4.2 Article

Evaluation of vaccines in the EU TB vaccine cluster using a guinea pig aerosol infection model of tuberculosis

Journal

TUBERCULOSIS
Volume 85, Issue 1-2, Pages 29-38

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.tube.2004.09.009

Keywords

vaccine; tuberculosis; guinea pig; aerosol

Funding

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [R01AI054338] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI054338-06, R01 AI054338] Funding Source: Medline
  3. Wellcome Trust [063643] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The TB Vaccine Cluster project funded by the EU Fifth Framework programme aims to provide novel vaccines against tuberculosis that are suitable for evaluation in humans. This paper describes the studies of the protective efficacy of vaccines in a guinea pig aerosol-infection model of primary tuberculosis. The objective was to conduct comparative evaluations of vaccines that had previously demonstrated efficacy in other animal models. Groups of 6 guinea pigs were immunized with vaccines provided by the relevant EU Vaccine Cluster partners. Survival over 17 or 26 weeks was used as the principal measure of vaccine efficacy following aerosol challenge with H37Rv. Counts of mycobacteria in lungs and spleens, and histopathological changes in the lungs, were also used to provide evidence of protection. A total of 24 vaccines were evaluated in 4 experiments each of a different design. A heterologous prime-boost strategy of DNA and MVA, each expressing Ag85A and a fusion protein of ESAT-6 and Ag85B in adjuvant, protected the guinea pigs to the same extent as BCG. Genetically modified BCG vaccines and boosted BCG strategies also protected guinea pigs to the same extent as BCG but not statistically significantly better. A relatively high aerosol-challenge dose and evaluation over a protracted time post-challenge allowed superior protection over BCG to be demonstrated by BCG boosted with MVA and fowl pox vectors expressing Ag85A. (C) 2004 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

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available