Background and Objectives To evaluate the immune-specific response after full severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) treated with different disease-modifying drugs by the detection of both serologic and T-cell responses. Methods Healthcare workers (HCWs) and patients with MS, having completed the 2-dose schedule of an mRNA-based vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in the past 2–4 weeks, were enrolled from 2 parallel prospective studies conducted in Rome, Italy, at the National Institute for Infectious diseases Spallanzani–IRCSS and San Camillo Forlanini Hospital. Serologic response was evaluated by quantifying the region-binding domain (RBD) and neutralizing antibodies. Cell-mediated response was analyzed by a whole-blood test quantifying interferon (IFN)–γ response to spike peptides. Cells responding to spike stimulation were identified by fluorescence-activated cell sorting analysis. Results We prospectively enrolled 186 vaccinated individuals: 78 HCWs and 108 patients with MS. Twenty-eight patients with MS were treated with IFN-β, 35 with fingolimod, 20 with cladribine, and 25 with ocrelizumab. A lower anti-RBD antibody response rate was found in patients treated with ocrelizumab (40%, p < 0.0001) and fingolimod (85.7%, p = 0.0023) compared to HCWs and patients treated with cladribine or IFN-β. Anti-RBD antibody median titer was lower in patients treated with ocrelizumab (p < 0.0001), fingolimod (p < 0.0001), and cladribine (p = 0.010) compared to HCWs and IFN-β–treated patients. Serum neutralizing activity was present in all the HCWs tested and in only a minority of the fingolimod-treated patients (16.6%). T-cell–specific response was detected in the majority of patients with MS (62%), albeit with significantly lower IFN-γ levels compared to HCWs. The lowest frequency of T-cell response was found in fingolimod-treated patients (14.3%). T-cell–specific response correlated with lymphocyte count and anti-RBD antibody titer (ρ = 0.554, p < 0.0001 and ρ = 0.255, p = 0.0078 respectively). IFN-γ T-cell response was mediated by both CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells. Discussion mRNA vaccines induce both humoral and cell-mediated specific immune responses against spike peptides in all HCWs and in the majority of patients with MS. These results carry relevant implications for managing vaccinations, suggesting promoting vaccination in all treated patients with MS. Classification of Evidence This study provides Class III data that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination induces both humoral and cell-mediated specific immune responses against viral spike proteins in a majority of patients with MS.

Vaccination is the main public health measure to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission and hospitalization, and a massive worldwide scientific effort resulted in the rapid development of effective vaccines. This work aimed to define the dynamics of humoral and cell-mediated immune response in a cohort of health care workers (HCWs) who received a two-dose BNT162b2-mRNA vaccination. The serological response was evaluated by quantifying the anti-RBD and neutralizing antibodies. The cell-mediated response was performed by a whole blood test quantifying Th1 cytokines (IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-2), produced in response to spike peptides. The BNT162b2-mRNA vaccine induced both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses against spike peptides in virtually all HCWs without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, with a moderate inverse relation with age in the anti-RBD response. Spike-specific T cells produced several Th1 cytokines (IFN-γ, TNF-α, and IL-2), which correlated with the specific-serological response. Overall, our study describes the ability of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine to elicit a coordinated neutralizing humoral and spike-specific T cell response in HCWs. Assessing the dynamics of these parameters by an easy immune monitoring protocol can allow for the evaluation of the persistence of the vaccine response in order to define the optimal vaccination strategy.

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are lipid bilayer-enclosed entities containing proteins and nucleic acids that mediate intercellular communication, in both physiological and pathological conditions. EVs resemble enveloped viruses in both structural and functional aspects. In full analogy with viral biogenesis, some of these vesicles are generated inside cells and, once released into the extracellular milieu, are called “exosomes”. Others bud from the plasma membrane and are generally referred to as “microvesicles”. In this review, we will discuss the state of the art of the current studies on the relationship between EVs and viruses and their involvement in three important viral infections caused by HIV, HCV and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) viruses. HIV and HCV are two well-known pathogens that hijack EVs content and release to create a suitable environment for viral infection. SARS viruses are a new entry in the world of EVs studies, but are equally important in this historical framework. A thorough knowledge of the involvement of the EVs in viral infections could be helpful for the development of new therapeutic strategies to counteract different pathogens.

To identify the best experimental approach to detect a SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response using a whole-blood platform. Whole-blood from 56 COVID-19 and 23 “NO-COVID-19” individuals were stimulated overnight with different concentrations (0.1 or 1 μg/mL) of SARS-CoV-2 PepTivator® Peptide Pools, including spike (pool S), nucleocapsid (pool N), membrane (pool M), and a MegaPool (MP) of these three peptide pools. ELISA was used to analyse interferon (IFN)-γ levels. The IFN-γ-response to every SARS-CoV-2 peptide pool was significantly increased in COVID-19 patients compared with NO-COVID-19 individuals. Pool S and MegaPool were the most potent immunogenic stimuli (median: 0.51, IQR: 0.14–2.17; and median: 1.18, IQR: 0.27–4.72, respectively) compared with pools N and M (median: 0.22, IQR: 0.032–1.26; and median: 0.22, IQR: 0.01−0.71, respectively). The whole-blood test based on pool S and MegaPool showed a good sensitivity of 77% and a high specificity of 96%. The IFN-γ-response was mediated by both CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells, and independently detected of clinical parameters in both hospitalized and recovered patients. This easy-to-use assay for detecting SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses may be implemented in clinical laboratories as a powerful diagnostic tool.

To characterize the plasma immune profile of patients with tuberculosis (TB)-COVID-19 compared with COVID-19, TB, or healthy controls and to evaluate in vitro the specific responses to SARS-CoV-2 and Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb)-antigens. We enrolled 119 subjects: 14 TB-COVID-19, 47 COVID-19, 38 TB, and 20 controls. The plasmatic levels of 27 immune factors were measured at baseline using a multiplex assay. The specific response to SARS-CoV-2 and Mtb antigens was evaluated using a home-made whole blood platform and QuantiFERON-Plus tubes, respectively. We found an immune signature (tumor necrosis factor [TNF]-α, macrophage inflammatory protein-1β, and interleukin [IL]-9) associated with TB-COVID-19 coinfection compared with COVID-19 (P <0.05), and TNF-α showed the highest discriminant power. We also found another signature (TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-17A, IL-5, fibroblast growth factor-basic, and granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor [GM-CSF]) in coinfected patients compared with patients with TB (P <0.05), and among them, TNF-α and granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor showed a non-negligible discriminating ability. Moreover, coinfected patients showed a significantly reduced SARS-CoV-2-specific response compared with COVID-19 for several pro-inflammatory cytokines/chemokines, anti-inflammatory cytokines, and growth factors (P ≤0.05). Furthermore, coinfection negatively affected the Mtb-specific response (P ≤0.05). We found immune signatures associated with TB-COVID-19 coinfection and observed a major impairment of SARS-CoV-2-specific and, to a lesser extent, the Mtb-specific immune responses. These findings further advance our knowledge of the immunopathology of TB-COVID-19 coinfection.