4.6 Article

Local Immune Response to Injection of Plasmodium Sporozoites into the Skin

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 193, 期 3, 页码 1246-1257

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1302669

关键词

-

资金

  1. Pasteur Institute (Programmes Transversaux de Recherche)
  2. AXA Research Fund
  3. F. Lacoste

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Malarial infection is initiated when the sporozoite form of the Plasmodium parasite is inoculated into the skin by a mosquito. Sporozoites invade hepatocytes in the liver and develop into the erythrocyte-infecting form of the parasite, the cause of clinical blood infection. Protection against parasite development in the liver can be induced by injection of live attenuated parasites that do not develop in the liver and thus do not cause blood infection. Radiation-attenuated sporozoites (RAS) and genetically attenuated parasites are now considered as lead candidates for vaccination of humans against malaria. Although the skin appears as the preferable administration route, most studies in rodents, which have served as model systems, have been performed after i.v. injection of attenuated sporozoites. In this study, we analyzed the early response to Plasmodium berghei RAS or wild-type sporozoites (WTS) injected intradermally into C57BL/6 mice. We show that RAS have a similar in vivo distribution to WTS and that both induce a similar inflammatory response consisting of a biphasic recruitment of polymorphonuclear neutrophils and inflammatory monocytes in the skin injection site and proximal draining lymph node (dLN). Both WTS and RAS associate with neutrophils and resident myeloid cells in the skin and the dLN, transform inside CD11b(+) cells, and induce a Th1 cytokine profile in the dLN. WTS and RAS are also similarly capable of priming parasite-specific CD8(+) T cells. These studies delineate the early and local response to sporozoite injection into the skin, and suggest that WTS and RAS prime the host immune system in a similar fashion.

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

4.6
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