Open Access
CC BY 4.0 · Glob Med Genet 2022; 09(03): 191-199
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1748170
Original Article

SARS-CoV-2-Induced Immunosuppression: A Molecular Mimicry Syndrome

1   Department of Biosciences, Biotechnologies and Biopharmaceutics, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
› Author Affiliations

Funding None.
 

Abstract

Background Contrary to immunological expectations, decay of adaptive responses against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) characterizes recovered patients compared with patients who had a severe disease course or died following SARS-CoV-2 infection. This raises the question of the causes of the virus-induced immune immunosuppression. Searching for molecular link(s) between SARS-CoV-2 immunization and the decay of the adaptive immune responses, SARS-CoV-2 proteome was analyzed for molecular mimicry with human proteins related to immunodeficiency. The aim was to verify the possibility of cross-reactions capable of destroying the adaptive immune response triggered by SARS-CoV-2.

Materials and Methods Human immunodeficiency–related proteins were collected from UniProt database and analyzed for sharing of minimal immune determinants with the SARS-CoV-2 proteome.

Results Molecular mimicry and consequent potential cross-reactivity exist between SARS-CoV-2 proteome and human immunoregulatory proteins such as nuclear factor kappa B (NFKB), and variable diversity joining V(D)J recombination-activating gene (RAG).

Conclusion The data (1) support molecular mimicry and the associated potential cross-reactivity as a mechanism that can underlie self-reactivity against proteins involved in B- and T-cells activation/development, and (2) suggest that the extent of the immunosuppression is dictated by the extent of the immune responses themselves. The higher the titer of the immune responses triggered by SARS-CoV-2 immunization, the more severe can be the cross-reactions against the human immunodeficiency–related proteins, the more severe the immunosuppression. Hence, SARS-CoV-2-induced immunosuppression can be defined as a molecular mimicry syndrome. Clinically, the data imply that booster doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines may have opposite results to those expected.


Introduction

Notwithstanding the massive anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination campaign, breakthrough infections that can progress to severe illness have occurred in repeatedly vaccinated people.[1] Possibly, such an undesired effect might result from SARS-CoV-2-induced immunosuppression as suggested by numerous clinical data. Indeed, as examples among the many as follows:

  • Analyses of blood samples from fully vaccinated health care workers showed that antibody (Ab) titers increased significantly at 5 weeks after first vaccination but decreased rapidly within 4 months after second vaccination.[2]

  • Individuals who received two doses of vaccine had a gradual increase of higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection with time elapsed since the second vaccine dose.[3]

  • Individuals who received the vaccine had different kinetics of Ab levels compared with patients who had been infected with the SARS-CoV-2, with higher initial levels but a much faster exponential decrease in the first group.[4]

  • Following two vaccine doses, SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunogammaglobulin (IgG) levels waned with an estimated half-life of 45 days and a decrease below detection level within 225 days.[5]

  • Ab decay following natural infection has been reported[6] [7] [8] with antinucleocapsid Abs declining more rapidly than antispike Abs.[9] [10]

  • As reviewed by Lee and Oh,[11] a rapid decline in anti-SARS-CoV-2 Ab levels was found in novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with mild symptoms or asymptomatic individuals,[7] [12] while higher Ab titers associated with severe COVID-19 manifestations.[13] [14] [15] [16] In particular, IgG Abs against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid were found to be significantly lower in mild SARS-CoV-2 infected patients[9] and declined more rapidly than spike Abs,[6] [9] [10] [17] with antinucleocapsid IgG seropositivity higher in pneumonia patients than in nonpneumonia/asymptomatic patients.[18]

  • High concentration of IgG against the nucleocapsid protein characterized poor outcome in COVID-19 and caused a three-fold increase in risk of admission to the medical intensive care unit.[19]

  • Suboptimal SARS-CoV-2 − specific CD8+ T-cell response has been reported,[20] and suppressed CD8+ T-cell differentiation was found to be associated with prolonged SARS-CoV-2 positivity.[21]

  • Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 infection of children leads to a mild illness with significantly lower CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 structural and ORF1ab proteins compared with infected adults.[22]

  • Lower than expected T-cell responses have been reported in healthy double vaccinated individuals.[23]

However, in spite of the multitude of such prominent and various clinical data, notwithstanding viral-induced immunosuppression is a phenomenon known and discussed for decades and historically dating back to observations by von Pirquet in 1908,[24] and further references therein, it is disappointing to admit our scanty knowledge of the molecular basis and mechanism that lead to immune decay following viral infections. In the case under study, the cardinal question that remains unanswered and till now, to the best of the author's knowledge, has not been clearly posed is the following. Why the anti-SARS-CoV-2 humoral and cellular immune responses decline in recovered, asymptomatic, and mild SARS-CoV-2 patients while remain higher in severe patients? Actually, the immune responses triggered by SARS-CoV-2 should be high titer and long lasting in recovered patients in that the immune responses are supposed to ensure the eradication of the pathogen and to prevent/resolve diseases associated with the infection. And, vice versa, the immune responses should be low titer and waning in patients with severe or fatal COVID-19 course. Today, this question is relevant also in light of the fact that repeated booster doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are being proposed for evaluation to enhance the immune response of the human host.[5]

In this clinical context and on the basis of reports[25] [26] that documented a high level of molecular mimicry between SARS-CoV-2 and human proteins, the hypothesis was tested here according to which the anti-pathogen immune responses are not exclusively directed against the virus but actually can cross-react with human proteins, in this way unleashing a self-attack against the human host and causing immunosuppression and the associated pathologic consequences, that is, uncontrolled infections, increased risk of cancer, and cardiovascular diseases, inter alia.[24]

Precisely, taking into consideration data obtained using as a research model the Measles virus–induced immunosupression,[27] the hypothesis has been tested that immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 have the potential to cross-react with human proteins that—when altered, mutated, deficient, deleted, or otherwise functioning improperly—lead to immunosuppression.

To prove/disprove the cross-reactivity paradigm, the present study comparatively analyzed the entire SARS-CoV-2 proteome and human proteins involved in immunodeficiencies searching for common amino acid (aa) sequences. Using the pentapeptide as the basic measurement unit of antigenicity and immunogenicity,[28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] sequence analyses revealed peptide commonalities that are susceptible of generating cross-reactions, thus feasibly explaining the immunosuppression associated with SARS-CoV-2 passive/active infection and its increase following repeated anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations.


Materials and Methods

The analyzed 10 SARS-CoV-2 proteins were derived from Wuhan-Hu-1, GenBank: MN908947.3, and are listed with the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) ID protein in parentheses as follows: ORF1ab polyprotein (QHD43415.1), spike glycoprotein (QHD43416.1), ORF3a protein (QHD43417.1), envelope protein (QHD43418.1), membrane glycoprotein (QHD43419.1), ORF6 protein (QHD43420.1), ORF7a protein (QHD43421.1), ORF8 protein (QHD43422.1), nucleocapsid phosphoprotein (QHD43423.2), and ORF10 protein (QHI42199.1).

Human immunodeficiency–related proteins were randomly collected from the UniProt database ( www.uniprot.org/ )[48] [49] using “immunodeficiency hypogammaglobulinemia AND reviewed” as keywords. Thirty-eight human proteins were obtained and are listed in [Supplementary Table S1.]

Methodologically, the primary sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 proteins was dissected into pentapeptides offset by one residue (i.e., MESLV, ESLVP, SLVPG, LVPGF, and others) and the resulting viral pentapeptides were analyzed to find perfect matches within the 38 human proteins which, when altered, relate to immunodeficiencies. Protein information resource peptide match (research.bioinformatics.udel.edu/peptidematch/index.jsp) and peptide search ( www.uniprot.org/peptidesearch/ ) programs that are available at UniProt ( www.uniprot.org/ ) were used.[48] [49] CoV controls are as follows, with NCBI:txid in parentheses: Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS)-CoV (1335626), Human (H) CoV-229E (11137), and HCoV-NL63 (277944).

The human proteins involved in the peptide sharing (i.e., 32) were analyzed for functions/diseases using UniProt, PubMed, and OMIM ( www.omim.org/ ) public resources. Human proteins are given by UniProt entry and/or UniProt name.

The immunological potential of the peptide sharing was analyzed by searching the Immune Epitope DataBase (IEDB; www.iedb.org/ )[50] for SARS-CoV-2-derived immunoreactive epitopes hosting the shared pentapeptides. Only unmodified epitopes ≤15 mers were considered. Given the size of the available data (i.e., 9,917 SARS-CoV-2-derived epitopes as of January 2022), analyses were limited to the peptide sharing involving nuclear factor kappa B1 (NFKB1) and NFKB2.


Results and Discussion

Pentapeptide sharing between SARS-CoV-2 proteins and human immunodeficiency–related proteins was analyzed using pentapeptide as a sequence probe because a peptide grouping formed by five aa residues defines a minimal immune determinant underlying the specific interaction of an antigen with B-cell receptor (BCR) and T-cell receptor (TCR).[28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] The results are displayed in [Table 1].

Table 1

Peptide sharing between the SARS-CoV-2 proteome and human immunodeficiency–related proteins

Viral protein[a]

Human immunodeficiency-related protein[b]

Shared peptides

ORF1ab

ALG12: Dol-P-Man:Man(7)GlcNAc(2)-PP-Dol α-1,6-mannosyltransferase

LCLFL, VVNAA

BCL10: B-cell lymphoma/leukemia 10

ATNNL

BTK: tyrosine-protein kinase BTK

DEFIE, EIDPK

C2TA: MHC class-II transactivator

LPSLA, VLLIL, AELAK, EVLLA

CAR11: caspase recruitment domain-containing protein 11

LGSLA, TTLNG, GSLPI, RKQIR, LQPEE, LDDDS

CD19: B-lymphocyte antigen CD19

PKGPK, ETGLL

CD20: B-lymphocyte antigen CD20

PSTQY

CD27: CD27 antigen

GVSFS

CR2: complement receptor type 2

LQGPP, GFTLK, FTLKG

CTLA4: cytotoxic T-lymphocyte protein 4

GTSSG

CXCR4: C-X-C chemokine receptor type 4

LLLTI

I2BP2: interferon regulatory factor 2-binding protein 2

PTLVP, AKPPP

IKZF1: DNA-binding protein Ikaros

SDRVV, ESLRP, VSTSG, GLPGT, ENLLL

IRF9: interferon regulatory factor 9

EDQDA, DTTEA

KPCD: protein kinase C delta type

GSSKC, NLIDS, LVKQG, LDNVL, CDHCG

LAT: linker for activation of T-cells family member 1

QFKRP

MOES: Moesin

SEAVE

NFKB1: nuclear factor NF-κ-B p105 subunit

DLSVV, KAALL, ALRQM, KTPKY, TPKYK, ISLAG

NFKB2: nuclear factor NF-κ-B p100 subunit

PKDMT, NNLGV, SVGPK, ANVNA, DFKLN

NS1BP: influenza virus NS1A-binding protein

GIATV, ATVQS, SAAKK, EMLAH, IIGGA, EEEEF

P85A: phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase regulatory subunit α

KPRPP, LKHFF, SLKEL, IQLLK, LRKGG

RAG1: V(D)J recombination-activating protein 1

VSAKP, KTPEE, ILSPL

RAG2: V(D)J recombination-activating protein 2

NSQTS, VSSAI, KQVVS, FDTYN, NIALI

RFX5: DNA-binding protein RFX5

PLKSA, EVPVS

RFXK: DNA-binding protein RFXANK

FTPLI, SVSSP

TR13C: tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily 13C

PAPRT, RDAPA, AGEAA

TRNT1: CCA tRNA nucleotidyltransferase 1, mitochondrial

LQQLR

VAS1: V-type proton ATPase subunit S1

SDRDL, GSVAY, VAYFN, LKSED

XIAP: E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase XIAP

SQTSL, HAAVD, LARAG

Spike

ALG12: Dol-P-Man:Man(7)GlcNAc(2)-PP-Dol α-1,6-mannosyltransferase

TQLPP, PRTFL

CAR11: caspase recruitment domain-containing protein 11

TNSFT, SNNLD

CR2: complement receptor type 2

TFKCY, SYECD

I2BP2: interferon regulatory factor 2-binding protein 2

TLLAL, LLALH

NFKB1: nuclear factor NF-κ-B p105 subunit

LVRDL

NFKB2: nuclear factor NF-κ-B p100 subunit

ALLAG

TR13B: tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily 13B

VPAQE

ORF3a

C2TA: MHC class-II transactivator

GEIKD

CAR11: caspase recruitment domain-containing protein 11

ITSGD

CD27: CD27 antigen

TIPIQ

IKZF1: DNA-binding protein Ikaros

NLLLL

NFKB1: nuclear factor NF-κ-B p105 subunit

LLLVA, LLVAA, LVAAG

Envelope

CD70: CD70 antigen

VTLAI

SP110: Sp110 nuclear body protein

LLVTL

VAS1: V-type proton ATPase subunit S1

VLLFL

Membrane

CAR11: caspase recruitment domain-containing protein 11

HSSSS

TRNT1: CCA tRNA nucleotidyltransferase 1, mitochondrial

LRIAG

VAS1: V-type proton ATPase subunit S1

KLGAS

ORF7

 –

 –

ORF8

 –

 –

Nucleocapsid

C2TA: MHC class-II transactivator

FAPSA

CD19: B-lymphocyte antigen CD19

GPQNQ

CTLA4: cytotoxic T-lymphocyte protein 4

PPTEP

NFKB1: nuclear factor NF-κ-B p105 subunit

DSTGS, LLDRL, ELIRQ

NFKB2: nuclear factor NF-κ-B p100 subunit

RPQGL

RFX5: DNA-binding protein RFX5

RNSTP

SP110: Sp110 nuclear body protein

GTWLT

ORF10

 –

 –

Abbreviation: SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2.


a Viral proteins described under methods.


b Human proteins given by UniProt entry and name. Disease association and references are available at UniProt, PubMed, and OMIM public databases.


Next, to evaluate the specificity of the peptide commonalities described in [Table 1], the shared pentapeptides (that is, 118) were analyzed for occurrences in the control CoV proteomes MERS-CoV, hCoV-229E, and hCoV-NL63 ([Table 2]).

Table 2

Quantitation of the pentapeptide sharing between CoV proteomes and human immunodeficiency − linked proteins

CoV

Number of shared pentapeptides

SARS-CoV-2

118

MERS-CoV

HCoV-229E

2

HCoV-NL63

3

Abbreviation: HCoV, human coronavirus; MERS-CoV; Middle East respiratory syndrome-coronavirus; SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2.


In summary, [Tables 1] and [2] show that following points:

  • One hundred and eighteen pentapeptides are shared between the SARS-CoV-2 proteins and the human immunodeficiency–related proteins analyzed in this study. Mathematically, such a high degree of peptide commonality is unexpected. In fact, assuming that all aa occur with the same frequency, the theoretical probability of a sequence of five aa occurring in two proteins can be calculated as 20−5 (or 1 in 3,200,000 or 0.0000003125), that is, it is extremely low.

  • Peptide sharing involves almost all viral proteins and human proteins linked to immunodeficiencies. Exceptions are the viral ORFs 7, 8, and 10 and human proteins CD40L, CD81, ICOS, IL21, RFXAP, and SH21A that were found to be extraneous to the peptide sharing

  • Furthermore, the pentapeptide overlap detailed in [Table 1] is highly specific for SARS-CoV-2. As reported in [Table 2], none of the 118 shared pentapeptides are present in the pathogenic MERS-CoV,[51] and only a few are found in the mildly pathogenic human coronavirus HCoV-OC43, as well as in HCoV-229E which cause only mild symptoms.[52]

At first glance, [Table 1] shows that viral matches are disseminated among human proteins that are interconnected in complex pathways, involved in multiple fundamental roles in immune regulation, and linked to defects in activation/development of B and T lymphocytes. An example is CAR11, a protein that plays a key role in the adaptive immune response by transducing NFKB activation downstream of TCR and BCR involvement, so that CAR11 alterations lead to defects in T-, B-, and NK-cell function and to immunodeficiencies.[53] [54] Genetic inactivation of the gene CARD11 results in a complete block in T- and B-cell immunity as CAR11 is essential for antigen receptor- and protein kinase C–mediated proliferation and for cytokine production in T- and B-cells.[55] The regulation of CAR11 signaling is a critical switch governing the decision between death and proliferation in antigen-stimulated mature B-cells.[56] Indeed, CAR11 deficiency causes profound combined immunodeficiencies in human subjects.[57] Nor are all the other proteins involved in the peptide sharing and summarily described in [Table 1] of less importance in governing and regulating the immunity status.

However, space constraints do not allow for a one-by-one analysis of all human proteins listed in [Table 1], and only some of the tabulated human proteins will be discussed below.

CD19, CD20, CD27, and CD70

The cluster differentiation molecules CD19, CD20, CD27, and CD70 are involved in the development, differentiation, activation, and survival of B-cell lymphocytes.[58] In particular, CD19 is not required for B-cell production, but the absence of CD19 inhibits the full activation and maturation of B-cells, thus causing panhypogammaglobulinemia in the presence of a normal number of B-cells in the blood.[59] Also CD20 deficiency can lead to hypogammaglobulinemia in the presence of a normal number of B-cells.[60] Defects in the CD27–CD70 axis indicate an immunodeficiency associated with terminal B-cell development defect and immune dysregulation leading to autoimmunity, uncontrolled viral infection, and lymphomas.[61]


RAG1 and RAG2

The two recombination-activating RAG1 and RAG2 proteins are essential for generating the immune response. Indeed, RAG1 and RAG2 synergistically preside over the genomic rearrangements that initiate the molecular processes that lead to lymphocyte receptor formation through V(D)J recombination. Variants in RAGs are common genetic causes of immunodeficiencies.[62] [63] [64]


NFKB1 and NFKB2

NFKB1 and NFKB2 share 20 pentapeptides with the SARS-CoV-2 proteome ([Table 1]). NFKB1 and NFKB2 are examples par excellence of proteins that, if hit by cross-reactions, can cause the decline in the anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune responses. Alterations of NFKB1 are a common cause of immunodeficiency. The clinical phenotype of NFKB1 deficiency includes hypogammaglobulinemia and sinopulmonary infections, as well as other highly variable individual manifestations.[65] In particular, alterations in the expression of the NFKB1 subunit p50 is associated with immunodeficiency.[66]

Similarly, NFKB2 is involved peripheral lymphoid organ development, B-cell development and Ab production,[67] and alterations in the p52 subunit appear to be specifically involved in Ab deficiency. Indeed, p52-deficient animals (1) have reduced numbers of B-cells and consistent with a loss of B-cell follicles, (2) are unable to form germinal centers and are impaired in Ab responses to T-dependent antigens, and (3) lack follicular dendritic cell networks.[68] As a matter of fact, coordination between p50 and p52 is essential in the development and organization of secondary lymphoid tissues,[69] that is, the sites where naive lymphocytes mature and initiate an adaptive immune response.[70] Emblematically, a single p52 nucleotide mutation, a nonsense mutation creating a premature stop codon (pos.W270), was found to be associated with haploinsufficiency and Ab deficiency.[71]

Therefore, it is relevant that many of the pentapeptides shared by NFKB1 and NFKB2 with the viral proteome (i.e., 10 out of 20) are allocated in the two subunits p50 and p52 ([Supplementary Table S2].


Immunological Potential of the Viral versus Human Peptide Sharing: NFKB as an Example

The extensive sharing of minimal immune determinants between the virus and NFKB1/NFKB2 and the associated potential for cross-reactivity might be able to block the physiological functioning of NFKB1 and NFKB2, resulting in the immunosuppression that follows exposure to SARS-CoV-2.[2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] A solid support for this possibility is given by the analysis of the immunological potential of the peptide overlap between the SARS-CoV-2 proteome and the two proteins NFKB1 and NFKB2. Indeed, [Table 3] documents that, according to IEDB,[50] the 20 pentapeptides that are common to the virus and NFKB1/NFKB2 ([Table 1]) are also found in numerous SARS-CoV-2-derived epitopes that have been experimentally validated as immunoreactive in the human host.

Table 3

Immunoreactive SARS-CoV-2-derived epitopes containing pentapeptides shared between SARS-CoV-2 and NFKB1/NFKB2

IEDB ID[a]

Epitope sequence[b]

IEDB ID[a]

Epitope sequence[b]

2432

alallLLDRL

1397276

ersgarskqrRPQGL

34851

lallLLDRL

1397409

rskqrRPQGLpnnta

37473

lLLDRLnql

1452222

iksqDLSVVskvvkv

37515

llLLDRLnql

1490109

pSVGPKqaslngvtl

39582

lspvALRQMscaagt

1500188

rskqrRPQGLpnnt

45385

npKTPKYKf

1513800

tfggpsDSTGSn

1074903

gdaalallLLDRLnql

1539491

alallLLDRLnqles

1075018

qELIRQgtdykhw

1539750

crkvqhmvvKAALLa

1149886

ismatnyDLSVVnar

1539768

cvdipgiPKDMTyrr

1310320

daalallLLDRLnql

1539806

ddfveiiksqDLSVV

1310358

eiiksqDLSVVskvv

1539824

deismatnyDLSVVn

1310598

llLLDRLnqleskms

1539833

DFKLNeeiaiilasf

1311682

garskqrRPQGLpn

1539942

dqELIRQgtdykhwp

1312093

aalallLLDRLnqle

1540048

eehfietISLAGsyk

1313309

pritfggpsDSTGSn

1540103

ELIRQgtdykhwpqi

1313389

qtqgnfgdqELIRQg

1540137

eqtqgnfgdqELIRQ

1313478

RPQGLpnntaswfta

1540169

evkilNNLGVdiaan

1313538

sDSTGSnqngersga

1540456

ggdaalallLLDRLn

1313553

sgarskqrRPQGLpn

1540513

glqpSVGPKqaslng

1313575

skqrRPQGLpnntas

1540692

hLLLVAAGleapfly

1313745

tISLAGsyk

1540751

icqavtANVNAllst

1315885

ELIRQgtdy

1540773

ietISLAGsykdwsy

1316419

fgdqELIRQgtdykh

1541014

kilNNLGVdiaantv

1316834

fnicqavtANVNAll

1541102

kpvpevkilNNLGVd

1318946

ISLAGsykdw

1541163

kvninivgDFKLNee

1323201

qELIRQgtdy

1541346

lkvdtanpKTPKYKf

1324011

RPQGLpnnta

1541368

lLLDRLnqleskmsg

1325450

tfggpsDSTGSnqng

1541425

lNNLGVdiaantviw

1332121

gnfgdqELIRQgtdy

1541700

nelspvALRQMscaa

1332637

LLDRLnq

1541742

ninivgDFKLNeeia

1342979

llLLDRLnqle

1541745

nivgDFKLNeeiaii

1377619

alallLLDRLnqlesk

1542039

pvALRQMscaagttq

1377643

allLLDRLnqleskms

1542155

qnnelspvALRQMsc

1377838

arskqrRPQGLpnnt

1542618

svfnicqavtANVNA

1378299

daalallLLDRLnqle

1542868

tpeehfietISLAGs

1381105

ggdaalallLLDRLnq

1543037

vdtanpKTPKYKfv

1381497

gnggdaalallLLDRL

1543087

vgDFKLNeeiaiila

1384139

lallLLDRLnqleskm

1543263

vtANVNAll

Abbreviations: IEDB, Immune Epitope DataBase; NFKB, nuclear factor kappa B; SARS-CoV-2, severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2.


a Epitopes listed according to the IEDB ID number. Further details and references for each epitope are available at: www.iedb.org/ .[50]


b Shared peptides are given capitalized.




Conclusion

Considerable information is presently available on the immune responses evoked by SARS-CoV-2 passive/active infection. Nevertheless, a main question remains unanswered, that is, why higher levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune responses characterize COVID-19 patients who had a severe disease course or died compared with patients who had a mild COVID-19 course and recovered. Here, the data shown in [Tables 1] and [3] locate the key to this immunological contradiction in the immune responses themselves which have the pathogenic potential to cross-react with self-proteins profoundly involved in the generation of the humoral and cellular adaptive immunity. Hence, the data have significant scientific implications, as they offer the molecular truth of peptide sharing and the resulting cross-reactivity as a likely mechanistic basis for understanding and explaining how the human anti-SARS-CoV-2 immune responses are overruled. More generally, the data offer a logical explanation for the currently still obscure phenomenon of virus-induced immunosuppression which can effectively be defined as a molecular mimicry syndrome.

Clinically, it derives from the above that the severity of the COVID-19 course is related to the extent of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 primary and secondary immune responses. Indeed, the more massive and avid is the immune response triggered by the virus, the more massive and intense can be the self-attacks against the human proteins that generate, modulate, and preside over the defensive adaptive immune response, And obviously, conversely, the less intense are the immune responses, and less intense are the cross-reactivity and the immunosuppression with consequent positive outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 disease.

As conclusive notes, the present study (1) warrants a global effort to thoroughly testing COVID-19 patients' sera for auto-Abs against the broad molecular peptide platform outlined in [Table 1], and (2) implies that immunotherapeutic strategies based on repeated boosters might unlikely be appropriate and successful in the current pandemic, and indeed might aggravate the immunosuppression pathology.

Finally and of utmost importance, this study once again indicates that using entire pathogen antigens in immunotherapies can associate with cross-reactivity and lead to autoimmune manifestations. The use of the peptide uniqueness concept remains the main scientific path for designing safe and effective therapeutic approaches against infectious agents.[44] [45] [72]



Conflict of Interest

None declared.

Supplementary Material


Address for correspondence

Darja Kanduc, PhD
Department of Biosciences, Biotechnologies, and Biopharmaceutics, University of Bari
Via Orabona 4, Bari 70125
Italy   

Publication History

Article published online:
14 July 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Stuttgart · New York