4.6 Article

Humoral and cell-mediated immune responses to H5N1 plant-made virus-like particle vaccine are differentially impacted by alum and GLA-SE adjuvants in a Phase 2 clinical trial

期刊

NPJ VACCINES
卷 3, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41541-017-0043-3

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medicago Inc.
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [UI201303]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The hemagglutinination inhibition (HI) response remains the gold standard used for the licensure of influenza vaccines. However, cell-mediated immunity (CMI) deserves more attention, especially when evaluating H5N1 influenza vaccines that tend to induce poor HI response. In this study, we measured the humoral response (HI) and CMI (flow cytometry) during a Phase II dose-ranging clinical trial (NCT01991561). Subjects received two intramuscular doses, 21 days apart, of plant-derived virus-like particles (VLP) presenting the A/Indonesia/05/2005 H5N1 influenza hemagglutinin protein (H5) at the surface of the VLP (H5VLP). The vaccine was co-administrated with Alhydrogel (R) or with a glucopyranosyl lipid adjuvant-stable emulsion (GLA-SE). We demonstrated that low doses (3.75 or 7.5 mu g H5VLP) of GLA-SE-adjuvanted vaccines induced HI responses that met criteria for licensure at both antigen doses tested. Alhydrogel adjuvanted vaccines induced readily detectable HI response that however failed to meet licensure criteria at any of three doses (10, 15 and 20 mu g) tested. The H5VLP also induced a sustained (up to 6 months) polyfunctional and cross-reactive HA-specific CD4(+) T cell response in all vaccinated groups. Interestingly, the frequency of central memory Th1-primed precursor cells before the boost significantly correlated with HI titers 21 days after the boost. The ability of the low dose GLA-SE-adjuvanted H5VLP to elicit both humoral response and a sustained cross-reactive CMI in healthy adults is very attractive and could result in significant dose-sparing in a pandemic situation.

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