4.8 Article

Clonal analysis of immunodominance and cross-reactivity of the CD4 T cell response to SARS-CoV-2

Journal

SCIENCE
Volume 372, Issue 6548, Pages 1336-+

Publisher

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/science.abg8985

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Henry Krenter Foundation
  2. Cariplo Foundation [2020-1374 CoVIM]
  3. Swiss National Science Foundation [189331]
  4. EOC research funds
  5. Helmut Horten Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study demonstrates a robust CD4(+) T cell response to SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleoprotein in COVID-19-recovered individuals, with a highly immunogenic receptor-binding domain (RBD). Through characterizing T cell clones, it was found that a region containing nested HLA-DR and HLA-DP-restricted epitopes is immunodominant. Cross-reactive T cells targeting multiple S protein sites were identified, which can guide vaccination strategies against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.
The identification of CD4(+) T cell epitopes is instrumental for the design of subunit vaccines for broad protection against coronaviruses. Here, we demonstrate in COVID-19-recovered individuals a robust CD4(+) T cell response to naturally processed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike (S) protein and nucleoprotein (N), including effector, helper, and memory T cells. By characterizing 2943 S-reactive T cell clones from 34 individuals, we found that the receptor-binding domain (RBD) is highly immunogenic and that 33% of RBD-reactive clones and 94% of individuals recognized a conserved immunodominant S346-S365 region comprising nested human leukocyte antigen DR (HLA-DR)- and HLA-DP-restricted epitopes. Using pre- and post-COVID-19 samples and S proteins from endemic coronaviruses, we identified cross-reactive T cells targeting multiple S protein sites. The immunodominant and cross-reactive epitopes identified can inform vaccination strategies to counteract emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.

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