High-dimensional analysis of 16 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine combinations reveals lymphocyte signatures correlating with immunogenicity

The range of vaccines developed against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) provides a unique opportunity to study immunization across different platforms. In a single-center cohort, we analyzed the humoral and cellular immune compartments following five coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines spanning three technologies (adenoviral, mRNA and inactivated virus) administered in 16 combinations. For adenoviral and inactivated-virus vaccines, heterologous combinations were generally more immunogenic compared to homologous regimens. The mRNA vaccine as the second dose resulted in the strongest antibody response and induced the highest frequency of spike-binding memory B cells irrespective of the priming vaccine. Priming with the inactivated-virus vaccine increased the SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response, whereas boosting did not. Distinct immune signatures were elicited by the different vaccine combinations, demonstrating that the immune response is shaped by the type of vaccines applied and the order in which they are delivered. These data provide a framework for improving future vaccine strategies against pathogens and cancer

Potential Involvement of Platelet-Derived Microparticles and Microparticles Forming Immune Complexes during Monocyte Activation in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Microparticles (MPs) are vesicles derived from the plasma membrane of different cells, are considered a source of circulating autoantigens, and can form immune complexes (MPs-ICs). The number of MPs and MPs-ICs increases in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). MPs activate myeloid cells by inducing IL-6 and TNF-α in both SLE and other diseases. Therefore, we propose that the recognition of MPs-ICs by monocytes rather that MPs may define their phenotype and contribute to the inflammatory process in patients with SLE. Thus, the aims of this study were to evaluate the association among circulating MPs-ICs from different cell sources, alterations observed in monocyte subsets, and disease activity in patients with SLE and to establish whether monocytes bind and respond to MPs-ICs in vitro. Circulating MPs and monocyte subsets were characterized in 60 patients with SLE and 60 healthy controls (HCs) using multiparametric flow cytometry. Patients had higher MP counts and frequencies of MPs-CD41a + (platelet-derived) compared with HCs, regardless of disease activity. MPs from patients with SLE were C1q + and formed ICs with IgM and IgG. MPs-IgG + were positively correlated with active SLE (aSLE), whereas MPs-IgM + were negatively correlated. Most of the circulating total ICs-IgG + were located on MPs. The proportion and number of non-classical monocytes were significantly decreased in patients with SLE compared with HCs and in patients with aSLE compared with patients with the inactive disease. Non-classical monocytes obtained from patients with SLE exhibited increased levels of CD64 associated with MPs-IgG +, MPs-C1q +, total circulating ICs-IgG +, and disease activity. The direct effects of MPs and MPs-IgG + on monocytes were evaluated in cell culture. Monocytes from both HCs and patients bound to and internalized MPs and MPs-IgG + independent of CD64. These vesicles derived from platelets (PMPs), mainly PMPs-IgG +, activated monocytes in vitro and increased the expression of CD69, CD64, and pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-1β, TNF-α, and IFN-α. Therefore, MPs are one of the most representative sources of the total amount of circulating ICs-IgG + in patients with SLE. MPs-IgG + are associated with SLE activity, and PMPs-IgG + stimulate monocytes, changing their phenotype and promoting pro-inflammatory responses related to disease activity

image_6.pdf

<p>Microparticles (MPs) are vesicles derived from the plasma membrane of different cells, are considered a source of circulating autoantigens, and can form immune complexes (MPs-ICs). The number of MPs and MPs-ICs increases in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). MPs activate myeloid cells by inducing IL-6 and TNF-α in both SLE and other diseases. Therefore, we propose that the recognition of MPs-ICs by monocytes rather that MPs may define their phenotype and contribute to the inflammatory process in patients with SLE. Thus, the aims of this study were to evaluate the association among circulating MPs-ICs from different cell sources, alterations observed in monocyte subsets, and disease activity in patients with SLE and to establish whether monocytes bind and respond to MPs-ICs in vitro. Circulating MPs and monocyte subsets were characterized in 60 patients with SLE and 60 healthy controls (HCs) using multiparametric flow cytometry. Patients had higher MP counts and frequencies of MPs-CD41a + (platelet-derived) compared with HCs, regardless of disease activity. MPs from patients with SLE were C1q + and formed ICs with IgM and IgG. MPs-IgG + were positively correlated with active SLE (aSLE), whereas MPs-IgM + were negatively correlated. Most of the circulating total ICs-IgG + were located on MPs. The proportion and number of non-classical monocytes were significantly decreased in patients with SLE compared with HCs and in patients with aSLE compared with patients with the inactive disease. Non-classical monocytes obtained from patients with SLE exhibited increased levels of CD64 associated with MPs-IgG +, MPs-C1q +, total circulating ICs-IgG +, and disease activity. The direct effects of MPs and MPs-IgG + on monocytes were evaluated in cell culture. Monocytes from both HCs and patients bound to and internalized MPs and MPs-IgG + independent of CD64. These vesicles derived from platelets (PMPs), mainly PMPs-IgG +, activated monocytes in vitro and increased the expression of CD69, CD64, and pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-1β, TNF-α, and IFN-α. Therefore, MPs are one of the most representative sources of the total amount of circulating ICs-IgG + in patients with SLE. MPs-IgG + are associated with SLE activity, and PMPs-IgG + stimulate monocytes, changing their phenotype and promoting pro-inflammatory responses related to disease activity.</p

image_3.pdf

<p>Microparticles (MPs) are vesicles derived from the plasma membrane of different cells, are considered a source of circulating autoantigens, and can form immune complexes (MPs-ICs). The number of MPs and MPs-ICs increases in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). MPs activate myeloid cells by inducing IL-6 and TNF-α in both SLE and other diseases. Therefore, we propose that the recognition of MPs-ICs by monocytes rather that MPs may define their phenotype and contribute to the inflammatory process in patients with SLE. Thus, the aims of this study were to evaluate the association among circulating MPs-ICs from different cell sources, alterations observed in monocyte subsets, and disease activity in patients with SLE and to establish whether monocytes bind and respond to MPs-ICs in vitro. Circulating MPs and monocyte subsets were characterized in 60 patients with SLE and 60 healthy controls (HCs) using multiparametric flow cytometry. Patients had higher MP counts and frequencies of MPs-CD41a + (platelet-derived) compared with HCs, regardless of disease activity. MPs from patients with SLE were C1q + and formed ICs with IgM and IgG. MPs-IgG + were positively correlated with active SLE (aSLE), whereas MPs-IgM + were negatively correlated. Most of the circulating total ICs-IgG + were located on MPs. The proportion and number of non-classical monocytes were significantly decreased in patients with SLE compared with HCs and in patients with aSLE compared with patients with the inactive disease. Non-classical monocytes obtained from patients with SLE exhibited increased levels of CD64 associated with MPs-IgG +, MPs-C1q +, total circulating ICs-IgG +, and disease activity. The direct effects of MPs and MPs-IgG + on monocytes were evaluated in cell culture. Monocytes from both HCs and patients bound to and internalized MPs and MPs-IgG + independent of CD64. These vesicles derived from platelets (PMPs), mainly PMPs-IgG +, activated monocytes in vitro and increased the expression of CD69, CD64, and pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-1β, TNF-α, and IFN-α. Therefore, MPs are one of the most representative sources of the total amount of circulating ICs-IgG + in patients with SLE. MPs-IgG + are associated with SLE activity, and PMPs-IgG + stimulate monocytes, changing their phenotype and promoting pro-inflammatory responses related to disease activity.</p

image_4.pdf

<p>Microparticles (MPs) are vesicles derived from the plasma membrane of different cells, are considered a source of circulating autoantigens, and can form immune complexes (MPs-ICs). The number of MPs and MPs-ICs increases in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). MPs activate myeloid cells by inducing IL-6 and TNF-α in both SLE and other diseases. Therefore, we propose that the recognition of MPs-ICs by monocytes rather that MPs may define their phenotype and contribute to the inflammatory process in patients with SLE. Thus, the aims of this study were to evaluate the association among circulating MPs-ICs from different cell sources, alterations observed in monocyte subsets, and disease activity in patients with SLE and to establish whether monocytes bind and respond to MPs-ICs in vitro. Circulating MPs and monocyte subsets were characterized in 60 patients with SLE and 60 healthy controls (HCs) using multiparametric flow cytometry. Patients had higher MP counts and frequencies of MPs-CD41a + (platelet-derived) compared with HCs, regardless of disease activity. MPs from patients with SLE were C1q + and formed ICs with IgM and IgG. MPs-IgG + were positively correlated with active SLE (aSLE), whereas MPs-IgM + were negatively correlated. Most of the circulating total ICs-IgG + were located on MPs. The proportion and number of non-classical monocytes were significantly decreased in patients with SLE compared with HCs and in patients with aSLE compared with patients with the inactive disease. Non-classical monocytes obtained from patients with SLE exhibited increased levels of CD64 associated with MPs-IgG +, MPs-C1q +, total circulating ICs-IgG +, and disease activity. The direct effects of MPs and MPs-IgG + on monocytes were evaluated in cell culture. Monocytes from both HCs and patients bound to and internalized MPs and MPs-IgG + independent of CD64. These vesicles derived from platelets (PMPs), mainly PMPs-IgG +, activated monocytes in vitro and increased the expression of CD69, CD64, and pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-1β, TNF-α, and IFN-α. Therefore, MPs are one of the most representative sources of the total amount of circulating ICs-IgG + in patients with SLE. MPs-IgG + are associated with SLE activity, and PMPs-IgG + stimulate monocytes, changing their phenotype and promoting pro-inflammatory responses related to disease activity.</p

Differential Profile of Systemic Extracellular Vesicles From Sporadic and Familial Alzheimer's Disease Leads to Neuroglial and Endothelial Cell Degeneration

Evidence suggests that extracellular vesicles (EVs) act as mediators and biomarkers of neurodegenerative diseases. Two distinct forms of Alzheimer disease (AD) are known: a late-onset sporadic form (SAD) and an early-onset familial form (FAD). Recently, neurovascular dysfunction and altered systemic immunological components have been linked to AD neurodegeneration. Therefore, we characterized systemic-EVs from postmortem SAD and FAD patients and evaluated their effects on neuroglial and endothelial cells. We found increase CLN-5 spots with vesicular morphology in the abluminal portion of vessels from SAD patients. Both forms of AD were associated with larger and more numerous systemic EVs. Specifically, SAD patients showed an increase in endothelial- and leukocyte-derived EVs containing mitochondria; in contrast, FAD patients showed an increase in platelet-derived EVs. We detected a differential protein composition for SAD- and FAD-EVs associated with the coagulation cascade, inflammation, and lipid-carbohydrate metabolism. Using mono- and cocultures (endothelium-astrocytes-neurons) and human cortical organoids, we showed that AD-EVs induced cytotoxicity. Both forms of AD featured decreased neuronal branches area and astrocytic hyperreactivity, but SAD-EVs led to greater endothelial detrimental effects than FAD-EVs. In addition, FAD- and SAD-EVs affected calcium dynamics in a cortical organoid model. Our findings indicate that the phenotype of systemic AD-EVs is differentially defined by the etiopathology of the disease (SAD or FAD), which results in a differential alteration of the NVU cells implied in neurodegeneration

High-dimensional analysis of 16 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine combinations reveals lymphocyte signatures correlating with immunogenicity

The range of vaccines developed against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) provides a unique opportunity to study immunization across different platforms. In a single-center cohort, we analyzed the humoral and cellular immune compartments following five coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines spanning three technologies (adenoviral, mRNA and inactivated virus) administered in 16 combinations. For adenoviral and inactivated-virus vaccines, heterologous combinations were generally more immunogenic compared to homologous regimens. The mRNA vaccine as the second dose resulted in the strongest antibody response and induced the highest frequency of spike-binding memory B cells irrespective of the priming vaccine. Priming with the inactivated-virus vaccine increased the SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response, whereas boosting did not. Distinct immune signatures were elicited by the different vaccine combinations, demonstrating that the immune response is shaped by the type of vaccines applied and the order in which they are delivered. These data provide a framework for improving future vaccine strategies against pathogens and cancer.Fil: Núñez, Nicolás. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Departamento de Bioquímica Clínica; Argentina. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Schmid, Jonas. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Power, Laura. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Alberti, Chiara. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Krishnarajah, Sinduya. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Kreutmair, Stefanie. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Unger, Susanne. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Blanco, Sebastián Gabriel. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Virología Dr. J. M. Vanella; ArgentinaFil: Konigheim, Brenda Salome. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Virología Dr. J. M. Vanella; ArgentinaFil: Marin, Constanza. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Departamento de Bioquímica Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Onofrio, Luisina Inés. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Departamento de Bioquímica Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Kienzler, Jenny Christine. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Costa Pereira, Sara. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Ingelfinger, Florian. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Cerban, Fabio Marcelo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; ArgentinaFil: Chiapello, Laura Silvina. Universitat Zurich; Suiza. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; ArgentinaFil: Montes, Carolina Lucia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; ArgentinaFil: Motran, Claudia Cristina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; ArgentinaFil: Dutto, Jeremias. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; ArgentinaFil: Almada, Laura. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; ArgentinaFil: Boffelli, Lucía. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; ArgentinaFil: Spinsanti, Lorena Ivana. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Virología Dr. J. M. Vanella; ArgentinaFil: Diaz, Luis Adrian. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Virología Dr. J. M. Vanella; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas; ArgentinaFil: Rivarola, María Elisa. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Virología Dr. J. M. Vanella; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba; ArgentinaFil: Aguilar, Javier. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Virología Dr. J. M. Vanella; ArgentinaFil: Beranek, Mauricio Daniel. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Virología Dr. J. M. Vanella; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas; ArgentinaFil: Pasinovich, Marina E.. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación; ArgentinaFil: Castelli, Juan Manuel. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación; ArgentinaFil: Vizzotti, Carla. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación; ArgentinaFil: Schaefer, Maximilian. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Villar Vesga, Juan. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Mundt, Sarah. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Merten, Carla Helena. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Sethi, Aakriti. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Wertheimer, Tobias. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Lutz, Mirjam. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Vanoaica, Danusia. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Sotomayor, Claudia Elena. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Departamento de Bioquímica Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Gruppi, Adriana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Departamento de Bioquímica Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Münz, Christian. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Cardozo, Diego. Provincia de Córdoba. Ministerio de Salud; ArgentinaFil: Barbás, Gabriela. Provincia de Córdoba. Ministerio de Salud; ArgentinaFil: López, Laura. Provincia de Córdoba. Ministerio de Salud; ArgentinaFil: Carreño, Paula. Provincia de Córdoba. Ministerio de Salud; ArgentinaFil: Castro, Gonzalo. Provincia de Córdoba. Ministerio de Salud; ArgentinaFil: Raboy, Elías Gabriel. Provincia de Córdoba. Ministerio de Salud; ArgentinaFil: Gallego, Sandra Veronica. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Virología Dr. J. M. Vanella; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Moron, Victor Gabriel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Departamento de Bioquímica Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Cervi, Laura Alejandra. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Departamento de Bioquímica Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Acosta Rodriguez, Eva Virginia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Departamento de Bioquímica Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Maletto, Belkys Angélica. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Departamento de Bioquímica Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Maccioni, Mariana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Córdoba. Centro de Investigaciones en Bioquímica Clínica e Inmunología; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Químicas. Departamento de Bioquímica Clínica; ArgentinaFil: Becher, Burkhard. Universitat Zurich; Suiz