4.6 Article

Streptococcus pyogenes vaccine candidates do not induce autoimmune responses in a rheumatic heart disease model

期刊

NPJ VACCINES
卷 8, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41541-023-00604-2

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We developed a candidate vaccine containing two synthetic peptides derived from Streptococcus pyogenes proteins to protect against multiple strains of infections. In a rat autoimmune valvulitis model, we found that the vaccine candidate antigens did not induce autoimmune complications and inflammatory pathology. The study provides preclinical evidence of the safety and suitability of the vaccine candidates for human clinical trials.
We have developed a candidate vaccine to protect against multiple strains of Streptococcus pyogenes infections. The candidate vaccine contains two synthetic peptides derived from S. pyogenes proteins: the M-protein epitope, p*17 and the IL-8 degrading S. pyogenes Cell-Envelope Proteinase (SpyCEP) epitope, K4S2. In this study we utilise a rat autoimmune valvulitis model that displays both the cardiac and neurobehavioural pathology associated with post-streptococcal sequelae, to assess if the vaccine candidate antigens induce autoimmune complications and inflammatory pathology. Each antigen was conjugated to carrier protein diphtheria toxoid (DT) and independently assessed for potential to induce autoimmune pathology in female Lewis rats. Rats were administered three subcutaneous doses, and one intranasal dose over a four-week study with a two-week recovery period. A positive control group received recombinant S. pyogenes M5 (rM5) protein, and the negative control group received PBS. Rats that received rM5 developed significant cardiac and neurological pathologies. There was no evidence of these pathologies in the PBS control group, or the rats administered either P*17-DT or K4S2-DT. This study provides further preclinical evidence of the safety of the vaccine candidates p*17 and K4S2 and their appropriateness as candidates in human clinical trials.

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