4.5 Article

Heterologous prime-boost strategy to overcome weak immunogenicity of two serosubtypes in hexavalent Neisseria meningitidis outer membrane vesicle vaccine

期刊

VACCINE
卷 24, 期 10, 页码 1569-1577

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2005.10.003

关键词

heterologous prime-boost; outer membrane vesicle (OMVs) vaccine; PorA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the hexavalent meningococcal B OMV vaccine (HexaMen), two of the six Porin A proteins present are weakly immunogenic in mice and humans. We investigated the possibility that the lower immunogenicity of these serosubtypes (P1.7-2,4 and P1.19,15-1) could be overcome by using HexaMen and monovalent OMVs in heterologous immunisation protocols. Whereas HexaMen priming on day 0 followed by a monovalent P1.7-2,4 OMV boosting on day 28 (specific boost) did not result in higher titres against P1.7-2,4 (on day 42), the reverse order of immunisations (specific priming) resulted in significantly higher ELISA and SBA titres, but with lower avidity. For the strongly immunogenic PorA P1.5-1,2-2, all strategies gave high antibody responses, while avidity was highest after two monovalent P1.5-1,2-2 OMV immunisations. Based on the improved antibody titres obtained by specific priming with the weakly immunogenic PorA, we extended our study with combined P1.7-2,4 and P1.19,15-1 priming followed by two HexaMen booster immunisations. This resulted in higher ELISA and SBA titres against these weakly immunogenic PorAs, while the response against the other four PorAs was unaffected. Also, we observed an increase in antibody avidity using this schedule, indicating that affinity maturation has occurred. In conclusion, we found that specific priming, rather than specific boosting with monovalent OMVs, gave a significant rise in the serosubtype-specific immune response against a weakly immunogenic PorA, with high avidity antibodies in an extended immunisation schedule. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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