RESUMEN
CD8+ T cells are the dominant lymphocyte population in multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions where they are highly clonally expanded. The clonal identity, function, and antigen specificity of CD8+ T cells in MS are not well understood. Here we report a comprehensive single-cell RNA-seq and T cell receptor (TCR)-seq analysis of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and blood from a cohort of treatment-naïve MS patients and control participants. A small subset of highly expanded and activated CD8+ T cells were enriched in the CSF in MS that displayed high activation, cytotoxicity and tissue-homing transcriptional profiles. Using a combination of unbiased and targeted antigen discovery approaches, MS-derived CD8+ T cell clonotypes recognizing Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) antigens and multiple novel mimotopes were identified. These findings shed vital insight into the role of CD8+ T cells in MS and pave the way towards disease biomarkers and therapeutic targets.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Prospective, deeply phenotyped research cohorts monitoring individuals with chronic neurologic conditions, such as multiple sclerosis (MS), depend on continued participant engagement. The COVID-19 pandemic restricted in-clinic research activities, threatening this longitudinal engagement, but also forced adoption of televideo-enabled care. This offered a natural experiment in which to analyze key dimensions of remote research: (1) comparison of remote vs in-clinic visit costs from multiple perspectives and (2) comparison of the remote with in-clinic measures in cross-sectional and longitudinal disability evaluations. METHODS: Between March 2020 and December 2021, 207 MS cohort participants underwent hybrid in-clinic and virtual research visits; 96 contributed 100 "matched visits," that is, in-clinic (Neurostatus-Expanded Disability Status Scale [NS-EDSS]) and remote (televideo-enabled EDSS [tele-EDSS]; electronic patient-reported EDSS [ePR-EDSS]) evaluations. Clinical, demographic, and socioeconomic characteristics of participants were collected. RESULTS: The costs of remote visits were lower than in-clinic visits for research investigators (facilities, personnel, parking, participant compensation) but also for participants (travel, caregiver time) and carbon footprint (p < 0.05 for each). Median cohort EDSS was similar between the 3 modalities (NS-EDSS: 2, tele-EDSS: 1.5, ePR-EDSS: 2, range 0.6.5); the remote evaluations were each noninferior to the NS-EDSS within ±0.5 EDSS point (TOST for noninferiority, p < 0.01 for each). Furthermore, year to year, the % of participants with worsening/stable/improved EDSS scores was similar, whether each annual evaluation used NS-EDSS or whether it switched from NS-EDSS to tele-EDSS. DISCUSSION: Altogether, the current findings suggest that remote evaluations can reduce the costs of research participation for patients, while providing a reasonable evaluation of disability trajectory longitudinally. This could inform the design of remote research that is more inclusive of diverse participants.