SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses can originate from cross-reactive CMV-specific T cells

Abstract

Detection of SARS-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in SARS-CoV-2-unexposed donors has been explained by the presence of T cells primed by other coronaviruses. However, based on the relative high frequency and prevalence of cross-reactive T cells, we hypothesized CMV may induce these cross-reactive T cells. Stimulation of pre-pandemic cryo-preserved PBMCs with SARS-CoV-2 peptides revealed that frequencies of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were higher in CMV-seropositive donors. Characterization of these T cells demonstrated that membrane-specific CD4+ and spike-specific CD8+ T cells originate from cross-reactive CMV-specific T cells. Spike-specific CD8+ T cells recognize SARS-CoV-2 spike peptide FVSNGTHWF (FVS) and dissimilar CMV pp65 peptide IPSINVHHY (IPS) presented by HLA-B*35:01. These dual IPS/FVS-reactive CD8+ T cells were found in multiple donors as well as severe COVID-19 patients and shared a common T cell receptor (TCR), illustrating that IPS/FVS-cross-reactivity is caused by a public TCR. In conclusion, CMV-specific T cells cross-react with SARS-CoV-2, despite low sequence homology between the two viruses, and may contribute to the pre-existing immunity against SARS-CoV-2.

Data availability

Figure 1 - Source data 1 contains percentages underlying figure 1C-F. Figure 4 - Source data 1 contains the sequence data used to generate figures and the data have been deposited in SRA (NCBI) database under BioProjectID PRJNA891934.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Cilia R Pothast

    Department of Hematology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
    For correspondence
    c.r.pothast@lumc.nl
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9761-3123
  2. Romy C Dijkland

    Department of Hematology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Melissa Thaler

    Department of Medical Microbiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5590-4918
  4. Renate S Hagedoorn

    Department of Hematology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Michel GD Kester

    Department of Hematology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Anne K Wouters

    Department of Hematology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Pieter S Hiemstra

    Department of Pulmonology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Martijn J van Hemert

    Department of Medical Microbiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Stephanie Gras

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Monash University, Clayton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. JH Frederik Falkenburg

    Department of Hematology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Mirjam HM Heemskerk

    Department of Hematology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Funding

Health~Holland (LSHM19088)

  • Mirjam HM Heemskerk

National Health and Medical Research Council (1159272)

  • Stephanie Gras

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Gabrielle T Belz, University of Queensland, Australia

Ethics

Human subjects: Bio-banked PBMCs were cryopreserved after informed consent from the respective donors, in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki. The samples from COVID-19 patients were part of a trial (NL8589) registered in the Dutch Trial Registry and approved by Medical Ethical Committee Leiden-Den Haag-Delft (NL73740.058.20).

Version history

  1. Received: July 21, 2022
  2. Preprint posted: August 1, 2022 (view preprint)
  3. Accepted: November 13, 2022
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: November 21, 2022 (version 1)
  5. Version of Record published: January 6, 2023 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2022, Pothast 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

  • 1,309
    views
  • 252
    downloads
  • 15
    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. Cilia R Pothast
  2. Romy C Dijkland
  3. Melissa Thaler
  4. Renate S Hagedoorn
  5. Michel GD Kester
  6. Anne K Wouters
  7. Pieter S Hiemstra
  8. Martijn J van Hemert
  9. Stephanie Gras
  10. JH Frederik Falkenburg
  11. Mirjam HM Heemskerk
(2022)
SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses can originate from cross-reactive CMV-specific T cells
eLife 11:e82050.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.82050

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.82050

Further reading

    1. Epidemiology and Global Health
    2. Medicine
    3. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Edited by Diane M Harper et al.
    Collection

    eLife has published the following articles on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19.

    1. Evolutionary Biology
    2. Immunology and Inflammation
    Mark S Lee, Peter J Tuohy ... Michael S Kuhns
    Research Advance

    CD4+ T cell activation is driven by five-module receptor complexes. The T cell receptor (TCR) is the receptor module that binds composite surfaces of peptide antigens embedded within MHCII molecules (pMHCII). It associates with three signaling modules (CD3γε, CD3δε, and CD3ζζ) to form TCR-CD3 complexes. CD4 is the coreceptor module. It reciprocally associates with TCR-CD3-pMHCII assemblies on the outside of a CD4+ T cells and with the Src kinase, LCK, on the inside. Previously, we reported that the CD4 transmembrane GGXXG and cytoplasmic juxtamembrane (C/F)CV+C motifs found in eutherian (placental mammal) CD4 have constituent residues that evolved under purifying selection (Lee et al., 2022). Expressing mutants of these motifs together in T cell hybridomas increased CD4-LCK association but reduced CD3ζ, ZAP70, and PLCγ1 phosphorylation levels, as well as IL-2 production, in response to agonist pMHCII. Because these mutants preferentially localized CD4-LCK pairs to non-raft membrane fractions, one explanation for our results was that they impaired proximal signaling by sequestering LCK away from TCR-CD3. An alternative hypothesis is that the mutations directly impacted signaling because the motifs normally play an LCK-independent role in signaling. The goal of this study was to discriminate between these possibilities. Using T cell hybridomas, our results indicate that: intracellular CD4-LCK interactions are not necessary for pMHCII-specific signal initiation; the GGXXG and (C/F)CV+C motifs are key determinants of CD4-mediated pMHCII-specific signal amplification; the GGXXG and (C/F)CV+C motifs exert their functions independently of direct CD4-LCK association. These data provide a mechanistic explanation for why residues within these motifs are under purifying selection in jawed vertebrates. The results are also important to consider for biomimetic engineering of synthetic receptors.