4.5 Editorial Material

The mucosal vaccine quandary Intranasal vs. sublingual immunization against influenza

Journal

HUMAN VACCINES & IMMUNOTHERAPEUTICS
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages 690-694

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.4161/hv.19568

Keywords

influenza; sublingual; intranasal; central nervous system; Bell's palsy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Intranasal vaccination can effectively induce both local and systemic immune responses and protect against influenza, but poses a risk of antigen or adjuvant delivery into the central nervous system (CNS). Sublingual vaccine delivery has recently received increased attention as a safer alternative to the intranasal route. Studies comparing the two routes have found that higher immune responses may be induced by intranasal than sublingual administration, possibly as a consequence of the differences in mucosal tissues between the two routes. Here we examine evidence of antigen transport into the CNS following intranasal immunization and discuss possible reasons for the superiority of the intranasal as compared with the sublingual route in terms of vaccine immunogenicity. We encourage generation of more information on the safety of mucosal adjuvants and propose that the next generation of vaccines and adjuvants may be designed specifically for administration via the different mucosal routes.

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