4.6 Article

Genetic stability of Rift Valley fever virus MP-12 vaccine during serial passages in culture cells

期刊

NPJ VACCINES
卷 2, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41541-017-0021-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [R01 AI087643-01A1]
  2. Sealy Center for Vaccine Development at the UTMB

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rift Valley fever is a mosquito-borne zoonotic disease endemic to Africa, which affects both ruminants and humans. Rift Valley fever causes serious damage to the livestock industry and is also a threat to public health. The Rift Valley fever virus has a segmented negative-stranded RNA genome consisting of Large (L)-segment, Medium (M)-segment, and Small (S)-segment. The live-attenuated MP-12 vaccine is immunogenic in livestock and humans, and is conditionally licensed for veterinary use in the US. The MP-12 strain encodes 23 mutations (nine amino acid substitutions) and is attenuated through a combination of mutations in the L-segment, M-segment, and S-segment. Among them, the M-U795C, M-A3564G, and L-G3104A mutations contribute to viral attenuation through the L-segment and M-segment. The M-U795C, M-A3564G, L-U533C, and L-G3750A mutations are also independently responsible for temperature-sensitive phenotype. We hypothesized that a serial passage of the MP-12 vaccine in culture cells causes reversions of the MP-12 genome. The MP-12 vaccine and recombinant rMP12-Delta NSs16/198 were serially passaged 25 times. Droplet digital polymerase chain reaction analysis revealed that the reversion occurred at L-G3750A during passages of MP-12 in Vero or MRC-5 cells. The reversion also occurred at M-A3564G and L-U533C of rMP12-Delta NSs16/198 in Vero cells. Reversion mutations were not found in MP-12 or the variant, rMP12-TOSNSs, in the brains of mice with encephalitis. This study characterized genetic stability of the MP-12 vaccine and the potential risk of reversion mutation at the L-G3750A temperature-sensitive mutation after excessive viral passages in culture cells.

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