4.7 Article

Heterologous prime-boost strategy in non-human primates combining the infective dengue virus and a recombinant protein in a formulation suitable for human use

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 14, 期 5, 页码 E377-E383

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2009.06.017

关键词

Dengue virus; Green monkeys; Heterologous prime-boost; Vaccines

资金

  1. Cuban Program for Dengue Vaccine Development

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of the present work was to test the concept of the heterologous prime-boost strategy combining an infective dengue virus with a recombinant chimeric protein carrying domain III of the envelope protein. Methods: Two studies in monkeys, combining recombinant protein PD5 (domain III of the envelope protein from dengue-2 virus, fused to the protein carrier P64k) and the infective dengue virus in the same immunization schedules were carried out. Humoral and cell-mediated immunity were evaluated. Results: In the first study, monkeys received four doses of the protein PD5 and were subsequently infected with one dose of dengue virus. Antibody response measured after virus inoculation was significantly higher compared to that in non-primed monkeys and comparable to that elicited after two doses of infective virus. In a second study, monkeys were infected with one dose of the virus and subsequently boosted with one dose of the recombinant protein, reaching high levels of neutralizing antibodies, which were still detectable 14 months after the last immunization. In addition, the cellular immune response was also recalled. Conclusions: The results obtained in the present work support the approach of heterologous prime-boosting, in either order prime or boost, combining the chimeric protein PD5 (formulated in alum-CPS-A) and an infective dengue virus. The latter could potentially be replaced by an attenuated vaccine candidate. (C) 2009 International Society for Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据