INTRODUCTION
Vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is one of the most effective public health interventions in combating the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The SARS-CoV-2 spike mRNA vaccines have been found to be safe in international studies involving hundreds of thousands of individuals (
1–
4), although very rare cases of adverse events have been subsequently reported (
5,
6). One such adverse event is inflammation of the heart—namely, myocarditis, pericarditis, or a combination of the two (myopericarditis) (
7–
12). SARS-CoV-2 vaccine–associated myopericarditis has been reported to occur most frequently in adolescent and young adult males during the first week after the second dose of an mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) (
2,
5,
13,
14), although it can also occur across demographic groups after a single or third (booster) dose of mRNA vaccination or after non–mRNA-based vaccines (
5,
15–
19). Various estimates of myopericarditis risk after vaccination have been reported (
2,
7,
14,
17,
20–
23), with most recent reports estimating an incidence of 0 to 35.9 and 0 to 10.9 cases per 100,000 for males and females, respectively, across age groups and mRNA vaccine cohorts (
24). A study of vaccine-associated myopericarditis incidence from our own health care network (Yale New Haven Hospital) between January and May 2021 identified eight cases from 24,673 individuals aged 16 to 25 (0.3%) given two doses of mRNA vaccine (
25).
Given the difficulties associated with studying such rare cases, the etiology of vaccine-associated myopericarditis remains largely unknown. A mechanistic understanding of the underlying pathology and associated immune alterations, as well as potential long-term effects, is needed and will likely have broad significance with the rapidly expanding clinical applications of effective mRNA-based vaccine modalities (
26–
28). Early hypotheses to explain mRNA vaccine–associated myopericarditis speculated that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which may be detectable in the blood (
29) and sparsely on cardiomyocytes (
30) of patients in some studies, may induce cardiac-targeted autoantibodies through molecular mimicry, although this has so far not been supported by other reports (
31,
32). Alternative hypotheses suggested that hypersensitivity myocarditis may instead explain the pathology, primarily based on clinical presentation, rapid recovery, and marked increase in incidence after second doses of mRNA vaccines (
11,
33). However, early case reports and cardiac biopsies from small numbers of patients were largely inconsistent with such a pathology (
9,
34–
36). Biopsy reports showed an inflammatory infiltrate predominantly composed of macrophages and T lymphocytes, although scattered eosinophils, B cells, and plasma cells were additionally noted in some reports (
37). Autoimmune myocarditis driven by T helper type 17 (T
H17) responses is another possible mechanism (
38,
39), although no evidence supporting such a pathology was found in the limited number of patients profiled to date (
32,
40). Other arguments proposed aberrant immune reactivity, both innate and adaptive, triggered by the mRNA and/or lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) (
13,
41,
42). Further, recent studies in two patients implicated a role for various inflammatory cytokines as well as natural killer (NK) and T lymphocytes (
32,
40). Each of these proposed mechanisms can be influenced by age, sex, and genetic background, leading to increased incidence in certain subpopulations (
13). To better understand the underlying pathology in SARS-CoV-2 LNP-mRNA vaccine–associated myopericarditis, we conducted a multimodal study of patients with acute myocarditis and/or pericarditis using unbiased approaches that define the maladaptive immune signatures during disease.
DISCUSSION
Although rare, vaccine-associated myopericarditis has emerged as an important area of investigation with implications for scientists and physicians working to optimize vaccination strategies (
81,
82). Understanding how and whether these rare adverse events result from maladaptive immune responses induced by vaccine-vectored antigens, or whether they instead result from immune responses triggered by elements of the LNP-mRNA vaccine delivery platform is a question of key importance given the enormous clinical potential for this effective vaccine modality. Furthermore, knowledge about longitudinal clinical outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine–associated myopericarditis is currently sparse. In this study, we performed multimodal analyses in a cohort of patients who developed myocarditis and/or pericarditis after receiving an mRNA vaccine to SARS-CoV-2, comprising the first system-level analysis of the immune landscape in such patients.
In line with prior reports (
5,
7,
9,
10,
12,
13), the majority of patients in our cohort were adolescent or young adult males presenting a few days after the second dose of an mRNA vaccine and characterized by acute systemic inflammation, elevated troponin and BNP levels, and cardiac imaging abnormalities. First, we show that these patients did not exhibit eosinophilia or elevated T
H2 cytokines, consistent with previous observations (
7,
9), making alternative hypotheses of hypersensitivity or eosinophilic myocarditis (
11,
33) unlikely explanations of the underlying pathogenesis. In addition, our analyses of the humoral response to vaccination revealed that patients with myopericarditis generated typical or even lower SARS-CoV-2–specific antibodies and neutralizing antibody responses relative to healthy VCs, consistent with previous results (
40). These patients also did not show evidence of cardiac-targeted autoantibodies, which have been reported in SARS-CoV-2 infection (
83–
85), in agreement with observations reported from one patient (
32). Although anti–IL-1RA antibodies have been reported in some patients from another report (
80), analysis of noncardiac antigens in a subset of patients from our cohort showed no such autoantibodies (
86). Consistently, our BCR repertoire analysis showed little evidence for B cell clonal expansion or somatic hypermutation in patients. These results argue that neither overexuberant nor cross-reacting humoral responses are likely explanations of the pathogenesis (
13,
87).
Instead, using an unbiased and system-based approach, we reveal that vaccine-associated myopericarditis patients are characterized by systemic cytokinopathy and activated cytotoxic lymphocytes with distinct transcriptional signatures consistent with their potential to mediate heart tissue damage. First, we noted an activation signature in NK cells with dysregulation of the activating receptor NKG2D, possibly linked to vaccine-associated myopericarditis. NKG2D is an activating receptor that binds stress ligands on tissues, including the heart (
88), inducing cytotoxic effector responses (
89–
96). Elevation and activation of NK cells were also reported in two patients with vaccine-associated myocarditis/myopericarditis from different studies (
32,
40). These cellular changes were coupled with elevated serum IL-15, a potent activator of NK and T cells, among other functions (
97–
100). Next, we show that activated CD4
+ and CD8
+ cytotoxic T cells (PD-1
+ and CD38
+/HLA-DR
+) are significantly expanded in myopericarditis early after vaccination, further expressing the chemokine receptors CXCR3 and CCR5, whose ligands, CXCL10 and CCL4, respectively, were concomitantly elevated in patients’ sera. As regulators of cytotoxic T cell and T
H1 responses, these chemokines play central roles in activated T cell infiltration of cardiac tissue, as demonstrated previously across inflammatory cardiovascular diseases, including classic myocarditis (
50–
58). Using TCR repertoire analysis, we uncovered that these cells did not show evidence of monoclonal expansion, suggestive of an antigen-independent, cytokine-dependent activation after vaccination. T cell activation was noted in a published report from one patient presenting after the first dose of mRNA-1273 vaccination, which centered around IL-18 responses (
32), suggesting that such a pathology likely overlaps across different clinical presentations and doses. Further, although published mechanistic studies into SARS-CoV-2 vaccine–associated myopericarditis remain scarce, reports from cardiac biopsies support our results, demonstrating lymphocytic infiltration (
34–
36,
80), including HLA-DR
+–activated T cells (
30). These findings are distinct from previously reported forms of vaccine-associated myocarditis (including after tetanus toxoid, conjugate meningococcal C and hepatitis B, and smallpox vaccines), where the pathologies were largely eosinophilic (
101–
103).
Longitudinal clinical follow-up months after vaccination revealed persistent cardiac imaging abnormalities in some patients, most notably LGE on CMR imaging, suggesting cardiac fibrosis (
104–
106). We additionally observed elevations in various serum extracellular matrix remodeling enzymes (MMP1, MMP8, MMP9, and TIMP1), increased inflammatory classical monocytes (CCR2
+ CD163
+) carrying a profibrotic signature, and elevation in sCD163, indicative of cardiac macrophage activation. Our clinical, cellular, and molecular findings potentially point to ongoing wound healing, tissue remodeling, and scar formation after cardiac injury in these patients (
39,
107–
111). Released damage-associated signals, in addition to elevation of the proinflammatory cytokine IL-1β as seen in patients’ sera, triggered by cardiac injury can induce monocyte/macrophage recruitment, further exacerbating the inflammation in myocarditis and/or resulting in tissue fibrosis (
39,
74,
76). These results are supported by published cardiac biopsy reports showing macrophage infiltration of heart tissue (
34–
36). Most recently, a large clinical study of 69 total patients with clinically suspected SARS-CoV-2 vaccine–associated myocarditis reported 40 biopsy-confirmed cases with prominent T cell and macrophage infiltration of cardiac tissue (
80). In one report, overlapping immune infiltrate of T cells and macrophages was additionally found at the vaccine injection site in the deltoid muscle (
112). Another histopathological study of 15 clinically suspected cases further reported cardiac infiltration of HLA-DR
+ T cells and MAC-1
+ macrophages (
30), which are consistent with the aberrant immune cell subsets we define here. Thus, our molecular and cellular immunological findings here are supported by published histological evidence, presenting the first characterization of these most likely pathogenic inflammatory cell subpopulations.
The question of why such adverse events develop more frequently after the second dose is intriguing. Recent system vaccinology approaches revealed that the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine stimulated only modest innate immune responses after the first dose. These responses were substantially enhanced after secondary immunization (
59). The authors further reported a significant increase in plasma IFN-γ and CXCL10 (also known as IFN-γ–induced protein 10) shortly after secondary immunization, proposing a ”cytokine feedback” model that regulates innate immune responses. In addition, effective mRNA vaccine responses have also been described to induce systemic IL-15 (
113), and other cytokines may be acting locally in the tissue (i.e., not measurably increased in systemic circulation) to potentially drive cytotoxic lymphocyte responses in myopericarditis. IFN-γ further correlated with pSTAT3 levels, which peaked 1 day after secondary vaccination in HDs across several cell types (
59). In patients with myopericarditis here, pSTAT3 levels in CD8
+ T cells were elevated several days after vaccination during hospitalization, consistent with sustained cytokinopathy after vaccination. IFN-γ is known to enhance HLA-DR expression on T cells during activation, as observed in our patients, which is further seen in CTL heart infiltration in myocarditis (
114). In addition, CXCR3, the activated T cell homing receptor for IFN-γ–induced CXCL10, has been characterized to facilitate the differentiation of CD8
+ T cells into short-lived effector, rather than long-lived memory, cells by mediating cell migration based on the strength of the inflammatory stimulus (
115–
117), which may suggest reduced long-term T cell memory responses to vaccination in such patients, with important implications for effective vaccine development. These accumulating pieces of evidence complement our observations, whereby susceptible individuals may experience a heightened cytokine-driven immune response to vaccination and, particularly, shortly after the second dose, consequently activating immune effectors and provoking heart inflammation. Whether such responses are governed by virtual memory responses (
118) or epigenetic reprogramming of effector subsets and/or innate immune memory (
119–
122) is a fundamental question warranting future investigation.
Although the LNP component of the vaccine alone was found to be highly inflammatory, such responses centered on IL-6 and IL-1β (
41,
123). IL-1β was elevated in our cohort of patients and together with upstream NLRP3 inflammasome activation and associated cytokines may play a role in the pathogenesis of myocarditis (
32,
39). However, IL-1β induction by lipid-formulated RNA vaccines, which can then stimulate various proinflammatory cytokines, was also shown to be dependent on both the RNA and lipid formulation in human immune cells (
124). Thus, a compound role of the adjuvant delivery platform in synergy with vaccine-vectored antigens is more likely the driver of an exaggerated immune cytokine response driving cardiac pathology after vaccination in susceptible individuals. What causes certain individuals, notably adolescent and young adult males, to be more susceptible to these cardiac-related adverse events is not clear but likely not unique to vaccine-induced pathogenesis. A bias toward younger males is similarly seen in community-acquired myocarditis/pericarditis, where many large-scale epidemiological and clinical studies have demonstrated that patients are much more frequently males (65 to 84% of patients) and significantly younger than female patients (
125–
136), potentially suggesting heightened immune and/or inflammatory responses in these demographic groups.
Our study has some limitations. Although our cohort of LNP-mRNA vaccine-associated myopericarditis is one of the largest studied to date, and our hypothesis is consistent with published reports from other patients, the number of participants remains limited to make broad conclusions. In addition, despite using several control groups to ensure that our findings are unique to vaccine-associated myopericarditis, variations in age, vaccine dose, or time after vaccination across individuals are considerations for interpretation and broad conclusions. Our high-throughput autoantibody analysis by REAP also focused on extracellular/secreted antigens, so intracellular autoantigens may still play a role in the pathogenesis, although this was not supported in previous studies (
32). In addition, the contribution of genetic variants that may influence myocarditis susceptibility has not yet been determined and is an active area of investigation. Last, our study did not have tissue samples to confirm the effector immune population infiltrating the heart, yet our results agree with previously published biopsy reports.
On the basis of our findings, longitudinal clinical monitoring of vaccine-associated myopericarditis patients may be warranted to assess potential persistence of cardiac abnormalities. It is also critical to contextualize the rare risk of adverse events and potential clinical sequelae after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (
2,
5) in comparison with the greater risks of sequelae (including myocarditis), hospitalization, and/or death resulting from infection with SARS-CoV-2 (
5,
24,
137–
140). Our study leverages a rare patient cohort and presents findings with potential implications for vaccine development and clinical care. Future studies building on the translational relevance of our work will be important to further optimize the excellent safety profile of mRNA vaccines among specific demographic subgroups. In conclusion, our findings likely rule out some previously proposed mechanisms of mRNA vaccine–associated myopericarditis and implicate aberrant cytokine-driven lymphocyte activation and cytotoxicity as well as inflammatory and profibrotic myeloid cell responses in the immunopathology occurring in susceptible patients after mRNA vaccination.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study design
The primary aim of this study was to investigate the systemic immunopathological landscape underlying rare cases of myopericarditis occurring after SARS-CoV-2 LNP-mRNA vaccination. A total cohort of 23 patients developing myocarditis and/or pericarditis with elevated troponin, BNP, and CRP levels as well as cardiac imaging abnormalities shortly after vaccination was compared with healthy VCs, among other groups. Different subsets of these patients were profiled using multimodal approaches, including SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and neutralization, high-throughput exoproteome cardiac autoantibody profiling, serum proteomics, flow cytometry, ELISA, and peripheral blood single-cell transcriptome and repertoire sequencing to define immunopathological alterations. Last, clinical follow-up including CMR imaging was conducted between 2 to 9 months after vaccination to assess potential long-term disease effects.
Human participant research
Human participants in this study provided informed consent to use their samples for research and to publish de-identified data in accordance with Helsinki principles for enrollment in research protocols that were approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Yale University (protocols 2000028924 and 1605017838). For a subset of patients, whose inclusion was solely for medical record review for population surveillance and vaccine investigations, the IRB approved the study and waived the requirement for informed consent (protocol 2000028093). All relevant ethical regulations for work with human participants were followed.
Blood sample processing
For the antibody, neutralization, REAP, and cytokine assays, whole blood was collected in heparinized CPT blood vacutainers (BDAM362780, BD) and processed on the same day of collection. Plasma samples were collected after centrifugation of whole blood at 600g for 20 min at room temperature. Undiluted plasma was transferred to 1.8-ml Eppendorf polypropylene tubes and stored at −80°C for subsequent analysis. For blood clinical parameters, significance was determined through comparison against normal reference ranges used at Yale New Haven Hospital for each test.
For the scRNA-seq analysis, PBMCs were first isolated by Ficoll-Paque Plus (GE Healthcare) or Lymphoprep (STEMCELL Technologies) density gradient centrifugation. Cells were subsequently washed twice in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and resuspended in complete RPMI 1640 (cRPMI) medium (Lonza) containing 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS), 2 mM glutamine, and penicillin and streptomycin (100 U/ml each; Invitrogen). PBMCs were then stored at 106 cells per ml in 10% dimethyl sulfoxide in FBS and stored in −80°C overnight before further storage in liquid nitrogen. Serum was isolated by centrifugation of serum tubes and saving the supernatant in aliquots, which were flash-frozen in liquid nitrogen before cryopreservation in −80°C. All patient PBMCs were processed and cryopreserved within 1 to 6 hours of blood draw. HD PBMCs were all processed within 24 hours to account for overnight shipping.
SARS-CoV-2–specific antibodies
ELISA was performed as previously described (
141). In short, Triton X-100 and ribonuclease A were added to serum samples at final concentrations of 0.5% and 0.5 mg/ml, respectively, and incubated at room temperature for 30 min before use to reduce risk from any potential virus in serum. MaxiSorp plates (96 wells; 442404, Thermo Fisher Scientific) were coated with recombinant SARS-CoV-2 S total (50 μl per well; 100 μg; SPN-C52H9, ACROBiosystems), S1 (100 μg; S1N-C52H3, ACROBiosystems), and RBD (100 μg; SPD-C52H3, ACROBiosystems) at a concentration of 2 μg/ml in PBS and were incubated overnight at 4°C. The coating buffer was removed, and plates were incubated for 1 hour at room temperature with 200 μl of blocking solution [PBS with 0.1% Tween 20 (PBS-T) and 3% milk powder]. Plasma was diluted serially at 1:100, 1:200, 1:400, and 1:800 in dilution solution (PBS-T and 1% milk powder), and 100 μl of diluted serum were added for 2 hours at room temperature. Human anti-spike (SARS-CoV-2 human anti-spike clone AM006415; 91351, Active Motif) and anti-nucleocapsid (SARS-CoV-2 human anti-nucleocapsid clone 1A6; MA5-35941, Invitrogen) were serially diluted to generate a standard curve. Plates were washed three times with PBS-T, and 50 μl of horseradish peroxidase anti-human IgG antibody (1:5000; A00166, GenScript) diluted in dilution solution were added to each well. After 1 hour of incubation at room temperature, plates were washed six times with PBS-T. Plates were developed with 100 μl of 3,3’,5,5'-tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) substrate reagent set (555214, BD Biosciences), and the reaction was stopped after 5 min by the addition of 2 N sulfuric acid. Plates were then read at wavelengths of 450 nm and 570 nm.
Cell lines and virus
Vero E6 kidney epithelial cells (C1008, CRL-1586) were cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM) supplemented with 1% sodium pyruvate, nonessential amino acids, and 5% FBS at 37°C and 5% CO2. The cell line was obtained from the American Type Culture Collection and was negative for contamination with Mycoplasma using commercially available kits. SARS-CoV-2 (ancestral strain, D614G) USA-WA1/2020 was obtained from BEI Resources (NR-52281) and minimally amplified in Vero E6 cells to generate working stocks of virus. All experiments were performed in a Biosafety Level 3 facility with approval from the Yale Environmental Health and Safety office.
Neutralization assay
Patient and VC sera were isolated as above and heat-treated for 30 min at 56°C. Plasma was serially diluted from 1:10 to 1:2430 and incubated with SARS-CoV-2 (ancestral strain, D614G) for 1 hour at 37°C. Inoculum was subsequently incubated with Vero E6 cells in a six-well plate for 1 hour for adsorption. Next, infected cells were overlayed with DMEM supplemented with NaHCO3, 2% FBS, and 0.6% Avicel mixture. Plaques were resolved at 40 hours after infection by fixing in 4% formaldehyde for 1 hour followed by staining in 0.5% crystal violet. All experiments were performed in parallel with negative control sera with an established viral concentration sufficient to generate 60 to 120 plaques in control wells.
REAP
Antibody purification, yeast adsorption and library selections, NGS library preparation, and REAP score calculation were performed as previously described (
43,
44,
86). A more detailed protocol is also included in Supplementary Methods.
Cytokine analysis
Plasma was isolated from patients as described above. Levels of cytokines were assessed using commercially available vendors, described at length previously (
142). Briefly, sera were shipped to Eve Technologies (Calgary, Alberta, Canada) on dry ice, and levels of cytokines and chemokines were measured using the Human Cytokine Array/Chemokine Array 71-403 Plex Panel (HD71) and the Human Matrix Metalloprotease Panel (HDMYO-3-12). All samples were measured upon first thaw. Samples below the range of detection were replaced with the lowest observed value for quantitation.
PCA and hierarchical clustering were performed using MATLAB 2020b (MathWorks Inc.) using standard built-in functions. Gene enrichment was performed on identified clusters using GO analysis to identify significance, and the top 10 hierarchical, biological processes were reported (
143,
144).
ELISA
Serum was isolated as above alongside PBMC isolation, flash-frozen, and stored at −80°C until further use. Serum was then thawed at 37°C and plated in duplicate or triplicate. Standards were made fresh for each assay. The assays were run using the ELISA MAX Deluxe Set Human IL-15 (BioLegend, catalog no. 435104) and the CD163 Human ELISA (Thermo Fisher Scientific, catalog no. EHCD163) kits following the manufacturer’s instructions.
scRNA-seq and alignment
Cryopreserved PBMCs were thawed in a water bath at 37°C for ~2 min and removed from the water bath when a tiny ice crystal remained. Cells were transferred to a 15-ml conical tube of prewarmed growth medium. The cryovial was rinsed with additional growth medium (10% FBS in DMEM) to recover leftover cells, and the rinse medium was added to the 15-ml conical tube while gently shaking the tube.
Thawed PBMCs were centrifuged at 400g for 8 min at room temperature, and the supernatant was removed without disrupting the cell pellet. The pellet was resuspended in 1× PBS with 2% FBS, and cells were filtered with a 30-μM cell strainer. The cellular concentration was adjusted to 1000 cells per μl on the basis of the cell count, and cells were immediately loaded onto the 10x Chromium Next GEM Chip G according to the manufacturer’s user guide [Chromium Next GEM SingleCell V(D)J Reagent Kits v1.1]. We aimed to obtain a yield of ~10,000 cells per lane.
cDNA libraries for gene expression and TCR/BCR sequencing were generated according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Chromium Next GEM SingleCell V(D)J Reagent Kits v1.1). Each library was then sequenced on an Illumina NovaSeq 6000 platform. The single-cell transcriptome sequencing data were processed using CellRanger v5.0.1 and aligned to the GRCh38 reference genome (
145). CITE-seq surface protein reads were quantified using a provided tagged antibodies dictionary.
Quality control, preprocessing, and integration
After data alignment and quantification, we performed quality control assessment before proceeding with data processing and downstream analysis. First, genes expressed in fewer than five cells and cells with fewer than 200 genes or more than 10% mitochondrial gene fraction were removed.
The filtered single-cell data were thereafter integrated, and batch effects were corrected using single-cell variational inference (scVI) (
146) with a generative model of 64 latent variables and 500 iterations. More specifically, scVI’s negative binomial model was used on raw counts, selecting 5000 highly variable genes identified by the tool’s native method in the combined datasets to produce latent variables. To minimize the dependence of clustering on cell cycle effects, previously defined cell cycle phase–specific genes in the Seurat package (
147) were excluded from this list of highly variable genes. Data from patients with acute myopericarditis, E-YVCs, recovered patients, and HDs were integrated for downstream analysis. Four MIS-C CITE-seq samples were also included to aid with cell annotation using surface protein markers.
The latent representation generated by scVI was used to compute the neighborhood graph (scanpy.pp.neighbors), which was used for Louvain clustering (scanpy.tl.louvain) and Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP) visualization (scanpy.tl.umap).
Before clustering, to aid with cell annotation, Single-Cell Remover of Doublets (Scrublet) (
148) was used to preliminary label doublets by computing a doublet score for each cell. In particular, a Student’s
t test (
P < 0.01) and Bonferroni correction were used within fine-grained subclustering of each cluster initially identified by the Louvain algorithm.
Data processing was performed using the Scanpy toolkit (
149) following published recommended standard practices. Before downstream analysis, data were normalized (
scanpy.pp.normalize_per_cell, scaling factor = 10
4) and log-transformed (
scanpy.pp.log1p). For heatmaps of gene expression, the data were further scaled (
scanpy.pp.scale, max value = 10).
Cluster identification and immune subset annotation
First, a logistic regression model was used to transfer preliminary cell annotations from our previous published MIS-C dataset (
63) using highly variable genes (
scanpy.pp.highly_variable_genes) shared between the two datasets to guide cluster identification. Thereafter, clustering was performed using the Louvain algorithm with an initial resolution of three, and the resulting clusters were defined on the basis of the expression of published cell-specific gene markers. For ambiguous clusters, differential gene expression analysis compared with all other clusters was performed (
scanpy.tl.rank_genes_groups), and the resulting top genes were used for unbiased determination of cell identity.
The initial doublet predications by Scrublet were revised here, and doublets were confirmed on the basis of cluster coexpression of heterogeneous lineage gene markers (e.g., CD3, CD19, and CD14) along with the n_counts and n_genes distributions. In addition to removing doublets, clusters displaying patterns of dying cells with high mitochondrial content were further removed. Refined subclusters were used for downstream data analysis and visualization, including cell type frequency, differential gene expression, and repertoire analyses.
Cell subset proportions
To determine significant changes in the proportions of identified subsets across the groups while accounting for compositional dependencies between the subsets in the scRNA-seq data, we used the Bayesian model scCODA (
49). Specifically, for each subset, the myopericarditis group was compared with the E-YVC group, and default parameters were used. Changes classified by scCODA as credible after correction for multiple comparisons (FDR < 0.05) were considered statistically significant. In some cases where changes were not classified as significant by scCODA’s method, we used the nonparametric unpaired two-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test with Benjamini-Hochberg FDR correction for multiple comparisons as previously described (
150), and we report the exact adjusted
P value, given that such changes may still be biologically meaningful.
Differential gene expression
The limma package (
151) was used to obtain differentially expressed genes (FDR < 0.05). The analysis was performed either comparing different cell subsets or in the same cell subset comparing cells from different groups. Top differentially expressed genes by logFC (up-regulated and down-regulated) and published pathway gene sets were used for plotting and heatmap visualization after data scaling.
Gene expression scores
Published gene sets from the MSigDB were used to calculate the average enrichment scores across cells of defined subsets as specified in the figure legends using the scanpy.tl.score_genes function with default parameters.
Mapping annotations between datasets
For mapping single-cell immune populations between datasets, a logistic regression model was used using scikit-learn with default parameters. For heart cells, T lymphocyte subsets from published single-cell data (
60) were used to train the model using expression data of highly variable genes (
scanpy.pp.highly_variable_genes) shared between the two datasets. The model was then applied to predict matching cell subsets in our dataset (mean prediction probability = 0.9), and the percentage of cells mapping between subsets was visualized.
TCR repertoire analysis
TCR diversity, gene usage, and clonotype analyses were done as previously described (
63). A more detailed protocol is also included in Supplementary Methods.
BCR repertoire analysis
Analysis of the BCR repertoire was performed as previously described (
63) using the Immcantation framework as listed above in the TCR analysis, and annotations were incorporated from overall PBMC clustering for B cell subsets.
Flow cytometry
Patient and donor PBMCs were thawed as above and rested in cRPMI for 2 hours at 37°C before staining. The cells were counted, resuspended in PBS, and stained with e780 Fixable Viability Dye (eBioscience, catalog no. 65-0865-14) for 15 min on ice. The cells were then washed and resuspended in PBS with 10% FBS, with Human TruStain FcX (BioLegend, catalog no. 422302) and True-Stain Monocyte Blocker (BioLegend, catalog no. 426102) for 15 min on ice. The cells were then stained with surface antibody cocktails for 25 min on ice. For phospho-staining, cells were first treated with Fc blocker and then fixed and permeabilized with methanol before staining for intracellular proteins. All flow cytometry data were acquired on the LSR Fortessa cytometer, and gating strategies are shown in figs. S9 and S10. Further details about flow cytometry antibodies are included in Supplementary Methods.
Statistical analysis
Data were analyzed by various statistical tests as described in detail in the corresponding individual figure captions. For all comparisons, error bars, exact P values, and testing levels were shown whenever possible, and corrections for multiple comparisons were done when appropriate.
Acknowledgments
We thank the patients and their families for participation in research and all clinical care staff for their contributions. We also thank A. Zaleski, T. Murray, A. Rice, J. Wang, K. Hoehn, X. Yan, N. Li, and the Yale Center for Genome Analysis (YCGA) staff for their contributions.
Funding: C.L.L. acknowledges funding from NIAID/NIH (R21AI144315-S1) and Yale University. A.B. is supported by the NIGMS/NIH Medical Scientist Training Grant (T32GM136651) and the Paul and Daisy Soros Fellowship. J.K. is supported by the NIGMS/NIH Medical Scientist Training Grant (T32GM136651). N.N.B. acknowledges funding from the Yale Center for Clinical Investigation and PCCTSDP/NICHD/NIH. T.S.S. acknowledges funding from Race to Erase MS Young Investigator award. I.Y. acknowledges funding from NIAID/NIH, Centers for Disease Control, and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. A.I. acknowledges funding from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. C.R.O. acknowledges funding from NIAID/NIH (K23AI159518). D.B. acknowledges funding from NIAID/NIH (R01HD108467). The contents of this work are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.
Author contributions: A.B., J.K., A.M.R., S.B.O., A.I., I.Y., and C.L.L. conceptualized, designed, and oversaw the research. N.N.B., H.S., V.H., M.C., A.K., D.B., C.R.O., J.S., E.K.H., and I.Y. coordinated clinical samples and data. A.B., J.K., A.R., J.R.J., K.M.J., T.S.S., M.P.-H., V.M., and C.L. performed experiments, analyzed data, and prepared figures. A.B., J.K., A.I., I.Y., and C.L.L. wrote the manuscript with input and review from all authors.
Competing interests: C.L.L. reported an unrelated advisory/consulting role for Pharming Healthcare Inc. and unrelated funding to her institution from Ono Pharma. I.Y. reported being a member of the NIAID/COVPN mRNA-1273 Study Group; has received funding to her institution to conduct clinical research from Pfizer and Moderna outside the submitted work; and has an unrelated advisory/consulting role for Sanofi Pasteur and Merck. A.I. cofounded and consults for RIGImmune, Xanadu Bio, and PanV; consults for Paratus Sciences and InvisiShield Technologies; and is a member of the Board of Directors of Roche Holding Ltd. A.M.R. is an inventor of a patent describing the REAP technology and is the founder of and holds equity in Seranova Bio, the commercial licensee of this patent. D.B. is the founder of Lab11 Therapeutics. S.B.O. serves on various WHO advisory committees and on the boards of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and Sabin Vaccine Institute.
Data and materials availability: The scRNA-seq data from the patients with myopericarditis and VCs used in this study are available through the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database under accession number GSE230227. Previously published single-cell data (
63) from pediatric HD controls and patients with MIS-C used in this study can be found at GEO under accession number GSE166489. All other data needed to evaluate the conclusions in the paper are present in the paper or the Supplementary Materials. Scripts used for analysis in this study followed standard code as detailed in Materials and Methods and are available upon request. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited. To view a copy of this license, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. This license does not apply to figures/photos/artwork or other content included in the article that is credited to a third party; obtain authorization from the rights holder before using this material.