| Literature DB >> 19433112 |
Yoshihiro Kaku1, Akira Noguchi, Glenn A Marsh, Jennifer A McEachern, Akiko Okutani, Kozue Hotta, Boldbaatar Bazartseren, Shuetsu Fukushi, Christopher C Broder, Akio Yamada, Satoshi Inoue, Lin-Fa Wang.
Abstract
Nipah virus (NiV) is a new zoonotic paramyxovirus that emerged in 1998 and is now classified in the genus Henipavirus along with the closely related Hendra virus (HeV). NiV is highly pathogenic in several vertebrate species including humans, and the lack of available vaccines or specific treatment restricts it to biosafety level 4 (BSL4) containment. A serum neutralization test was developed for measuring NiV neutralizing antibodies under BSL2 conditions using a recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) expressing green fluorescent protein (GFP) and bearing the F and G proteins of NiV (VSV-NiV-GFP). The neutralization titers were obtained by counting GFP-expressing cells or by measuring fluorescence. The performance of this new assay was compared against the conventional test using live NiV with panels of sera from several mammalian species, including sera from NiV outbreaks, experimental infections, as well as HeV-specific sera. The results obtained with the VSV-NiV-GFP based test correlated with those obtained using live NiV. Using a 50% reduction in VSV-NiV-GFP infected cells as the cut-off for neutralization, this new assay demonstrated its potential as an effective tool for detecting NiV neutralizing antibodies under BSL2 containment with greater speed, sensitivity and safety as compared to the conventional NiV serum neutralization test.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19433112 PMCID: PMC7112920 DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2009.04.037
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Virol Methods ISSN: 0166-0934 Impact factor: 2.014
The comparison of neutralization titers between VSV–NiV–GFP and live-NiV based assays.
| Species | No. | Origin | Ref. | ELISA | Neutralization titer | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VSV–NiV–GFP | Live-NiV | |||||
| Human | 1 | NiV outbreak | 1 | + | >1,280 | 15 |
| 2 | HeV outbreak | 2 | + | 1,280 | 20 | |
| 3 | + | 1,280 | 20 | |||
| 4 | Negative control | – | − | <10 | <10 | |
| 5 | − | <10 | <10 | |||
| Fruit bat | 1 | NiV experimental infection | 3 | + | >640 | 240 |
| 2 | + | >640 | 80 | |||
| 3 | + | >640 | 160 | |||
| 4 | Negative control | − | <10 | <10 | ||
| Horse | 1 | HeV outbreak | 2 | + | >1,280 | 240 |
| 2 | + | >1,280 | 240 | |||
| 3 | + | >1,280 | 480 | |||
| 4 | + | 160 | 15 | |||
| 5 | + | >1,280 | 240 | |||
| 6 | + | >1,280 | 240 | |||
| 7 | + | >1,280 | 160 | |||
| 8 | Negative control | – | − | <10 | <10 | |
| Cat | 1 | NiV experimental infection | 4 | + | 160 | <10 |
| 2 | + | >640 | 640 | |||
| 3 | + | >640 | 640 | |||
| 4 | Negative control | 4 | − | <10 | <10 | |
| Rabbit | 1 | NiV-F DNA immunization | 5 | + | 40,960 | 320 |
| 2 | + | 164,840 | 480 | |||
| 3 | NiV-G DNA immunization | 5 | + | 40,960 | 960 | |
| 4 | + | 40,960 | 1280 | |||
| 5 | Negative control | 5 | − | <10 | NT | |
| 6 | − | <10 | NT | |||
| 7 | − | <10 | NT | |||
| 8 | − | <10 | NT | |||
| Pig | 1 | NiV experimental infection | 6 | + | >1,280 | 60 |
| 2 | + | >1,280 | 240 | |||
| 3 | + | >1,280 | 240 | |||
| 4 | Negative control | 6 | − | <10 | <10 | |
| 5 | − | <10 | <10 | |||
| 6 | NiV outbreak in Malaysia | 1 | + | 80 | <20 | |
| 7 | + | 640 | 60 | |||
| 8 | + | >1,280 | 240 | |||
| 9 | + | >1,280 | 80 | |||
| 10 | + | 640 | 80 | |||
| 11 | + | 640 | 40 | |||
| 12 | + | 640 | 80 | |||
| 13 | + | 640 | 30 | |||
| 14 | + | 640 | 60 | |||
| 15 | + | 320 | 20 | |||
| 16 | + | 160 | 30 | |||
| 17 | − | <10 | <20 | |||
| 18 | Japanese field-A αJEV (−) | 7 | − | 5 | NT | |
| 19 | − | <5 | NT | |||
| 20 | − | 5 | NT | |||
| 21 | − | <5 | NT | |||
| 22 | − | 5 | NT | |||
| 23 | − | 5 | NT | |||
| 24 | − | 5 | NT | |||
| 25 | − | 5 | NT | |||
| 26 | Japanese field-B αJEV (+) | 7 | − | 40 | <10 | |
| 27 | − | 40 | <10 | |||
| 28 | − | 10 | <10 | |||
| 29 | − | 20 | <10 | |||
| 30 | JEV experimental infection | 8 | − | <10 | <10 | |
| 31 | − | <10 | <10 | |||
| 32 | − | <10 | <10 | |||
| 33 | − | <10 | <10 | |||
| 34 | − | <10 | <10 | |||
(1) Chua et al. (2000), (2) Murray et al. (1995), (3) Middleton et al. (2007), (4) McEachern et al. (2008), (5) see Section 2, (6) Middleton et al. (2002), (7) provided by Dr. T. Takasaki (Department of Virology I, National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Japan, (8) Williams et al. (2001).
Fig. 1The specificity of VSV–NiV–GFP infection. VSV–NiV–GFP was pre-incubated with serially diluted rabbit αNiV-F and αNiV-G sera (a) and non-immunized sera (b). The infectivity of VSV–NiV–GFP was measured by counting GFP-expressing cells. The number of GFP-expressing cells in the absence of sample serum was set as 100%. The results are shown as mean ± SD for at least three independent assays.
Fig. 2The reduction curves of VSV–NiV–GFP infectivity obtained in the serum neutralization test against the sera of various species; human (a), fruit bat (b), horse (c), cat (d), NiV-experimentally-infected pig (e) and Malaysian field pig (f). The infectivity of VSV–NiV–GFP was measured by counting the number of GFP-expressing cells as described in Fig. 1.
Fig. 3The reduction curve of VSV–NiV–GFP infectivity obtained in the serum neutralization test against the sera of Japanese field pigs (a) and JEV-experimentally-infected pigs (b). The infectivity of VSV–NiV–GFP was measured by counting the number of GFP-expressing cells as described in Fig. 1.