SARS-CoV-2 特异性 T 细胞反应:QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2、T-SPOT.COVID 和内部 Omicron ELISpot 之间的比较分析。

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS
Willem A. Mak , Wendy Visser , Johannes G.M. Koeleman , David S.Y. Ong
{"title":"SARS-CoV-2 特异性 T 细胞反应:QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2、T-SPOT.COVID 和内部 Omicron ELISpot 之间的比较分析。","authors":"Willem A. Mak ,&nbsp;Wendy Visser ,&nbsp;Johannes G.M. Koeleman ,&nbsp;David S.Y. Ong","doi":"10.1016/j.jviromet.2024.114949","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>T cell immunity plays a pivotal role in mitigating the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, reliable functional T cell assays are required to evaluate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific T cell immunity in specific patient populations.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We recruited a cohort of 23 healthcare workers who received their bivalent Omicron BA.1 / ancestral mRNA booster vaccination or were infected with the Omicron variant at a median of 144 days and 227 days before blood collection, respectively. In this cohort, we compared the performances of two widely utilized commercial SARS-CoV-2 interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs), i.e., QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 and T-SPOT.<em>COVID</em>, and an in-house designed Omicron enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 and T-SPOT.<em>COVID</em> assays detected SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific T cells in 34.8 % and 21.7 % of participants, respectively. Moreover, our in-house designed ELISpot that included Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 full-spike peptides detected T cell responses in 47.8 % of participants and was strongly associated with the T-SPOT.<em>COVID.</em></p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 T cell immunity using commercially accessible assays may yield disparate outcomes as results from different assays are not directly comparable. A specific Omicron ELISpot should be considered to assess Omicron-specific T cell immunity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":17663,"journal":{"name":"Journal of virological methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166093424000739/pdfft?md5=90a8f097726be517e6b2f351bcc8d20d&pid=1-s2.0-S0166093424000739-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses: a comparative analysis between QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2, T-SPOT.COVID, and an in-house Omicron ELISpot\",\"authors\":\"Willem A. Mak ,&nbsp;Wendy Visser ,&nbsp;Johannes G.M. Koeleman ,&nbsp;David S.Y. Ong\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jviromet.2024.114949\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>T cell immunity plays a pivotal role in mitigating the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, reliable functional T cell assays are required to evaluate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific T cell immunity in specific patient populations.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We recruited a cohort of 23 healthcare workers who received their bivalent Omicron BA.1 / ancestral mRNA booster vaccination or were infected with the Omicron variant at a median of 144 days and 227 days before blood collection, respectively. In this cohort, we compared the performances of two widely utilized commercial SARS-CoV-2 interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs), i.e., QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 and T-SPOT.<em>COVID</em>, and an in-house designed Omicron enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 and T-SPOT.<em>COVID</em> assays detected SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific T cells in 34.8 % and 21.7 % of participants, respectively. Moreover, our in-house designed ELISpot that included Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 full-spike peptides detected T cell responses in 47.8 % of participants and was strongly associated with the T-SPOT.<em>COVID.</em></p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 T cell immunity using commercially accessible assays may yield disparate outcomes as results from different assays are not directly comparable. A specific Omicron ELISpot should be considered to assess Omicron-specific T cell immunity.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17663,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of virological methods\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166093424000739/pdfft?md5=90a8f097726be517e6b2f351bcc8d20d&pid=1-s2.0-S0166093424000739-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of virological methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166093424000739\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of virological methods","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166093424000739","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:T细胞免疫在减轻2019年冠状病毒疾病(COVID-19)的严重程度方面发挥着关键作用。因此,需要可靠的功能性 T 细胞检测来评估特定患者群体中严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)特异性 T 细胞免疫:我们招募了23名医护人员,他们分别在采血前144天和227天接受了二价奥米克龙BA.1/祖先mRNA强化疫苗接种或感染了奥米克龙变体。在这个队列中,我们比较了两种广泛使用的商用 SARS-CoV-2 干扰素-γ 释放测定(IGRA),即 QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 和 T-SPOT.COVID,以及内部设计的 Omicron 酶联免疫斑点(ELISpot)的性能:结果:QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2和T-SPOT.COVID检测方法分别在34.8%和21.7%的参与者中检测到了SARS-CoV-2尖峰特异性T细胞。此外,我们自行设计的包含 Omicron BA.4 和 BA.5 全尖峰肽的 ELISpot 能检测到 47.8% 参与者的 T 细胞应答,并与 T-SPOT.COVID 检测结果密切相关:结论:使用市场上可买到的检测方法评估 SARS-CoV-2 T 细胞免疫力可能会产生不同的结果,因为不同检测方法的结果不能直接比较。应考虑使用特定的奥米克龙 ELISpot 来评估奥米克龙特异性 T 细胞免疫。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses: a comparative analysis between QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2, T-SPOT.COVID, and an in-house Omicron ELISpot

Background

T cell immunity plays a pivotal role in mitigating the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, reliable functional T cell assays are required to evaluate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific T cell immunity in specific patient populations.

Methods

We recruited a cohort of 23 healthcare workers who received their bivalent Omicron BA.1 / ancestral mRNA booster vaccination or were infected with the Omicron variant at a median of 144 days and 227 days before blood collection, respectively. In this cohort, we compared the performances of two widely utilized commercial SARS-CoV-2 interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs), i.e., QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 and T-SPOT.COVID, and an in-house designed Omicron enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot).

Results

The QuantiFERON SARS-CoV-2 and T-SPOT.COVID assays detected SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific T cells in 34.8 % and 21.7 % of participants, respectively. Moreover, our in-house designed ELISpot that included Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 full-spike peptides detected T cell responses in 47.8 % of participants and was strongly associated with the T-SPOT.COVID.

Conclusion

The evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 T cell immunity using commercially accessible assays may yield disparate outcomes as results from different assays are not directly comparable. A specific Omicron ELISpot should be considered to assess Omicron-specific T cell immunity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
209
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Virological Methods focuses on original, high quality research papers that describe novel and comprehensively tested methods which enhance human, animal, plant, bacterial or environmental virology and prions research and discovery. The methods may include, but not limited to, the study of: Viral components and morphology- Virus isolation, propagation and development of viral vectors- Viral pathogenesis, oncogenesis, vaccines and antivirals- Virus replication, host-pathogen interactions and responses- Virus transmission, prevention, control and treatment- Viral metagenomics and virome- Virus ecology, adaption and evolution- Applied virology such as nanotechnology- Viral diagnosis with novelty and comprehensive evaluation. We seek articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and laboratory protocols that include comprehensive technical details with statistical confirmations that provide validations against current best practice, international standards or quality assurance programs and which advance knowledge in virology leading to improved medical, veterinary or agricultural practices and management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信