4.5 Article

ViroSpot microneutralization assay for antigenic characterization of human influenza viruses

期刊

VACCINE
卷 35, 期 1, 页码 46-52

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.11.060

关键词

Antigenic characterization; Influenza A virus, H3N2 subtype; Neutralization tests

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay has been used for the antigenic characterization of influenza viruses for, decades. However, the majority of recent seasonal influenza A viruses of the H3N2 subtype has lost the capacity to agglutinate erythrocytes of various species. The hemagglutination (HA) activity of other A(H3N2) strains is generally sensitive to the action of the neuraminidase inhibitor oseltamivir, which indicates that the neuraminidase and not the hemagglutinin is responsible for the HA activity. These findings complicate the antigenic characterization and selection of A(H3N2) vaccine strains, calling for alternative antigenic characterization assays. Here we describe the development and use of the ViroSpot microneutralization (MN) assay as a reliable and robust alternative for the HI assay. Serum neutralization of influenza A(H3N2) reference virus strains and epidemic isolates was determined by automated readout of immunostained cell monolayers, in a format designed to minimize the influence of infectious virus doses on serum neutralization titers. Neutralization of infection was largely independent from rates of viral replication and cell-to-cell transmission, facilitating the comparison of different virus isolates. Other advantages of the ViroSpot MN assay include its relative insensitivity to variation in test dose of infectious virus, automated capture and analyses of residual infection patterns, and compatibility with standardized large scale analyses. Using this assay, a number of epidemic influenza A(H3N2) strains that failed to agglutinate erythrocytes, were readily characterized antigenically. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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

4.5
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