T cells make an important contribution to host control of M. tuberculosis replication, and following infection, MHC-II-restricted CD4+ T cells and MHC-I-restricted CD8+ T cells specific for many protein antigens are primed and expand and accumulate at sites of disease, particularly in the lung. Many of the mycobacterial epitopes that are recognized by CD4+ and CD8+ T cells have been defined, although only a few of these have been shown to be protective in challenge models of tuberculosis. We have previously defined CFP-10 as an immunodominant antigen that is recognized by T cells elicited following M. tuberculosis infection of C3H mice.
In this study, we evaluate the immune responses generated by a DNA vaccine encoding CFP-10 and determine the epitope specificity of the elicited T cells. We find that the CFP-10 DNA vaccine selectively elicits CFP-1032-39-specific CD8+ T cells in C3H mice. Challenge of immunized mice with aerosolized M. tuberculosis leads to a specific increase in CFP-1032-39-specific CD8+ T cells that can be detected as early as 2 weeks after infection and persists for at least 8 weeks. Mice vaccinated with the CFP-10 DNA vaccine had fewer pulmonary CFU 4 and 8 weeks after M. tuberculosis challenge than mice immunized with the “empty” DNA vector. Thus, CFP-10 is a target of protective immunity.
While the ability of vaccine-induced CD4
+ T cells to provide protection has been demonstrated, it has been more difficult to demonstrate that CD8
+ T cells elicited after immunization augment host defense against tuberculosis. Most protective vaccines elicit a mixture of epitope-specific CD4
+ and CD8
+ T-cell responses (
2,
10,
27), and we are not aware of vaccines that uniquely elicit CD8
+ T cells and are protective. In fact, only a few MHC-II-restricted epitopes and no MHC-I-restricted epitopes have been identified that are sufficient to elicit protective immunity (
23). The induction of significant protection by DNA vaccines has been achieved only when a cocktail of DNA vaccines is administered (
4,
5,
9,
21) or genes such as Ag85A, which is known to induce both CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells recognizing multiple epitopes, are used (
12,
15,
16,
19). In contrast, vaccination of C3H mice with the CFP-10 DNA vaccine elicits a specific CD8
+ T-cell response to a single epitope without any evidence of CFP-10-specific CD4
+ T-cell priming as part of the vaccine-induced immune response. Our vaccination strategy may not be optimized, given the relatively weak response following DNA vaccination. Nevertheless, the T cells that are primed develop into functional memory T cells, since a dramatic increase in the frequency and absolute number of CFP-10
32-39-specific CD8
+ T cells is observed following challenge with
M. tuberculosis. By defining the epitope specificity of the T cells elicited by vaccination, we demonstrate that CFP-10
32-39-specific CD8
+ T cells are sufficient to mediate protection against tuberculosis.
Several vaccine strategies are designed to elicit antigen-specific CD8
+ T cells. Vaccination with plasmid DNA encoding microbial antigens is used to induce T-cell immunity against intracellular pathogens such as
M. tuberculosis. This approach elicits CD8
+ cytotoxic T lymphocyte and Th1 responses, and several mycobacterial DNA vaccines can protect mice against
M. tuberculosis challenge, although translation into the clinical arena has been frustrating. Similarly, recombinant viruses and intracellular bacteria, including BCG, can be used to induce CD8
+ T-cell responses that recognize
M. tuberculosis. Recently, Hinchey et al. found that
M. tuberculosis mutants that induce greater macrophage apoptosis were more effective in priming CD8
+ T cells and, when used as a vaccine, provided greater protection against tuberculosis than BCG (
11). However, even when a vaccine is effective in an animal model, the reason for its success is often unknown. The lack of defined epitopes recognized by CD8
+ T cells makes it challenging to assess the success of vaccines designed to elicit CD8
+ T-cell responses. Assessment is also complicated, since nearly all of these vaccine strategies elicit complex immune responses, which make it difficult to know how the various components of the immune response benefit the host.
There have been several reports that have tried to show that CD8
+ T cells elicited by vaccination are sufficient to protect mice from
M. tuberculosis challenge. Several of these studies have used the CD4 KO mouse (
7,
29); however, these studies suffer from the confounder that despite the lack of CD4
+ T cells, these mice still have CD4
− CD8
− and CD8
+ MHC-II-restricted T cells that can mediate many of the functions of conventional CD4
+ T cells (
24,
28). Derrick et al. found that their DNA vaccine cocktail protects CD4 KO mice against
M. tuberculosis challenge and that protection under these conditions is dependent upon CD8
+ T cells, since in vivo depletion of CD8
+ T cells using MAb abolishes the vaccine-induced protection (
8); however, the MHC restriction of the protective CD8
+ T-cell subset was not determined. Our data extend these results by showing that vaccine-induced MHC-I-restricted CD8
+ T cells can mediate protection in normal mice with intact immune systems. These findings provide an important rationale for further evaluating whether strategies that induce both
M. tuberculosis-specific CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells would provide greater protection than vaccines that elicit a predominantly CD4
+ T-cell response.
A previous study found that a similar CFP-10 DNA vaccine provided no protection to BALB/c mice at 2, 4, or 8 weeks after challenge with
M. tuberculosis (
20). However, no immunological evaluation was performed, and we suspect that the CFP-10 DNA vaccine did not elicit CFP-10-specific T cells. Since CFP-10-specific T cells are not detected following
M. tuberculosis infection of BALB/c mice, CFP-10 peptides may not prime T cells in mice of the
H-2d haplotype (
14). In contrast, CFP-10 DNA vaccination of C3H mice induces a CD8
+ T-cell response to CFP-10
32-39, an epitope that is immunodominant following
M. tuberculosis infection, and we show in this report that this T-cell response is protective. Thus, the capacity of the CFP-10 antigen to induce a protective response depends on the host's immunogenetic background. This is an important consideration, as the inability of the CFP-10 DNA vaccine to protect BALB/c mice from
M. tuberculosis challenge should not eliminate it from consideration as a vaccine candidate. CFP-10 is clearly an important target of the human T-cell response, even across multiple MHC haplotypes and ethnic populations (
17,
26). Our results indicate that CFP-10 should be considered a vaccine candidate.
These issues highlight the importance of understanding the basis for the success or failure of different vaccine strategies. An immunization strategy may fail because it does not elicit antigen-specific T cells, in which case it is a vaccine failure, or it may fail because antigen-specific T cells are elicited that are unable to mediate protection—in other words, an immunological failure. An important reason why T cells elicited by a vaccine may fail to protect the host against
M. tuberculosis is that the epitope recognized by the vaccine-induced T cells is not presented or presented inefficiently by
M. tuberculosis-infected cells. Vaccine strategies affect the selection of epitopes that prime CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells in ways that are not yet understood. We now recognize that the epitopes that stimulate T cells after vaccination can differ from the epitopes that stimulate T cells after
M. tuberculosis infection (
1,
6). This scenario can result in antigen-specific T cells induced by vaccination that are unable to recognize infected cells. Identification of mycobacterial epitopes recognized by CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cells will enable careful immunological monitoring of T-cell responses following vaccination and following infection. Such a careful epitope-based analysis will be required to understand how vaccine-induced immunity correlates with host protection.