4.8 Article

MF59-and Al(OH)3-adjuvanted Staphylococcus aureus (4C-staph) vaccines induce sustained protective humoral and cellular immune responses, with a critical role for effector CD4 T cells at low antibody titers

期刊

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 1-11

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00439

关键词

Staphylococcus aureus; bacterial infection; vaccination; adjuvant; antibodies; T cells; mice

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) is an important opportunistic pathogen that may cause invasive life-threatening infections, like sepsis and pneumonia. Due to the increasing antibiotic resistance, the development of an effective vaccine against S. aureus is needed. Although a correlate of protection against staphylococcal diseases is not yet established, several findings suggest that both antibodies and CD4 T cells might contribute to optimal immunity. In this study, we show that adjuvanting a multivalent vaccine (4C-Staph) with MF59, an oil-in-water emulsion licensed in human vaccines, further potentiated antigen-specific IgG titers and CD4 T-cell responses compared to alum and conferred protection in the peritonitis model of S. aureus infection. Moreover, we showed that MF59- and alum-adjuvanted 4C-Staph vaccines induced persistent antigen-specific humoral and T-cell responses, and protected mice from infection up to 4 months after immunization. Furthermore, 4C-Staph formulated with MF59 was used to investigate which immune compartment is involved in vaccine-induced protection. Using CD4 T cell-depleted mice or B cell-deficient mice, we demonstrated that both T and B-cell responses contributed to 4C-Staph vaccine-mediated protective immunity. However, the role of CD4 T cells seemed more evident in the presence of low-antibody responses. This study provides preclinical data further supporting the use of the adjuvanted 4C-Staph vaccines against S. aureus diseases, and provides critical insights on the correlates of protective immunity necessary to combat this pathogen.

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

4.8
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