4.6 Review

Exosome-Based Vaccines: Pros and Cons in the World of Animal Health

期刊

VIRUSES-BASEL
卷 13, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v13081499

关键词

extracellular vesicles; vaccines; viral diseases

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

EVs, as lipid bilayer nanovesicles, have shown potential as an important source for vaccines in different animal health areas, opening opportunities for new strategies to overcome issues related to animal health, food security, and emerging diseases.
Due to the emergence of antibiotic resistance and new and more complex diseases that affect livestock animal health and food security, the control of epidemics has become a top priority worldwide. Vaccination represents the most important and cost-effective measure to control infectious diseases in animal health, but it represents only 23% of the total global animal health market, highlighting the need to develop new vaccines. A recent strategy in animal health vaccination is the use of extracellular vesicles (EVs), lipid bilayer nanovesicles produced by almost all living cells, including both prokaryotes and eukaryotes. EVs have been evaluated as a prominent source of viral antigens to elicit specific immune responses and to develop new vaccination platforms as viruses and EVs share biogenesis pathways. Preliminary trials with lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus infection (LCMV), porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV), and Marek's disease virus (MDV) have demonstrated that EVs have a role in the activation of cellular and antibody immune responses. Moreover, in parasitic diseases such as Eimeria (chickens) and Plasmodium yoelii (mice) protection has been achieved. Research into EVs is therefore opening an opportunity for new strategies to overcome old problems affecting food security, animal health, and emerging diseases. Here, we review different conventional approaches for vaccine design and compare them with examples of EV-based vaccines that have already been tested in relation to animal health.

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