4.7 Article

Lethal Antibody Enhancement of Dengue Disease in Mice Is Prevented by Fc Modification

期刊

PLOS PATHOGENS
卷 6, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1000790

关键词

-

资金

  1. Pediatric Dengue Vaccine Initiative [CRA-14]
  2. National Institutes of Health [AI65359, AI72933, AI077955]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Immunity to one of the four dengue virus (DV) serotypes can increase disease severity in humans upon subsequent infection with another DV serotype. Serotype cross-reactive antibodies facilitate DV infection of myeloid cells in vitro by promoting virus entry via Fc gamma receptors (Fc gamma R), a process known as antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). However, despite decades of investigation, no in vivo model for antibody enhancement of dengue disease severity has been described. Analogous to human infants who receive anti-DV antibodies by transplacental transfer and develop severe dengue disease during primary infection, we show here that passive administration of anti-DV antibodies is sufficient to enhance DV infection and disease in mice using both mouse-adapted and clinical DV isolates. Antibody-enhanced lethal disease featured many of the hallmarks of severe dengue disease in humans, including thrombocytopenia, vascular leakage, elevated serum cytokine levels, and increased systemic viral burden in serum and tissue phagocytes. Passive transfer of a high dose of serotype-specific antibodies eliminated viremia, but lower doses of these antibodies or cross-reactive polyclonal or monoclonal antibodies all enhanced disease in vivo even when antibody levels were neutralizing in vitro. In contrast, a genetically engineered antibody variant (E60-N297Q) that cannot bind Fc gamma R exhibited prophylactic and therapeutic efficacy against ADE-induced lethal challenge. These observations provide insight into the pathogenesis of antibody-enhanced dengue disease and identify a novel strategy for the design of therapeutic antibodies against dengue.

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