INTRODUCTION
The world changed in December 2019 with the emergence of a new zoonotic pathogen, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes a variety of clinical syndromes collectively termed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Severe COVID-19 could lead to respiratory failure, septic shock, and, ultimately, death (
1–
3). The current severe SARS-CoV-2 pandemic highlights the clinical consequences of immune dysregulation in host antiviral immunity (
4). T lymphocytes play a vital role in cell-mediated and humoral immunity. During virus infection, CD8
+ cytotoxic T cells (CTLs) are capable of secreting an array of molecules such as perforin, granzymes, and interferon-γ (IFN-γ) to eradicate viruses from the host (
5). At the same time, CD4
+ T helper cells (T
H) can assist CTLs and cytotoxic B cells and enhance their abilities to clear virus (
6). A beneficial role of T cells in combating COVID-19 would be in line with observations that CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells are protective against the closely related SARS-CoVs (
7–
9). Only a limited number of studies have characterized the SARS-CoV-2–specific T cell responses in patients with COVID-19 (
10–
12). SARS-CoV-2 spike (S), membrane (M), and nucleocapsid (N) peptide–treated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) up-regulated IFN-γ but not interleukin-4 (IL-4) or IL-17, suggesting that a T
H1 response was induced in COVID-19 (
11,
12). The study of phenotype based on CD45RA and CCR7 suggested SARS-CoV-2–specific T cells to be more of the effector memory phenotype (
12). Subsequently, T cell–mediated immune responses and inflammation are proved to be critical for host elimination against SARS-CoV-2 (
13). These studies indicated that T cells play a key role in antivirus immunity in COVID-19. Thus, it is critical to investigate the regulatory mechanism of T cell functions in patients with COVID-19.
In the initiation of innate immune responses against pathogens, pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) have an essential role in recognizing specific components of microorganisms and triggering responses that eliminate the invading microorganisms (
14). These PRRs include membrane-bound C-type lectin receptors, cytosolic proteins such as Toll-like receptors (TLRs), nucleotide oligomerization domain (NOD)–like receptors, retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I)–like receptors, and unidentified proteins that mediate sensing of microbial components (
14). The pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) and damage-associated molecular patterns induce inflammatory T cells either indirectly, through the induction of proinflammatory cytokine production by innate immune cells, or directly, by binding to PRRs on T cells (
15). T cells also express PRRs such as TLRs, and evidence is emerging that TLR signaling in T cells can promote cytokine secretion or regulate their function (
16,
17).
Triggering receptors expressed on myeloid cells (TREMs) belong to a family of innate immune receptors that broadly express in monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells (
18). The most well-characterized members of the TREM family are TREM-1 and TREM-2, which signal through the same adaptor molecule, DNAX activating protein of 12 kDa (DAP12), but execute distinct functions on inflammatory modulation. In myeloid cells, TREM-1 amplifies TLR signaling and host inflammation (
19), whereas TREM-2 inhibits the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines induced by the TLR and Fc receptor response (
20). Although substantive evidence has demonstrated the anti-inflammatory properties of TREM-2 in innate immune cells, in vivo studies have shown contradictory effects of TREM-2 in modulating infectious and inflammatory diseases (
21–
23). On one hand, TREM-2 fine-tunes inflammatory responses in a murine model of sepsis induced by Gram-negative bacteria. Mice lacking TREM-2 exhibited heightened liver damage and inflammation in a chemical reagent–induced liver injury model (
21). On the other hand, TREM-2 deficiency has been shown to attentuate the inflammatory response and restrict organ damage and mortality induced by
Burkholderia pseudomallei infection (
22). Knockout of TREM-2 also inhibits neuroinflammation and protects against neurodegeneration in a mouse model of tauopathy (
23). These contradictory reports indicate that TREM-2 may play a distinct role in other immune cells such as lymphocytes that do not have myeloid lineage. Our previous study demonstrated that TREM-1 is highly expressed in Vδ2 T cells from patients with active pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) and that TREM-1 promotes the antigen-presenting capability of Vδ2 T cells (
24). It is reported that TREM-like transcript 2 (TLT2) is constitutively expressed on CD8
+ T cells and enhances IL-2 and IFN-γ production (
25). Moreover, TREM-2 expression was induced in peripheral blood CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells of patients with TB (
26). Several studies have reported that TREM-2 exhibits distinct roles in viral infection (
27–
29). However, the role of TREM-2 in SARS-CoV-2 infection remains uninvestigated.
In this study, we identified TREM-2 as a modulator expressed in T cells during SARS-CoV-2 infection. TREM-2 was up-regulated in periphery and lung-infiltrating T cells from patients with COVID-19. TREM-2+ T cells of patients with COVID-19 was positively correlated with clinical indicators of severe COVID-19 and displayed activation and effector memory phenotype. TREM-2 bound to SARS-CoV-2 M protein TREM-2 and interacted with T cell receptor (TCR) subunit CD3ζ and kinase ζ-chain associated protein of 70 kDa (ZAP70). SARS-CoV-2 M protein–reconstituted pseudovirus induced the phosphorylation of CD3ζ, ZAP70, and STAT1 (signal transducers and activators of transcription 1), as well as T-bet expression in TREM-2+ T cells. TREM-2 enhanced proinflammatory TH1 cytokines IFN-γ and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) produced by T cells upon SARS-CoV-2 M protein stimulation. Furthermore, CD4-specific conditional TREM-2 knockout (CD4–TREM-2 cKO) mice were used to generate the mouse hepatitis virus A-59 (MHV-A59) intranasally inoculated model. The in vitro coronavirus infection model exhibited lower expression of IFN-γ and TNF, together with higher viral load and lung destruction in TREM-2 KO mice compared with wild-type (WT) control, suggesting that TREM-2 is required in T cell–mediated immune defense and inflammation. Our results thus provide a preliminary demonstration of a TREM-2–mediated T cell response, suggesting potential therapeutic targets for infectious and inflammatory diseases.
DISCUSSION
In this study, we demonstrated that TREM-2 was inducibly expressed on T cells in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and interacted with SARS-CoV-2 M protein to activate CD3ζ/ZAP70/STAT1 signaling and proinflammatory TH1 responses. We used a TREM-2 cKO mouse model of MHV-A59 infection to show that intrinsic TREM-2 in T cell promoted viral clearance and alleviated the destruction of lung. To the best of our knowledge, this study explored a novel role of TREM-2 in the T cell response, which may explain the inflammatory syndrome and previous in vivo and in vitro studies on SARS-CoV-2 infection.
TREM family was originally identified as innate receptors expressed on myeloid lineage. To date, TLT2 is reported being expressed on B lymphoid lineage cells (
46), CD8
+ T cells, and activated CD4
+ T cells (
25). We previously reported that TREM-1 was expressed on innate lymphocyte Vδ2T cells and activated the antigen presentation activity of Vδ2T cells to enhance T
H1 response in TB (
24). In addition, TREM-2 expression was reported to be induced on peripheral blood CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells in patients with TB (
26). In this study, we demonstrated that TREM-2 was inducibly expressed on T cells in response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and substantially elevated in patients with severe COVID-19. Furthermore, we found that anti-CD3 agonist Abs could not induce TREM-2 up-regulation in T cells, which indicated that TREM-2 expression was increased in COVID-19 T cells independent of TCR stimulation. However, TREM-2 expression was up-regulated in T cells upon the treatment of plasma from patients with COVID-19, which together indicate that some plasma components such as inflammatory cytokines may induce TREM-2 expression in patients with COVID-19. Meanwhile, TREM-2 expression has been reported to be altered in the in vitro stimulation of inflammatory contexts, including IFN-γ, TNF, IL-1β, and IL-4 (
47), which have been found in patients with COVID-19, especially in severe patients (
48). Moreover, the frequency of TREM-2
+CD4
+ T cell was positively correlated with CRP, lymphocyte count, and D-dimer, the indicators of patients with severe COVID-19 (
1). An sTREM-2 is derived from the proteolytic cleavage of the cell surface receptor (
49). sTREM-2 was elevated in the lung of Sendai virus–infected mice (
27) or in the cerebrospinal fluids of patients with HIV (
30). In the study, we found that the concentration of sTREM-2 was increased in the lung tissues from patients with COVID-19. This finding indicates that TREM-2 may be used as a potential biomarker for COVID-19 severity.
The balance between the resting and activation status, naive, and memory phenotype of T cells is crucial for maintaining an efficient immune response (
50). The study has demonstrated that high expression of CD69, CD134, and CD137 was distinguished as SARS-CoV-2–specific T cells, which produced high-level IFN-γ and granzyme B (
11). Other study showed that an increase in coexpression of activation phenotype CD38 and human leukocyte antigen DR (HLA-DR) was observed in T cells of patients with COVID-19 (
51). In the present study, we found that TREM-2 expression on CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells was positively associated with the expression of TCR-dependent activation-induced markers, including CD134 (OX40), CD137 (4-1BB), CD69, and CD25. Increased frequency of effector and memory population was observed in the peripheral T cell of a patient with COVID-19 (
12). Moreover, we found that TREM-2 expression level on naive CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells was much lower than that in effector and memory T cell subsets (T
CM and T
EM). These data together suggest that TREM-2 may play an essential role in T cell activation and differentiation during COVID-19.
To date, the ligands of TREM-2 are still unclear. It has been reported previously that TREM-2 can bind to certain bacterial components (
32,
33) and endogenous proteins (
52–
54), especially lipoprotein (
34,
55,
56). The coronavirus M protein is the most abundant structural protein anchoring on the envelope membrane surface of coronavirus and attributes to virion invasion and assembly (
57). Besides, coronavirus M protein has been proven to play critical roles in host immune responses, including the inducement of Abs (
58), IFN-α production (
59), and CTL-specific responses (
60). A study has demonstrated that the viral epitopes from SARS-CoV-2 M protein could elicit higher percentage of IFN-γ–producing T cells (59%), compared to the S protein (26%) and N protein (22%) peptides (
61), indicating the predominance of M protein in host T cell responses against SARS-CoV-2. However, because of the lack of related researches, the underlying mechanism associated with T cell activation by SARS-CoV-2 M protein remains unclear. PRRs on T cells could sense the PAMPs and initiate the activation of T cells. SARS-CoV-1 M protein is already identified as a PAMP to trigger TLR-mediated signal (
62). Here, we identified SARS-CoV-2 M protein as a novel exogenous ligand of TREM-2 by immunofluorescence, co-IP, and in vitro binding assay both in 293T cell, primary T cells, and the lung tissue of patients with COVID-19.
However, it is intriguing that the lymphocytes lack angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) expression (
63), suggesting an alternative mechanism by which SARS-CoV-2 regulates T lymphocytes. The unique location of M protein on the viral envelope makes it hard to recognize M protein by surface receptors because of the spike structure of S protein. In addition, it is generally believed that the S protein of SARS-CoV-2 is responsible for both virion attachment and internalization (
64,
65). However, coronaviruses M protein could mediate the receptor binding and membrane fusion of the virion with the host cell (
66). For instance, human coronavirus NL63 (HCoV-NL63) uses ACE2 as an entry receptor for infection (
67). Further study demonstrated that the M protein of NL63 is responsible for this attachment and interaction with adhesion receptor heparan sulfate proteoglycans (
68). In the study, we could not exclude the possibility that TREM-2 could directly recognize the M protein of SARS-CoV-2 and mediate the attachment of SARS-CoV-2 to the T cells and the subsequent activation of T cell responses. Whereas, other possibilities could also be proposed rationally according to the results we observed. One possibility is the existence of dissociative M protein. In the process of virus assembly, structural and nonstructural proteins are synthesized within target cells. However, some infected cells would be directly lysed by CTLs before the end of virus assembly, which leads to the release of dissociative M protein (
69). Moreover, the direct target of Abs and complement may also result in the destruction of virus structure and the dissociation of M protein (
70). Dissociative M protein is recognized and bound with TREM-2, triggering the activation of T cells. This could explain why we detected the binding of M protein with TREM-2 and CD3ζ as well as ZAP70 in the lung tissue of patients with COVID-19, where abundant infiltrating TREM-2
+CD4
+ T cells were found. Another possibility is related to the involvement of sTREM-2. sTREM-2 as the secreted form from proteolytic cleavage of the cell surface receptor may represent another binding approach for M protein and TREM-2. sTREM-2 could recognize M protein across the viral envelope and transmit signal. We demonstrated in in vitro binding assay that TREM-2–Fc fusion protein, which is similar to sTREM-2, could bind to recombinant M protein.
Various lipids and lipoproteins have been reported as the potential ligands for TREM-2 (
34–
36). It is unclear whether TREM-2 recognizes other components such as lipids, which was expressed in viral membrane, as well as in the sera of patients with severe COVID-19 (
71). TREM-2 could recognize the lipid component PS or SM exposed on the cell membrane (
36). PS or SM could not increase the binding between TREM-2–Fc and M protein. Furthermore, PS or SM alone could not induce the activation of CD3ζ/ZAP70/STAT1 signal pathway in T cells. Besides, M protein combined with PS or SM did not enhance the activation of CD3ζ/ZAP70/STAT1 signal pathway compared with the treatment with M protein alone. The results partially demonstrated that M protein bound to TREM-2 and activated TREM-2/CD3ζ/ZAP70/STAT1 signal pathway independent of lipids, at least PS and SM.
TREM-2 was often described as an anti-inflammatory and reparative receptor (
18,
20). Nevertheless, TREM-2 signal was reported to be proinflammatory and destructive in vivo in some infectious models, intestinal and neurological disease (
22,
23,
72). Several studies reported that TREM-2 exhibits a distinct role in virus infection in vivo, which indicated that different mechanism participated in TREM-2–mediated viral immunity (
27–
29). TREM-2 KO mice showed marked decreases in lung inflammation and airway mucus production after mouse parainfluenza Sendai virus infection (
27), because TREM-2 allows for macrophages to accumulate in the lung and thereby amplify disease-promoting IL-13 production (
27). TREM-2 suppresses the proinflammatory response to facilitate porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus infection via PI3K/NF-κB (phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/nuclear factor κB) signaling (
28). TREM-2 KO mice were protected from lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus–induced hepatitis and showed improved virus control despite comparable virus-specific T cell responses (
29). Here, we used CD4-specific conditional TREM-2 KO mice to generate MHV-A59 intranasally inoculated model. CD4-specific conditional TREM-2 KO mice exhibited lower levels of activation markers CD69 and CD134, as well as T
H1 cytokines IFN-γ and TNF, together with higher viral load and lung destruction after MHV-A59 infection compared with WT mice, suggesting that TREM-2 is required in T cell–mediated immune defense and inflammation.
We explored the signal transduction mechanism of TREM-2–mediated T cell activation. We used IP and LC-MS to find the protein that interacted with TREM-2, and LC-MS data identified that CD3ζ may be the most likely protein. It is well known that antigen-specific signal via TCR induces the phosphorylation of ITAM on CD3 chains and then recruits the kinase ZAP70 to the phosphorylated ITAMs (
37). Activated ZAP70, in turn, phosphorylates and activates various downstream signal transduction molecules, leading to T cell activation (
38). In the present study, TREM-2 interacted with CD3ζ/ZAP70 complex in T cells, and this interaction was strengthened in patients with COVID-19 compared to healthy donors. Our data indicated that CD3ζ, rather than DAP12 (the adaptor molecule reported in macrophage) (
73), may be an adaptor of TREM-2 in T cells. Furthermore, while interacting with SARS-CoV-2 M protein, TREM-2 recruited CD3ζ/ZAP70 complex to activate STAT1/T-bet signaling and promoted proinflammatory T
H1 responses. Thus, roles of TREM-2 in host inflammation and disease progression may largely depend on the major effector cells belonging to either innate or adaptive immunity.
In summary, the present study explored the role of TREM-2 on T cells in COVID-19. We found that TREM-2 was induced on T cell surface during COVID-19 disease and was bound to SARS-CoV-2 M protein. TREM-2 interacted with CD3ζ/ZAP70 complex in T cells and therefore activated STAT1/T-bet signaling to enhance the proinflammatory TH1 responses. These findings have broadened the TREM-2–mediated T cell response of COVID-19 on a new and unexpected mechanism for the regulation of adaptive immunity and host inflammation, which may provide a promising therapeutic target for COVID-19 diseases.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Ethics statement
This study and all experiment protocols were approved by the Ethics Committee Board for Human Experiments in the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University (approval number K174-1). For experiments with human samples, informed consent was obtained from all participants. The procedure was performed in accordance with the National Commission for the Protection of Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research guidelines for animal experiments. All efforts were made to minimize suffering.
Human subjects
Patients with COVID-19 (n = 113) were recruited from the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (Zhuhai, China). All the patients were selected on the basis of clinical diagnosis and laboratory information. Healthy donors (n = 50) were randomly recruited from individuals undergoing health checkup at the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University and confirmed as coronavirus nucleic acid negative. Detailed clinical characteristics and laboratory information are shown in table S1. Pathological tissues of the lung organ of a patient who died from COVID-19 were provided by the Shenzhen Third People’s Hospital (Shenzhen, China). The lung tissues defined as healthy control were paracancerous normal tissues isolated from the lungs of patients with lung cancer admitted to the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University. Informed consent was obtained. Detailed clinical characteristics of these patients are shown in table S2.
Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction
Total RNA was extracted from PBMCs using TRIzol (Invitrogen) reagent according to the manufacturer’s protocol, and total RNA yield was quantified using NanoDrop (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA). cDNAs were synthesized from 1 μg of total RNA using the RevertAid First Strand cDNA Synthesis Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was carried out using cDNA, SYBR green PCR master mix (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA), and forward and reverse primers for TREM-1, TREM-2, TLT1, TLT2, TLT, IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-1β, and MHV-A59 N gene using a real-time PCR system (CFX96, Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA). Relative gene expression was normalized against β-actin, and fold change in mRNA expression was determined using the ΔΔCt method. Primers used in these experiments are shown in table S4.
Immunofluorescence
PBMCs were centrifuged at 1500 rpm for 5 min and then lysed with 1× red blood cell lysing buffer [BD Biosciences (BD)] for 5 min at room temperature. Cells were fixed with 1% paraformaldehyde (Sigma-Aldrich) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) for 15 min and then stained with fluorescein isothiocyanate–labeled anti-CD4 (clone L200, BD) and phycoerythrin (PE)–labeled anti–TREM-2 Abs (clone 237920, R&D Systems) for 30 min. HEK293T cells were fixed for 10 min at room temperature with 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS and permeabilized with 0.1% Triton X100 in 5% bovine serum albumin (BSA) for 1 hour at room temperature. Samples were then incubated with primary Abs to HA [clone C29F4, Cell Signaling Technology (CST)] and FLAG (M2, monoclonal; Sigma-Aldrich) and followed by incubation with Alexa Fluor 488– and Alexa Fluor 594–conjugated anti-rabbit and anti-mouse secondary Abs (Invitrogen). Lung sections from a healthy donor and patient were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS and incubated with 5% BSA for 1 hour at room temperature. Samples were then incubated with primary Abs to CD4 (clone RPA-T4, BioLegend) and TREM-2 (polyclonal goat IgG, R&D Systems) at 4°C for 12 hours and followed by incubation with Alexa Fluor 488– and Alexa Fluor 594–conjugated anti-mouse and anti-goat secondary Abs (Invitrogen) for 2 hours. All samples were covered with a drop of 4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) for 5 min. Confocal images were captured on a ZEISS LSM 880 confocal microscope using a 20× objective or a 63× oil objective. The quantitative intensity analysis of TREM-2 in confocal images has been performed with ImageJ software.
Flow cytometry
Fluorescent dye–labeled Abs were purchased from the following companies. Anti-human: CD3 (clone UCHT1, BD), CD4 (clone L200, BD), CD8 (clone RPA-T8, BD), CD14 (clone 63D3, BioLegend), CD45RO (clone UCHL1, BD), CCR7 (clone 150503, BD), CD134 (clone ACT35, BioLegend), CD137 (clone 4B4-1, BioLegend), CD69 (clone FN50, eBioscience), CD25 (clone BC96, eBioscience), TREM-2 (clone 237920, R&D Systems), TNF (clone MAb11, eBioscience), IFN-γ (clone 4S.B3, eBioscience), IL-2 (clone MQ1-17H12, BioLegend), granzyme B (clone QA16A02, BioLegend), T-bet (clone O4-46, BD), anti–phospho-ZAP70 (Tyr319) (clone 1503310, BioLegend), anti–phospho-CD3 (Tyr83) [clone EP776(2)Y, Abcam], and anti–phospho-STAT1 (Tyr701) (clone A15158B, BioLegend). Anti-mouse: CD3 (clone 17A2, BioLegend), CD4 (clone GK1.5, BioLegend), CD8 (clone 53-6.7, BioLegend), CD69 (clone H1.2F3, BioLegend), CD134 (clone H1.2F3, BioLegend), and T-bet (clone 4B10, BD). For intracellular cytokine staining or intracellular molecule phosphorylation staining, cells were restimulated for 4 to 6 hours with phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (50 ng/ml) (Sigma-Aldrich, MO, USA), ionomycin (1 μg/ml) (Sigma-Aldrich, MO, USA), and brefeldin A (3 μg/ml) (eBioscience, CA, USA). Intracellular cytokines were stained using the intracellular fixation/permeabilization buffer set (eBioscience, CA, USA). Samples were analyzed on a CytoFLEX LX flow cytometer (Beckman Coulter) and analyzed with FlowJo software (version 10.0.7; Tree Star).
Western blot
Cells were collected and lysed with cell lysis buffer in the presence of protease inhibitor phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride (PMSF) for 30 min on ice. Protein concentration was determined by the BCA protein assay kit (EMD Millipore Corp., Billerica, MA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s instruction. Equal amounts of protein from each cell lysate were subjected to 10% or 12% SDS–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDSPAGE). The resolved proteins were transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membranes and blotted with indicated Abs, anti-HA, anti-FLAG, anti-Myc, anti–TREM-2, anti-CD3ζ, anti-ZAP70, anti–p-CD3ζ, or anti–p-ZAP70. Actin or β-tubulin was used as an internal control. Then, the membranes were incubated with appropriate secondary Abs at room temperature for 1 hour and lastly visualized on GE ImageQuant LAS 500 using an ECL kit (Fdbio Science). The quantitative intensity analysis of Western blot bands has been performed with ImageJ software.
Immunoprecipitation
Plasmids containing HA-tagged TREM-2 full-length, Ig domain, or truncated forms of TREM-2 respectively deleting transmembrane (△TM), cytosolic domain (△Cyto), or Ig domain (△Ig) Myc-tagged CD3ζ were generated by molecular clone. FLAG-tagged SARS-CoV-2 M protein, FLAG-tagged SARS-CoV-2 N protein, and FLAG-tagged SARS-CoV-2 RBD were provided by P. Wang’ s laboratory (Shandong University, China). Indicated constructs were transfected into HEK293T cells using Lipofectamine 2000 for 48 hours. Cellular lysates were prepared by incubating the cells in cell lysis buffer in the presence of protease inhibitor PMSF for 30 min on ice, followed by centrifugation at 13,000 rpm for 10 min at 4°C. For IP, cellular or lung tissue lysates were incubated with anti-FLAG (Sigma-Aldrich) or HA M2 affinity gel (Sigma-Aldrich) or consecutively incubated with control (IgG) or TREM-2 Abs (clone D418C, CST) and protein A/G agarose beads (EMD Millipore) for 12 hours at 4°C with constant rotation. Beads were then washed eight times using the cell lysis buffer. Between washes, the beads were collected by centrifugation at 13,000 rpm for 1 min at 4°C. The precipitated proteins were eluted from the beads by resuspending the beads in 5× SDSPAGE loading buffer and boiling for 10 min. The boiled immune complexes were subjected to SDSPAGE, followed by immunoblotting with appropriate Abs.
Pseudovirus/lentivirus production
The gene encoding M membrane glycoprotein and human TREM-2 was synthesized by BGI (Beijing, China). The pseudovirus of SARS-CoV-2 M was generated from VSV expression system, which was replaced the glycoprotein gene (G) with the M protein of SARS-CoV-2 (
39,
40). Briefly, the gene encoding M membrane glycoprotein was cloned into the lentiviral expression plasmid pcDNA3.1, and an mCherry tag was added. Pseudovirus expression vector (pcDNA3.1-M-mCherry and pcDNA3.1–TREM-2–GFP), pHIV-GFP-luc expression vector, pgagpol HIV vector, pHIV-Rev, and pHIV-TAT were cotransfected into HEK293T cells with 70 to 80% cell density in a 100-mm dish. To produce lentivirus containing human TREM-2, the gene encoding human TREM-2 was cloned into the lentiviral expression plasmid pCDH, and a GFP tag was added. Vectors were produced by standard transient transfection of a three-plasmid system into HEK293T cells. Briefly, 10 μg of lentiviral expression vector (pcDH-M-mCherry), 7.5 μg of packaging plasmid ps-PAX2, and 2.5 μg of envelope plasmid pMD2.G were transfected to HEK293 cells with 70 to 80% cell density in a 100-mm dish using polyethylenimine. Culture medium was replaced with Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM) [10% fetal bovine serum (FBS)] 10 hours after transfection. Pseudoviral-containing supernatants were collected 24 and 48 hours after transfection, filtered, pooled, and mixed with polyethylene glycol 8000 at 4°C overnight and then concentrated by centrifugation at 4000
g for 30 min. Pseudovirus vector titer was determined by a quantitative real-time PCR-based method to detect stably integrated virus sequences (copy number) in target HEK293T cells and was expressed as transducing units per milliliter.
Cell sorting and culture
Human CD4+ and CD8+ T cells were sorted from PBMCs of healthy donors and patients with COVID-19 using the magnetic cell sorting system (BD). The purity of isolated cells was confirmed as more than 95%. Cells were cultured in 10% FBS containing RPMI 1640 medium. To study the effect of COVID-19 plasma on TREM-2 expression on T cells, sorted CD4+ T cells from healthy donors were stimulated with plasma from heterogeneous healthy donors and patients with COVID-19; the ratio of medium to plasma was 20:1. To obtain TREM-2–overexpressed CD4+ T cells, lentivirus containing TREM-2 was added to the culture system for 12 hours. To study the effect of TREM-2–Fc fusion protein, PP2, or SH-4-54 on T cell response, human CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells were pretreated with TREM-2–Fc fusion protein (300 ng/ml; 1828-T2, R&D Systems), TREM-1–Fc fusion protein (300 ng/ml; 1278-TR, R&D Systems), TREM-2 Ab (1 μg/ml; clone 237920, R&D Systems), or isotype IgG (300 ng/ml; 110-HG, R&D Systems), PP2 (250 nM), or SH-4-54 (100 nM) versus dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) for 1 hour. Cells were then stimulated with pseudovirus of SARS-CoV-2 M protein, recombinant SARS-CoV-2 M protein (1 μg/ml; Wksubio, China), or anti-CD3 agonist Ab (1 μg/ml; clone OKT3, BD) for the indicated times and collected for flow cytometric analysis and Western blot.
Solid phase binding assay
The procedure for cell staining in this study was described according a previous study (
34) with some modification. A 96-well plate was coated with TREM-2–Fc or TREM-1–Fc or control IgG (2 μg/ml) (R&D Systems) in PBS overnight at 4°C. After washing and blocking with 3% BSA in PBS for 1 hour at 37°C, recombinant M protein (Wksubio, China) was diluted as indicated into a concentration in PBS containing 0.5% BSA or PS/SM (Avanti Polar Lipids) diluted into a concentration of 10 μg/ml in methanol, was added, and incubated for 20 min at 37°C. After washing, the binding of M protein/Fc proteins were detected with biotinylated anti–M protein Ab (Abnova) for 1 hour at 37°C. Plates were washed and then incubated with avidin–horseradish peroxidase (Solarbio) for 30 min at 37°C, washed again, developed with TMB substrate solution (Solarbio), and read at 450 nm.
MHV-A59 infection of mice
MHV-A59 C57BL/6 was propagated using the L929 cell line, and the titer of the virus was determined by plaque assay in L929 cells exactly as described. WT mice were purchased from the Guangdong Medical Laboratory Animal Center. The TREM-2–floxed mice were crossed with CD4-cre transgenic mice (Model Animal Research Center Co. Ltd.) to produce TREM-2fl/flCd4-Cre (CD4–TREM-2 KO) mice. Mice were intranasally inoculated with 20 μl of MHV-A59 [105 plaque-forming units (PFU)], and control mice were inoculated intranasally with an equal volume of DMEM. We found that mice developed severe progressive pulmonary disease by days 2 to 3 after MHV-A59 infection with 100% mortality within 5 to 7 days of infection for CD4–TREM-2 cKO mice. CT imaging of each mice were gained on a small animal positron emission tomography (PET) imaging system (nanoScan PET/CT 82s) at 3 days after infection. At 5 days after infection, mice were euthanized. Plasma of mice were collected by centrifugation at 3000 rpm for 5 min for ELISA assay, and lungs were separated into three portions for measurements of viral load by plaque assays or PCR and for histological analysis. The surface activation markers in lung-infiltrating T cells were determined by flow cytometry. Intracellular molecule phosphorylation staining was performed as above and determined by flow cytometry. All experiments were performed with protocols approved by the Laboratory Animal Center, the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University.
Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
Cytokines were quantified by commercially available ELISAs for IFN-γ and TNF-α according to the manufacturer’s instruction (R&D Systems). sTREM-2 in supernatants of the lung tissue was quantified by a commercial kit according to the manufacturer’s instruction (MultiSciences).
Viral load by plaque assay
The lung tissue of infected mice and control uninfected mice were weighed and triturated in DMEM (containing 10% FBS) and rapidly frozen and thawed for their times. Cell debris was removed by centrifugation, and the virus titers (PFU per gram of tissue) in the supernatants were determined by plaque assay on L929 cells. Briefly, L929 cells were deposited in 12-well dishes, and supernatants of the lung tissue homogenate were added in each well (300 μl), three dilutions of 10−1, 10−2, and 10−3 were set, respectively. The supernatants containing virus were replaced with DMEM (containing 1% methyl cellulose and 2.5% FBS) after incubating at 37°C for 2 hours. Cells were cultured for another 3 days, and plaques were clearly visualized by crystal violet dyeing (1%).
Histopathology evaluation
Lung tissue from the mice and patients with COVID-19 were fixed in zinc formalin. For routine histology, sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (Servicebio, Wuhan, China), and the pathology of the lung was evaluated under a microscope (Olympus BX53, Japan).
Statistical analysis
Data analyses were performed in GraphPad Prism 5.0 Software (San Diego, CA). Statistical significance was determined with Kruskal-Wallis test or
Mann-Whitney test for nonparametric tests, as well as with analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Student’s
t test analyses for parametric tests. Data are shown as means ± SD unless otherwise stated. A
P value of <0.05 was regarded as statistically significant.
Acknowledgments
We thank all of the health care workers involved in the analysis, diagnosis, and treatment of patients at the Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (Zhuhai, China). We thank all our patients, supporters, and families for confidence in our work.
Funding: This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82072062), National Science and Technology Key Projects for Major Infectious Diseases (2017ZX10302301-002), Guangzhou Science and Technology Planning Project (201704020226 and 201604020006), National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFC1200105), The Three Major Scientific Research Projects of Sun Yat-sen University (20200326236), Guangdong Scientific and Technological Research Project for COVID-19 containment (2020A111128022, 2020B111112003), Guangdong Scientific and Technological Research for COVID-19 (202020012612200001), and Zhuhai Scientific and Technological Research Project for COVID-19 containment (ZH22036302200029PWC).
Author contributions: X.H. and Y.W. initiated and designed the research. X.H., Y.W., S.M., and M.W. wrote the manuscript with the help of other co-authors. Y.W., M.W., H.Y., and X.L. performed the experiments and analyzed and/or interpreted results. X.H., H.Z., H.S., S.G., L.L., and Y.L. were in charge of patient care and contributed to the discussion of the results. All authors read the final version of the manuscript and approved the submission.
Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Data and materials availability: All data needed to evaluate the conclusions in the paper are present in the paper and/or the Supplementary Materials.