Epigenetic immune monitoring for COVID-19 disease course prognosis.
COVID-19
SARS-CoV-2
disease prognosis
epigenetic qPCR
immune monitoring
lymphopenia
Journal
Frontiers in immunology
ISSN: 1664-3224
Titre abrégé: Front Immunol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101560960
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
25
11
2022
accepted:
02
03
2023
medline:
3
4
2023
entrez:
31
3
2023
pubmed:
1
4
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The course of COVID-19 is associated with severe dysbalance of the immune system, causing both leukocytosis and lymphopenia. Immune cell monitoring may be a powerful tool to prognosticate disease outcome. However, SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects are isolated upon initial diagnosis, thus barring standard immune monitoring using fresh blood. This dilemma may be solved by epigenetic immune cell counting. In this study, we used epigenetic immune cell counting by qPCR as an alternative way of quantitative immune monitoring for venous blood, capillary blood dried on filter paper (dried blood spots, DBS) and nasopharyngeal swabs, potentially allowing a home-based monitoring approach. Epigenetic immune cell counting in venous blood showed equivalence with dried blood spots and with flow cytometrically determined cell counts of venous blood in healthy subjects. In venous blood, we detected relative lymphopenia, neutrophilia, and a decreased lymphocyte-to-neutrophil ratio for COVID-19 patients (n =103) when compared with healthy donors (n = 113). Along with reported sex-related differences in survival we observed dramatically lower regulatory T cell counts in male patients. In nasopharyngeal swabs, T and B cell counts were significantly lower in patients compared to healthy subjects, mirroring the lymphopenia in blood. Naïve B cell frequency was lower in severely ill patients than in patients with milder stages. Overall, the analysis of immune cell counts is a strong predictor of clinical disease course and the use of epigenetic immune cell counting by qPCR may provide a tool that can be used even for home-isolated patients.
Sections du résumé
Background
The course of COVID-19 is associated with severe dysbalance of the immune system, causing both leukocytosis and lymphopenia. Immune cell monitoring may be a powerful tool to prognosticate disease outcome. However, SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects are isolated upon initial diagnosis, thus barring standard immune monitoring using fresh blood. This dilemma may be solved by epigenetic immune cell counting.
Methods
In this study, we used epigenetic immune cell counting by qPCR as an alternative way of quantitative immune monitoring for venous blood, capillary blood dried on filter paper (dried blood spots, DBS) and nasopharyngeal swabs, potentially allowing a home-based monitoring approach.
Results
Epigenetic immune cell counting in venous blood showed equivalence with dried blood spots and with flow cytometrically determined cell counts of venous blood in healthy subjects. In venous blood, we detected relative lymphopenia, neutrophilia, and a decreased lymphocyte-to-neutrophil ratio for COVID-19 patients (n =103) when compared with healthy donors (n = 113). Along with reported sex-related differences in survival we observed dramatically lower regulatory T cell counts in male patients. In nasopharyngeal swabs, T and B cell counts were significantly lower in patients compared to healthy subjects, mirroring the lymphopenia in blood. Naïve B cell frequency was lower in severely ill patients than in patients with milder stages.
Conclusions
Overall, the analysis of immune cell counts is a strong predictor of clinical disease course and the use of epigenetic immune cell counting by qPCR may provide a tool that can be used even for home-isolated patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36999021
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1107900
pmc: PMC10043382
doi:
Banques de données
figshare
['10.6084/m9.figshare.21710237.v1']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1107900Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Samans, Rosselló Chornet, Rosselló Chornet, Jung, Schildknecht, Lozza, Alos Zaragoza, Hernández Laforet, Babel and Olek.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Authors BS, AR, KS, JJ, LL and SO were employed by the company Precision for Medicine. 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.
Références
J Clin Invest. 2020 May 1;130(5):2620-2629
pubmed: 32217835
BMC Infect Dis. 2021 Jan 18;21(1):80
pubmed: 33461497
Cancer. 1950 Jan;3(1):32-5
pubmed: 15405679
J Clin Immunol. 2023 Apr;43(3):662-669
pubmed: 36600150
Mucosal Immunol. 2021 Mar;14(2):305-316
pubmed: 33244161
Science. 2020 Sep 4;369(6508):
pubmed: 32669297
Public Policy Aging Rep. 2020;30(4):142-146
pubmed: 33214754
EBioMedicine. 2020 May;55:102763
pubmed: 32361250
Eur J Immunol. 2007 Sep;37(9):2378-89
pubmed: 17694575
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2020 Jul;146(1):89-100
pubmed: 32407836
Front Immunol. 2021 Dec 02;12:789735
pubmed: 34925369
Cancer Res. 2009 Jan 15;69(2):599-608
pubmed: 19147574
Arch Virol. 2000;145(5):905-20
pubmed: 10881678
Sci Transl Med. 2018 Aug 1;10(452):
pubmed: 30068569
Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Jul;96:131-135
pubmed: 32376308
Infect Dis (Lond). 2019 Jul;51(7):543-546
pubmed: 31012776
Epigenetics. 2013 Nov;8(11):1226-35
pubmed: 24071829
Epigenetics. 2011 Feb;6(2):236-46
pubmed: 20962591
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2019 Nov 1;58(11):2015-2024
pubmed: 31081041
J Transl Autoimmun. 2022 Mar 28;5:100152
pubmed: 35517914
Immunol Lett. 2020 Sep;225:31-32
pubmed: 32569607
Nat Rev Immunol. 2020 Jul;20(7):442-447
pubmed: 32528136
Sci Rep. 2020 Oct 19;10(1):17718
pubmed: 33077873
Nature. 2020 Aug;584(7821):463-469
pubmed: 32717743
Front Immunol. 2021 Aug 09;12:720090
pubmed: 34434199
Lancet Respir Med. 2020 May;8(5):475-481
pubmed: 32105632
Stem Cell Res. 2020 Dec 16;50:102116
pubmed: 33352531
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2021 Feb 19;104(4):1188-1201
pubmed: 33606667
Nature. 2020 Jul;583(7816):437-440
pubmed: 32434211