Monocyte-derived transcriptome signature indicates antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis as a potential mechanism of vaccine-induced protection against HIV-1

  1. Shida Shangguan
  2. Philip K Ehrenberg
  3. Aviva Geretz
  4. Lauren Yum
  5. Gautam Kundu
  6. Kelly May
  7. Slim Fourati
  8. Krystelle Nganou-Makamdop
  9. LaTonya D Williams
  10. Sheetal Sawant
  11. Eric Lewitus
  12. Punnee Pitisuttithum
  13. Sorachai Nitayaphan
  14. Suwat Chariyalertsak
  15. Supachai Rerks-Ngarm
  16. Morgane Rolland
  17. Daniel C Douek
  18. Peter Gilbert
  19. Georgia D Tomaras
  20. Nelson L Michael
  21. Sandhya Vasan
  22. Rasmi Thomas  Is a corresponding author
  1. Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, United States
  2. Emory University, United States
  3. National Institutes of Health, United States
  4. Duke University School of Medicine, United States
  5. Mahidol University, Thailand
  6. AFRIMS, Thailand
  7. Chiang Mai University, Thailand
  8. Ministry of Public Health, Thailand
  9. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, United States

Abstract

A gene signature previously correlated with mosaic adenovirus 26 vaccine protection in simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) and SHIV challenge models in non-human primates (NHP). In this report we investigated presence of this signature as a correlate of reduced risk in human clinical trials and potential mechanisms of protection. The absence of this gene signature in the DNA/rAd5 human vaccine trial, which did not show efficacy, strengthens our hypothesis that this signature is only enriched in studies that demonstrated protection. This gene signature was enriched in the partially effective RV144 human trial that administered the ALVAC/protein vaccine, and we find that the signature associates with both decreased risk of HIV-1 acquisition and increased vaccine efficacy. Total RNA-seq in a clinical trial that used the same vaccine regimen as the RV144 HIV vaccine implicated antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis (ADCP) as a potential mechanism of vaccine protection. CITE-seq profiling of 53 surface markers and transcriptomes of 53,777 single cells from the same trial showed that genes in this signature were primarily expressed in cells belonging to the myeloid lineage, including monocytes, which are major effector cells for ADCP. The consistent association of this transcriptome signature with vaccine efficacy represents a tool both to identify potential mechanisms, as with ADCP here, and to screen novel approaches to accelerate development of new vaccine candidates.

Data availability

All code and data generated or analyzed during this study are included with the manuscript and supporting files. Source data files have been provided for all data used in this study, including CITE-seq and gene expression matrix for all studies are available at figshare 10.6084/m9.figshare.14555958. The RNA-seq gene expression data for RV306 and HVTN 505 studies are available in the National Center for Biotechnology Information Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) under accession numbers: "GSE181932" and "GS1E181859" respectively. Dataset from GSE181932 can be accessed at URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE181932with reviewer token mnyxkcgedbqdnch.Dataset from GSE181859 can be accessed at URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE181859with reviewer token etuhyseoxrghxkd.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Shida Shangguan

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Philip K Ehrenberg

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8695-4301
  3. Aviva Geretz

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Lauren Yum

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Gautam Kundu

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Kelly May

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Slim Fourati

    Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6609-7587
  8. Krystelle Nganou-Makamdop

    National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. LaTonya D Williams

    Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Sheetal Sawant

    Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Eric Lewitus

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Punnee Pitisuttithum

    Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Sorachai Nitayaphan

    AFRIMS, Bangkok, Thailand
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Suwat Chariyalertsak

    Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Supachai Rerks-Ngarm

    Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Morgane Rolland

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Maryland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Daniel C Douek

    National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Peter Gilbert

    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Georgia D Tomaras

    Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Nelson L Michael

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Sandhya Vasan

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  22. Rasmi Thomas

    Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Silver Spring, United States
    For correspondence
    rthomas@hivresearch.org
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2116-2418

Funding

Henry M. Jackson Foundation (W81XWH-07-2-0067)

  • Shida Shangguan
  • Philip K Ehrenberg
  • Aviva Geretz
  • Lauren Yum
  • Gautam Kundu
  • Kelly May
  • Eric Lewitus
  • Morgane Rolland
  • Nelson L Michael
  • Sandhya Vasan
  • Rasmi Thomas

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases

  • Shida Shangguan
  • Philip K Ehrenberg
  • Aviva Geretz
  • Lauren Yum
  • Gautam Kundu
  • Eric Lewitus
  • Morgane Rolland
  • Nelson L Michael
  • Sandhya Vasan
  • Rasmi Thomas

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 1,546
    views
  • 201
    downloads
  • 12
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Shida Shangguan
  2. Philip K Ehrenberg
  3. Aviva Geretz
  4. Lauren Yum
  5. Gautam Kundu
  6. Kelly May
  7. Slim Fourati
  8. Krystelle Nganou-Makamdop
  9. LaTonya D Williams
  10. Sheetal Sawant
  11. Eric Lewitus
  12. Punnee Pitisuttithum
  13. Sorachai Nitayaphan
  14. Suwat Chariyalertsak
  15. Supachai Rerks-Ngarm
  16. Morgane Rolland
  17. Daniel C Douek
  18. Peter Gilbert
  19. Georgia D Tomaras
  20. Nelson L Michael
  21. Sandhya Vasan
  22. Rasmi Thomas
(2021)
Monocyte-derived transcriptome signature indicates antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis as a potential mechanism of vaccine-induced protection against HIV-1
eLife 10:e69577.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.69577

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.69577

Further reading

    1. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Han Kang Tee, Simon Crouzet ... Caroline Tapparel
    Research Article

    Because of high mutation rates, viruses constantly adapt to new environments. When propagated in cell lines, certain viruses acquire positively charged amino acids on their surface proteins, enabling them to utilize negatively charged heparan sulfate (HS) as an attachment receptor. In this study, we used enterovirus A71 (EV-A71) as model and demonstrated that unlike the parental MP4 variant, the cell-adapted strong HS-binder MP4-97R/167G does not require acidification for uncoating and releases its genome in the neutral or weakly acidic environment of early endosomes. We experimentally confirmed that this pH-independent entry is not associated with the use of HS as an attachment receptor but rather with compromised capsid stability. We then extended these findings to another HS-dependent strain. In summary, our data indicate that acquisition of capsid mutations conferring affinity for HS come together with decreased capsid stability and allow EV-A71 to enter the cell via a pH-independent pathway. This pH-independent entry mechanism boosts viral replication in cell lines but may prove deleterious in vivo, especially for enteric viruses crossing the acidic gastric environment before reaching their primary replication site, the intestine. Our study thus provides new insight into the mechanisms underlying the in vivo attenuation of HS-binding EV-A71 strains. Not only are these viruses hindered in tissues rich in HS due to viral trapping, as generally accepted, but our research reveals that their diminished capsid stability further contributes to attenuation in vivo. This underscores the complex relationship between HS-binding, capsid stability, and viral fitness, where increased replication in cell lines coincides with attenuation in harsh in vivo environments like the gastrointestinal tract.

    1. Medicine
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Berit Siedentop, Viacheslav N Kachalov ... Sebastian Bonhoeffer
    Research Article

    Background:

    Under which conditions antibiotic combination therapy decelerates rather than accelerates resistance evolution is not well understood. We examined the effect of combining antibiotics on within-patient resistance development across various bacterial pathogens and antibiotics.

    Methods:

    We searched CENTRAL, EMBASE, and PubMed for (quasi)-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published from database inception to 24 November 2022. Trials comparing antibiotic treatments with different numbers of antibiotics were included. Patients were considered to have acquired resistance if, at the follow-up culture, a resistant bacterium (as defined by the study authors) was detected that had not been present in the baseline culture. We combined results using a random effects model and performed meta-regression and stratified analyses. The trials’ risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool.

    Results:

    42 trials were eligible and 29, including 5054 patients, qualified for statistical analysis. In most trials, resistance development was not the primary outcome and studies lacked power. The combined odds ratio for the acquisition of resistance comparing the group with the higher number of antibiotics with the comparison group was 1.23 (95% CI 0.68–2.25), with substantial between-study heterogeneity (I2=77%). We identified tentative evidence for potential beneficial or detrimental effects of antibiotic combination therapy for specific pathogens or medical conditions.

    Conclusions:

    The evidence for combining a higher number of antibiotics compared to fewer from RCTs is scarce and overall compatible with both benefit or harm. Trials powered to detect differences in resistance development or well-designed observational studies are required to clarify the impact of combination therapy on resistance.

    Funding:

    Support from the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant 310030B_176401 (SB, BS, CW), grant 32FP30-174281 (ME), grant 324730_207957 (RDK)) and from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID, cooperative agreement AI069924 (ME)) is gratefully acknowledged.