4.7 Article

A surface plasmon resonance based approach for measuring response to pneumococcal vaccine

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-85958-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. Generalitat Valenciana
  2. European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) funds (PO FEDER of Comunitat Valenciana 2014-2020)
  3. Health Research Institute Hospital La Fe (IIS La Fe)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to evaluate the reliability of using SPR technology for quantifying anti-pneumococcal capsular polysaccharides (anti-PnPs) IgGs in vaccinated individuals.
Incidence of pneumococcal disease has increased worldwide in recent years. Response to pneumococcal vaccine is usually measured using the multiserotype enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) pneumococcal test. However, this approach presents several limitations. Therefore, the introduction of new and more robust analytical approaches able to provide information on the efficacy of the pneumococcal vaccine would be very beneficial for the clinical management of patients. Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) has been shown to offer a valuable understanding of vaccines' properties over the last years. The aim of this study is to evaluate the reliability of SPR for the anti-pneumococcal capsular polysaccharides (anti-PnPs) IgGs quantification in vaccinated. Fast protein liquid chromatography (FPLC) was used for the isolation of total IgGs from serum samples of vaccinated patients. Binding-SPR assays were performed to study the interaction between anti-PnPs IgGs and PCV13. A robust correlation was found between serum levels of anti-PnPs IgGs, measured by ELISA, and the SPR signal. Moreover, it was possible to correctly classify patients into non-responder, responder and high-responder groups according to their specific SPR PCV13 response profiles. SPR technology provides a valuable tool for reliably characterize the interaction between anti-PnPs IgGs and PCV13 in a very short experimental time.

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