4.4 Article

Effect of preexisting immunity to Salmonella on the immune response to recombinant Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium expressing a Porphyromonas gingivalis hemagglutinin

期刊

INFECTION AND IMMUNITY
卷 68, 期 6, 页码 3116-3120

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/IAI.68.6.3116-3120.2000

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDCR NIH HHS [T32 DE007200, R01 DE010963, DE-07200, DE-10963] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recombinant Salmonella strains expressing foreign heterologous genes have been extensively studied as live oral vaccine delivery vectors. We have investigated the mucosal and systemic immune responses following oral immunization with a recombinant Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium expressing the hemagglutinin HagB from Porphyromonas gingivalis, a suspected etiological agent of adult periodontal disease. We have previously shown a primary mucosal and systemic response following oral immunization with chi 4072/pDMD1 and recall responses following boosting at 14 weeks after primary immunization. In this study, we examined the effects of earlier boosting as well as the effects of deliberately induced immunity to the Salmonella carrier strain on subsequent immune responses. Mice boosted at week 7 following immunization, a point which corresponded to the peak of the primary response, generally showed lower responses than those boosted at week 14. When mice were preimmunized with the Salmonella carrier alone and then immunized with the recombinant strain 7 or 14 weeks later, significant reductions were seen for serum immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies at week 14 and for salivary IgA at week 7, No reductions were seen in serum IgA. or vaginal wash IgA antibodies. Mice appear to be refractory to boosting with orally administered salmonellae at 7 weeks. Deliberate immunization with the carrier strain did not appreciably affect recall responses at 14 weeks, with the exception of the serum IgG responses, nor did it affect colonization of the Peyer's patches.

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

4.4
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