4.8 Article

Antigen-Specific Adaptive Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in Acute COVID-19 and Associations with Age and Disease Severity

期刊

CELL
卷 183, 期 4, 页码 996-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.038

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH NIAID, United States [AI142742]
  2. NIH [75N9301900065]
  3. NIH NIAID [AI100625, U19 AI118626]
  4. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, United States
  5. LJI Institutional Funds
  6. Johnathan and Mary Tu Foundation
  7. NIAID under K08 award [AI135078]
  8. NIAID under K99 award [AI145762]
  9. UCSD T32s Infectious Diseases Division [AI007036, AI007384]
  10. Therapeutics Accelerator [INV-006133]
  11. Mastercard
  12. Wellcome
  13. Departamento Administrativo de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovacion (COLCIENCIAS)
  14. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Colombia (Convocatoria 727 Doctorados Nacionales)
  15. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation [INV-006133] Funding Source: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Limited knowledge is available on the relationship between antigen-specific immune responses and COVID-19 disease severity. We completed a combined examination of all three branches of adaptive immunity at the level of SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cell and neutralizing antibody responses in acute and convalescent subjects. SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells were each associated with milder disease. Coordinated SARS-CoV-2-specific adaptive immune responses were associated with milder disease, suggesting roles for both CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells in protective immunity in COVID-19. Notably, coordination of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-specific responses was disrupted in individuals R 65 years old. Scarcity of naive T cells was also associated with aging and poor disease outcomes. A parsimonious explanation is that co-ordinated CD4(+) T cell, CD8(+) T cell, and antibody responses are protective, but uncoordinated responses frequently fail to control disease, with a connection between aging and impaired adaptive immune responses to SARS-CoV-2.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据