4.6 Article

Development of a recombinant replication-deficient rabies virus-based bivalent-vaccine against MERS-CoV and rabies virus and its humoral immunogenicity in mice

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 14, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223684

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan [H30-SinkogyouseiShitei-10109700]
  2. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development [18fk0108070j0101, 18fk0108072j0001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Middle East respiratory syndrome-coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is an emerging virus that causes severe disease with fatal outcomes; however, there are currently no approved vaccines or specific treatments against MERS-CoV. Here, we developed a novel bivalent vaccine against MERS-CoV and rabies virus (RV) using the replication-incompetent P-gene deficient RV (RV Delta P), which has been previously established as a promising and safe viral vector. MERS-CoV spike glycoprotein comprises S1 and S2 subunits, with the S1 subunit being a primary target of neutralizing antibodies. Recombinant RV Delta P, which expresses S1 fused with transmembrane and cytoplasmic domains together with 14 amino acids from the ectodomains of the RV-glycoprotein (RV-G), was developed using a reverse genetics method and named RV Delta P-MERS/S1. Following generation of RV Delta P-MERS/S1 and RV Delta P, our analysis revealed that they shared similar growth properties, with the expression of S1 in RV Delta P-MERS/S1-infected cells confirmed by immunofluorescence and western blot, and the immunogenicity and pathogenicity evaluated using mouse infection experiments. We observed no rabies-associated signs or symptoms in mice inoculated with RV Delta P-MERS/S1. Moreover, virus-specific neutralizing antibodies against both MERS-CoV and RV were induced in mice inoculated intraperitoneally with RV Delta P-MERS/S1. These findings indicate that RV Delta P-MERS/S1 is a promising and safe bivalent-vaccine candidate against both MERS-CoV and RV.

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