Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome and tuberculosis (TB) are two of the world's most devastating diseases. The first vaccine the majority of infants born in Africa receive is Mycobacterium bovis bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) as a prevention against TB. BCG protects against disseminated disease in the first 10 years of life, but provides a variable protection against pulmonary TB and enhancing boost delivered by recombinant modified vaccinia virus Ankara (rMVA) expressing antigen 85A (Ag85A) of M. tuberculosis is currently in phase IIb evaluation in African neonates. If the newborn's mother is positive for human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), the baby is at high risk of acquiring HIV-1 through breastfeeding. We suggested that a vaccination consisting of recombinant BCG expressing HIV-1 immunogen administered at birth followed by a boost with rMVA sharing the same immunogen could serve as a strategy for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 and rMVA expressing an African HIV-1-derived immunogen HIVA is currently in phase I trials in African neonates. Here, we aim to develop a dual neonate vaccine platform against HIV-1 and TB consisting of BCG.HIVA administered at birth followed by a boost with MVA.HIVA.85A. Thus, mMVA.HIVA.85A and sMVA.HIVA.85A vaccines were constructed, in which the transgene transcription is driven by either modified H5 or short synthetic promoters, respectively, and tested for immunogenicity alone and in combination with BCG.HIVA(222). mMVA.HIVA.85A was produced markerless and thus suitable for clinical manufacture. While sMVA.HIVA.85A expressed higher levels of the immunogens, it was less immunogenic than mMVA.HIVA.85A in BALB/c mice. A BCG.HIVA(222)-mMVA.HIVA.85A prime-boost regimen induced robust T cell responses to both HIV-1 and M. tuberculosis. Therefore, proof-of-principle for a dual anti-HIV-1/M. tuberculosis infant vaccine platform is established. Induction of immune responses against these pathogens soon after birth is highly desirable and may provide a basis for lifetime protection maintained by boosts later in life.
Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome and tuberculosis (TB) are two of the world's most devastating diseases. The first vaccine the majority of infants born in Africa receive is Mycobacterium bovis bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) as a prevention against TB. BCG protects against disseminated disease in the first 10 years of life, but provides a variable protection against pulmonary TB and enhancing boost delivered by recombinant modified vaccinia virus Ankara (rMVA) expressing antigen 85A (Ag85A) of M. tuberculosis is currently in phase IIb evaluation in African neonates. If the newborn's mother is positive for humanimmunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), the baby is at high risk of acquiring HIV-1 through breastfeeding. We suggested that a vaccination consisting of recombinant BCG expressing HIV-1 immunogen administered at birth followed by a boost with rMVA sharing the same immunogen could serve as a strategy for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 and rMVA expressing an African HIV-1-derived immunogen HIVA is currently in phase I trials in African neonates. Here, we aim to develop a dual neonate vaccine platform against HIV-1 and TB consisting of BCG.HIVA administered at birth followed by a boost with MVA.HIVA.85A. Thus, mMVA.HIVA.85A and sMVA.HIVA.85A vaccines were constructed, in which the transgene transcription is driven by either modifiedH5 or short synthetic promoters, respectively, and tested for immunogenicity alone and in combination with BCG.HIVA(222). mMVA.HIVA.85A was produced markerless and thus suitable for clinical manufacture. While sMVA.HIVA.85A expressed higher levels of the immunogens, it was less immunogenic than mMVA.HIVA.85A in BALB/c mice. A BCG.HIVA(222)-mMVA.HIVA.85A prime-boost regimen induced robust T cell responses to both HIV-1 and M. tuberculosis. Therefore, proof-of-principle for a dual anti-HIV-1/M. tuberculosisinfant vaccine platform is established. Induction of immune responses against these pathogens soon after birth is highly desirable and may provide a basis for lifetime protection maintained by boosts later in life.
Despite great efforts in distributing anti-retroviral therapy (ART) to infected
mothers in resource-poor countries, universal accessibility to ART remains
challenging [1]. The
best solution to preventing mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency
virus type 1 (HIV-1) via breast-feeding, which also does not require a daily
compliance, is development of an effective infant vaccine [2]. Because Mycobacterium
bovis bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is the first vaccine of the
Expanded Programme for Immunization (EPI) and technologies are now available to
genetically manipulate BCG [3]–[7], we proposed to use recombinant BCG (rBCG) vaccine
expressing an HIV-1-derived transgene for priming of both tuberculosis (TB)- and
HIV-1-specific immune responses at birth [8]. Induced HIV-1 responses can be
boosted later by a heterologous vector such as modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA)
delivering the same HIV-1-derived transgene.The main goal in preventing HIV-1 infection is development of a vaccine eliciting
broadly neutralizing antibodies (bNAb). However, even if such a vaccine can be made
[9], it will be
hard to stop some virus infection occurring e.g. through cell-cell transmission and
thus control of infection will require T cell-mediated immune responses. A vaccine
inducing strong long-lasting T cell memory alone without bNAbs is likely to have an
impact on the HIV-1 transmission.As the first step towards a vaccine against breast milk transmission of HIV-1, we
engineered BCG.HIVA222 vectored by a lysine auxotroph of the Pasteur
strain of BCG and delivering chimaeric protein designated HIVA [8]. HIVA is the first clinically tested
T cell immunogen based on consensus African HIV-1 clade A and comprizes Gagp24-p17
and a string of CD8+ T cell epitopes [10], [11]. In BALB/c mice,
BCG.HIVA222 induced durable high-quality HIV-1-specific
CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses. Furthermore,
when used in a heterologous prime-boost regimen, protection against surrogate virus
challenge through the HIV-1-specific responses was achieved and
BCG.HIVA222 alone protected against aerosol challenge with M.
tuberculosis
[8].MVA is currently one of the leading candidates for development of subunit vaccines
against globally important diseases. As a capacity building and the first stage
towards a more complex regimen, the safety and immunogenicity of MVA.HIVA vaccine
alone is under evaluation in two phase I infant vaccine clinical trials in
sub-Saharan Africa [12]. The vaccine is administered to 20-week-old babies born
to healthy either HIV-1-negative or positive mothers. BCG confers consistent and
reliable protection against disseminated disease, but the protection against
pulmonary disease is much more variable, and typically lower in tropical climates
[13], [14]. MVA
expressing antigen 85A (Ag85A) of M. tuberculosis was developed and
shown to boost strongly BCG-primed and naturally acquired anti-mycobacterial
immunity in humans [15]–[19] and is currently in a proof-of-concept phase IIb clinical
trial evaluating the safety, immunogenicity and prevention of TB in infants primed
with BCG. In the present work, we describe construction of MVA.HIVA.85A, a dual
vaccine, which is designed to boost both M. tuberculosis- and
HIV-1-specific immune responses primed by BCG.HIVA222.
Results
Construction of mMVA.HIVA.85A and sMVA.HIVA.85A
Novel experimental vaccines against pulmonary TB and breast milk HIV-1 are under
development. Because protection against both of these major killers is required
from birth and the first four months of life are already very busy with the
scheduled EPI vaccinations, we thought it was advantageous to combine the
anti-TB and anti-HIV-1 vaccine strategies into a single dual vaccine regimen
consisting of priming with rBCG expressing an HIV-1-derived immunogen and a
single-vaccine-construct TB/HIV-1 boost. Construction of priming BCG.HIVA was
reported previously [8], [20] and individual MVA.HIVA and MVA.85A vaccines have
been extensively clinically tested [10], [19] and are currently in
clinical studies in neonates (HMcS and TH, unpublished). The two rMVAs drive
transcription of the transgenes from early/late vaccinia virus promoter P7.5 and
employ β-galactosidase gene as a marker facilitating identification of
homologous recombinants (Fig.
1). However, both of these functional elements are relatively large
in size, and yet smaller modifiedH5 (mH5) and short synthetic (ssp) promoters
were reported previously for other immunogens to support higher protein
expression levels compared to the P7.5 promoter [21], [22]. Furthermore, markerless
rMVA is the desirable form should this vaccine become a licensed product.
Therefore, mMVA.HIVA.85A and sMVA.HIVA.85A vaccines driving expression of the
two immunogens from the mH5 or ssp promoters, respectively, were constructed
(Fig. 1) and
characterized with the aim to progress the best construct to further vaccine
development. In both instances, green fluorescent protein (GFP) expression
served as a selection marker for recombinant identification and for the
mMVA.HIVA.85A vaccine, the marker gene was flanked by two direct 200-nucleotide
repeat sequences derived from the A26L gene to facilitate
excision of the marker via in cis homologous recombination
resulting in a markerless rMVA.
Figure 1
Schematic representation of inserted DNA fragments.
Expression cassettes containing genes coding for immunogens HIVA and Ag85
using either β-galactosidase or GFP markers were inserted into the
tk locus of the MVA genome by homologous recombination directed by the
left and right tk flanking regions (tkL and tkR).
Transcription of the two immunogens was controlled by either P7.5,
modified H5 (mH5) or short synthetic (ssp) promoters. In the mH5
version, the GFP gene is flanked by two homologous repeats (A26L), which
facilitate removal of the selection marker. Proteins/epitopes are shown
in bold, while promoters are indicated using a regular font style.
Schematic representation of inserted DNA fragments.
Expression cassettes containing genes coding for immunogens HIVA and Ag85
using either β-galactosidase or GFP markers were inserted into the
tk locus of the MVA genome by homologous recombination directed by the
left and right tk flanking regions (tkL and tkR).
Transcription of the two immunogens was controlled by either P7.5,
modifiedH5 (mH5) or short synthetic (ssp) promoters. In the mH5
version, the GFP gene is flanked by two homologous repeats (A26L), which
facilitate removal of the selection marker. Proteins/epitopes are shown
in bold, while promoters are indicated using a regular font style.
Short synthetic promoter supports the highest transgene expression
The mMVA.HIVA.85A and sMVA.HIVA.85A vaccines were first characterized as for the
levels of the two transgene product expression. Both HIVA and Ag85A proteins
contain a C-terminal epitope Pk recognized by monoclonal antibody SV5-P-k [23], which was
attached to facilitate the immunogen detection. In addition, a mAb against p24
was employed to detect specifically the HIVA protein. Thus, monolayers of CEF
cells were infected at MOI 1 with either the 7.5MVA.HIVA, mMVA.HIVA.85A or
sMVA.HIVA.85A vaccines and the expression of the transgene products using the
anti-Pk and p24 mAbs were readily detectable for the ssp and mH5 promoters,
while for the P7.5 promoter, the immunofluorescence signal was fainter for
anti-p24 mAb and almost undetectable for the Pk tag (Fig. 2A); this is similar to our previous
experience [24]. To obtain more quantitative expression data, CEF
cells were infected with empty parental or rMVAs and subjected to analysis by
flow cytometry. The number and median fluorescent intensity (MFI) of cells
expressing the Pk-epitope confirmed superior transgene expression from the
sMVA.HIVA.85A ssp promoter (Fig. 2B
and C).
Figure 2
Protein expression from recombinant MVAs in CEF cells.
CEF cells were infected with indicated viruses at MOI 1 for 16 h.
(A) Cell were stained either for Gag p24 or Pk tag (on
HIVA and Ag85A) expression as shown above and analyzed under fluorescent
microscope. Also, the relative levels of protein expression were
assessed using flow cytometry and shown either as a (B)
histogram for parental MVA (black), 7.5MVA.HIVA (red), mMVA.HIVA.85A
(blue) or sMVA.HIVA.85A (green) viruses or (C) expressed as
mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) ± SD (C). The
figure shows representative data of three independent experiments.
Protein expression from recombinant MVAs in CEF cells.
CEF cells were infected with indicated viruses at MOI 1 for 16 h.
(A) Cell were stained either for Gagp24 or Pk tag (on
HIVA and Ag85A) expression as shown above and analyzed under fluorescent
microscope. Also, the relative levels of protein expression were
assessed using flow cytometry and shown either as a (B)
histogram for parental MVA (black), 7.5MVA.HIVA (red), mMVA.HIVA.85A
(blue) or sMVA.HIVA.85A (green) viruses or (C) expressed as
mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) ± SD (C). The
figure shows representative data of three independent experiments.
Modified H5 promoter provides the most immunogenic vaccine
To assess the dual vaccine immunogenicity, induction of MHC class I- and
II-restricted T cell responses to the HIVA and Ag85A immunogens was compared
between the dual sMVA.HIVA.85A and single 7.5MVA.HIVA and 7.5MVA.85A vaccines at
the 107 PFU dose delivered i.m., and found similar. For the
sMVA.HIVA,85A vaccine, specific CD8+ T cell frequencies were
dominated by responses against the H epitope, and responses to the other tested
known MHC class I and II epitopes were clearly detectable (Fig. 3 A). Thus, the dual vaccine can
substitute for the two single-immunogen constructs inducing both
CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses against both
pathogens.
Figure 3
Induction of HIV-1- and M. tuberculosis-specific T
cell responses.
(A) Groups of 4 BALB/c mice were immunized with
107 PFU i.m. of either 7.5MVA.HIVA, 7.5MVA.85A or
sMVA.HIVA.85A, sacrificed 2 weeks later and splenocytes from individual
mice were analyzed for IFN-γ production following peptide
stimulation. Data are represented as means ± SD.
(B–C) Groups of 4 BALB/c mice were immunized i.m.
with 105 PFU of either 7.5MVA.HIVA (triangles), mMVA.HIVA.85A
(circles) or sMVA.HIVA.85A (squares) vaccines. Two weeks later, mice
were sacrificed and the ability of splenocytes from individual animals
to respond to increasing amounts of peptide H was assessed in an
IFN-γ ELISPOT (B), ICS (C) and in
vivo killing (D) assays. Mean ± SD are
shown. Only stimulation with 1 µM H peptide in an IFN-γ
ELISPOT assay provided a statistically significant difference
(p = 0.04) between frequencies
induced using the mH5 and ssp promoters.
Induction of HIV-1- and M. tuberculosis-specific T
cell responses.
(A) Groups of 4 BALB/c mice were immunized with
107 PFU i.m. of either 7.5MVA.HIVA, 7.5MVA.85A or
sMVA.HIVA.85A, sacrificed 2 weeks later and splenocytes from individual
mice were analyzed for IFN-γ production following peptide
stimulation. Data are represented as means ± SD.
(B–C) Groups of 4 BALB/c mice were immunized i.m.
with 105 PFU of either 7.5MVA.HIVA (triangles), mMVA.HIVA.85A
(circles) or sMVA.HIVA.85A (squares) vaccines. Two weeks later, mice
were sacrificed and the ability of splenocytes from individual animals
to respond to increasing amounts of peptide H was assessed in an
IFN-γ ELISPOT (B), ICS (C) and in
vivo killing (D) assays. Mean ± SD are
shown. Only stimulation with 1 µM H peptide in an IFN-γ
ELISPOT assay provided a statistically significant difference
(p = 0.04) between frequencies
induced using the mH5 and ssp promoters.Next, CD8+ T cell immunogenicity between the P7.5, mH5 and ssp
promoters was compared to guide the decision which construct is to be taken for
further development. Groups of BALB/c mice were administered with 106
PFU of rMVA i.m. and their HIVA-specific responses were assessed in a number of
T cell assays 2 weeks later. Isolated splenocytes from individual mice were
stimulated in vitro with increasing concentrations of the H
peptide ranging from 0.001 µM to 10 µM and the responding cells were
enumerated in an IFN-γ ELISPOT assay. The results indicated that
mMVA.HIVA.85A was the most immunogenic vaccine followed by sMVA.HIVA.85A, and
then 7.5MVA.HIVA, although only at 1 µM H peptide, a statistically
significant difference between the mH5 and ssp promoters was detected (Fig. 3 B). Similar relative
H-specific CD8+ T cell induction was detected using
polychromatic flow cytometry confirming that the highest frequencies of
IFN-γ-producing and degranulating cells were stimulated by the mMVA.HIVA.85A
vaccine (Fig. 3 C). In both
assays, the responses reached a plateau at 0.1 µM peptide H. Next, the
immunogenicity of the 7.5MVA.HIVA, mMVA.HVA.85A and sMVA.HIVA.85A were compared
in an in vivo killing assay, in which the target cells were
pulsed with increasing concentrations of peptide H, labeled differentially with
increasing concentrations of CFSE, mixed, transferred back into immunized mice
and re-isolated after 5 h. The in vivo specific lysis indicated
again that of the three tested vaccines, the most immunogenic was mMVA.HIA.85A
(Fig. 3 D). For the ICS
and in vivo killing assays, there was no statistically
significant difference between the frequencies of H-specific T cells induced by
the mH5 and ssp promoters. Taken together, data from three different T cell
assays showed a consistent trend that the highest H-specific T cell responses
were induced by the mMVA.HIVA.85A vaccine despite the fact that it did not
support the highest HIVA protein expression.
BCG.HIVA222-mMVA.HIVA.85A elicits oligofunctional anti-HIV-1 and
anti-TB responses
The mMVA.HIVA.85A vaccine was tested for T cell immunogenicity in a combined
regimen with BCG.HIVA222. Previously, we demonstrated induction of
robust HIV-1-specific T-cell responses in a heterologous prime-boost regimen, in
which BALB/c mice were immunized with BCG.HIVA222 derived from a
lysine auxotroph Pasteur strain of BCG followed by a boost with 7.5MVA.HIVA
[8]. However,
this vaccine combination was able to benefit from a prime-boost effect only for
the anti-HIVA T-cells, but could not increase responses against M.
tuberculosis. Here, the induction of anti-Ag85A responses by the
BCG.HIVA222 prime-mMVA.HIVA.85A boost regimen was assessed. Thus,
BALB/c mice were immunized with 106 CFU of BCG.HIVA222
i.p. or left unimmunized, and boosted with 106 PFU i.m. of single or
mixed rMVAs 12 weeks later or left unboosted. To control for the possible
increased MVA adjuvantation given in the 7.5MVA.HIVA and 7.5MVA.85A group,
additional 106 PFU of empty parental MVA was added to the single rMVA
immunizations to make the total number of poxvirus PFUs given to each mouse
comparable. MHC class I and II-restricted T cell responses induced by immunogens
HIVA and Ag85A were analyzed 2 weeks after the last vaccination and a number of
observations was made. Thus, BCG.HIVA222 alone induced weak
CD8+ T cell responses to P15 and weak responses to Purified
Protein Derivative (PPD), the latter mainly generated by CD4+ T
cells (Fig. 4). The
P15-specific responses were strongly boosted by both the 7.5MVA.85A and
mMVA.HIVA.85A vaccines (Fig. 4 A,
Viii and ix). However, the lower 106-PFU dose of
7.5MVA.85A and mMVA.HIVA.85A alone did not prime any significant Ag85A-specific
T cells (Fig. 4 A, iv and
v). Interestingly, there was a trend of augmenting the PPD responses by
the prime-boost regimens (Fig. 4 A,
viii and ix), while frequencies of P11-specific T cells remained low.
Consistent with previous reports [25], [26], no detectable HIVA-specific T
cell responses were elicited by BCG.HIVA222 alone (Fig. 4 A, i). A single
injection of 7.5MVA.HIVA induced a typical 100- to 300-SFU response reflecting
the fact that rMVA is not a strong priming vaccine (Fig. 4 A, ii and iv). This frequency was
approximately doubled by using the mH5 promoter (Fig. 4 A, iii and v). A similar 2-fold
increase in H-specific responses was achieved by BCG.HIVA222 priming
of the 7.5MVA.HIVA alone responses, but not for the combination
7.5MVA.HIVA+7.5MVA85A boost (Fig. 4 A, vi and viii). A smaller BCG.HIVA222 priming
effect was detected for the mH5 promoter-driven HIVA expression (Fig. 4 A, vii and ix). No
regimen induced detectable HIVA-specific MHC class II-restricted responses.
Finally, robust T cell responses against both HIVA and Ag85A antigens were
elicited by the BCG.HIVA222-mMVA.HIVA.85A regimen (Fig. 4 A, ix), an important
initial milestone for the pre-clinical development of this approach.
Oligofunctionality of the vaccine-induced CD8 T cell responses was confirmed by
a multicolour flow cytometry assessing production of IFN-γ, TNF-α and
CD107a (Fig. 4 B).
Figure 4
Induction of robust HIV-1- and M.
tuberculosis-specific T cells by the BCG.HIVA222
prime - mMVA.HIVA.85A boost regimen.
(A) Groups of 5 BALB/c mice received either
BCG.HIVA222 (B222) (i and
vii–ix) or no vaccine (ii–v)
on week 0, followed by rMVA(s) (ii–ix) as indicated
on the top of the graphs or no vaccine (i) at week 12. On
week 16, mice were killed and their HIV-1 (H and II)- and mycobacterium
(P11, P15 or PPD)-specific responses were determined in an IFN-γ
ELISPOT assay using MHC class I (H and P11) or class II (II and
P15)-restricted peptides. Results are shown as individual animal
responses (black dots) with group means (horizontal bars).
(B) The functionality of vaccine-induced
CD8+ T cell responses was assess in a multicolour
intracellular cytokine staining assay. The group mean frequencies of
single-, double- or triple-cytokine-producing H- or P11-specific cells
following background subtraction are shown for the three regimens
indicated above the graphs.
Induction of robust HIV-1- and M.
tuberculosis-specific T cells by the BCG.HIVA222
prime - mMVA.HIVA.85A boost regimen.
(A) Groups of 5 BALB/c mice received either
BCG.HIVA222 (B222) (i and
vii–ix) or no vaccine (ii–v)
on week 0, followed by rMVA(s) (ii–ix) as indicated
on the top of the graphs or no vaccine (i) at week 12. On
week 16, mice were killed and their HIV-1 (H and II)- and mycobacterium
(P11, P15 or PPD)-specific responses were determined in an IFN-γ
ELISPOT assay using MHC class I (H and P11) or class II (II and
P15)-restricted peptides. Results are shown as individual animal
responses (black dots) with group means (horizontal bars).
(B) The functionality of vaccine-induced
CD8+ T cell responses was assess in a multicolour
intracellular cytokine staining assay. The group mean frequencies of
single-, double- or triple-cytokine-producing H- or P11-specific cells
following background subtraction are shown for the three regimens
indicated above the graphs.
Discussion
In this report, we describe construction of vaccine MVA.HIVA.85A, which expresses
immunogens derived from HIV-1 and M. tuberculosis, and demonstrate
its dual T cell immunogenicity in BALB/c mice following a prime with
BCG.HIVA222, recombinant BCG expressing the same HIV-1 immunogen. A
self-excising GFP gene was used to construct a markerless MVA-vectored vaccine
making it more suitable for Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) production. Overall,
we demonstrate that BCG.HIVA222 prime-MVA.HIVA.85A boost strategy may
offer a neonate vaccination platform combining induction of T cell responses against
two major killers, AIDS and TB, into a single regimen. This is an early
proof-of-concept study indicating that this approach is worthy of further
pursuit.In recent years, MVA has been used extensively as a non-replicating vaccine vector
for delivery of immunogens derived from diverse pathogens [27]. Its ability to boost consistently
and strongly T cell responses against the transgene products in humans has been
shown by experimental vaccines against AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and cancer [10], [28]–[30]. MVA has a
complex genome and its promoters are classified based on the timing of gene
expression into early, intermediate and late. This has an impact on the
immunogenicity through multiple mechanisms, which interfere with presentation of
late T-cell epitopes [31]–[37]. Here, we compared three conventional early/late
promoters P7.5, mH5 and ssp in combination with the HIVA and Ag85A open-reading
frames for maximum T cell induction. The P7.5 promoter is active both early and late
in the MVA life cycle and by immunofluorescence often yields low to undetectable
levels of the transgene product [38], [39], yet supported good immunogenicity in a number of
clinical vaccines, especially if the T cell responses were well primed, e.g. by
HIV-1 infection [10], [28], [30]. The mH5 promoter is stronger than P7.5 and has an early
bias, while the ssp promoter is the strongest of the three with a bias towards late
expression [21],
[22], [40]. We found
that ssp promoter led to the highest level of protein expression, however, very high
expression may lead to genetic instability as reported previously for some
transgenes [21],
[40],
[41].
Nevertheless, stable recombinant MVAs have been prepared expressing proteins from
two ssp promoters pointing away from [42] as well as towards each other [43]. Thus, genetic stability of
ssp-controled transgenes is likely to be specific for each particular combination of
immunogen and/or integration sites in the MVA genome [44], [45].Next, the efficiency of T cell induction was investigated in the BALB/c mice and
showed that vaccination with either mixed single-transgene or dual vaccines elicited
comparable T cell responses specific for the HIVA and Ag85A proteins. Furthermore, a
direct comparison of the P7.5, mH5 and ssp rMVAs showed a consistent trend in three
different functional tests, the IFN-γ/CD107a ICS, IFN-γ ELISPOT and
in vivo killing assays, that superior frequency and
functionality of specific T cells against HIVA were induced by the mMVA.HIVA.85A
vaccine. This outcome concurs with previously published work [22]. When the novel rMVA vaccine was
tested in a heterologous BCG.HIVA222 prime-mMVA.HIVA.85A regimen,
elicitation of robust HIV-1-specific CD8+ and TB-specific
CD4+ T cell responses were detected. Although the anti-HIV-1
responses showed only a trend of enhancement by the combined regimen relative to
unprimed mMVA.HIVA.85A, a boost was readily detected for the Ag85A response.
HIVA-specific enhancement was observed in mice for single-immunogen as described for
7.5MVA.HIVA before [8]; this may be due to the weaker vaccinia virus promoter, which
“leaves room” for improvement in this model. Overall, we find induction
of the dual HIV-1 and TB-specific responses encouraging for further vaccine and
regimen optimizations. Several studies used successfully rBCG in heterologous
prime-boost regimens with other vaccine modalities, whereby poxviruses, adenoviruses
and virus-like particles as vectors delivered a strong boost for BCG-primed
responses against the shared transgene products [3], [20], [46], [47]. MVA.85A delivered a
particularly strong boost for BCG-primed anti-Ag85A T cells [15], [28], [39] and in mice, intranasally
administered MVA.85A increased protective efficacy of BCG against M.
tuberculosis challenge [39]. Improved efficacy by
MVA.85A over BCG vaccine alone was also shown in non-human primates and cattle [48], [49]. To
prepare a BCG.HIVA vaccine compliant with Good Laboratory Practice, endosomal escape
strain of BCG AERAS-401 derived from the Danish SSI-1331 parent was utilized [20]. In
combination with MVA.HIVA and ovine atadenovirus-vectored OAdV.HIVA [50] vaccines,
BCG.HIVA401 primed for robust HIV-1-specific T cell responses [20]. However, in
macaque neonates, the BCG.HIVA401 prime-MVA.HIVA boost regimen was only
weakly immunogenic [51]. It is worth noting that interspecies differences in T
cell responsiveness to BCG may influence the outcome of immunizations and therefore
it is not clear how adult mouse data transfer to non-human primate and human
neonates; it remains a possibility that human neonates actually respond better to a
rBCG vaccine than the model systems.BCG given to immunocompromized individuals may cause a disseminated disease. Thus,
the current WHO guidelines recommend withholding BCG vaccination until the HIV-1
negativity is confirmed (if the infrastructure to carry out testing exists) [52]. However,
because the risk of TB is so high, HIV-1-negative babies born to HIV-1-positive
mothers are recommended to receive BCG and so there would be use for BCG.HIVA.
Furthermore, the lysine auxotroph strain of BCG Pasteur used here [53] may provide
addition safety and genetic stability [54].In conclusion, MVA continues to feature prominently in clinical trials of recombinant
vaccines against major global diseases. Here, we have constructed a novel prototype
vaccine MVA.HIVA.85A, which is markerless and therefore compatible with GMP
manufacture, and combines stimulation of oligofunctional T cell responses against
both HIV-1 and M. tuberculosis. Furthermore, we demonstrate that a
dual platform against AIDS and TB consisting of BCG.HIVA prime-MVA.HIVA.85A boost is
in principle possible, although particularly the HIV-1 immunogen may be further
refined e.g. by using conserved regions of the HIV-1 proteome, which may better
control diverse HIV-1 strains circulating in the target population and HIV-1 escape
from immune responses [55]. This work is a logical extension of the current efforts
in developing strategies against these two major killers and timely given the
WHO's interest in improving the currently recommended infant vaccine schedules.
Of course, the only relevant proof of efficacy can only come from protection studies
in human neonates.
Materials and Methods
Preparation of dual-insert recombinant MVAs
The construction of transfer plasmids directing the insertion of transgenes under
the control of either the mH5 or ssp promoters [21], [22] into the thymidine kinase
(tk) locus of the MVA genome is described in detail in elsewhere generating
mMVA.HIVA.85A and sMVA.HIVA.85A, respectively (DPhil Thesis, Richard Hopkins,
University of Oxford, 2010). rMVAs were rescued by infecting a semi-confluent
monolayer of chicken embryo fibroblast (CEF) cells grown in Dulbeco's
Modified Eagles Medium supplemented with 10% FBS, penicillin/streptomycin
and glutamine, (DMEM-10) with parental MVA expressing the red fluorescent
protein (RFP) at multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 0.1 and transfecting 2
µg of transfer plasmid DNA containing the GFP gene as a marker 1 h later.
Note, that a successful recombination into the tk locus exchanges the parental
RFP for GFP of the recombinant (Gilbert, unpublished). Forty-eight h post
transfection, the total virus was harvested and used to re-infect fresh CEF
monolayer. rMVA was subjected to at least five rounds of plaque purification,
based on GFP expression and the absence of RFP. Removal of the parental MVA was
confirmed by PCR. Master virus stock was grown, purified on a 36% sucrose
cushion, titred and stored at −80°C until use. In the mMVA.HIVA.85A,
the GFP gene flanked by two small regions of homology, which allowed GFP removal
in a homologous recombination event during further passaging and generation of a
markerless vaccine (Fig.
1).
Preparation of BCG.HIVA222 vaccine
Construction and preparation of the BCG.HIVA222 stock was described
previously [26].
Briefly, mycobacterial cultures were grown in Middlebrook 7H9 broth medium or on
Middlebrook agar7H10 medium supplemented with albumin-dextrose complex (ADC,
Difco) and containing 0.05% Tween 80 and 25 µg/ml kanamycin. The
L-lysine monohydrochloride (Sigma) was dissolved in distilled water and used at
a concentration of 40 µg/ml.
Quantitation of HIVA and Ag85A protein expression by immunofluorescence and
flow cytometry
Three hundred thousand CEF cells were infected with rMVA at 1 MOI in a single
well of a six-well plate with or without a glass slide. After 16 h, cells not
growing on a glass slide were detached and transferred into to a test tube. Both
suspended and glass-attached CEF populations were fixed, permeabilized with
−20°C methanol for 5 min, washed 3× with PBS, blocked for 30 min
in PBS-10% FCS at room temperature, incubated with primary anti-HIV-1Gagp24 antibody (NIH AIDS Reagents) at 1 µg/ml at room temperature for 2 h
and washed with PBS 3×. The secondary antibody, Alexa-Fluor 594-conjugated
goat anti-mouse mAb (Molecular Probes, Invitrogen), was then added at 5
µg/ml in combination with a primary anti-Pk antibody conjugated to FITC
(Abcam) in PBS-1% FCS at room temperature for 2 h, and the cells were
washed 3× with PBS. Cells mounted on a glass slide were covered with
Vector-Shield containing DAPI (Vector Laboratories) and photographed on a Zeiss
fluorescence microscope, while cells in suspension were acquired on a Cyan FACS
machine (Dako) and analyzed using Flowjo software (Tree Star).
Mouse immunizations and isolation of splenocytes
Groups of 5- to 6-week-old female BALB/c mice were immunized either without
anaesthesia intraperitoneally (i.p.) with BCG.HIVA222, or under
general anaesthesia intramuscularly (i.m) with rMVA at doses and schedules
outlined in the figure legends. On the day of sacrifice, individual spleens were
collected and splenocytes were isolated by pressing spleens through a cell
strainer (Falcon) using a 5-ml syringe rubber plunger. Following the removal of
red blood cells with RBC Lysis Buffer (Sigma), the splenocytes were washed and
resuspended in RPMI 1640 supplemented with 10% FCS,
penicillin/streptomycin (R-10).
Ethics statement
All animal procedures and care conformed strictly to the United Kingdom Home
Office Guidelines under The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. The
protocol was approved by the local Research Ethics Committee (Clinical Medicine,
University of Oxford). Experiments were carried out under Project Licence no.
30/2406 held by TH with a strict implementation of the Replacement, Reduction
and Refinement (3Rs) principles.
Peptides
Peptides RGPGRAFVTI designated H [56] and derived from HIVA,
and EWYDQSLGSVVMPVGGQSSF designated P11 and derived from Ag85A [57] were used
to investigate the MHC class I-restricted responses. A pool of three peptides
MHQALSPRTLNAQVKVIEEK, NPPIPVGDIYKRWIILGLNK, FRDYVDRFFKTLREAQATQE designated II
[8] and a
single peptide TFLTSELTGWLQANRHVKPT designated P15 [57] were used to analyze the
MHC class II-restricted responses induced by immunogens HIVA and Ag85A,
respectively. All peptides were synthesized in an in-house facility (Weatherall
Institute of Molecular Medicine, Oxford, UK), dissolved in DMSO (Sigma) at a
concentration of 10 mg/ml, and stored at −80°C. The final assay
concentration for individual peptides was 4 µg/ml unless otherwise stated.
PPD (Statens Serum Institute, Copenhagen) was used to assess the immunogenicity
of BCG.
Ex vivo IFN-γ ELISPOT assay
The ELISPOT assay was performed using the IFN-γ ELISPOT kit (Mabtech) as
described previously [58]. The ELISPOT plate membranes (Millipore) were coated
with purified anti-mouse IFN-γ antibody diluted in carbonate-bicarbonate
buffer (Sigma) to a final concentration of 5 µg/ml at 4°C overnight,
washed once in R-10, and blocked for 2 h with R-10. A total of
2.5×105 splenocytes were added to each well, stimulated
with HIVA- or Ag85A-derived peptides or PPD RT49 (Statens Serum Institute,
Denmark) or left un-stimulated.for 16 h at 37°C, 5% CO2
and lyzed by incubating 2× with deionized water for 5 min. Wells were then
washed 3× with PBS 0.05% Tween-20, incubated for 2 h with a
biotinylated anti-IFN-γ antibody diluted in PBS 2% FCS to a final
concentration of 2 µg/ml, washed 3× in PBS 0.005% Tween-20
and incubated with 50 mg/ml horseradish peroxidase-conjugated to avidin in PBS
2% FCS. Wells were washed 4× with PBS 0.005% Tween-20 and
2× with PBS before incubating with an AEC substrate solution
[3-amino-9-ethyl-carbazole (Sigma) dissolved at 10 mg/ml in Dimethyl
formaldehyde and diluted to 0.333 mg/ml in 0.1 M acetate solution (148 ml 0.2 M
acetic acid and 352 ml 0.2 M sodium acetate in 1 liter pH 5.0) with
0.005% H2O2]. After 5–10 min, the plates
were washed with tapwater, dried and the resulting spots were counted using an
ELISPOT reader (Autoimmune Diagnostika GmbH). All samples were analyzed in
duplicates.
Polychromatic flow cytometry assay
Two million splenocytes per well of a 96-well round-bottomed plate (Falcon) were
pulsed with peptides together with anti-CD107a/b-FITC antibody and incubated at
37°C, 5% CO2 for 90 min before addition of GolgiStop.
After further 5 h, the reaction was terminated, the cells were washed with FACS
wash buffer (PBS, 2% FCS, 0.01% Azide) and blocked with
anti-CD16/32 at 4°C for 30 min. All subsequent antibody incubations were
performed using the same conditions. The cells were washed 2× and stained
with: 25 ng of anti-mouseCD19-Pacific Blue; 100 ng anti mouse-CD3 PerCP-Cy5.5
(eBioscience); 200 ng anti-mouseCD8α-PE-Texas Red (Abcam). The cells were
washed 2× with FACS buffer and permeabilized with BD Cytofix/Cytoperm (BD
Biosciences), washed 2× with BD Perm/Wash buffer, before staining with 25
ng of anti-mouse IFN-γ -PE-Cy-7. Cells were washed with Perm/Wash buffer and
fixed with CellFIX and stored at 4°C until analysis. Samples were acquired
on Cyan FACS machine (Dako) and the results were analyzed using Flowjo software
(Tree Star).
In vivo killing assay
To prepare the targets, naïve 5- to 6-week-old female BALB/c mice were
sacrificed and the splenocytes were isolated as described above [26]. The
splenocytes were then incubated without or with 0.1, 1 or 10 µM peptide H
in R-10, washed 3× and subsequently labeled with carboxyfluorescein
diacetate succinimidyl ester (CFSE, Molecular Probes) at the following
concentrations for the deferentially pulsed populations: 4 nM - no peptide; 16
nM–0.1 µM peptide H; 80 nM–1 µM peptide H; 160
nM–10 µM peptide for at 37°C for 15 min and a further 15 min in
fresh medium. Peptide-pulsed splenocytes were washed 3× and combined for
intravenous adoptive transfer. Each animal received approximately
2×106 cells of each population and was sacrificed 5 h
later, and its splenocytes were isolated and analyzed using flow cytometry.
Cytotoxicity was calculated as described previously [59]: Adjusted %
survival = 100×(% survival of peptide-pulsed
targets/mean % survival of irrelevant peptide pulsed cells), followed by
the calculation of % specific lysis = 100 –
adjusted % survival.
Statistical analysis
Statistical significance was determined using an unpaired Student's t-test
with a two-tailed distribution on group immunization data using Prism software.
Data were presented as mean ± SD unless otherwise stated. Differences
were considered as significant at p≤0.05.
Authors: Ping Li; Nan Wang; Delu Zhou; Christina S K Yee; Cheong-Hee Chang; Randy R Brutkiewicz; Janice S Blum Journal: J Immunol Date: 2005-11-15 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: Tonya J Roberts Webb; Roberta A Litavecz; Masood A Khan; Wenjun Du; Jacquelyn Gervay-Hague; Gourapura J Renukaradhya; Randy R Brutkiewicz Journal: Eur J Immunol Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Caroline L Smith; P Rod Dunbar; Fareed Mirza; Michael J Palmowski; Dawn Shepherd; Sarah C Gilbert; Pierre Coulie; Joerg Schneider; Eric Hoffman; Robert Hawkins; Adrian L Harris; Vincenzo Cerundolo Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2005-01-10 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Kara Jensen; Myra Grace Dela Pena; Robert L Wilson; Uma Devi K Ranganathan; William R Jacobs; Glenn Fennelly; Michelle Larsen; Koen K A Van Rompay; Pamela A Kozlowski; Kristina Abel Journal: Trials Vaccinol Date: 2013-11-01
Authors: Birgit Korioth-Schmitz; Casey C Perley; Jaimie D Sixsmith; Eva M Click; Sunhee Lee; Norman L Letvin; Richard Frothingham Journal: Vaccine Date: 2015-07-17 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Toritse Orubu; Naif Khalaf Alharbi; Teresa Lambe; Sarah C Gilbert; Matthew G Cottingham Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-06-27 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Nicola Ternette; Peter D Block; Álvaro Sánchez-Bernabéu; Nicola Borthwick; Elisa Pappalardo; Sultan Abdul-Jawad; Beatrice Ondondo; Philip D Charles; Lucy Dorrell; Benedikt M Kessler; Tomáš Hanke Journal: J Virol Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 5.103
Authors: Muhammed O Afolabi; Jorjoh Ndure; Abdoulie Drammeh; Fatoumatta Darboe; Shams-Rony Mehedi; Sarah L Rowland-Jones; Nicola Borthwick; Antony Black; Gwen Ambler; Grace C John-Stewart; Marie Reilly; Tomáš Hanke; Katie L Flanagan Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-10-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Narcís Saubi; Alice Mbewe-Mvula; Ester Gea-Mallorqui; Maximillian Rosario; Josep Maria Gatell; Tomáš Hanke; Joan Joseph Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-08-21 Impact factor: 3.240