MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4410715762 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.2025-0390.o003

CHARACTERIZATION OF MEMORY T CELL SUBSETS DURING FLARES AND DISEASE QUIESCENCE IN LUPUS

2025· article· en· W4410715762 sur OpenAlexaffvenue
Carol Nassar, Rene Quevedo, M. Teresa Ciudad, Zoha Faheem, Kieran Manion, Carolina Munoz-Grajales, Michael Kim, D. Gladman, Murray B. Urowitz, Zahi Touma, Tracy L. McGaha, Joan Wither

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Établissements canadiensToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
Organismes subventionnairesUniversitätsklinikum ErlangenFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of SydneyFondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore PoliclinicoUniversidad de GranadaPfizerKarolinska InstitutetCentro Pfizer-Universidad de Granada-Junta de Andalucía de Genómica e Investigación OncológicÖrebro UniversitetFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-NürnbergNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens
Mots-clésMedicineSystemic lupus erythematosusDiseaseLupus erythematosusCharacterization (materials science)ImmunologyPathologyAntibody

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

O003 / #470 Topic:AS01 - Adaptive Immunity SCIENTIFIC HYBRID SESSION: BASIC TRACK PRESENTATIONS - OUTSTANDING ABSTRACT PRESENTATIONS 23-05-2025 9:00 AM - 10:00 AM Background/Purpose Around 70% of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) patients follow a relapsing-remitting pattern of disease, with unpredictable flares of disease activity followed by variable periods of disease quiescence. CD4+T cell subsets have been shown to play an important role in driving the autoantibody production which causes flares in SLE, however the precise T cell changes that accompany flares are unknown. Here, we characterized the antigen-experienced memory T cell compartment at various phases of disease to gain insight into this question. Methods CITE-seq was used to assess the transcriptomic profiles of CD4+memory T cells in flaring (change in the clinical SLEDAI-2K > 0 in the last month prompting a change in therapy) and quiescent (clinical SLEDAI = 0 for at least a year, prednisone dose < 10) SLE patients. CD4+memory T cells were isolated from previously archived PBMCs, stained with oligo-conjugated antibodies against surface proteins, and then partitioned, barcoded, and sequenced. Samples from 15 distinct patients at 2 separate clinical visits spaced at least 1 year apart were examined. TCR sequencing was performed to assess clonotype expansion/contraction. The longitudinal nature of our data permitted examination of transcriptional changes both between and within patients. Results Integration of the gene and surface protein expression data led to identification of 23 unique immune populations (Figure 1A). Samples from flaring patients were more enriched for T follicular helper (Tfh), T peripheral helper (Tph), and Th1 cells. Conversely, quiescent patients were more enriched for central memory T cells (TCMs), specifically TCM1/2/6, compared to flaring patients (p < 0.05) (Figure 1B,C). There was no difference in the proportion of exhausted Treg cells between flaring and quiescent patients at baseline suggesting that exhaustion of this subset is a consistent feature of SLE, potentially contributing to an inherent level of immune dysregulation regardless of clinical flare status. Differential gene expression analyses at baseline showed a high prevalence of IFN-induced genes in most identified cell subsets within the genes that were upregulated in flaring compared to quiescent patients, with a few exceptions (eg, Th1). TCR repertoire analyses of samples at baseline revealed a higher proportion of expanded clonotypes in various clusters, such as Th17, in flaring patients (Figure 2A), which was not seen in quiescent patients (Figure 2B). Similarly, clonal overlap among subsets was more pronounced in the flaring patient samples (Figure 2C) than in the quiescent samples (Figure 2D). This overlap indicates that these T cells have shared antigen specificity, suggesting cell plasticity or differentiation from a common precursor – which will be investigated by trajectory pathway analyses. Figure 1: A)UMAP depicting 23 annotated clusters.B)Bar chart of normalized weighted proportions of cells across clusters at baseline based on disease stams: Flaring (F, orange) and Quiescent (Q, blue).C)Boxplots showing distribution of proportional percentages of subsets for each patient at baseline based on disease status. Each dot represents an individual patient’s data point. To assess for statistical difference, Mann-Whitney U test was used, with p-values adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Benjamini-Hochberg method (*, adjusted p < 0.05). Figure 2: Left:Stacked barchart representing the distribution of clonally expanded T cells in each of the identified clusters at baseline (visit 1) in(A)flaring and(B)quiescent patients.Right:Chord diagrams representing clonal overlap between the clusters at baseline in(C)flaring and(D)quiescent patients. The width of each chord indicates the normalized proportion of unique or shared clones between groups which highlights the extent of clonal overlap. Conclusions Although flaring patients demonstrate expansion of relatively few T cell subsets (Tfh, Tph, Th1 cells), analysis of TCR clonotypes suggests that T cells involved in the autoimmune response are found in several additional T cell subsets (Th17, Th2), indicating that there is substantial functional diversification/plasticity in the response. These findings are absent in quiescent patients, which instead show enrichment of TCMs expressing diverse TCRs. Our findings suggest that expanded populations of antigen-specific T cells can be seen in flaring patients, and that further characterization of these cells may provide insight into the specificity of the T cells that support autoantibody production in lupus flares.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,007

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,264
Écart entre enseignants0,254 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Même sujetSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research→Travaux en français237 207→