| Literature DB >> 25202307 |
Sumit Joshi1, Keerti Rawat1, Narendra Kumar Yadav1, Vikash Kumar2, Mohammad Imran Siddiqi2, Anuradha Dube1.
Abstract
Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) or kala-azar, a vector-borne protozoan disease, shows endemicity in larger areas of the tropical, subtropical and the Mediterranean countries. WHO report suggested that an annual incidence of VL is nearly 200,000 to 400,000 cases, resulting in 20,000 to 30,000 deaths per year. Treatment with available anti-leishmanial drugs are not cost effective, with varied efficacies and higher relapse rate, which poses a major challenge to current kala-azar control program in Indian subcontinent. Therefore, a vaccine against VL is imperative and knowing the fact that recovered individuals developed lifelong immunity against re-infection, it is feasible. Vaccine development program, though time taking, has recently gained momentum with the emergence of omic era, i.e., from genomics to immunomics. Classical as well as molecular methodologies have been overtaken with alternative strategies wherein proteomics based knowledge combined with computational techniques (immunoinformatics) speed up the identification and detailed characterization of new antigens for potential vaccine candidates. This may eventually help in the designing of polyvalent synthetic and recombinant chimeric vaccines as an effective intervention measures to control the disease in endemic areas. This review focuses on such newer approaches being utilized for vaccine development against VL.Entities:
Keywords: DNA vaccines; mutant vaccines; recombinant vaccines; synthetic peptide vaccines; visceral leishmaniasis
Year: 2014 PMID: 25202307 PMCID: PMC4141159 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00380
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
Figure 1An overview of different approaches of vaccine development for visceral leishmaniasis.
Summary of vaccines evaluated against visceral leishmaniasis.
| Vaccine delivery | Antigen | Species used | Challenge with | Host system | Remarks | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (a) Killed | ALM ± BCG | Indian langur | Triple dose is more effective than single dose | Dube et al. ( | ||
| Human | Poor efficacy (6%) | Khalil et al. ( | ||||
| Alum-ALM + BCG | Indian langur | Single dose is effective; increased IFN-γ production | Misra et al. ( | |||
| Human | Protective; induced strong DTH response | Kamil et al. ( | ||||
| Dog | Moderate efficacy (69.3%) | Mohebali et al. ( | ||||
| (b) Live-attenuated | BT1 deleted parasite | BALB/c mice | Protective immunity; increased IFN-γ production | Papadopoulou et al. ( | ||
| SIR2 single allele deletion | High IFN-γ/IL-10 ratio with increased NO production; protective immunity | Silvestre et al. ( | ||||
| Non-pathogenic strain expressing | Protective response with high level of IFN-γ production | Mizbani et al. ( | ||||
| Amastigote-specific protein p27 | Significant reduction in parasite burden, Th1-type response | Dey et al. ( | ||||
| Suicidal mutant | Hamster | Effective cellular immunity; increased iNOS expression and IFN-γ, IL-12 production | Kumari et al. ( | |||
| Replication deficient centrin gene | BALB/c mice and Hamster | Protective immunity with increased level of IFN-γ, IL-2, and TNF-α producing cells | Selvapandiyan et al. ( | |||
| Beagle dog | High immunogenicity; increased secretion of IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-12, and decreased production of IL-4 | Fiuza et al. ( | ||||
| Parasite fraction | Sonicated antigen+ AlBCG/MISA/MPLA | Vervet Monkey | Good protection; elicit IFN-γ production | Mutiso et al. ( | ||
| Membrane protein | Dp72 and gp70-2 | BALB/c mice | Dp 72 showed 81.1% efficacy; gp70-2 is non-protective | Jaffe et al. ( | ||
| FML + saponin | Mice | 84.4% Protection | Palatnik et al. ( | |||
| Hamster | Protective | Palatnik et al. ( | ||||
| Mice | Increase in IgG2 and decrease in parasite load by 88% | Santos et al. ( | ||||
| Dog | Effective protection; cellular and humoral response | Saraiva et al. ( | ||||
| Secretory protein | LiESAp | Beagle dog | Protective; high level of IFN-γ and low level of IL-4 with increased NO production | Lemesre et al. ( | ||
| Humoral response with cell-mediated immunity | Bourdoiseau et al. ( | |||||
| Membrane protein | LCR 1 | BALB/c mice | Partial protection with increased IFN-γ production but not IL-4, IL-5, and IL-10 | Wilson et al. ( | ||
| HASPB1 | Mice | Protective (70 and 90%); increased IL-12 production by dendritic cells | Stager et al. ( | |||
| A2 | Beagle dog | Partial protection with increased IgG and IFN-γ production; low IL-10 level | Fernandes et al. ( | |||
| Soluble protein | F14 | Golden hamster | Partial protection; increased level of IFN-γ | Bhardwaj et al. ( | ||
| elF2 | Protective (65%); increased level of IFN-γ, IL-12, TNF-α, IgG2, and down-regulation of IL-4, IL-10, TGF-β | Kushawaha et al. ( | ||||
| P45 | Protective (85%); increased level of IFN-γ, IL-12, TNF-α, iNOS, and decreased TGF-β, IL-4 | Gupta et al. ( | ||||
| PDI | Protective (90%); increased level of IFN-γ, TFN-α, IL-12, and IgG2 | Kushawaha et al. ( | ||||
| TPI | Protective (90%); increased level of IFN-γ, TFN-α, IL-12, IgG2, and down-regulation of IL-10, IL-4 | Kushawaha et al. ( | ||||
| TPR | Good efficacy (~60%); increased iNOS, IFN-γ, IL-12, TNF-α, and downregualation of IL-4, IL-10, and TGF-β | Khare et al. ( | ||||
| Aldolase and enolase | Increased expression of iNOS, IFN-γ, TNF-α, and IL-12 with down-regulation of TGF-β, IL-4, and IL-10 | Gupta et al. ( | ||||
| Ribosomal protein + saponin | BALB/c mice | Increased production of IFN-γ, IL-12, and GM-CSF | Chavez-Fumagalli et al. ( | |||
| Hypothetical amastigote-specific protein | BALB/c mice | Protective; increased level of IFN-γ, IL-12, GM-CSF, and down-regulation of IL-4, IL-10 | Martins et al. ( | |||
| Secretory protein | Secretory serine protease | BALB/c mice | Exhibit significant protection with lower parasite burden | Choudhury et al. ( | ||
| LiESAp-MDP | Dog | Efficacy (92%); increased IgG2, NO, and IFN-γ production | Lemesre et al. ( | |||
| Q protein | Dog | Protective (90%); positive DTH response | Molano et al. ( | |||
| BALB/c mice | Induced significant protection with long-lasting IgG response | Parody et al. ( | ||||
| Leish-111f | Beagle dog | No protection | Gradoni et al. ( | |||
| Mice and hamster | Decreased parasite load (99.6%); strong Th1 response (increased IFN-γ, IL-2, TNF-α) | Coler et al. ( | ||||
| Dog | Protection | Trigo et al. ( | ||||
| Leish-110f | Dog | Protective with increased IFN-γ, TNF-α, and IL-2 | Bertholet et al. ( | |||
| KSAC | C57BL/6 mice | Protective Th1-type response | Goto et al. ( | |||
| A2 DNA | Mice | Significant protection with increased IFN-γ production | Ghosh et al. ( | |||
| P36LACK | Mice | Strong Th1-type response (IFN-γ); non-protective | Melby et al. ( | |||
| ORFF | BALB/c mice | Significant protection (80%) with increased IFN-γ expression | Sukumaran et al. ( | |||
| KMP-11 | Hamster | Mixed Th1/Th2 response; protective with up-regulation of IFN-γ, TNF-α, and IL-12 and down-regulation of IL-10 | Basu et al. ( | |||
| BALB/c mice | Protective; mixed Th1/Th2 response (enhanced IFN-γ and depressed IL-4 production) | Bhaumik et al. ( | ||||
| H2A, H2B, H3, H4, and p36 (LACK) | Dog | Partial protection; elicit type 1 cellular response (IFN-γ) | Saldarriaga et al. ( | |||
| γGCS | Mice | Protective immunity; production of specific IgG1 and IgG2a antibodies; enhanced granuloma formation | Carter et al. ( | |||
| UBQ-ORFF | Mice | Protective; higher levels of IL-12 and IFN-γ and the low levels of IL-4 and IL-10 | Sharma and Madhubala ( | |||
| PPG | Hamster | Efficacy about 80% with increased IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-12, and decreased IL-4, IL-10, TGF-β | Samant et al. ( | |||
| HbR | BALB/c mice and hamster | Complete protection; increased Th1 response (IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-12) with down-regulation of IL-4 and IL-10 | Guha et al. ( | |||
| p36 LACK | BALB/c mice | Non-protective(IL-10 production); no reduction in parasite load (both liver and spleen) | Marques-da-Silva et al. ( | |||
| PapLe22 | Dog | Downregulate Th2-type response and reduces parasite burden by 50% | Fragaki et al. ( | |||
| P36 LACK | Mice | Protective immunity; significantly increased IFN-γ and IL-4 with decreased IL-10 production | Gomes et al. ( | |||
| H2A, H2B, H3, and H4 | BALB/c mice | No protection | Carrion et al. ( | |||
| Purified FML, rNH36, and NH36 DNA | BALB/c mice | Significant protection with 88% reduction in parasite load; Th1-type response | Aguilar-Be et al. ( | |||
| VR1012-NH36 | BALB/c mice | Protective (77%); reduction in parasite burden (91%) | Gamboa-Leon et al. ( | |||
| A2 and NH | BALB/c mice | Protective response (only A2) with increased IFN-γ and decreased IL-4 and IL-10 production | Zanin et al. ( | |||
| ORFF (HPB) | BALB/c mice | Protective; reduction in parasite load (75–80%) with increased IgG2a and IFN-γ production | Tewary et al. ( | |||
| GP63 as heterologous prime boost (HPB) | Enhanced IFN-γ, IL-12, NO, IgG2a/IgG1 ratio, and reduced IL-4 and IL-10 | Mazumder et al. ( | ||||
| Virus expressing LACK antigen (WRp36 or MVAp36) | BALB/c mice | Protective; significant level of IFN-γ and TNF-α | Dondji et al. ( | |||
| LACK | Dog | Moderate protection (60%); increased level of IL-4 and IFN-γ | Ramiro et al. ( | |||
| Type I ( | BALB/c mice | Protective; strong Th1 response (higher level of IFN-γ/IL-5 ratio) | Rafati et al. ( | |||
| CP type I and II | Dog | Increased IFN-γ expression and IgG, IgG2 level with strong DTH response | Rafati et al. ( | |||
| Liposomised | BALB/c mice | Induced both Th1 and Th2-type responses with high level of IgG2a, IgG2b, and IgG1 | Afrin et al. ( | |||
| pDNA + SLA | Protective; potentiate Th1 response and downregulate Th2 response | Mazumder et al. ( | ||||
| GP63 in stable cationic liposomes | Up-regulation of IFN-γ and down-regulation of IL-4; mixed Th1/Th2-type response | Bhowmick et al. ( | ||||
| BM-DCs pulsed with H1 | Increased level of IFN-γ and IgG2a/IgG1 ratio; decreased level of IL-10 | Agallou et al. ( | ||||
| Golden hamster | Protective; high IFN-γ/TGF-β ratio and increased iNOS expression | Gomes et al. ( | ||||
| LJM143 and LJM17 | Beagle dog | Strong Th1-type response with IFN-γ and IL-12 expression | Collin et al. ( | |||
ALM, autoclaved .
Summary of peptide vaccines evaluated against leishmaniasis.
| Protein(s) | Spp. used | Epitopes (no. of amino acid residues) | Prediction tool(s) utilized | Challenge with | Dose and route | Host system | Immune response | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GP63 | PT 1–4; PT 6–8 (12–16 residues) | Predictive algorithm | 100 μg (each) + 8% poloxamer 407; SC | BALB/c mice | Proliferation of CD4+ Th1 sub-set cells PT3 showed immunoprotection | Jardim et al. ( | ||
| 24 Partially overlapping peptides (12–35 residues) | AMPHI algorithm | 100 μg + 100 μg | CBA and BALB/c mice | Induction of T-cell response; classical DTH reactivity and secretion of IL-2 and IFN-γ p146-171 and p467-482 induces significant host-resistance | Yang et al. ( | |||
| P154 and P467 (16 residues) | AMPHI algorithm | 50 μg; IP or SC | CBA mice | ThI type cytokine responses Secretion of IL-2, IFN-γ, and GM-CSF | Frankenburg et al. ( | |||
| PT3 (16 residues) | Predictive algorithm | 100 μg + 8% poloxamer 407; SC | BALB/c mice | Long-lasting protection | Spitzer et al. ( | |||
| MHC class II – restricted peptides (AAR, AAP, ASR) (15 residues) | SYFPETHI | 100 μg emulsified in 1:1 dilution with IFA; SC | FVB/N-DR1 transgenic mice | High levels of Th1-type immune response and significant level of IFN-γ | Rezvan ( | |||
| HLA-A2 peptides (9 residues) | SYFPETHI | 100 μg + 140μg HAP-B (helper peptide) + 50 μl IFA; SC | HHDII and BALB/c mice | Induction of CTL responses Up-regulation of IFN-γ | Rezvan et al. ( | |||
| P1–P4 (9–18 residues) | EpiMatrix | 100 μg of each peptide | Human PBMCs | Moderate increase in IFN-γ | Elfaki et al. ( | |||
| KMP-11 | 84 Overlapping peptides (9 residues) | SYFPEITHI | 44 μg/ml (each) | CD8+ T-cells from human PBMCs | Trigger interferon-γ secretion by CD8+ T-cells | Basu et al. ( | ||
| A2 | MHC class I binding peptide (CD8) and B-cell epitope (B-1) 2 MHC class II binding epitopes (CD4-1 and CD4-2; 17 residues each) | BIMAS and ProtScale | CFSE (20 μm) cells pulsed for 30 min at 37°C + A2-specific peptide + CFSE (1 μm each), and injected at 4 × 107 cells/mouse; IV | BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice | Induction of both IFN-γ secreting CD4+ T and CD8+ T-cells as well as cytolytic CD8+ T-cells | Resende et al. ( | ||
| CPB, CPC LmsTI-1, TSA, LeIF, and LPG-3 | 18 HLA-A*0201 restricted peptides (9 residues) | SYFPEITHI, BIMAS, EpiJen, Rankpep, nHLApred, NetCTL, and Multipred | 10 μg/ml | Human PBMCs | Induces CD8+ T-cell response | Seyed et al. ( |
GP63, glycoprotein 63; KMP-11, kinetoplastid membrane protein-11; A2, amastigote virulence factor; CPB, type I cysteine proteinase; CPC, type III cysteine peptidase; LmsTI-1, .