4.7 Article

A Granulocytic Signature Identifies COVID-19 and Its Severity

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 222, 期 12, 页码 1985-1996

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiaa591

关键词

SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; neutrophil; eosinophil; basophil; CRTH2; immune checkpoint; CD11b; CD16; PD-L1

资金

  1. French National Research Agency (Agence Nationale de la Recherche, ANR Flash COVID, grant IMMUNO-COVID)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. An unbiased approach to SARS-CoV-2-induced immune dysregulation has not been undertaken so far. We aimed to identify previously unreported immune markers able to discriminate COVID-19 patients from healthy controls and to predict mild and severe disease. Methods. An observational, prospective, multicentric study was conducted in patients with confirmed mild/moderate (n = 7) and severe (n = 19) COVID-19. Immunophenotyping of whole-blood leukocytes was performed in patients upon hospital ward or intensive care unit admission and in healthy controls (n = 25). Clinically relevant associations were identified through unsupervised analysis. Results. Granulocytic (neutrophil, eosinophil, and basophil) markers were enriched during COVID-19 and discriminated between patients with mild and severe disease. Increased counts of CD15(+)CD16(+) neutrophils, decreased granulocytic expression of integrin CD11b, and Th2-related CRTH2 downregulation in eosinophils and basophils established a COVID-19 signature. Severity was associated with emergence of PD-L1 checkpoint expression in basophils and eosinophils. This granulocytic signature was accompanied by monocyte and lymphocyte immunoparalysis. Correlation with validated clinical scores supported pathophysiological relevance. Conclusions. Phenotypic markers of circulating granulocytes are strong discriminators between infected and uninfected individuals as well as between severity stages. COVID-19 alters the frequency and functional phenotypes of granulocyte subsets with emergence of CRTH2 as a disease biomarker.

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

4.7
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