| Literature DB >> 18458742 |
Upma Gulati1, Wendy A Keitel, Gillian M Air.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our studies aimed to measure the quality of antibody response to influenza vaccines in the elderly. The frequency of significant rise in hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) titer in the elderly is low and although annual vaccination reduces morbidity and mortality, better correlates of vaccine efficacy in the elderly are needed.Entities:
Keywords: Elderly; HA inhibition; influenza virus; native and denatured antigen; serum antibodies
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2007 PMID: 18458742 PMCID: PMC2367137 DOI: 10.1111/j.1750-2659.2007.00017.x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Influenza Other Respir Viruses ISSN: 1750-2640 Impact factor: 4.380
Serum response (as fold difference) in terms of hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and to native and denatured red cell‐bound virus after vaccination, compared with the corresponding pre‐vaccination sample
| Subject | Dose (μg) | Fold HAI (log2)* Panama/99 | Native | Denatured | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre‐vac | Fold | Fold | Pre‐vac | Fold Amax Panama/99 | Fold | |||
| D | Placebo | 1 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 1.1 | 0.8 |
| H | Placebo | 1 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| L | Placebo | 1 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| P | Placebo | 1.8 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 1.1 |
| T | Placebo | 1 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| W | Placebo | 1 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| A | 15 | 1 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 1.0 |
| E | 15 | 1.3 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 1.9 | 0.7 | 1.2 | 2.1 |
| I | 15 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| M | 15 | 1.5 | 0.4 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 2.0 | 0.5 |
| Q | 15 | 1 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 0.9 |
| U | 15 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 2.5 |
| X | 15 | 1 | 0.4 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 0.3 | 1.2 | 1.4 |
| AA | 15 | 2 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 2.2 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 2.3 |
| DD | 15 | 3.5 | 0.2 | 3.6 | 1.4 | 0.1 | 2.2 | 5.0 |
| GG | 15 | 1.3 | 0.4 | 1.4 | 2.6 | 0.3 | 1.8 | 2.5 |
| B | 30 | 1 | 0.4 | 1.1 | 1.0 | 0.3 | 1.4 | 0.9 |
| F | 30 | 1 | 0.3 | 2.3 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 1.7 | 0.9 |
| J | 30 | 1 | 0.4 | 1.2 | 1.0 | 0.2 | 1.8 | 0.7 |
| N | 30 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 1.9 |
| R | 30 | 1 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 2.1 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 3.6 |
| Y | 30 | 1 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 2.2 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| BB | 30 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 1.5 |
| EE | 30 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 5.2 | 0.1 | 1.6 | 5.0 |
| HH | 30 | 1.6 | 0.2 | 1.6 | 3.4 | 0.1 | 2.7 | 3.2 |
| II | 30 | 2.3 | 0.3 | 1.5 | 1.1 | 0.2 | 1.4 | 2.2 |
| C | 60 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 1.1 | 0.5 | 1.4 | 0.8 |
| G | 60 | 1 | 0.5 | 1.3 | 2.0 | 0.3 | 1.0 | 2.7 |
| K | 60 | 1 | 0.4 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 1.5 |
| O | 60 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 2.4 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 2.8 |
| S | 60 | 2 | 0.5 | 1.5 | 3.2 | 0.5 | 1.2 | 3.9 |
| V | 60 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 1.3 | 2.9 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 4.0 |
| Z | 60 | 1.4 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.6 |
| CC | 60 | 1 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 1.3 |
| FF | 60 | 3 | 0.2 | 5.1 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 5.0 | 2.3 |
| JJ | 60 | 3 | 0.2 | 4.3 | 1.4 | 0.0 | 5.0 | 2.4 |
*The HAI responses in this vaccine trial and HAI for a younger population were reported earlier.
Figure 1Examples of binding curves showing variable response toward native glycoproteins. The pre‐vaccination and post‐vaccination serum samples from three subjects are shown. In panel (A) the subject has very low pre‐immunization antibody levels and shows a good rise after vaccination. Panel (B) shows a subject with high levels of pre‐immunization antibodies and little increase on vaccination. The subject in panel (C) is a true non‐responder, with a very low level of pre‐immunization antibody and no increase after vaccination.
Figure 2Relationships between pre‐immunization antibody levels, fold increase in antibodies, and vaccine dose. Panel (A) shows the fold increase in A max (post‐/pre‐immunization) determined by fitting the binding curve, plotted against initial antibody level (A 405) obtained by running all samples together for comparison, where the diameter of the circles reflects the dose of vaccine. Panel (B) shows fold increase in K a(app) plotted against pre‐immunization levels. In panels (C) and (D), the fold increase A max and K a of antibodies against denatured proteins are plotted against the pre‐immunization levels of anti‐unfoldon antibodies. Panel (E) shows the fold increase in hemagglutination inhibition determined previously plotted against the pre‐immunization A 405 determined in this study.
Figure 3Effect of increasing dosage of vaccine on A max and K a(app) of antibodies against Panama/99 and Sydney/97. The average fold increase in anti‐native and anti‐unfoldon serum antibody levels and avidity after vaccination with increasing dosages of vaccine is compared. The P‐values from the Student’s t‐test comparing the 15 μg dosage with the highest dosage (60 μg) are shown for each virus. There are increasing trends with dosage for each parameter, but only the avidity of unfoldon antibodies significantly increases with dosage. Each vaccine dosage group has 10 subjects, and the control group has six subjects.