Literature DB >> 12559796

Local and systemic immune response in nursing-home elderly following intranasal or intramuscular immunization with inactivated influenza vaccine.

Mordechai Muszkat1, Evgenia Greenbaum, Arie Ben-Yehuda, Moses Oster, Efrain Yeu'l, Shmuel Heimann, Reuven Levy, Gideon Friedman, Zichria Zakay-Rones.   

Abstract

Intramuscular (IM) influenza vaccines are only 30-40% effective in preventing clinical illness among the elderly, and their effectiveness in eliciting mucosal response may be even lower. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the immunological effect of a novel inactivated intranasal (IN) trivalent whole influenza virus vaccine among nursing-home elderly. Twenty-one institutionalized elderly subjects were vaccinated IN with an inactivated novel vaccine, twice, 21 days apart, and with no adverse effects. Twenty-two subjects were vaccinated once with a commercial IM vaccine. Viral strains used in the 1998/9 vaccine (20 microg of each per dose) were A/Beijing/262/95, A/Sydney/5/97 and B/Harbin/7/94. Serum antibodies (IgG and IgM) and nasal IgA were determined by the hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), respectively. Mucosal antibody response to the three vaccine strains was detected in 47.6-71.4% and 18.1-31.8% of IN and IM immunized subjects, respectively. Serum antibody response to the three antigens tested was detected in 20.0-61.9% and 18.2-72.7% of IN and IM immunized subjects, respectively. Seroconversion was not significantly different after IN or IM vaccination for both A/Sydney and B/Harbin, but higher for A/Beijing following IM vaccination. On study completion, 57.1, 65.0 and 50.0% of IN vaccinees were seroprotected to A/Beijing, A/Sydney and B/Harbin, respectively. Similarly, 68.1, 77.2 and 54.5% were immune after IM vaccination. The IN vaccine tested was significantly more effective than the IM vaccine in inducing mucosal IgA response. This may prevent influenza at its early stages and thus contribute to the reduction of morbidity and complications in nursing-home elderly. Copyright 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12559796     DOI: 10.1016/s0264-410x(02)00481-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vaccine        ISSN: 0264-410X            Impact factor:   3.641


  17 in total

1.  Induction of mucosal immunity through systemic immunization: Phantom or reality?

Authors:  Fei Su; Girishchandra B Patel; Songhua Hu; Wangxue Chen
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016-01-11       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  A dose-response evaluation of inactivated influenza vaccine given intranasally and intramuscularly to healthy young adults.

Authors:  Robert L Atmar; Wendy A Keitel; Thomas R Cate; Flor M Munoz; Fred Ruben; Robert B Couch
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2007-05-22       Impact factor: 3.641

3.  Intranasal DNA vaccination induces potent mucosal and systemic immune responses and cross-protective immunity against influenza viruses.

Authors:  Lea Torrieri-Dramard; Bénédicte Lambrecht; Helena Lage Ferreira; Thierry Van den Berg; David Klatzmann; Bertrand Bellier
Journal:  Mol Ther       Date:  2010-10-19       Impact factor: 11.454

4.  FcRn-Targeted Mucosal Vaccination against Influenza Virus Infection.

Authors:  Susan Park Ochsner; Weizhong Li; Arunraj Mekhemadhom Rajendrakumar; Senthilkumar Palaniyandi; Gyanada Acharya; Xiaoyang Liu; Gefei Wang; Florian Krammer; Meiqing Shi; Wenbin Tuo; C David Pauza; Xiaoping Zhu
Journal:  J Immunol       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 5.426

5.  Contrasting effects of type I interferon as a mucosal adjuvant for influenza vaccine in mice and humans.

Authors:  Robert B Couch; Robert L Atmar; Thomas R Cate; John M Quarles; Wendy A Keitel; Nancy H Arden; Janet Wells; Diane Niño; Philip R Wyde
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 3.641

6.  A single immunization with a dry powder anthrax vaccine protects rabbits against lethal aerosol challenge.

Authors:  S D Klas; C R Petrie; S J Warwood; M S Williams; C L Olds; J P Stenz; A M Cheff; M Hinchcliffe; C Richardson; S Wimer
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2008-08-12       Impact factor: 3.641

7.  Phase I evaluation of intranasal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine with nontoxigenic Escherichia coli enterotoxin and novel biovector as mucosal adjuvants, using adult volunteers.

Authors:  Iain Stephenson; Maria C Zambon; Anna Rudin; Anthony Colegate; Audino Podda; Roberto Bugarini; Giusseppe Del Giudice; Ada Minutello; Susan Bonnington; Jan Holmgren; Kingston H G Mills; Karl G Nicholson
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 5.103

8.  Lactobacillus GG as an immune adjuvant for live-attenuated influenza vaccine in healthy adults: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

Authors:  L E Davidson; A-M Fiorino; D R Snydman; P L Hibberd
Journal:  Eur J Clin Nutr       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 4.016

9.  Protection against divergent influenza H1N1 virus by a centralized influenza hemagglutinin.

Authors:  Eric A Weaver; Adam M Rubrum; Richard J Webby; Michael A Barry
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-03-28       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Development of mucosal adjuvants for intranasal vaccine for H5N1 influenza viruses.

Authors:  Hideki Hasegawa; Takeshi Ichinohe; Akira Ainai; Shin-Ichi Tamura; Takeshi Kurata
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2009-03-26       Impact factor: 2.423

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.