4.8 Article

Adenoviral Vector Vaccination Induces a Conserved Program of CD8+ T Cell Memory Differentiation in Mouse and Man

Journal

CELL REPORTS
Volume 13, Issue 8, Pages 1578-1588

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2015.10.034

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Oxford Martin School
  2. Wellcome Trust [WT091663MA]
  3. Swiss National Science Foundation
  4. Schweizerische Stiftung fur Medizinisch-Biologische Stipendien (SSMBS)
  5. NIH [U19AI082630]
  6. MRC
  7. NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford
  8. Medical Research Council [1890672, G0701694, MR/K010239/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  9. National Institute for Health Research [CL-2013-18-009, NF-SI-0510-10204] Funding Source: researchfish
  10. MRC [MR/K010239/1, G0701694] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Following exposure to vaccines, antigen-specific CD8(+) T cell responses develop as long-term memory pools. Vaccine strategies based on adenoviral vectors, e.g., those developed for HCV, are able to induce and sustain substantial CD8(+) T cell populations. How such populations evolve following vaccination remains to be defined at a transcriptional level. We addressed the transcriptional regulation of divergent CD8(+) T cell memory pools induced by an adenovector encoding a model antigen (beta-galactosidase). We observe transcriptional profiles that mimic those following infection with persistent pathogens, murine and human cytomegalovirus (CMV). Key transcriptional hallmarks include upregulation of homing receptors and anti-apoptotic pathways, driven by conserved networks of transcription factors, including T-bet. In humans, an adenovirus vaccine induced similar CMV-like phenotypes and transcription factor regulation. These data clarify the core features of CD8(+) T cell memory following vaccination with adenovectors and indicate a conserved pathway for memory development shared with persistent herpesviruses.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available