4.7 Article

Intranasal Immunization of Mice with Multiepitope Chimeric Vaccine Candidate Based on Conserved Autotransporters SigA, Pic and Sap, Confers Protection against Shigella flexneri

Journal

VACCINES
Volume 8, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines8040563

Keywords

bacillary dysentery; Shigella flexneri; mucosal immunity; autotransporters; GroEL; multiepitope chimeric vaccine

Funding

  1. Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Cientifico y Tecnologico (FONDECYT), Santiago, Chile [1180122]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Shigellosis is a diarrheal disease and the World Health Organization prompts the development of a vaccine against Shigella flexneri. The autotransporters SigA, Pic and Sap are conserved among Shigella spp. We previously designed an in silico vaccine with immunodominat epitopes from those autotransporters, and the GroEL protein of S. typhi as an adjuvant. Here, we evaluated the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of the chimeric multiepitope protein, named rMESF, in mice against lethal infection with S. flexneri. rMESF was administered to mice alone through the intranasal (i.n.) route or accompanied with Complete Freund's adjuvant (CFA) intradermically (i.d.), subcutaneously (s.c.), and intramuscular (i.m.), as well as with Imject alum (i.m.). All immunized mice increased IgG, IgG1, IgG2a, IgA and fecal IgA titers compared to PBS+CFA and PBS+alum control groups. Furthermore, i.n. immunization of mice with rMESF alone presented the highest titers of serum and fecal IgA. Cytokine levels (IFN-gamma, TNF-alpha, IL-4, and IL-17) and lymphocyte proliferation increased in all experimental groups, with the highest lymphoproliferative response in i.n. mice immunized with rMESF alone, which presented 100% protection against S. flexneri. In summary, this vaccine vests protective immunity and highlights the importance of mucosal immunity activation for the elimination of S. flexneri.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available