Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Clinical and Vaccine Immunology, September 2007, p. 1108-1116, Vol. 14, No. 9
1071-412X/07/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/CVI.00004-07
Copyright © 2007, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Division of Immunology and Allergy, Department of Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland
Received 3 January 2007/ Returned for modification 7 February 2007/ Accepted 2 July 2007
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
In the present study, tetanus toxoid (TT) was used as a model vaccine antigen that likely shares common functional characteristics with other nonviral antigens, such as a low frequency of specific CD4+ T cells in the periphery at steady state and a specific CD4+ T-cell response to multiple epitope peptides presented by MHC class II molecules (16, 36, 40). Using ex vivo cell phenotyping and cloning in combination with TCR spectratype analysis of cytokine-positive CD4+ T cells, we sought to establish experimental conditions to track ex vivo antigen-specific CD4+ T cells in conditions that are likely to reflect clinical situations such as vaccination, nonviral pathogen infections, or allergic diseases.
|
|
|---|
Immunofluorescence staining and cell sorting.
Stimulated and nonstimulated PBMC were stained in phosphate-buffered saline buffer containing 0.5% bovine serum albumin (Flucka) and 1 mM EDTA, using the following monoclonal antibodies: fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-conjugated CD69 (FN50), CD45RO (UCHL1), and CD27 (M-T271); phycoerythrin-conjugated CD62L (DREG-56), HLA-DR, -DP, and -DQ (TU39); cytochrome-conjugated CD4 (RPA-T4); PerCP-Cy5.5-conjugated CD4 (SK3); APC-conjugated CD69 (FN50) and CD25 (2A3); and FITC- or APC-conjugated polyclonal goat anti-rat immunoglobulin (all from BD Bioscience, Basel, Switzerland). We also used phycoerythrin-conjugated CD8 (DK25; Dakocytomation, Zug, Switzerland), phycoerythrin/Texas Red-conjugated CD4 (SFC2T4D11; Beckman Coulter, Nyon, Switzerland), and rat anti-human CCR7 antibody (3D12; rat immunoglobulin G2a). For cytokine expression, cells were first stained by using gamma interferon (IFN-
) and/or interleukin-2 (IL-2) catch reagent according to the manufacturer's protocol (Miltenyi Biotec GmbH, Bergisch Gladbach, Germany), followed by selected anti-cell surface marker antibodies. Samples were analyzed on a FACScalibur, and the fluorescence intensity was determined by using CellQuest software (Becton Dickinson, Mountain View, CA). When indicated, labeled cells were sorted on a FACS Vantage SE (Becton Dickinson).
T-cell proliferation, T-cell cloning, and IL-2 production. Freshly prepared PBMC (3 x 105 to 4 x 105 cells) were plated in 96-well flat-bottom plates in complete RPMI 1640 medium, stimulated with TT at 50 µg/ml or phytohemagglutinin at 2 µg/ml or left unstimulated, followed by incubation for 5 days at 37°C in 5% CO2. Cells were harvested after 18 h of incubation with 1 µCi of [3H]thymidine (Hartmann Analytic GmbH, Braunschweig, Germany). [3H]thymidine incorporation was measured in a β-counter (Top Count; Packard Bioscience S.A., Zürich, Switzerland). T-cell cloning (0.3 cell/well) was performed as described earlier (3, 36). Clones with a stimulation index of >2 were further expanded and retested for specificity as described previously (4, 36). The IL-2 concentration in supernatants from PBMC stimulated with or without TT or Staphylococcus enterotoxin B was determined by using the IL-2-dependent CTL-L line assay.
T-cell receptor spectratype analysis and sequencing. CD4+ T-cell subpopulations of interest were first sorted in 0.5-ml tubes. The procedure for cDNA preparation and cDNA amplification was recently described in detail (7). cDNA amplification was performed with a minimal cell number of 80 and a maximum of 100 cells. PCR of the cDNA was performed using on one side with a radiolabeled constant primer and on the other with a primer corresponding to the variable region of the TCR β-chain region, based on the procedure described by Malanska et al. (33). PCR conditions and primers used were as described previously (18). PCR products were applied to a 6% polyacrylamide-urea gel. Autoradiographies were performed on dried gels and, after scanning, each TCR-CDR3 band of the spectratype was quantified by densitometry using InstantImager electronic autoradiography software (Packard Bioscience). A separate CD3 PCR amplification was used as an internal control for cDNA quality and for migration reference. TCRs of T-cell clones were sequenced according to a standardized procedure. Briefly, PCR products were purified by using a QIAquick PCR purification kit (QIAGEN, Basel, Switzerland). A sequencing reaction was performed by using BigDye terminator cycle sequencing kit (Applied Biosystems, Rotkreuz, Switzerland). Purified sequenced reactions (DyeEx spin kit; QIAGEN) were analyzed by using the sequencer ABI Prism 377 and Sequencher 4.1 software (Applied Biosystems).
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (27K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Ex vivo phenotypic characterization of total CD4+ and TT-stimulated IL-2+ CD4+ T-cell population. (A) Steady-state, unstimulated total PBMC (from donor 4) were stained ex vivo for the expression of CCR7, CD45RO, CD27, CD62L, CD69, and CD4. Four-color flow cytometry was used to delineate naive (CCR7+ CD45RO– CD62L+ CD4+; CD27+ CD45RO– CD62L+ CD4+), TCM (CCR7+ CD45RO+ CD62Lint CD4+; CD27+ CD45RO+ CD62Lint CD4+), and TEM (CCR7– CD45RO+ CD62L– CD4+; CD27– CD45RO+ CD62L– CD4+) T-cell populations. Values in quadrants represent the percentage of each subpopulation of gated CD4+ T cells. There were a total of 105 analyzed events. (B) PBMC (from donor 4) were stimulated for 16 h with TT at 100 µg/ml, stained for IL-2 and cell surface markers, and analyzed as in panel A. Values in the quadrants represent the percentage of each subpopulation of gated IL-2+ CD4+ T cells. There were a total of 106 analyzed events. (C) PBMC cultured in the absence of antigen (from donor 4) were analyzed as in panel B. Similar experiments were performed in parallel with the three other donors at four different time points with similar results.
|
and/or IL-2 secretion and then in combination with the early activation marker CD69, cloned, and analyzed for specificity by classical antigen proliferation (Table 1, donor 1, and Fig. 2A). From the first step of this analysis, we could conclude that cytokine expression alone was unable to identify the core of TT-specific CD4+ T cells. Indeed, despite the high number of clones tested (212 and 96), the frequency of TT-specific T-cell clones in the IFN-
+ (2%), as well as in the IL-2+ (3%), compartments was definitely low. This suggested that even a short in vitro antigen stimulation was able to induce a high, nonspecific bystander activation signal leading to cytokine release by the surrounding nonspecific CD4+ T cells. In contrast, when IL-2+ CD4+ T cells were further separated into CD69+/– cells, close to half of the CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ derived T-cell clones belonged to TT-specific T cells (61 of 128) (Table 1, donor 1, and Fig. 2A). In contrast, the frequency of TT-specific clones in the CD69+ IFN-
+ fraction for this donor was markedly lower (6 of 104). We further sorted CD69+/– IL-2+ CD4+ T cells into CCR7+/– cells before cloning (Table 1, donors 2 and 3, and Fig. 2B). Under these conditions, a higher precursor frequency of TT-specific CD4+ T-cell clones was found in the TCM cells (CCR7+ CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+; range, 28 to 53%; median, 43% [all time points confounded]) than in the TEM cells (CCR7– CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+; range, 11 to 46%; median, 20%) (Table 1, donors 2 and 3). In donor 3, at day 35 after boost, TT-specific T-cell clones were predominantly found within the IL-2-secreting T-cell subsets, although the frequency of IFN-
-secreting TT-specific clones was considerably higher than in donor 1. In addition, very few, if any, TT-specific CD4+ T-cell clones could be derived from the IL-2–, IFN-
–, or CD69– populations (range, 0 to 8%; median, 0.5%; Table 1). After double cytokine staining, only rare cells stained for both IL-2 and IFN-
(0.06% in donor 3 [data not shown]). Nonetheless, whereas very few clones (n = 7) were derived from the IL-2+ IFN-
+ double-positive population, most of them were antigen specific (n = 5 [71%]). Finally, we reproducibly failed to detect Th2 type IL-4+ CCR7+/– CD69+ CD4+ T cells. Overall, from these cloning experiments we concluded that a marked proportion of TT-specific CD4+ T cells belonged to Th1, IL-2-expressing CCR7+/– CD69+ CD4+ T-cell subsets, at steady state as well as postboost, although a significant but variable number of antigen-specific T cells could be detected among the IFN-
-expressing CCR7+/– CD69+ CD4+ population, depending on the donor. Pragmatically, to further track TT-specific CD4+ T cells, we concentrated our analysis on the IL-2-expressing CCR7+/– CD69+ CD4+ T-cell populations. |
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Antigen-specific clonal frequency of defined CD4+ T-cell subsetsa
|
![]() View larger version (26K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Sorting and cloning strategy for activated TT-specific CD4+ T cells. Freshly prepared PBMC were first stimulated for 16 h with TT at 100 µg/ml; stained for IFN- , IL-2, and cell surface markers CD4, CD69, and CCR7; and then sorted by cytofluorimetry and cloned. (A) Stimulated cells were first gated on the IFN- + CD4+ or IL-2+ CD4+ subpopulations and then sorted according to CD69 expression to isolate CD69+/– IFN- + CD4+ T cells or CD69+/– IL-2+ CD4+ T cells for cloning. (B) Stimulated cells were first gated on the IL-2+ CD4+ subpopulation and then sorted according to CCR7 and CD69 expression to identify the CCR7+/– CD69+/– IL-2+ CD4+ T-cell subpopulations for cloning. A similar approach was performed for the IFN- + CD4+ subpopulation. For abundant cell populations, an average number of 400 cells were cloned, and at least 100 cells were evaluated for smaller populations.
|
![]() View larger version (21K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. Kinetics of CD4+ T-cell proliferation and IL-2 secretion. (A) Proliferation of TT-specific T cells. Pre- and post-TT boost PBMC were stimulated for 4 days with TT at 50 µg/ml. The data (means of triplicates) are expressed as stimulation indexes. (B) IL-2 secretion by TT-specific T cells. PBMC were stimulated for 16 h with TT at 100 µg/ml. Supernatants were collected, and IL-2 was detected by a functional IL-2-dependent CTL-L cell line assay. The data represent means of triplicates. (C) TCM versus TEM IL-2+ CD4+ T cells before and after TT immunization. PBMC were stimulated as in panel B; stained for IL-2, CCR7, CD4, CD45RO, and CD69; and analyzed as in Fig. 1. The data represent the percentage of CCR7+/– CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T cells from gated IL-2+ CD4+ T cells. D0, day 0; D7, day 7, etc.
|
![]() View larger version (77K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. TCR BV usage of a TT-specific repertoire is broad and stable over time. (A) Spectratype analysis of ex vivo-sorted CD4+ T cells. PBMC sampled before (day 0 [D0]) or after (days 14 and 35 [D14 and D35]) a TT boost were stimulated for 16 h with TT at 100 µg/ml and stained for IL-2, CCR7, CD69, and CD4. CCR7+/– CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T cells were sorted, and TCR BV spectratypes were performed by RT-PCR (21 BV families [top grids]; detected BVs are indicated in boldface, and nondetected BVs are in italics). In the gel, two BV PCR products were loaded per slot. The virtual horizontal bar delineates short and long sizes PCR products in the upper part (U) and lower part (L), respectively. This is a representative experiment with a CCR7+ CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T-cell population from donor 4; similar results were obtained with the three other donors. Filled dots designate TCRs present at all time points, open squares indicate TCRs detected after TT boost only. (B) For comparison, TCR BV spectratype analysis of a polyclonal, non-antigen-specific CD4+ T-cell population with the expected Gaussian distribution for BV3 and BV13. (C) In vitro-generated TT-specific T-cell clones from ex vivo-sorted CCR7+ CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T cells are found within the original population (from donor 2). Specific T-cell clone TCR BV usage was determined by RT-PCR and compared to the original sorted CD4+ T-cell population for the corresponding TCR. Analysis is limited to a representative example with TT-specific T-cell clones restricted to TCR BV9. "Total sorted cells," spectratype of the whole population of originally sorted T cells at days 0, 7, 14, and 280. (D) Similar analysis as in panel C for donor 1, with TT-specific T-cell clones restricted to TCR BV8, BV5.1, and BV22 and corresponding total sorted cells (ex vivo, left lanes).
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. TCR BV usage of ex vivo-sorted CCR7+/– CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T cells and in vitro-derived TT-specific T-cell clones
|
![]() View larger version (23K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. Longitudinal analysis of TCR BV spectratype usage of CCR7+/– CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ sorted T cells and of TT-specific derived T-cell clones. (A) Pre- and post-TT boost PMBC were treated as described in Fig. 4. TCR BV spectratypes were performed on sorted CCR7+/– CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T cells. The diagram indicates the presence (filled rectangles) of TCR-CDR3 at different time points before and after the TT boost for the 21BV families. (B) Number of TT-specific T-cell clones and TCR BV expression analysis. TT-specific T-cell clones were generated in vitro from sorted CCR7+/– CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T cells, and their BV expression was determined by RT-PCR. Panels A and B are examples from donor 3; similar data were obtained with the other donors. (C) TCR diversity in TCM CCR7+ and TEM CCR7– populations. CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ TCM and TEM populations were ex vivo sorted and analyzed as described in Fig. 4. Diversity is expressed as the total number of TCR-CDR3 obtained in each population. *, sample not available and not tested at this time point. D0, day 0; D7, day 7, etc.
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 3. TCR sequencing of TT-specific T-cell clones revealed a highly diverse TCR repertoire, with preferential BV but diverse BJ family usage
|
|
|
|---|
+ CD4+ T-cell subset of another donor (i.e., donor 3). This confirms that, upon priming, depending on the nature of the generated immune response, heterogeneous and variable pools of memory T cells could be generated, further diversified by recall immunization (30, 41). Indeed, although the recall immunization with TT induced a dominant population of antigen-specific IL-2-producing CD4+ T cells within the TCM subset, this does not exclude, depending on individual homeostatic constraints, the generation of a significant proportion of antigen-specific IFN-
-producing CD4+ T cells within the TCM and TEM subset, results in line with recently published observations (19, 41, 47).
All time points included, the median frequency of TT-specific CD4+ T-cell clones was grossly twice as high in the CCR7+ CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T-cell subset (TCM; median, 43%) than in the CCR7– CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T-cell subset (TEM, median 20%). We cannot exclude differences in the ability of TCM and TEM cells to further expand in vitro because of differences in their replicative capacity and cannot totally rule out a transient CCR7 re-expression during the short-term stimulation, as well as a bias inherent to the assay, i.e., the exclusive study of the circulating compartment (44). Indeed, after immunization, some cells trafficking to lymph nodes may have disappeared from the periphery and therefore were not sorted at some defined bleeding time points (Fig. 5C). Nonetheless, a considerable expansion of the TCM population was observed after the boost, with a decline to the basal level as early as 3 weeks postimmunization, whereas variations of the TEM population were limited. This contrasts with the memory response in viral models (cytomegalovirus or hepatitis B virus), showing that antigen-specific, cytokine-secreting CD4+ T cells mainly expressed a TEM phenotype (8, 37). This difference may be related to the way a pathogen, as opposed to a polypeptide, is detected by the immune system, and to the complex but distinct signals induced by such different triggers. Vaccines based on the use of live viral vectors such as modified vaccinia virus Ankara markedly stimulated an IFN-
+ CD8+ T-cell response against pre-erythrocytic malaria antigens (2, 5). A similar strategy in the field of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) induced a robust virus-specific, highly polyfunctional, mainly IL-2+ and IFN-
+ CD8+ T-cell response (38). Preferential expansion of several memory T-cell populations with variable functional potentials, as reported in viral models (13, 14), may also be the consequence of multifactorial influences such as HLA class II molecule expression, T-cell epitope diversity, TCR avidity, TCR repertoire, cell homeostasis, interactions with antigenic environment, or vaccination type and schedule (reviewed in references 25, 28, and 46). In this respect, the variability observed in the proliferative capacity and IL-2 secretion (Fig. 3), as well as in the TCR-CDR3 and TCR BJ gene usage (Tables 2 and 3 and Fig. 5C) strengthens the heterogeneous character of the CD4+ T-cell recall response. The nature of the encountered antigen appears thus to largely orient the regulation of memory differentiation. Further experiments, such as fractionation of TCM and TEM subsets prior to antigen stimulation, are needed to definitively assess this hypothesis. Altogether, this certainly underlines the difficulty in defining a consensus pathway for T-cell memory generation and persistence and directly questions the monitoring of the T-cell response in vaccination trials, for instance.
Our phenotypic approach was reinforced by a molecular analysis of the T-cell repertoire, allowing a direct comparison of TCR BV spectratype polymorphism of the various ex vivo-sorted CD4+ T cells with TT-specific T-cell clone BV usage. We indeed observed a good correlation between largely persistent TCR BV present in the ex vivo-sorted populations at several time points and the TCR BV expressed by the in vitro-generated TT-specific T-cell clones (Table 2 and Fig. 5A and B). The polyclonal profile of the CCR7+/– CD69+ IL-2+ TT-specific CD4+ T-cell repertoire confirmed earlier in vitro data (10). This contrasted with responses to viral antigens, which induced a restricted CD4+ T-cell response toward a dominant epitope (9, 14). This could be partly explained by the abundance of TT epitopes generated during antigen processing and their promiscuous presentation (36, 40). Interestingly, all TCR BV detected in the CCR7+ CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T-cell population were indeed present in CCR7+ CD69+ IFN-
+ CD4+ T cells (data not shown), an observation in agreement with the concept of TCM as a reservoir of early differentiated memory T cells (41).
Most TT-vaccinated individuals are efficiently protected against Clostridium tetani infection. Our data suggest that this protection may be correlated with a highly diverse, but stable memory CD4+ T-cell response. This leads to an important remark regarding antigen-specific vaccination with peptide epitopes. If we postulate that a protective immune response is supported by a highly diverse T-cell response, vaccination protocols based on peptide epitopes might generate restricted CD4+ and/or CD8+ T-cell responses and subsequently impair the efficiency of the T-cell response. There are increasing examples in vaccination studies underlying the need for broad CD4+/CD8+ T-cell cooperation to get protective immunity (17, 49, 50) and consequently the need for efficient protocols to monitor the immune response. With regard to the B-cell and specific antibody response, with a T-dependent antigen such as TT, a close correlation between CD4+ T-cell frequency and antibody response is expected, as suggested from studies in immunodeficient human models (26, 27). However, the final development of the secondary B-cell response appears to be much more complex, and may involve not only CD4 T-cell-dependent antigen-specific stimulation but also vaccine-related, adjuvant-dependent innate stimulation, as well as lifelong B-cell polyclonal stimulation (6, 39).
Fine characterization and monitoring of T-cell responses to defined antigens are thus first-line objectives in the evaluation of many clinical situations involving antigen-specific immunotherapy or vaccination. For the CD4+ T-cell response, a fully characterized picture might be given by the use of a large range of specific MHC class II tetramer/peptide complexes and ex vivo specific analysis of the epitope restricted response. How much other strategies such as CD154 expression may improve this characterization warrants further analysis, since recent publications suggested that this methodology could reliably identify antigen-specific T cells (19). However, waiting for further developments, our approach appeared to be sufficiently sensitive to provide an overall evaluation of the antigen-specific CD4+ T-cell response satisfying practical issues of field trials. Only large field trials with sufficient statistical power will definitely give support to our concept, which is thus far limited to a longitudinal study of four subjects. However, because of the large number of epitopes present within TT, a heterogeneous response such as that observed here is reasonably expectable (16, 36). In addition, previous studies strongly support our observation, i.e., the demonstration of a broad clonal heterogeneous response to a recall response to TT, with a high frequency of specific precursors, as opposed to a rather oligoclonal T-cell response to primary antigens (HIV gp120 or HIV p66) (31). Taken together, as supported by cloning and TCR spectratyping, our phenotypic approach demonstrated that in this model of TT immunization a substantial proportion of antigen-specific CD4+ T cells were included within the CCR7+/– CD69+ IL-2+ CD4+ T-cell subpopulations (up to 50%). Specific, broad-range CD4+ responses can thus be tracked in a highly feasible and collective manner. This approach appears thus far advantageous over an MHC class II tetramer/peptide complex strategy which, in the current stage of technology in field application, is limited to the analysis of selected and well-identified epitopes and therefore to restricted insights into the T-cell response.
We thank N. Rufer, ISREC, Lausanne, Switzerland, for fruitful assistance in establishing ex vivo reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR); N. Donatelli-Dufour for technical support; and E. Devevre, Ludwig Cancer Institute, Lausanne, Switzerland, for cell sorting.
Published ahead of print on 18 July 2007. ![]()
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2010 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»