSP12) of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has a high sequence identity with common cold coronaviruses (CCC). Methods: Here, we comprehensively assessed the breadth and specificity of the NSP12-specific T-cell response after in vitro T-cell expansion with 185 overlapping 15-mer peptides covering the entire SARS-CoV-2 NSP12 at singlepeptide resolution in a cohort of 27 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Samples of nine uninfected seronegative individuals, as well as five pre-pandemic controls, were also examined to assess potential cross-reactivity with CCCs. Results: Surprisingly, there was a comparable breadth of individual NSP12 peptide-specific CD4+ T-cell responses between COVID-19 patients (mean: 12.82 responses; range: 0-25) and seronegative controls including prepandemic samples (mean: 12.71 responses; range: 0-21). However, the NSP12-specific T-cell responses detected in acute COVID-19 patients were on average of a higher magnitude. The most frequently detected CD4+ T-cell peptide specificities in COVID-19 patients were aa236-250 (37%) and aa246-260 (44%), whereas the peptide specificities aa686-700 (50%) and aa741-755 (36%), were the most frequently detected in seronegative controls. In CCCspecific peptide-expanded T-cell cultures of seronegative individuals, the corresponding SARS-CoV-2 NSP12 peptide specificities also elicited responses in vitro. However, the NSP12 peptide-specific CD4+ T-cell response repertoire only partially overlapped in patients analyzed longitudinally before and after a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Discussion: The results of the current study indicate the presence of pre-primed, cross-reactive CCC-specific T-cell responses targeting conserved regions of SARS-CoV-2, but they also underline the complexity of the analysis and the limited understanding of the role of the SARS-CoV-2 specific T-cell response and cross-reactivity with the CCCs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Potential differences in the breadth, distribution and magnitude of CD4+ T‐cell responses directed against the SARS‐CoV‐2 spike glycoprotein between vaccinees, COVID‐19 patients and subjects who experienced both ways of immunisation have not been comprehensively compared on a peptide level. Methods: Following virus‐specific in vitro cultivation, we determined the T‐cell responses directed against 253 individual overlapping 15‐mer peptides covering the entire SARS‐CoV‐2 spike glycoprotein using IFN‐γ ELISpot and intracellular cytokine staining. In vitro HLA binding was determined for selected peptides. Results: We mapped 955 single peptide‐specific CD4+ T‐cell responses in a cohort of COVID‐19 patients (n = 8), uninfected vaccinees (n = 16) and individuals who experienced both infection and vaccination (n = 11). Patients and vaccinees (two‐time and three‐time vaccinees alike) had a comparable number of CD4+ T‐cell responses (median 26 vs. 29, P = 0.7289). Most of these specificities were conserved in B.1.1.529 and the BA.4 and BA.5 sublineages. The highest magnitude of these in vitro IFN‐γ CD4+ T‐cell responses was observed in COVID‐19 patients (median 0.35%), and three‐time vaccinees showed a higher magnitude than two‐time vaccinees (median 0.091% vs. 0.175%, P < 0.0001). Twelve peptide specificities were each detected in at least 40% of subjects. In vitro HLA binding showed promiscuous presentation by DRB1 molecules for several peptides. Conclusion: Both SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and vaccination prime broadly directed T‐cell responses directed against the SARS‐CoV‐2 spike glycoprotein. This comprehensive high‐resolution analysis of spike peptide specificities will be a useful resource for further investigation of spike‐specific T‐cell responses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies prospectively monitoring de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSAs) and their clinical impact are sparse. This substudy of ATHENA was initiated to evaluate the effect of everolimus (EVR) or mycophenolic acid (MPA) in combination with reduced calcineurin inhibitor (CNI, tacrolimus [TAC] or cyclosporine [CsA]) on the formation of human leukocyte antibodies (HLA), including dnDSA, and the impact on clinical outcomes in kidney transplant (KTx) recipients., Methods: All eligible patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive either EVR + TAC, EVR + CsA or MPA + TAC, with basiliximab induction plus steroids after transplantation up to Month 12. The incidence of dnDSA by treatment group and the association with clinical events were evaluated descriptively as an exploratory objective in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations with at least one antibody assessment., Results: Overall, none of the patients in the EVR + TAC group had either dnDSA or antibody mediated rejection (PP or ITT population) and only one patient with dnDSA in the TAC + MPA group had antibody mediated rejection., Conclusion: The EVR regimen was comparable to MPA regimen with an extremely low incidence of dnDSA over 1 year of treatment., Competing Interests: WA received consulting honoraria from Novartis. IAH was in the advisory board of Novartis and received honoraria for lectures from Takeda, Biotest, MSD, CareDx, Novartis, Astellas, Bayer, and Astra Zeneca. FT has received study honoraria from Novartis, Sanofi, Astellas, Alexion, Hexal, Chiesi, and Pfizer. BS received study honoraria and was in the advisory board of Novartis. JH, CS, and AE are employees of Novartis. BN was in the advisory board and received funding from Novartis. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© 2023 Arns, Philippe, Ditt, Hauser, Thaiss, Sommerer, Suwelack, Dragun, Hillen, Schiedel, Elsässer and Nashan.)

Introduction: The nonstructural protein 12 (NSP12) of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has a high sequence identity with common cold coronaviruses (CCC)., Methods: Here, we comprehensively assessed the breadth and specificity of the NSP12-specific T-cell response after in vitro T-cell expansion with 185 overlapping 15-mer peptides covering the entire SARS-CoV-2 NSP12 at single-peptide resolution in a cohort of 27 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Samples of nine uninfected seronegative individuals, as well as five pre-pandemic controls, were also examined to assess potential cross-reactivity with CCCs., Results: Surprisingly, there was a comparable breadth of individual NSP12 peptide-specific CD4 + T-cell responses between COVID-19 patients (mean: 12.82 responses; range: 0-25) and seronegative controls including pre-pandemic samples (mean: 12.71 responses; range: 0-21). However, the NSP12-specific T-cell responses detected in acute COVID-19 patients were on average of a higher magnitude. The most frequently detected CD4 + T-cell peptide specificities in COVID-19 patients were aa236-250 (37%) and aa246-260 (44%), whereas the peptide specificities aa686-700 (50%) and aa741-755 (36%), were the most frequently detected in seronegative controls. In CCC-specific peptide-expanded T-cell cultures of seronegative individuals, the corresponding SARS-CoV-2 NSP12 peptide specificities also elicited responses in vitro . However, the NSP12 peptide-specific CD4 + T-cell response repertoire only partially overlapped in patients analyzed longitudinally before and after a SARS-CoV-2 infection., Discussion: The results of the current study indicate the presence of pre-primed, cross-reactive CCC-specific T-cell responses targeting conserved regions of SARS-CoV-2, but they also underline the complexity of the analysis and the limited understanding of the role of the SARS-CoV-2 specific T-cell response and cross-reactivity with the CCCs., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Westphal, Mader, Karsten, Cords, Knapp, Schulte, Hermanussen, Peine, Ditt, Grifoni, Addo, Huber, Sette, Lütgehetmann, Pischke, Kwok, Sidney and Schulze zur Wiesch.)

Objectives: Potential differences in the breadth, distribution and magnitude of CD4 + T-cell responses directed against the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein between vaccinees, COVID-19 patients and subjects who experienced both ways of immunisation have not been comprehensively compared on a peptide level., Methods: Following virus-specific in vitro cultivation, we determined the T-cell responses directed against 253 individual overlapping 15-mer peptides covering the entire SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein using IFN-γ ELISpot and intracellular cytokine staining. In vitro HLA binding was determined for selected peptides., Results: We mapped 955 single peptide-specific CD4 + T-cell responses in a cohort of COVID-19 patients ( n  = 8), uninfected vaccinees ( n  = 16) and individuals who experienced both infection and vaccination ( n  = 11). Patients and vaccinees (two-time and three-time vaccinees alike) had a comparable number of CD4 + T-cell responses (median 26 vs. 29, P  = 0.7289). Most of these specificities were conserved in B.1.1.529 and the BA.4 and BA.5 sublineages. The highest magnitude of these in vitro IFN-γ CD4 + T-cell responses was observed in COVID-19 patients (median 0.35%), and three-time vaccinees showed a higher magnitude than two-time vaccinees (median 0.091% vs. 0.175%, P  < 0.0001). Twelve peptide specificities were each detected in at least 40% of subjects. In vitro HLA binding showed promiscuous presentation by DRB1 molecules for several peptides., Conclusion: Both SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination prime broadly directed T-cell responses directed against the SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein. This comprehensive high-resolution analysis of spike peptide specificities will be a useful resource for further investigation of spike-specific T-cell responses., Competing Interests: The authors do not report any competing interests., (© 2022 The Authors. Clinical & Translational Immunology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian and New Zealand Society for Immunology, Inc.)