Go to JCI Insight
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Alerts
  • Advertising/recruitment
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Neuroscience
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • Vascular biology
    • All ...
  • Videos
    • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
    • Author's Takes
  • Reviews
    • View all reviews ...
    • 100th Anniversary of Insulin's Discovery (Jan 2021)
    • Hypoxia-inducible factors in disease pathophysiology and therapeutics (Oct 2020)
    • Latency in Infectious Disease (Jul 2020)
    • Immunotherapy in Hematological Cancers (Apr 2020)
    • Big Data's Future in Medicine (Feb 2020)
    • Mechanisms Underlying the Metabolic Syndrome (Oct 2019)
    • Reparative Immunology (Jul 2019)
    • View all review series ...
  • Viewpoint
  • Collections
    • Recently published
    • In-Press Preview
    • Commentaries
    • Concise Communication
    • Editorials
    • Viewpoint
    • Top read articles
  • Clinical Medicine
  • JCI This Month
    • Current issue
    • Past issues

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • Reviews
  • Review series
  • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • Author's Takes
  • Recently published
  • In-Press Preview
  • Commentaries
  • Concise Communication
  • Editorials
  • Viewpoint
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Alerts
  • Advertising/recruitment
  • Subscribe
  • Contact

Submit a Letter to the Editor

Innate gene signature distinguishes humoral versus cytotoxic responses to influenza vaccination
Eléna Gonçalves, … , Odile Launay, Behazine Combadière
Eléna Gonçalves, … , Odile Launay, Behazine Combadière
Published March 7, 2019
Citation Information: J Clin Invest. 2019;129(5):1960-1971. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI125372.
View: Text | PDF
Clinical Medicine Immunology Vaccines

Innate gene signature distinguishes humoral versus cytotoxic responses to influenza vaccination

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

BACKGROUND. Systems vaccinology allows cutting-edge analysis of innate biomarkers of vaccine efficacy. We explored a strategy to shape the adaptive immune response by targeting innate immune cells through novel immunization routes. METHODS. This randomized phase I/II clinical study (n = 60 healthy subjects aged 18–45 years old) used transcriptomic analysis to discover early biomarkers of immune response quality after transcutaneous (t.c.), intradermal (i.d.), and intramuscular (i.m.) administration of a trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV, season 2012–2013, 1:1:1 ratio). Safety and immunogenicity (hemagglutinin inhibition [HI], microneutralization [MN] antibodies, and CD4+ and CD8+ effector T cells) were measured at baseline day 0 (d0) and at d21. Blood transcriptome was analyzed at d0 and d1. RESULTS. TIV-specific CD8+ granzyme B+ (GRZ) T cells appeared in more individuals immunized by the t.c. and i.d. routes, whereas immunization by the i.d. and i.m. routes prompted high levels of HI antibody titers and MN against A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 influenza viral strains. The early innate gene signature anticipated immunological outcome by discriminating 2 clusters of individuals with either distinct humoral or CD8 cytotoxic responses. Several pathways explained this dichotomy and confirmed that 9 genes and the serum level of CXCL10 were correlated with either TIV-specific cytotoxic CD8+GRZ+ T cell or antibody responses. A logistic regression analysis demonstrated that these 9 genes and the serum levels of CXCL10 at d1/d0 best predicted TIV-specific CD8+GRZ+ T cell and antibody responses at d21. CONCLUSION. This study provides new insight into the impact of immunization routes and innate signature in the quality of adaptive immune responses. TRIAL REGISTRATION. This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01707602). FUNDING. This work was supported by grants from the French Ministry of Health PHRCN 2012 – RCT 12061, INSERM-DGOS, the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale, and the Société Française de Dermatologie (to AS). These funding sources had no direct role in any aspect of the research or article.

Authors

Eléna Gonçalves, Olivia Bonduelle, Angèle Soria, Pierre Loulergue, Alexandra Rousseau, Marine Cachanado, Henri Bonnabau, Rodolphe Thiebaut, Nicolas Tchitchek, Sylvie Behillil, Sylvie van der Werf, Annika Vogt, Tabassome Simon, Odile Launay, Behazine Combadière

×

Guidelines: The Editorial Board will only consider letters that we deem relevant and of interest to our readers. We will not post data that have not been subjected to peer review, nor will we post letters that are essentially a reiteration of another letter. We reserve the right to edit any letter for length, content, and clarity. Authors will be notified by e-mail if their letters were accepted. No appeals will be considered.

Specific requirements: All letters must be 400 words or fewer. You may enter the letter as plain text or HTML. The author's name and e-mail address are required, and will be posted with the letter. All possible conflicts of interest must be noted, even if they are not posted. If you wish to include a figure (keep in mind that non-peer-reviewed data will not be posted), please contact the editors directly at editors@the-jci.org.

This field is required
This field is required
This field is required
This field is required
This field is required

This field is required
Follow JCI:
Copyright © 2021 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN: 0021-9738 (print), 1558-8238 (online)

Sign up for email alerts