4.7 Article

An atlas of immune cell exhaustion in HIV-infected individuals revealed by single-cell transcriptomics

期刊

EMERGING MICROBES & INFECTIONS
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 2333-2347

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/22221751.2020.1826361

关键词

HIV-1; single-cell RNA-seq; T cell dysfunction; immune exhaustion; KLRG1; NK cell impairment

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [DA039562, DA046171, DA049524]
  2. University of California, San Diego Center for AIDS Research, an NIH [P30 AI036214]
  3. NIAID
  4. NCI
  5. NIDA
  6. NHLBI
  7. NIGMS
  8. NIDDK
  9. NIMH
  10. NICHD
  11. NIA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chronic infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) can cause progressive loss of immune cell function, or exhaustion, which impairs control of virus replication. However, little is known about the development and maintenance, as well as heterogeneity of immune cell exhaustion. Here, we investigated the effects of HIV infection on immune cell exhaustion at the transcriptomic level by analyzing single-cell RNA sequencing of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from four healthy subjects (37,847 cells) and six HIV-infected donors (28,610 cells). We identified nine immune cell clusters and eight T cell subclusters, and three of these (exhausted CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells and interferon-responsive CD8(+) T cells) were detected only in samples from HIV-infected donors. An inhibitory receptor KLRG1 was identified in a HIV-1 specific exhausted CD8(+) T cell population expressing KLRG1, TIGIT, and T-bet(dim)Eomes(hi) markers. Ex-vivo antibody blockade of KLRG1 restored the function of HIV-specific exhausted CD8(+) T cells demonstrating the contribution of KLRG1(+) population to T cell exhaustion and providing an immunotherapy target to treat HIV chronic infection. These data provide a comprehensive analysis of gene signatures associated with immune cell exhaustion during HIV infection, which could be useful in understanding exhaustion mechanisms and developing new cure therapies.

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