| Literature DB >> 36233533 |
Lili Ji1, Yanxia Zhan1, Boting Wu2, Pu Chen3, Luya Cheng1, Yang Ke1, Xibing Zhuang4, Fanli Hua5, Lihua Sun5, Hao Chen6, Feng Li1,5, Yunfeng Cheng1,4,5,7.
Abstract
Background: Primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an autoimmune disorder. The existence of autoreactive T cells has long been proposed in ITP. Yet the identification of autoreactive T cells has not been achieved, which is an important step to elucidate the pathogenesis of ITP.Entities:
Keywords: CDR3; T cell receptor; primary immune thrombocytopenia
Year: 2022 PMID: 36233533 PMCID: PMC9571369 DOI: 10.3390/jcm11195665
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.964
The characteristic of enrolled patients.
| Patient No. | Sex | Age (Years) | Platelet Counts (×109/L) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Befor Treatment | After Treatment | |||
| 1 * | F | 28 | 3 | 210 |
| 2 # | F | 19 | 5 | 101 |
| 3 * | M | 29 | 11 | 118 |
| 4 | F | 49 | 4 | 28 |
| 5 | F | 33 | 22 | 102 |
| 6 * | M | 71 | 18 | 99 |
| 7 | F | 22 | 5 | 157 |
| 8 # | F | 45 | 25 | 116 |
| 9 | F | 76 | 2 | 11 |
| 10 * | M | 29 | 6 | 55 |
| 11 # | F | 58 | 15 | 102 |
| 12 | M | 64 | 28 | 27 |
| 13 | F | 68 | 17 | 26 |
| 14 | M | 36 | 23 | 204 |
| 15 | M | 34 | 8 | 104 |
| 16 | F | 67 | 6 | 15 |
| 17 # | F | 49 | 18 | 123 |
| 18 | F | 39 | 23 | 27 |
| 19 # | F | 62 | 15 | 139 |
| 20 | M | 47 | 12 | 92 |
| 21 | M | 38 | 11 | 155 |
| 22 | F | 55 | 21 | 180 |
| 23 | F | 57 | 6 | 17 |
| 24 | M | 18 | 15 | 134 |
| 25 | F | 77 | 14 | 198 |
| 26 | M | 66 | 5 | 95 |
| 27 | F | 27 | 17 | 24 |
| M:F = 10:17 | 47 (18–77) | 14 (3–28) | 102 (11–210) | |
* These 4 patients’ plasma samples were removed beacause of hemolysis in vitro. # These 5 patients’ DNA extracted from CD4+T and CD8+ T cells was adequate for later sequence analysis.
Figure 1Changes of serum cytokines in ITP patients. (A) Changes of serum IL-23 in ITP patients; (B) Changes of serum IL-17β in ITP patients; (C). Changes of serum Galectin-7 in ITP patients; (D) Changes of serum LAP/TGF β1 in ITP patients; (E) Changes of serum PDGF-αβ1 in ITP patients; (F) Changes of serum ANG-1 in ITP patients; (G) Changes of serumE-cadherin in ITP patients; (H) Changes of serum AgRP in ITP patients; b: before treatment; a: after treatment; CR: complete remission; PR: partial remission; NR: no remission; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01. student t test and Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney) test were used for data fulfilled normal distribution and for those did not, respectively.
The CD8+T cells’ TCR Vβ oligoclonal usage tendency testified by flow cytometry.
| Vβ Subfamily | Before Treatment (n) | After Treatment (n) |
|---|---|---|
| Vβ 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Vβ 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Vβ 3 | 1 | 1 |
| Vβ 5.1 | 15 | 18 |
| Vβ 5.2 | 19 | 21 |
| Vβ 5.3 | 7 | 6 |
| Vβ 6.7 | 14 | 18 |
| Vβ 7 | 7 | 9 |
| Vβ 8 | 12 | 16 |
| Vβ 9 | 16 | 13 |
| Vβ 11 | 6 | 7 |
| Vβ 12 | 14 | 13 |
| Vβ 13.1 | 8 | 11 |
| Vβ 13.6 | 8 | 8 |
| Vβ 14 | 4 | 5 |
| Vβ 16 | 2 | 5 |
| Vβ 17 | 14 | 12 |
| Vβ 18 | 7 | 8 |
| Vβ 20 | 17 | 18 |
| Vβ 21.3 | 10 | 18 |
| Vβ 22 | 3 | 8 |
| Vβ 23 | 3 | 0 |
The distribution of CD4+ T cell repertoire in peripheral blood before treatment.
| Number of Clones <0.1% | Number of Clones 0.1–0.2% | Number of Clones 0.2–0.3% | Number of Clones 0.3–0.4% | Number of Clones 0.4–0.5% | Number of Clones >0.5% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITP2 | 37,907 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 10 |
| ITP8 | 541,495 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| ITP11 | 205,597 | 26 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 9 |
| ITP17 | 218,117 | 17 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 11 |
| ITP19 | 308,764 | 15 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5 |
Figure 2The clone distribution of ITP patients’ CD4+T and CD8+T cells before treatment. One Way ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis test were used for data fulfilled normal distribution and for those did not, respectively. (A) CD4+T cell clones; (B) CD8+T cell clones.
The distribution of CD8+ T cell repertoire in peripheral blood before treatment.
| Number of Clones <0.1% | Number of Clones 0.1–0.2% | Number of Clones 0.2–0.3% | Number of Clones 0.3–0.4% | Number of Clones 0.4–0.5% | Number of Clones >0.5% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITP2 | 285,477 | 15 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 8 |
| ITP8 | 267,730 | 23 | 13 | 6 | 3 | 9 |
| ITP11 | 239,437 | 25 | 19 | 9 | 6 | 33 |
| ITP17 | 303,346 | 34 | 16 | 8 | 4 | 19 |
| ITP19 | 128,323 | 16 | 9 | 3 | 5 | 11 |
The distribution of CD4+ T cell repertoire in peripheral blood after treatment.
| Number of Clones <0.1% | Number of Clones 0.1–0.2% | Number of Clones 0.2–0.3% | Number of Clones 0.3–0.4% | Number of Clones 0.4–0.5% | Number of Clones >0.5% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITP2 | 296,126 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 |
| ITP8 | 301,674 | 13 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| ITP11 | 176,880 | 14 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 4 |
| ITP17 | 253,060 | 19 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 14 |
| ITP19 | 314,797 | 13 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
Figure 3The clone distribution of ITP patients’ CD4+T and CD8+T cells after treatment, and the comparison with the distribution before treatment. One Way ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis test were used for data fulfilled normal distribution and for those did not, respectively. (A) CD4+T cell clones; (B) CD8+T cell clones. #: p > 0.05 when the percentage of T cell clones before treatment compared with the correspondent T cell clones after treatment; *: In the CD8+T cells, the number of clones of 0.1–0.2% grade increased after treatment, p = 0.0431.
The distribution of CD8+ T cell repertoire in peripheral blood after treatment.
| Number of Clones <0.1% | Number of Clones 0.1–0.2% | Number of Clones 0.2–0.3% | Number of Clones 0.3–0.4% | Number of Clones 0.4–0.5% | Number of Clones >0.5% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITP2 | 439,425 | 15 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| ITP8 | 199,974 | 31 | 16 | 8 | 4 | 31 |
| ITP11 | 195,202 | 37 | 13 | 9 | 8 | 29 |
| ITP17 | 135,012 | 41 | 12 | 11 | 5 | 22 |
| ITP19 | 172,172 | 19 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 14 |
Representative sequence of CD8+ T cell CDR3 before and after treatment.
| Sequence | Percentage before Treatment | The Percentage Rank of the Clone before Treatment | Percentage after Treatment | The Percentage Rank of the Clone after Treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TGTGCTGTGAGTGATCGGACTCTAGCAACACAGGCAAACTAATCTTT | 0.200912 | 1 | 0.244993 | 1 |
| TGTGCAATGAGAGAGAATAACTATGGTCAGAATTTTGTCTTT | 0.042286 | 2 | 0.061844 | 2 |
| TGTGCAGAGTGGGACGCAGGCAAATCAACCTTT | 0.03282 | 3 | 0.018226 | 5 |
| TGTGCTGTGAGCCCCATAATGCTGGCAACAACCGTAAGCTGATTTGG | 0.024714 | 4 | 0.027579 | 3 |
| TGTGCTGTGTTTAAGGGGCTCAAATTCCGGGTATGCACTCAACTTC | 0.018299 | 5 | 0.026758 | 4 |
| TGTGTGGTGAGCACTAACGACTACAAGCTCAGCTTT | 0.017066 | 6 | 0.015805 | 6 |
| TGTGCAATGAGAGAACGCAACAAATTTTACTTT | 0.013396 | 7 | 0.015171 | 7 |
| TGTGCTGTGGAAGACTATGGTCAGAATTTTGTCTTT | 0.012513 | 8 | 0.0083 | 15 |
| TGTGCTGGCCCCAAGCAAACCTCCTACGACAAGGTGATATTT | 0.011513 | 9 | 0.008645 | 14 |
| TGTGCTGTGATGGATAGCAACTATCAGTTAATCTGG | 0.010112 | 10 | 0.0129 | 9 |
| TGTGCTGTGAGAGATAGCAACTATCAGTTAATCTGG | 0.010074 | 11 | 0.012218 | 10 |
| TGTGCTGCCTTAATAATGCAGGCAACATGCTCACCTTT | 0.009917 | 12 | 0.008811 | 13 |
| TGTGTGGTGAGCGGGGAGGAGGAAACAAACTCACCTTT | 0.008334 | 13 | 0.009348 | 12 |
| TGTGCTGTGAGGGGTGCAGGCAACATGCTCACCTTT | 0.008324 | 14 | 0.011192 | 11 |
| TGTGCCCGAAACACCGGTAACCAGTTCTATTTT | 0.007235 | 15 | 0.006974 | 16 |
| TGTGCCTTTCGGTATGGAAACAAACTGGTCTTT | 0.006343 | 16 | 0.004324 | 26 |
| TGCATCCTGAGAGACTGTAGAGGCCAGACTCATGTTT | 0.006316 | 17 | 0.006084 | 18 |
| TGTGCTGTGCTGGACTCAGGAACCTACAAATACATCTTT | 0.005898 | 18 | 0.006058 | 19 |
| TGTGCTCTGAGCAACCCCCAAATTCAGGAAACACACCTCTTGTCTTT | 0.005776 | 19 | 0.013743 | 8 |
Figure 4The diagram of CD4+T and CD8+T cells’ HECs comparison of patients. To clarify the diagram, ITP 2 was taken as an example: There were 10 CD4+ TCR HECs before treatment and eleven CD4+ TCR HECs after treatment. And the 10 CD4+ TCR HECs before treatment still existed as HECs after treatment. There were 8 CD8+ TCR HECs before treatment, and among them, 6 HECs existed after treatment. However, ITP 19 showed a little different alteration in CD8+ TCR HECs. Before treatment, there were 11 HECs. Among them, 9 HECs remained as HECs after treatment, while 2 HECs deminished. Another 5 new HECs emerged after treatment.