4.5 Article

A genomics-based approach to assessment of vaccine safety and immunogenicity in children

Journal

VACCINE
Volume 30, Issue 10, Pages 1865-1874

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.12.118

Keywords

Immunisation; Infants; Safety; Cellular immunity; Atopy; Genomics

Funding

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Immune responses to vaccines in infants and young children are typically Th2-biased, giving rise to concerns regarding potential atopy-like side effects, and antagonism of Th1-associated sterilising immunity. Conventional immunological methodology has limited capacity to effectively address these problems because of the inherent complexity of the immune responses involved. In the present study, we sought to develop an unbiased systems biology approach to elucidate superficially similar Th2-associated responses to paediatric vaccines and allergens, and to differentiate between them via gene coexpression network analysis. We demonstrate below that in immune responses to the diptheria/acellular pertussis/tetanus and pneumococcal polysaccharide conjugate vaccines, potentially antagonistic Th1-/IFN-associated and Th2-associated gene networks coexist in an apparent state of dynamic equilibrium, whereas in Th2-dominant allergen-specific responses of atopics the Th1 and IFN networks are respectively disrupted and downregulated. Capacity to detect and interpret these covert differences between responses to vaccines and allergens relies on the use of sophisticated algorithms that underpin coexpression network analysis, which identify genes that function co-ordinately in complex pathways. This methodology has significant potential to identify covert interactions between inflammatory pathways triggered by vaccination, and as such may be a useful tool in prediction of vaccine safety/efficacy. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available