Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- - (2) (remove)
Publisher
- S. Karger AG (1)
- Wiley (1)
Abstract
Background
Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is likely a misdirected bacterial host defense mechanism. Platelet factor 4 (PF4) binds to polyanions on bacterial surfaces exposing neo‐epitopes to which HIT antibodies bind. Platelets are activated by the resulting immune complexes via FcγRIIA, release bactericidal substances, and kill Gram‐negative Escherichia coli.
Objectives
To assess the role of PF4, anti‐PF4/H antibodies and FcγRIIa in killing of Gram‐positive bacteria by platelets.
Methods
Binding of PF4 to protein‐A deficient Staphylococcus aureus (SA113Δspa) and non‐encapsulated Streptococcus pneumoniae (D39Δcps) and its conformational change were assessed by flow cytometry using monoclonal (KKO,5B9) and patient derived anti‐PF4/H antibodies. Killing of bacteria was quantified by counting colony forming units (cfu) after incubation with platelets or platelet releasate. Using flow cytometry, platelet activation (CD62P‐expression, PAC‐1 binding) and phosphatidylserine (PS)‐exposure were analyzed.
Results
Monoclonal and patient‐derived anti‐PF4/H antibodies bound in the presence of PF4 to both S. aureus and S. pneumoniae (1.6‐fold increased fluorescence signal for human anti‐PF4/H antibodies to 24.0‐fold increase for KKO). Staphylococcus aureus (5.5 × 104cfu/mL) was efficiently killed by platelets (2.7 × 104cfu/mL) or their releasate (2.9 × 104cfu/mL). Killing was not further enhanced by PF4 or anti‐PF4/H antibodies. Blocking FcγRIIa had no impact on killing of S. aureus by platelets. In contrast, S. pneumoniae was not killed by platelets or releasate. Instead, after incubation with pneumococci platelets were unresponsive to TRAP‐6 stimulation and exposed high levels of PS.
Conclusions
Anti‐PF4/H antibodies seem to have only a minor role for direct killing of Gram‐positive bacteria by platelets. Staphylococcus aureus is killed by platelets or platelet releasate. In contrast, S. pneumoniae affects platelet viability.
Introduction: In the light of the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, convalescent plasma is a treatment option for COVID-19. In contrast to usual therapeutic plasma, the therapeutic agents of convalescent plasma do not represent clotting factor activities, but immunoglobulins. Quarantine storage of convalescent plasma as a measure to reduce the risk of pathogen transmission is not feasible. Therefore, pathogen inactivation (e.g., Theraflex®-MB, Macopharma, Mouvaux, France) is an attractive option. Data on the impact of pathogen inactivation by methylene blue (MB) treatment on antibody integrity are sparse. Methods: Antigen-specific binding capacity was tested before and after MB treatment of plasma (n = 10). IgG and IgM isoagglutinin titers were tested by agglutination in increasing dilutions. Furthermore, the binding of anti-EBV and anti-tetanus toxin IgG to their specific antigens was assessed by ELISA, and IgG binding to Fc receptors was assessed by flow cytometry using THP-1 cells expressing FcRI and FcRII. Results: There was no significant difference in the isoagglutinin titers, the antigen binding capacity of anti-EBV and anti-tetanus toxin IgG, as well as the Fc receptor binding capacity before and after MB treatment of plasma. Conclusion: MB treatment of plasma does not inhibit the binding capacity of IgM and IgG to their epitopes, or the Fc receptor interaction of IgG. Based on these results, MB treatment of convalescent plasma is appropriate to reduce the risk of pathogen transmission if quarantine storage is omitted.