| Literature DB >> 28934310 |
Camille Tumiotto1, Lionel Riviere1, Pantxika Bellecave1, Patricia Recordon-Pinson1, Alice Vilain-Parce1, Gwenda-Line Guidicelli2, Hervé Fleury1.
Abstract
One of the strategies for curing viral HIV-1 is a therapeutic vaccine involving the stimulation of cytotoxic CD8-positive T cells (CTL) that are Human Leucocyte Antigen (HLA)-restricted. The lack of efficiency of previous vaccination strategies may have been due to the immunogenic peptides used, which could be different from a patient's virus epitopes and lead to a poor CTL response. To counteract this lack of specificity, conserved epitopes must be targeted. One alternative is to gather as many data as possible from a large number of patients on their HIV-1 proviral archived epitope variants, taking into account their genetic background to select the best presented CTL epitopes. In order to process big data generated by Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) of the DNA of HIV-infected patients, we have developed a software package called TutuGenetics. This tool combines an alignment derived either from Sanger or NGS files, HLA typing, target gene and a CTL epitope list as input files. It allows automatic translation after correction of the alignment obtained between the HxB2 reference and the reads, followed by automatic calculation of the MHC IC50 value for each epitope variant and the HLA allele of the patient by using NetMHCpan 3.0, resulting in a csv file as output result. We validated this new tool by comparing Sanger and NGS (454, Roche) sequences obtained from the proviral DNA of patients at success of ART included in the Provir Latitude 45 study and showed a 90% correlation between the quantitative results of NGS and Sanger. This automated analysis combined with complementary samples should yield more data regarding the archived CTL epitopes according to the patients' HLA alleles and will be useful for screening epitopes that in theory are presented efficiently to the HLA groove, thus constituting promising immunogenic peptides for a therapeutic vaccine.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28934310 PMCID: PMC5608338 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185211
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Description of TutuGenetics software.
Four input files are used to generate an output final file merging the quantification (% variants) and qualification (amino-acid sequence) of the variability of HIV epitopes as well as their theoretical presentation to their HLA molecules (IC50 value in nM). It allows the automated analysis of nucleic acid alignments from Sanger or UDPS sequences, corrects them (for the UDPS) and translates each read into its corresponding amino acids. Then, according to the HLA genotype of the patient, it retrieves the CTL epitopes and their variants according to the Los Alamos HIV Immunology Database CTL epitope list. Finally, given the patient’s HLA, the IC50 scores of each epitope and their variants are calculated using the stand-alone of the NetMHCpan 3.0 software.
Patients’ characteristics.
The viral clade and HLA allele A and B typing results for each individual from the French, Canadian or Peruvian cohort are presented.
| Sample ID | Geographic origin | Viral Clade | HLA allele |
|---|---|---|---|
| B01_Bg | Bordeaux | B | A*02:01 B*15:01 B*44:02 |
| B02_Bl | Bordeaux | B | A*02:01 A*29:02 B*27:05 B*44:03 |
| B03_Ba | Bordeaux | B | A*02:01 A*24:02 B*27:05 B*51:01 |
| B04_Ce | Bordeaux | B | A*02:01 A*29:02 B*39:01 B*44:03 |
| B05_Ca | Bordeaux | B | A*02:01 A*02:22 B*14:01 B*15:01 |
| B06_Cc | Bordeaux | B | A*02:01 A*26:01 B*08:01 B*38:01 |
| B07_Dj | Bordeaux | CRF02_AG | A*02:01 A*68:01 B*15:02 B*51:01 |
| B08_Jc | Bordeaux | B | A*02:01 A*30:01 B*13:02 B*40:01 |
| B09_Ma | Bordeaux | CRF01_AE | A*01:01 A*02:01 B*35:03 B*44:02 |
| B10_Mj | Bordeaux | B | A*03:01 A*68:01 B*07:02 B*44:02 |
| B11_Sy | Bordeaux | B | A*02:01 A*26:01 B*39:01 B*40:01 |
| B12_Sb | Bordeaux | A1 | A*02:01 A*02:05 B*15:03 B*18:01 |
| B13_TEp | Bordeaux | B | A*02:01 B*40:01 B*44:02 |
| B14_TIp | Bordeaux | B | A*01:01 A*02:01 B*07:02 B*51:01 |
| B15_Vp | Bordeaux | B | A*01:01 A*02:01 B*44:02 B*57:01 |
| M01_A4 | Montreal | B | A*02:01 A*33:03 B*50:01 B*58:01 |
| M02_A7 | Montreal | B | A*03:01 A*30:02 B*07:02 B*18:01 |
| M03_G0 | Montreal | B | A*02:01 A*24:02 B*08:01 B*18:01 |
| M04_G1 | Montreal | B | A*02:01 A*29:02 B*08:01 B*44:03 |
| M05_H9 | Montreal | B | A*01:01 B*35:01 B*51:01 |
| L01_H6 | Lima | B | A*24:02 A*29:02 B*35:10 B*44:03 |
| L02_H0 | Lima | B | A*24:02 B*35:43 B*58:01 |
Output of TutuGenetics and comparison with Sanger sequencing results: Eight HLA/peptide associations are detailed.
For each sample and HLA, the first line shows the putative epitope described in the HxB2 reference sequence and the calculated IC50 (nM). For each epitope, the number of NGS reads as well as the percentage of variants is also shown. The mutated amino-acids are in bold. In the last column, “yes” means that this epitope obtained with NGS was retrieved in the Sanger sequence; “no” indicates that the epitope can be quantified by NGS but was not observed by Sanger.
| B03_Ba | HLA-B*27:05 | p17 (19–27) | IRLRPGGKK | 192.5 | 4949 | 93% | yes |
| B03_Ba | HLA-B*27:05 | p17 (19–27) | 144.5 | 71 | 1.3% | no | |
| B01_Bg | HLA-B*15:01 | p24 (137–145) | GLNKIVRMY | 392.9 | 8336 | 96.8% | yes |
| B01_Bg | HLA-B*15:01 | p24 (137–145) | 1467.1 | 108 | 1.3% | no | |
| M03_G0 | HLA-A*24:02 | p17 (28–36) | 405 | 896 | 89.8% | yes | |
| M03_G0 | HLA-A*24:02 | p17 (28–36) | 517.9 | 53 | 5.3% | no | |
| B13_TEp | HLA-B*40:01 | p24 (44–52) | SEGATPQDL | 492.6 | 1160 | 76.5% | yes |
| B13_TEp | HLA-B*40:01 | p24 (44–52) | SE | 600.9 | 312 | 20.6% | no |
| B13_TEp | HLA-B*40:01 | p2p7p1p6 (118–126) | KELYPL | 14.7 | 2603 | 94.9% | yes |
| B13_TEp | HLA-B*40:01 | p2p7p1p6 (118–126) | KELYPL | 11.9 | 38 | 1.4% | no |
| B13_TEp | HLA-B*40:01 | p2p7p1p6 (118–126) | 51.7 | 31 | 1.1% | no | |
| B04_Ce | HLA-A*29:02 | p17 (78–86) | L | 12.1 | 5315 | 94.4% | yes |
| L01_H6 | HLA-A*24:02 | p17 (28–36) | 528.9 | 1360 | 88.3% | yes | |
| L01_H6 | HLA-A*24:02 | p17 (28–36) | 1437.3 | 26 | 1.7% | no | |
| L01_H6 | HLA-A*24:02 | p17 (28–36) | 244.2 | 49 | 3.2% | no | |
| L01_H6 | HLA-A*24:02 | p17 (28–36) | 850.8 | 16 | 1% | no | |
| B11_Sy | HLA-B*40:01 | p17 (11–19) | G | 20805.1 | 2114 | 95.4% | yes |
| M05_H9 | HLA-B*35:01 | RT (118–127) | VPLDEDFRKY | 424.1 | 532 | 76.9% | yes |
| M05_H9 | HLA-B*35:01 | RT (118–127) | VPLDEDFRK | 29962.8 | 140 | 20.2% | no |