Long lived T memory cells one year after COVID-19.

Authors studied CD8 memory cells that persisted after the initial effector response, followed by contraction.

They noted phenotypical differences between memory cells in mild & severe COVID-19.

1/12

nature.com/articles/s4158…
Authors believe that factors such as antigen availability, type of antigen-presenting cells, and cytokine milieu – might influence the type of memory formed.

Note: T cell memory cells are of multiple categories, not all of which are detected in peripheral blood.

2/
Some memory cells live in tissue and others in lymph nodes.

This study looked only at peripheral blood, and hence is not a description of T rm or T cm memory cells.

T rm’s live in tissues and do not move out. They defend tissues (e.g. lungs & mucosa) when an attack occurs.

3/
These T rm cells, who live in tissues, are able to quickly respond to a dendritic cell that presents an antigen, without having to involve the headquarters (lymph node).

This saves time, compared to the initial infection.

4/
Remember that during the initial infection (in someone who has not been previously infected or vaccinated), dendritic cells have to travel all the way to lymph nodes to find naive T cells to match, activate & expand.

This process takes some time, and the delay can be costly.

5/
This research however mainly dealt with T emra cells and NOT with other types of memory cells, for the reasons explained above.

I just mentioned the diversity of T memory cells to introduce the various subtypes.

6/
Past research with Yellow fever that dealt with human memory CD8+ T cells, examined several years after vaccination, found T scm to persist.

The authors believe T emra & T Scm could be part of the same phenotypical trajectory, with progressive enrichment in T scm over time.

4/
After studying effector T cell response over time, authors hypothesise that increased T emra (Terminally differentiated effector memory cells) form after severe disease, versus T scm (stem cell memory) in mild disease & upon inoculation with live attenuated virus vaccines.

5/
T emra cells circulate in blood and represent the subset of effector memory cells, called “terminally differentiated”.

As they lack CCR7 receptors, they don’t home into lymphoid tissues unlike T cm (central memory) cells.

6/
T scm have the capacity to live long and convert to other different memory cell types, upon subsequent exposure to cognate antigen.

These cells (which have sub populations) possess properties of self-renewal & clonal longevity necessary to maintain long-lived immune memory.

7/
While it is tempting to draw overtly optimistic conclusions based on these descriptions, it is critical to realise that the body works as a whole, rather than as a sum of its individual components.

Correlation with actual outcomes in real patients - over time - is important.

8/
Let me point out an example of such an exaggerated optimism that happened early in the pandemic.

When mRNA vaccine phase 3 trials were announced, they said “efficacy in the 94-95% range” which led many to believe that vaccines could do more than they were really capable of.

9/
What the vaccine makers meant was that when they looked at “symptomatic COVID-19” as the endpoint, there was a “95% difference” between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups.

Importantly, this was measured during a period IMMEDIATELY following vaccination.

10/
There was no mention of asymptomatic cases, or of efficacy decline when the antibody levels would naturally drop in a few months (IgG half life < 25 days; plasmablasts do not live long)

Moral of the story is to not mix our own optimism to technical terms in immunology.

11/
In summary, there is proof of long-term T cell memory after natural infection.

This can be expected to protect against future infection.

The observation that reinfections are asymptomatic or mild, lends strong supporting evidence to the findings in this research paper.

12/12
@threadreaderapp please unroll

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Rajeev Jayadevan

Rajeev Jayadevan Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RajeevJayadevan

10 Dec
“Immortal Time Bias” produces exaggerated positive results in observational studies. Thanks @DrToddLee for pointing it out

e.g. Booster studies give reliable results when subjects are randomised to booster or placebo. RCT ensures ~equal comparison.

1/9

academic.oup.com/aje/article/16…
What is immortal time bias?

When a group under observation has a fixed advantage at the outset.

In heart transplantation VS non heart transplantation studies, this bias was first described (those who got the transplant had the opportunity to survive till they got operated)

2/
That is, the transplanted group were the healthier of the lot, they survived longer than those who died while waiting for surgery.

This was projected as an apparent outcome of transplant in some studies.

3/
Read 9 tweets
9 Dec
Large study on boosters in Israel

Summary

>60 age

Risk of death among those who got infected: No difference between 2 or 3 dose groups

Risk of picking up an infection was 12 times lower after booster

Note: this was not a randomised trial

1/10

nejm.org/doi/full/10.10… Image
The study compared the outcomes among 7,58,118 people who got booster with 85,090 who did not.

We do not know if there was a baseline difference in COVID- appropriate behaviour between the 2 groups.

Assuming no such difference, infection risk is reduced 12 fold by booster.

2/
A few calculations based on the table:

Age > 60, non boosted (2 dose)

Infection rate 62 per 100,000 person days
Death rate 2.3
Ratio = 1 : 27

Age >60 (boosted)
Infection rate 5.1 per 100,000 person days
Death rate 0.2
Ratio = 1 : 26

(Ratio = chance of death if infected)

3/ Image
Read 10 tweets
9 Dec
No waning of immunity against severe disease: New York data NEJM

Note the effectiveness is calculated by comparing with unvaccinated group, which is gradually acquiring immunity from natural infection. Hence, there will be a decrease in the difference as time moves forward.

1/n ImageImage
There is a marked difference in hospitalisation rates among vaccinated people compared to unvaccinated.

I have calculated some numbers for three age groups👇

🔹For >65

Unvax Risk of Hospitalisation 1:87 (1:1000 for vax)
Difference is 12 times

See below 👇
🔹For 50-64

Unvax Risk of Hospitalisation 1:186 (1:3636 for vax)
Difference is 20 times

🔹For 18-49

Unvax Risk of Hospitalisation 1:453 (1:9899 for vax)
Difference is 22 times

All calculations based on Pfizer (see table below for others) Image
Read 4 tweets
9 Dec
Immunology simplified

A map of our immune response to viral infection shared by @papaphone2002

I have added (in red) the role of the much-discussed neutralising antibody, thread👇

Our immunity team has so many more players, who cannot be fooled by the virus.

Here’s why

1/5
Please note the diagram only presents an outline, not the whole thing.

Neutralising antibodies form only a tiny fraction of our TOTAL antibody response. Most antibodies are produced AFTER the attack occurs, helping eliminate virus.

(Labs measure Ab’s ALREADY in circulation)

2/
In other words, neutralising antibodies aren’t everything.

And, importantly, a “loss of neutralisation” (‼️🔴alarmist language that lab researchers love to use while describing their work to a clueless public) doesn’t mean “we have lost against the virus”.

3/
Read 15 tweets
8 Dec
Tuesday COVID meeting updates this week (been holding these ever since the onset of the pandemic)

#1

In a series of 70 consecutive COVID deaths reported at a large Kerala hospital, 69 were unvaccinated, one had received 1 dose vaccine.

That was 98.6% unvaccinated, May-Sept

1/
This data is powerful evidence that vaccination has made a significant reduction in the severe outcomes of delta.

Remember, these are vaccines based on the old Wuhan strain of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Yet they are protective against delta variant.

This is hard evidence.

2/
This is real-world evidence that vaccine protection (against severe disease, mainly cell mediated immunity) kicks in with the first dose itself.

In fact we know from lab studies that T cells arrive by day 10 after the first dose.

Let me explain the immunology.

3/
Read 9 tweets
8 Dec
Discussed a few aspects of vaccination among children in India with @snehamordani @IndiaToday
Link to 24 minute video of the panel discussion 👇

Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(