Induction of tolerogenic lung CD4+ T cells by local treatment with a pSTAT-3 and pSTAT-5 inhibitor ameliorated experimental allergic asthma.

Signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT)-3 inhibitors play an important role in regulating immune responses. Galiellalactone (GL) is a fungal secondary metabolite known to interfere with the binding of phosphorylated signal transducer and activator of transcription (pSTAT)-3 as well of pSTAT-6 dimers to their target DNA in vitro. Intra nasal delivery of 50 μg GL into the lung of naive Balb/c mice induced FoxP3 expression locally and IL-10 production and IL-12p40 in RNA expression in the airways in vivo. In a murine model of allergic asthma, GL significantly suppressed the cardinal features of asthma, such as airway hyperresponsiveness, eosinophilia and mucus production, after sensitization and subsequent challenge with ovalbumin (OVA). These changes resulted in induction of IL-12p70 and IL-10 production by lung CD11c(+) dendritic cells (DCs) accompanied by an increase of IL-3 receptor α chain and indoleamine-2,3-dioxygenase expression in these cells. Furthermore, GL inhibited IL-4 production in T-bet-deficient CD4(+) T cells and down-regulated the suppressor of cytokine signaling-3 (SOCS-3), also in the absence of STAT-3 in T cells, in the lung in a murine model of asthma. In addition, we found reduced amounts of pSTAT-5 in the lung of GL-treated mice that correlated with decreased release of IL-2 by lung OVA-specific CD4(+) T cells after treatment with GL in vitro also in the absence of T-bet. Thus, GL treatment in vivo and in vitro emerges as a novel therapeutic approach for allergic asthma by modulating lung DC phenotype and function resulting in a protective response via CD4(+)FoxP3(+) regulatory T cells locally

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health