Background
Chagas’ disease, caused by the hemoflagellate parasite
Trypanosoma cruzi, has a widespread distribution in Central and South America. Approximately 10 million people are infected along 21 endemic countries of Latin-America [
1]. However, due to increasing migration to North America and Europe, the disease has been expanded beyond its original borders [
2,
3]. Infection with
T. cruzi, results in a generally asymptomatic disease due to the fact that most of the infected individuals remains in an indeterminate chronic phase. After the acute phase, the disease becomes clinically evident in 30-40% of them with cardiac or digestive manifestations (symptomatic chronic phase) [
4‐
7].
Trypanosoma cruzi is an obligate intracellular parasite which invades and replicates into mammalian cells. As other intracellular infectious agents,
T. cruzi induces a CD8
+ T cell immune response with secretion of cytokines and release of cytotoxic granules [
8,
9]. The role of CD8
+ T cells is crucial for controlling the
T. cruzi infection. Indeed, during the acute infection, depleted CD8
+ T cells mice showed increased parasite burden in their hearts, moderate decrease in the inflammation and higher mortality compared with wild type infected animals [
10]. Nonetheless, in chronic infection, there are several experimental data supporting that the suboptimal generation of functional specific effector CD8
+ T cells leads to the lack of infection control and parasite persistence in the tissues [
11,
12]. Thus, the presence of late-differentiated CD8
+ T cells exhibiting signs of senescence that are incapable of maintaining effector functions [
11‐
13], and the diversity of
T. cruzi antigens that can enter MHC class I processing pathway should be responsible of the absence of a potent and antigen focused cellular immune response [
8,
14]. Due to the parasite’s genetic complexity and a high degree of polymorphism among strains, only a few human CD8
+ T cell parasite-specific epitopes capable of inducing specific CD8
+ T cell responses have been described [
14‐
21]. Furthermore, even less is known about the capacity of chagasic patients to respond to non-chagasic microbial antigens.
A
T. cruzi-induced nonspecific immune-suppression during the acute phase of the disease has been reported by several authors, showing the immunosuppressive effect on dendritic cells, macrophages, splenic T cells, and LTs [
22‐
25]. Nonetheless, experimental infection in mice indicated that there is no general immunosuppressive effect of
T. cruzi on CD8
+ T cell priming [
26]. No data of CD8
+ T cell immune-suppression have been reported with another derived-microbial epitopes in humans infected with
T. cruzi.
The aim of the present work was to determine whether or not there is a nonspecific immune-suppression in chronic chagasic patients. Consequently, we investigated the CD8+ T cells response against a representative viral antigen. Thus, we examined the frequency, phenotype and the functional activity of the influenza virus specific CD8+ T cells in chagasic patients and healthy donors. We selected an epitope from the viral matrix protein because the majority of individuals throughout their life have been exposed to the influenza virus and have had at least one infection.
Discussion
Chagas disease is a persistent parasitic infection that does not induce sterilizing immunity. The generation of memory T cell response depends on the environmental conditions at the initial antigenic priming [
30]. Indeed, the T cell responses may be influenced by previous antigen encounters, a phenomenon known as “original antigenc sin” [
31]. Thus, the goal of this study was to determine whether chagasic patients are able to respond against a non-
T. cruzi microbial antigen such as the matrix peptide derived from influenza virus. Exposure to influenza virus is widely spread therefore most individuals develop a serotype-dependent sterilizing immunity.
At first, frequency of Flu-MP* peptide-specific CD8
+ T cells from chronic chagasic patients and healthy donors was studied. Noticeably, no differences were found between these two groups. Moreover, the average frequency values were similar to those previously reported for the influenza-M1
58–66 (GILGFVFTL) specific CD8
+ T cells (0.28% to 0.73%) from healthy donors [
32]. A similar Flu-MP tetramer positive cell frequency (0.11% to 0.56%) was reported in six HLA-A*0201+ healthy donors [
33]. Likewise, in a previous study we reported the existence of Flu-MP*-specific CD8
+ T cells with frequencies up to 0.36% in 16 out of 19 HLA-A2+ chagasic patients and frequencies up to 0.25% in 10 out of 12 healthy donors without statistically significant difference when non-chagasic and
T. cruzi infected individuals were compared (P > 0
.05) [
34].
Memory T cells consist in central (T
CM) and effector (T
EM) memory cells [
28,
30,
35]. While human T
CM express CCR7 and CD62L, molecules involved in cellular homing to lymphoid tissue, human T
EM have lost the expression of CCR7 and CD62L and preferentially migrate to non-immune tissues [
28]. In this study, Flu-MP* peptide-specific CD8
+ T cells were predominately T
EM cells, in both healthy donors and chagasic patients. Results that are in agreement with reports of Hoji et al., showing that Flu-specific T cells from healthy donors had a lower proportion of CCR7 expression on Flu-specific T cells and a moderate expression of CD62L with a phenotype that corresponds to effector memory CD8
+ T cells [
33]. Expression of CD27 and CD28 are useful in distinguishing CD8
+ T cell differentiation stages: early (CD27+ CD28+), intermediate (CD27+ CD28-) and late differentiation (CD27- CD28-) [
28]. In our study, in the influenza-specific CD8
+ T cells there was not a predominant population based on CD27 and CD28 expression. During chronic viral infection, and depending on the infecting virus, there is a certain predominance of a cell stage of differentiation [
29]. Nonetheless, we could not find any report in the literature showing the expression of these markers in influenza-specific CD8
+ T cells to be compared with our results.
CD8+ TEM cells have cytotoxic granules and produce cytokines within hours after antigenic stimulation. MP-Flu* peptide-specific CD8+ T cells expressed surface CD107a/b and were able to secrete IL-2, IFNγ and storage perforin. Interestingly, in both infected patients and healthy donors, the expression of IL-2, IFNγ and perforin by Flu-MP* peptide-specific CD8+ T cells was similar in magnitude (percentage of expressing cells), quality (MFI) or both (iMFI), indicating that these populations are equally functional upon Flu-MP* peptide recognition.
In agreement with results presented here, a study of congenital Chagas disease performed in newborns congenitally infected with
T. cruzi, showed that the infection did not interfere with responses to Bacillus Calmette Guerin (BCG), hepatitis B, diphtheria, and tetanus vaccines during the neonatal period [
36].
Acknowledgements
The HLA-A2/Flu-MP* tetramers were generated and kindly provided by the NIH Tetramer Facility. This work was supported by Colciencias Research project No. 1203-333-18692, and COLCIENCIAS and CONICYT COLCIENCIAS and CONICYT 2008-151, Research Exchange Program. JMG was supported by an associate professor grant form Vicerrectoria Académica, Universidad de los Andes, Colombia. MC López and MC Thomas were supported by Grants P08-CVI-04037 from PAI (Junta de Andalucía), BFU2010-1670 from Plan Nacional I + D + i (MICINN) and RD06/0021/0014 from ISCIII-RETIC (MICINN Spain and FEDER).
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contribution
PL performed the experiments, participated in the data analysis and wrote the manuscript. DM and NB performed the experiments and participated in the data analysis. AC and JMG participated in the designed the study, analyzed the data and collaborated writing the manuscript. ZC, VV and FR recruited and assessed the patients and collected the clinical information. MCT, MCL and FG participated in the data analysis and collaborated writing the manuscript. CPB conceived and designed the study, obtained financial support, analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript. All authors participated in revising the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.