BACKGROUND: The worldwide burden of the Group A Streptococcus (GAS) primary infection and sequelae is considerable, although immunization programs with broad coverage of the hyper variable GAS are still missing. We evaluate the streptococcal hemoprotein receptor (Shr), a conserved streptococcal protein, as a vaccine candidate against GAS infection. METHODS: Mice were immunized intraperitoneally with purified Shr or intranasally with Shr-expressing Lactococcus lactis. The resulting humoral response in serum and secretions was determined. We evaluated protection from GAS infection in mice after active or passive vaccination with Shr, and Shr antiserum was tested for bactericidal activity. RESULTS: A robust Shr-specific immunoglobulin (Ig) G response was observed in mouse serum after intraperitoneal vaccination with Shr. Intranasal immunization elicited both a strong IgG reaction in the serum and a specific IgA reaction in secretions. Shr immunization in both models allowed enhanced protection from systemic GAS challenge. Rabbit Shr antiserum was opsonizing, and mice that were administrated with Shr antiserum prior to the infection demonstrated a significantly higher survival rate than did mice treated with normal rabbit serum. CONCLUSIONS: Shr is a promising vaccine candidate that is capable of eliciting bactericidal antibody response and conferring immunity against systemic GAS infection in both passive and active vaccination models.
BACKGROUND: The worldwide burden of the Group A Streptococcus (GAS) primary infection and sequelae is considerable, although immunization programs with broad coverage of the hyper variable GAS are still missing. We evaluate the streptococcal hemoprotein receptor (Shr), a conserved streptococcal protein, as a vaccine candidate against GASinfection. METHODS:Mice were immunized intraperitoneally with purified Shr or intranasally with Shr-expressing Lactococcus lactis. The resulting humoral response in serum and secretions was determined. We evaluated protection from GASinfection in mice after active or passive vaccination with Shr, and Shr antiserum was tested for bactericidal activity. RESULTS: A robust Shr-specific immunoglobulin (Ig) G response was observed in mouse serum after intraperitoneal vaccination with Shr. Intranasal immunization elicited both a strong IgG reaction in the serum and a specific IgA reaction in secretions. Shr immunization in both models allowed enhanced protection from systemic GAS challenge. Rabbit Shr antiserum was opsonizing, and mice that were administrated with Shr antiserum prior to the infection demonstrated a significantly higher survival rate than did mice treated with normal rabbit serum. CONCLUSIONS: Shr is a promising vaccine candidate that is capable of eliciting bactericidal antibody response and conferring immunity against systemic GASinfection in both passive and active vaccination models.
Authors: Taff Jones; Francine Allard; Sonya L Cyr; Steven P Tran; Martin Plante; Joelle Gauthier; Nathalie Bellerose; George H Lowell; David S Burt Journal: Vaccine Date: 2003-09-08 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Richard F Facklam; Diana R Martin; Marguerite Lovgren; Dwight R Johnson; Androulla Efstratiou; Terry A Thompson; Sonia Gowan; Paula Kriz; Gregory J Tyrrell; Edward Kaplan; Bernard Beall Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2001-11-26 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Christopher S Bates; Griselle E Montañez; Charles R Woods; Rebecca M Vincent; Zehava Eichenbaum Journal: Infect Immun Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 3.441
Authors: Stephen B Beres; Gail L Sylva; Kent D Barbian; Benfang Lei; Jessica S Hoff; Nicole D Mammarella; Meng-Yao Liu; James C Smoot; Stephen F Porcella; Larye D Parkins; David S Campbell; Todd M Smith; John K McCormick; Donald Y M Leung; Patrick M Schlievert; James M Musser Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2002-07-16 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Andrew C Steer; Adam W J Jenney; Joseph Kado; Michael F Good; Michael Batzloff; Graham Magor; Roselyn Ritika; Kim E Mulholland; Jonathan R Carapetis Journal: Pediatr Infect Dis J Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 2.129
Authors: Nilanjana Chatterjee; Laura C C Cook; Kristin V Lyles; Hong Anh T Nguyen; Darius J Devlin; Lamar S Thomas; Zehava Eichenbaum Journal: J Bacteriol Date: 2020-06-25 Impact factor: 3.490
Authors: Mark J Walker; Timothy C Barnett; Jason D McArthur; Jason N Cole; Christine M Gillen; Anna Henningham; K S Sriprakash; Martina L Sanderson-Smith; Victor Nizet Journal: Clin Microbiol Rev Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 26.132
Authors: Andrea L Herrera; Christopher Van Hove; Mary Hanson; James B Dale; Rodney K Tweten; Victor C Huber; Diego Diel; Michael S Chaussee Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 3.240