Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters

Database
Language
Affiliation country
Publication year range
2.
Front Immunol ; 14: 1107900, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36999021

ABSTRACT

Background: The course of COVID-19 is associated with severe dysbalance of the immune system, causing both leukocytosis and lymphopenia. Immune cell monitoring may be a powerful tool to prognosticate disease outcome. However, SARS-CoV-2 positive subjects are isolated upon initial diagnosis, thus barring standard immune monitoring using fresh blood. This dilemma may be solved by epigenetic immune cell counting. Methods: In this study, we used epigenetic immune cell counting by qPCR as an alternative way of quantitative immune monitoring for venous blood, capillary blood dried on filter paper (dried blood spots, DBS) and nasopharyngeal swabs, potentially allowing a home-based monitoring approach. Results: Epigenetic immune cell counting in venous blood showed equivalence with dried blood spots and with flow cytometrically determined cell counts of venous blood in healthy subjects. In venous blood, we detected relative lymphopenia, neutrophilia, and a decreased lymphocyte-to-neutrophil ratio for COVID-19 patients (n =103) when compared with healthy donors (n = 113). Along with reported sex-related differences in survival we observed dramatically lower regulatory T cell counts in male patients. In nasopharyngeal swabs, T and B cell counts were significantly lower in patients compared to healthy subjects, mirroring the lymphopenia in blood. Naïve B cell frequency was lower in severely ill patients than in patients with milder stages. Conclusions: Overall, the analysis of immune cell counts is a strong predictor of clinical disease course and the use of epigenetic immune cell counting by qPCR may provide a tool that can be used even for home-isolated patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Lymphopenia , Humans , Male , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/genetics , SARS-CoV-2 , Monitoring, Immunologic , Prognosis , Disease Progression , Epigenesis, Genetic
3.
Cancer Res ; 80(9): 1885-1892, 2020 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32075798

ABSTRACT

Although ample evidence indicates that immune cell homeostasis is an important prognostic outcome determinant in patients with cancer, few studies have examined whether it also determines cancer risk among initially healthy individuals. We performed a case-cohort study including incident cases of breast (n = 207), colorectal (n = 111), lung (n = 70), and prostate (n = 201) cancer as well as a subcohort (n = 465) within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Heidelberg cohort. Relative counts of neutrophils, monocytes, and lymphocyte sublineages were measured by qRT-PCR. HRs and 95% confidence intervals were used to measure the associations between relative counts of immune cell and cancer risks. When relative counts of immune cell types were taken individually, a significant positive association was observed between relative counts of FOXP3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs) and lung cancer risk, and significant inverse associations were observed between relative CD8+ counts and risks of lung and breast cancer (overall and ER+ subtype). Multivariable models with mutual adjustments across immune markers showed further significant positive associations between higher relative FOXP3+ T-cell counts and increased risks of colorectal and breast cancer (overall and ER- subtype). No associations were found between immune cell composition and prostate cancer risk. These results affirm the relevance of elevated FOXP3+ Tregs and lower levels of cytotoxic (CD8+) T cells as risk factors for tumor development. SIGNIFICANCE: This epidemiologic study supports a role for both regulatory and cytotoxic T cells in determining cancer risk among healthy individuals.See related commentary by Song and Tworoger, p. 1801.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , T-Lymphocytes, Regulatory , Cohort Studies , Epigenesis, Genetic , Humans , Male , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL