Literature DB >> 23896580

Evaluation of immunogen delivery by DNA immunization using non-invasive bioluminescence imaging.

Stefan P Petkov1, Frank Heuts1, Olga A Krotova2, Athina Kilpelainen1, Gunnel Engström1, Elizaveta S Starodubova3, Maria G Isaguliants4.   

Abstract

The efficacy of DNA vaccines is highly dependent on the methods used for their delivery and the choice of delivery sites/targets for gene injection, pointing at the necessity of a strict control over the gene delivery process. Here, we have investigated the effect of the injection site on gene expression and immunogenicity in BALB/c mice, using as a model a weak gene immunogen, DNA encoding firefly luciferase (Luc) delivered by superficial or deep injection with subsequent electroporation (EP). Immunization was assessed by monitoring the in vivo expression of luciferase by 2D- and 3D-bioluminescence imaging (BLI) and by the end-point immunoassays. Anti-Luc antibodies were assessed by ELISA, and T-cell response by IFN-γ and IL-2 FluoroSpot in which mouse splenocytes were stimulated with Luc or a peptide representing its immunodominant CD8+ T-cell epitope GFQSMYTFV. Monitoring of immunization by BLI identified EP parameters supporting the highest Luc gene uptake and expression. Superficial injection of Luc DNA followed by optimal EP led to a low level Luc expression in the mouse skin, and triggered a CD8+ T-cell response characterized by the peptide-specific secretion of IFN-γ and IL-2, but no specific antibodies. Intramuscular gene delivery resulted in a several-fold higher Luc expression and anti-Luc antibody, but induced low IL-2 and virtually no specific IFN-γ. Photon flux from the sites of Luc gene injection was inversely proportional to the immune response against GFQSMYTFV (p<0.05). Thus, BLI permitted to control the accuracy of gene delivery and transfection with respect to the injection site as well as the parameters of electroporation. Further, it confirmed the critical role of the site of DNA administration for the type and magnitude of the vaccine-specific immune response. This argues for the use of luminescent reporters in the preclinical gene vaccine tests to monitor both gene delivery and the immune response development in live animals.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DNA; bioluminescence; delivery; electroporation; immune response; immunization; luciferase; route

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23896580      PMCID: PMC3906409          DOI: 10.4161/hv.25561

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother        ISSN: 2164-5515            Impact factor:   3.452


  28 in total

1.  Plasmid DNA encoding influenza virus haemagglutinin induces Th1 cells and protection against respiratory infection despite its limited ability to generate antibody responses.

Authors:  P A Johnson; M A Conway; J Daly; C Nicolson; J Robertson; K H Mills
Journal:  J Gen Virol       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 3.891

Review 2.  Inflammatory cytokines and antigen presenting cell activation.

Authors:  Michael P Murtaugh; Dennis L Foss
Journal:  Vet Immunol Immunopathol       Date:  2002-09-10       Impact factor: 2.046

3.  The effect of electroporation type pulsed electric fields on DNA in aqueous solution.

Authors:  Alex Goldberg; Boris Rubinsky
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2010-08

Review 4.  Clarification of how HIV-1 DNA and protein immunizations may be better used to obtain HIV-1-specific mucosal and systemic immunity.

Authors:  Jorma Hinkula
Journal:  Expert Rev Vaccines       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 5.217

5.  Recruitment of antigen-presenting cells to the site of inoculation and augmentation of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 DNA vaccine immunogenicity by in vivo electroporation.

Authors:  Jinyan Liu; Rune Kjeken; Iacob Mathiesen; Dan H Barouch
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  2008-03-19       Impact factor: 5.103

Review 6.  Induction of immune responses by DNA vaccines in large animals.

Authors:  L A Babiuk; R Pontarollo; S Babiuk; B Loehr; S van Drunen Littel-van den Hurk
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2003-01-30       Impact factor: 3.641

7.  Late administration of plasmid DNA by intradermal electroporation efficiently boosts DNA-primed T and B cell responses to carcinoembryonic antigen.

Authors:  Andreas Bråve; David Hallengärd; Lindvi Gudmundsdotter; Richard Stout; Richard Walters; Britta Wahren; Kristian Hallermalm
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2009-05-03       Impact factor: 3.641

8.  DNA transfection of mononuclear cells in muscle tissue.

Authors:  Eirik Grønevik; Stig Tollefsen; Liv Ingunn Bjoner Sikkeland; Terje Haug; Torunn Elisabeth Tjelle; Iacob Mathiesen
Journal:  J Gene Med       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 4.565

9.  A combination of intradermal jet-injection and electroporation overcomes in vivo dose restriction of DNA vaccines.

Authors:  David Hallengärd; Andreas Bråve; Maria Isaguliants; Pontus Blomberg; Jenny Enger; Richard Stout; Alan King; Britta Wahren
Journal:  Genet Vaccines Ther       Date:  2012-08-08

10.  Skin electroporation: effects on transgene expression, DNA persistence and local tissue environment.

Authors:  Anna-Karin Roos; Fredrik Eriksson; James A Timmons; Josefine Gerhardt; Ulrika Nyman; Lindvi Gudmundsdotter; Andreas Bråve; Britta Wahren; Pavel Pisa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-09-30       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  9 in total

1.  DNA vaccination strategy targets epidermal dendritic cells, initiating their migration and induction of a host immune response.

Authors:  Trevor Rf Smith; Katherine Schultheis; William B Kiosses; Dinah H Amante; Janess M Mendoza; John C Stone; Jay R McCoy; Niranjan Y Sardesai; Kate E Broderick
Journal:  Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 6.698

2.  Preservation of tumor-host immune interactions with luciferase-tagged imaging in a murine model of ovarian cancer.

Authors:  John B Liao; Kelsie J Ovenell; Erin E M Curtis; Denise L Cecil; Marlese R Koehnlein; Lauren R Rastetter; Ekram A Gad; Mary L Disis
Journal:  J Immunother Cancer       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 13.751

3.  Luciferase Expression Allows Bioluminescence Imaging But Imposes Limitations on the Orthotopic Mouse (4T1) Model of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  V P Baklaushev; A Kilpeläinen; S Petkov; M A Abakumov; N F Grinenko; G M Yusubalieva; A A Latanova; I L Gubskiy; F G Zabozlaev; E S Starodubova; T O Abakumova; M G Isaguliants; V P Chekhonin
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Codon optimization and improved delivery/immunization regimen enhance the immune response against wild-type and drug-resistant HIV-1 reverse transcriptase, preserving its Th2-polarity.

Authors:  A A Latanova; S Petkov; A Kilpelainen; J Jansons; O E Latyshev; Y V Kuzmenko; J Hinkula; M A Abakumov; V T Valuev-Elliston; M Gomelsky; V L Karpov; F Chiodi; B Wahren; D Y Logunov; E S Starodubova; M G Isaguliants
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  The Immunogenicity in Mice of HCV Core Delivered as DNA Is Modulated by Its Capacity to Induce Oxidative Stress and Oxidative Stress Response.

Authors:  Juris Jansons; Irina Sominskaya; Natalia Petrakova; Elizaveta S Starodubova; Olga A Smirnova; Ekaterina Alekseeva; Ruta Bruvere; Olesja Eliseeva; Dace Skrastina; Elena Kashuba; Marija Mihailova; Sergey N Kochetkov; Alexander V Ivanov; Maria G Isaguliants
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2019-02-28       Impact factor: 6.600

6.  Comparative Profiling of Metastatic 4T1- vs. Non-metastatic Py230-Based Mammary Tumors in an Intraductal Model for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Jonas Steenbrugge; Niels Vander Elst; Kristel Demeyere; Olivier De Wever; Niek N Sanders; Wim Van Den Broeck; Luc Dirix; Steven Van Laere; Evelyne Meyer
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 7.561

Review 7.  Technological approaches to streamline vaccination schedules, progressing towards single-dose vaccines.

Authors:  Giuseppe Lofano; Corey P Mallett; Sylvie Bertholet; Derek T O'Hagan
Journal:  NPJ Vaccines       Date:  2020-09-18       Impact factor: 7.344

8.  DNA immunization site determines the level of gene expression and the magnitude, but not the type of the induced immune response.

Authors:  Stefan Petkov; Elizaveta Starodubova; Anastasia Latanova; Athina Kilpeläinen; Oleg Latyshev; Simons Svirskis; Britta Wahren; Francesca Chiodi; Ilya Gordeychuk; Maria Isaguliants
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Lentiviral vector induces high-quality memory T cells via dendritic cells transduction.

Authors:  Min Wen Ku; Pierre Authié; Fabien Nevo; Philippe Souque; Maryline Bourgine; Marta Romano; Pierre Charneau; Laleh Majlessi
Journal:  Commun Biol       Date:  2021-06-10
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.