Characterization of epitope-specific T cell responses is critical in the understanding of immune responses to infection or vaccination. In this study, we performed a less biased and comprehensive screening of peptides covering all influenza A virus proteins. We confirmed previous reports by us [
8,
9] and others [
10-
13] that the T cell responses to influenza are broadly directed to several viral proteins. We found that surface glycoproteins, HA and NA, which are major components of inactivated vaccines, had many T cell epitopes. Recently we [
16,
25] and others [
26] reported that trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine can induce T cell responses and part of these T cell responses may be targeting epitopes on HA, NA and M1. Overall, HA and M1 had more T cell epitopes than other viral proteins, most of which were recognized by CD4
+ T cells. One limitation of this study is that for some of the peptides identified in our screening, we were not able to determine whether T cells responding to a given peptide were CD4
+ or CD8
+ T cells. We did not use
in vitro amplification of influenza A-specific T cells to avoid the skewing the relative frequency of the T cells specific to each epitope. As a result, the frequency of most peptide-specific T cells in PBMC was not high enough to determine the phenotype by performing ICS or depletion experiments. Based on the ICS of PBMC stimulated with live influenza A viruses it is estimated that approximately 80% of T cells responding to the viruses are CD8
+ T cells (data not shown). However, for peptides that we were able to do further studies, they were all recognized by CD4
+ T cells, with the exception of the CD8
+ T cell epitope, M1
58-66. The peptides we used for the screening are 17mers, which may have stimulated CD4
+ T cells better than CD8
+ T cells and as a result the sensitivity of detecting CD4
+ T cells may have been relatively higher. Ideally we should have included influenza-naïve donors as a negative control to show that T cells responding to influenza peptides have been generated against influenza virus. However, it is practically not possible to find influenza-naïve adults (we cannot obtain large volume of blood for genome-wide screening experiments from very young influenza-naïve children).
Assarsson et al. recently found that PB1 was the major target for both CD4
+ and CD8
+ T cell responses [
13]. In our screening, HA (especially H3) and M1 were major targets of T cell responses. The peptides they screened were predicted to have high-affinity binding to HLA class I or class II molecules and to be highly conserved. Our peptides were 17mers overlapping by 11 amino acids covering all influenza A viral proteins. Using minimal epitope peptides in the assays is likely to increase the sensitivity of detecting responding T cells, especially in the case of CD8
+ T cells. Using longer peptides covering all viral proteins is probably less sensitive in detecting specific CD8
+ T cells, but can detect T cells recognizing atypical T cell epitopes or epitopes restricted by MHC class I or class II molecules whose binding motif predictions are not available (for example HLA-DP and DQ alleles and rare HLA-A, B and C alleles). These differences in the peptide sets may explain why the two screenings by Assarsson et al. and the present study produced different results. Because HLA-restriction of the epitope candidate peptides identified in this screening has not been determined, we were not able to test if these epitopes could be identified by the computer predictions. We think that our results are complementary to those of Assarsson et al. and that both approaches may be used, if possible, to identify T cell epitopes on a virus.
The abundance of T-cell responses against HA was confirmed by analyzing the PBMC of 30 more donors. In screening using the PBMC of 30 hospital workers, more responses to H3 HA were seen than to H1 HA (53.3% to H3 and 16.7% to H1). These may reflect the epidemiology of currently circulating influenza A strains, prior infections with H3N2 versus H1N1 viruses, or higher virulence of H3N2 strain than H1N1 strain. Additionally, only 17% of the hospital workers had responses to H1, thus it is probably not surprising that none of the four healthy donors we previously screened had responses to H1. The amino acid sequence identity between the HA and NA of A/New Caledonia/20/99 (H1N1) and A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2), is 40% for the HA (AAP34324 and ABW80978) and 42% for the NA (CAD57252 and ABP52004) respectively. This suggests a low probability of identifying subtype cross-reactive T cell epitopes in these proteins. However, in two of the four healthy adult donors whose PBMC were screened, we detected T cells responding to the peptides encoded by the H5 HA gene in IFN-γ ELISPOT assays. Although the frequencies of these T cells were not high, they were comparable to those responding to the peptides encoded by H3 HA gene. Recently Roti and colleagues [
27] reported the presence of CD4
+ T cells recognizing epitopes encoded by H5 HA gene in healthy individuals, who were unlikely to have been exposed to the H5N1 virus, although
in vitro amplification of specific T cells were needed to detect them, suggesting a low frequency of these H5 HA cross-reactive T cells. They found that none of the H5 HA epitopes identified were uniquely cross-reactive to H2 HA, which is the closest subtype to H5 and suggested that exposure to H2N2 viruses is not essential for cross-reactivity to H5 HA. Except for two peptides (H5
151-167 and H5
243-259 in ) which have a four- to eight-amino acid overlap with the H5 HA epitopes identified by them, the H5 HA peptides that our donors’ PBMCs responded to are different. We did not observe responses to the H1 and H3 HA peptides corresponding to these eight H5 HA peptides in these donors. Other groups have also identified cross-reactive memory T cell responses to avian H5N1 proteins in healthy individuals who were previously infected or exposed to seasonal influenza [
28,
29], as well as in individuals who were recently vaccinated for influenza [
30]. Most of the cross-reactive responses were towards the internal proteins M1 and NP [
28,
29], which is expected since the internal proteins are highly conserved even among the different subtypes. They were also able to identify cross-reactive responses to the HA [
28] and NA [
30] proteins.
Many of the novel H3 HA T cell epitopes we detected and those previously defined are situated at conserved segments of the H3 protein sequence, with the majority of them clustering at the C-terminus. This confirms a previous study that correlated the H3 three-dimensional structure and the epitopes that had been identified in mice and humans and found that dominant epitopes to HA are primarily located in conformationally stable segments of the C-terminal region [
31]. In addition, a recent study using HLA-DR1 transgenic mice [
32] identified a diverse HA-specific, HLA-DR1-restricted CD4
+ T cell response, with the majority of epitopes located in conserved HA regions. Our data also suggest that the T cell responses are directed to influenza HA regions that are structurally and functionally conserved. Repeated infection or immunization by different virus strains may selectively stimulate T cells specific to the epitopes located in conserved regions.
CD4
+ T cell effector and memory responses to influenza infection have been studied to some extent in mice (reviewed in [
33,
34]), however, our knowledge of CD4
+ T cell responses to influenza in humans is quite limited. A few HA CD4
+ T cell epitopes have been identified in humans [
35-
38], and from recent study done using HLA-DR1 transgenic mice [
32]. These influenza-specific CD4
+ T cell responses may have important roles during influenza infection. An earlier study done in athymic mice reported a differential ability of influenza T helper clones to afford help to B-cells, depending on whether the B cells presented either viral surface proteins or internal viral components on their cell surface [
39]. In Balb/c mice, CD4
+ effector T cells mediated protection against a lethal influenza infection by perforin-mediated cytotoxicity [
40]. Moreover, higher neutralizing antibody titers were attributed to CD4
+ T cell help [
40]. In another study, murine CD4
+ T cells were able to traffic to the lungs during influenza infection, but needed antigen to be present to proliferate [
41]. By stimulating PBMC with peptides of interest, we established CD4
+ T cell lines specific to three peptides. These three lines were able to lyse target cells pulsed with the peptides. One CD4
+ T cell line, 2-10D8, produced little IFN-γ after stimulation with autologous BLCL pulsed with the peptide or infected with influenza A virus, although the peptide recognized by the line was initially identified in IFN-γ ELISPOT assays, suggesting that measuring IFN-γ production alone is likely to underestimate the T cell responses to influenza A virus.
In summary, our screening data showed the strength and breadth of T cell responses against influenza A virus at baseline levels of healthy adults. These T cell responses target both subtype specific (most of the epitopes localized with HA and NA peptides) and subtype cross-reactive (internal protein peptides) peptides. Genome-wide screening using overlapping peptides covering all viral proteins is useful for identifying T cell epitopes and complementary to the approach based on the predicted binding peptides to well-studied HLA-A, B and DR alleles. It is important to analyze the effect of influenza vaccination on T cell responses, and the information reported here will be useful for that purpose.