4.8 Article

A T-cell response to a liver-stage Plasmodium antigen is not boosted by repeated sporozoite immunizations

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1303834110

Keywords

vaccination; epitope

Funding

  1. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Grant [1K08AI097238-01]
  2. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Development of an antimalarial subunit vaccine inducing protective cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated immunity could pave the way for malaria eradication. Experimental immunization with sporozoites induces this type of protective response, but the extremely large number of proteins expressed by Plasmodium parasites has so far prohibited the identification of sufficient discrete T-cell antigens to develop subunit vaccines that produce sterile immunity. Here, using mice singly immunized with Plasmodium yoelii sporozoites and high-throughput screening, we identified a unique CTL response against the parasite ribosomal L3 protein. Unlike CTL responses to the circumsporozoite protein (CSP), the population of L3-specific CTLs was not expanded by multiple sporozoite immunizations. CSP is abundant in the sporozoite itself, whereas L3 expression does not increase until the liver stage. The response induced by a single immunization with sporozoites reduces the parasite load in the liver so greatly during subsequent immunizations that L3-specific responses are only generated during the primary exposure. Functional L3-specific CTLs can, however, be expanded by heterologous prime-boost regimens. Thus, although repeat sporozoite immunization expands responses to preformed antigens like CSP that are present in the sporozoite itself, this immunization strategy may not expand CTLs targeting parasite proteins that are synthesized later. Heterologous strategies may be needed to increase CTL responses across the entire spectrum of Plasmodium liver-stage proteins.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available