Post-acute COVID-19 associated with evidence of bystander T-cell activation and a recurring AMR bacterial pneumonia

Abstract

Here we describe the case of a COVID-19 patient who developed recurring ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa that acquired increasing levels of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in response to treatment. Metagenomic analysis revealed the AMR genotype, while immunological analysis revealed massive and escalating levels of T-cell activation. These were both SARS-CoV-2 and P. aeruginosa specific, and bystander activated, which may have contributed to this patient's persistent symptoms and radiological changes.

Data availability

Human-filtered sequencing data for this study have been deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA) at EMBL-EBI under accession PRJEB40239.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Michaela Gregorova

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1605-0558
  2. Daniel Morse

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Tarcisio Brignoli

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Joseph Steventon

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Fergus Hamilton

    Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Mahableshwar Albur

    Pathology, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9792-7280
  7. David Arnold

    Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3158-7740
  8. Matthew Thomas

    Intensive Care Unit, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Alice Halliday

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Holly Baum

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Christopher Rice

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Matthew B Avison

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Andrew D Davidson

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1136-4008
  14. Marianna Santopaolo

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Elizabeth Oliver

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Anu Goenka

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Adam Finn

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Linda Wooldridge

    Bristol Veterinary School in the Faculty of Health Sciences, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Borko Amulic

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Rosemary J Boyton

    Lung Immunology Group, Section of Infectious Disease and Immunity, Department of Medicine, MRC & Asthma UK Centre in Allergic Mechanisms of Asthma, Centre for Respiratory Infection Imperial College, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Daniel M Altmann

    Human Disease Immunogenetics Group, Section of Infectious Disease and Immunity, Department of Medicine, Imperial College London W12 ONN, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  22. David K Butler

    Lung Immunology Group, Section of Infectious Disease and Immunity, Department of Medicine, MRC & Asthma UK Centre in Allergic Mechanisms of Asthma, Centre for Respiratory Infection Imperial Coll, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  23. Claire McMurray

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  24. Joanna Stockton

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  25. Sam Nicholls

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  26. Charles Cooper

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  27. Nicholas Loman

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  28. Michael J Cox

    Institute of Microbiology and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  29. Laura Rivino

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    laura.rivino@bristol.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  30. Ruth C Massey

    School of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    ruth.massey@bristol.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8154-4039

Funding

Southmead Hospital Charity

  • Fergus Hamilton

Wellcome Trust (212258/Z/18/Z)

  • Ruth C Massey

Elizabeth Blackwell Institute

  • Laura Rivino

UKRI (MR/S019553/1)

  • Rosemary J Boyton

UKRI (MR/R02622X/1)

  • Daniel M Altmann

Cystic Fibrosis Trust (CF Trust SRC 015)

  • David K Butler

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

Ethics

Human subjects: The patient was enrolled onto the DISCOVER study (Diagnostic and Severity markers of COVID-19 to Enable Rapid triage study), a single centre prospective study recruiting consecutive patients admitted with COVID-19, from 30.03.2020 until present (Ethics approval via South Yorkshire REC: 20/YH/0121, CRN approval no: 45469). Blood/serum samples from pre-pandemic healthy controls and asymptomatic healthy controls were obtained under the Bristol Biobank (NHS Research Ethics Committee approval ref 14/WA/1253).

Copyright

© 2020, Gregorova et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,078
    views
  • 345
    downloads
  • 25
    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. Michaela Gregorova
  2. Daniel Morse
  3. Tarcisio Brignoli
  4. Joseph Steventon
  5. Fergus Hamilton
  6. Mahableshwar Albur
  7. David Arnold
  8. Matthew Thomas
  9. Alice Halliday
  10. Holly Baum
  11. Christopher Rice
  12. Matthew B Avison
  13. Andrew D Davidson
  14. Marianna Santopaolo
  15. Elizabeth Oliver
  16. Anu Goenka
  17. Adam Finn
  18. Linda Wooldridge
  19. Borko Amulic
  20. Rosemary J Boyton
  21. Daniel M Altmann
  22. David K Butler
  23. Claire McMurray
  24. Joanna Stockton
  25. Sam Nicholls
  26. Charles Cooper
  27. Nicholas Loman
  28. Michael J Cox
  29. Laura Rivino
  30. Ruth C Massey
(2020)
Post-acute COVID-19 associated with evidence of bystander T-cell activation and a recurring AMR bacterial pneumonia
eLife 9:e63430.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63430

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63430

Further reading

    1. Immunology and Inflammation
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Hoang Thanh Hai, Le Thanh Hoang Nhat ... Nguyen Thuy Thuong Thuong
    Research Article

    Mortality and morbidity from tuberculous meningitis (TBM) are common, primarily due to inflammatory response to Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, yet the underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood. We aimed to uncover genes and pathways associated with TBM pathogenesis and mortality, and determine the best predictors of death, utilizing whole-blood RNA sequencing from 281 Vietnamese adults with TBM, 295 pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB), and 30 healthy controls. Through weighted gene co-expression network analysis, we identified hub genes and pathways linked to TBM severity and mortality, with a consensus analysis revealing distinct patterns between HIV-positive and HIV-negative individuals. We employed multivariate elastic-net Cox regression to select candidate predictors of death, then logistic regression and internal bootstrap validation to choose best predictors. Increased neutrophil activation and decreased T and B cell activation pathways were associated with TBM mortality. Among HIV-positive individuals, mortality associated with increased angiogenesis, while HIV-negative individuals exhibited elevated TNF signaling and impaired extracellular matrix organization. Four hub genes—MCEMP1, NELL2, ZNF354C, and CD4—were strong TBM mortality predictors. These findings indicate that TBM induces a systemic inflammatory response similar to PTB, highlighting critical genes and pathways related to death, offering insights for potential therapeutic targets alongside a novel four-gene biomarker for predicting outcomes.

    1. Immunology and Inflammation
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Bin Li, Jin Zhang ... Chao Wu
    Research Article

    Adjuvants can affect APCs function and boost adaptive immune responses post-vaccination. However, whether they modulate the specificity of immune responses, particularly immunodominant epitope responses, and the mechanisms of regulating antigen processing and presentation remain poorly defined. Here, using overlapping synthetic peptides, we screened the dominant epitopes of Th1 responses in mice post-vaccination with different adjuvants and found that the adjuvants altered the antigen-specific CD4+ T-cell immunodominant epitope hierarchy. MHC-II immunopeptidomes demonstrated that the peptide repertoires presented by APCs were significantly altered by the adjuvants. Unexpectedly, no novel peptide presentation was detected after adjuvant treatment, whereas peptides with high binding stability for MHC-II presented in the control group were missing after adjuvant stimulation, particularly in the MPLA- and CpG-stimulated groups. The low-stability peptide present in the adjuvant groups effectively elicited robust T-cell responses and formed immune memory. Collectively, our results suggest that adjuvants (MPLA and CpG) inhibit high-stability peptide presentation instead of revealing cryptic epitopes, which may alter the specificity of CD4+ T-cell-dominant epitope responses. The capacity of adjuvants to modify peptide–MHC (pMHC) stability and antigen-specific T-cell immunodominant epitope responses has fundamental implications for the selection of suitable adjuvants in the vaccine design process and epitope vaccine development.