4.3 Article

Potential Usefulness of Streptococcus pneumoniae Extracellular Membrane Vesicles as Antibacterial Vaccines

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY RESEARCH
卷 2017, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2017/7931982

关键词

-

资金

  1. Korea Basic Science Institute Research Program [D36402]
  2. Science Research Center Program [2015R1A5A1009024]
  3. Basic Science Research Program of the National Research Foundation (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning [2015R1C1A1A01054897]
  4. Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI) - Ministry of Health Welfare [HI14C2726, HI16C0950]
  5. National Research Foundation of Korea [2015R1C1A1A01054897] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The secretion of extracellular membrane vesicles (EMVs) is a common phenomenon that occurs in archaea, bacteria, and mammalian cells. The EMVs of bacteria play important roles in their virulence, biogenesis mechanisms, and host cell interactions. Bacterial EMVs have recently become the focus of attention because of their potential as highly effective vaccines that cause few side effects. Here, we isolated the EMVs of Streptococcus pneumoniae and examined their potential as new vaccine candidates. Although the S. pneumoniae bacteria were highly pathogenic in a mouse model, the EMVs purified from these bacteria showed low pathological activity both in cell culture and in mice. When mice were injected intraperitoneally with S. pneumoniae EMVs and then challenged, they were protected from both the homologous strain and another pathogenic serotype of S. pneumoniae. We also identified a number of proteins that may have immunogenic activity and may be responsible for the immune responses by the hosts. These results suggest that S. pneumoniae EMVs or their individual immunogenic antigens may be useful as new vaccine agents.

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

4.3
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