4.6 Article

The Co-Operonic PE25/PPE41 Protein Complex of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Elicits Increased Humoral and Cell Mediated Immune Response

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 3, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003586

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Biotechnology (DBT), India
  2. Bose National Fellow of the Ministry of Science & Technology, Government of India
  3. CSIR [Senior Research Fellow]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Many of the PE/PPE proteins are either surface localized or secreted outside and are thought to be a source of antigenic variation in the host. The exact role of these proteins are still elusive. We previously reported that the PPE41 protein induces high B cell response in TB patients. The PE/PPE genes are not randomly distributed in the genome but are organized as operons and the operon containing PE25 and PPE41 genes co-transcribe and their products interact with each other. Methodology/Principal Finding: We now describe the antigenic properties of the PE25, PPE41 and PE25/PPE41 protein complex coded by a single operon. The PPE41 and PE25/PPE41 protein complex induces significant (p<.0001) B cell response in sera derived from TB patients and in mouse model as compared to the PE25 protein. Further, mice immunized with the PE25/PPE41 complex and PPE41 proteins showed significant (p<0.00001) proliferation of splenocyte as compared to the mice immunized with the PE25 protein and saline. Flow cytometric analysis showed 15-22% enhancement of CD8(+) and CD4(+) T cell populations when immunized with the PPE41 or PE25/PPE41 complex as compared to a marginal increase (8-10%) in the mice immunized with the PE25 protein. The PPE41 and PE25/PPE41 complex can also induce higher levels of IFN-gamma, TNF-alpha and IL-2 cytokines. Conclusion: While this study documents the differential immunological respo nse to the complex of PE and PPE vis-a-vis the individual proteins, it also highlights their potential as a candidate vaccine against tuberculosis.

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