| Literature DB >> 28052136 |
Shu-Ting Ren1, Xue-Mei Zhang2, Peng-Fei Sun1,3, Li-Juan Sun4, Xue Guo2, Tian Tian1, Jian Zhang1, Qi-Yuan Guo2, Xue Li2, Li-Jun Guo5, Jin Che6, Bing Wang1,6, Hui Zhang7.
Abstract
Intranasal vaccination is more potent than parenteral injection for the prevention of influenza. However, because the poor efficiency of antigen uptake across the nasal mucosa is a key issue, immunostiEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28052136 PMCID: PMC5215226 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169501
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Intranasal immunization design in the different groups.
| Groups | n | Time | Volume/mouse | HA/each strain/mouse | Adjuvant/mouse |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | days 0, 7, and 14 | 10 μL | –/PBS | –/PBS | |
| 12 | days 0, 7, and 14 | 10 μL | 1.5 μg | – | |
| 12 | days 0, 7, and 14 | 10 μL | 1.5 μg | 500 μg of PA | |
| 12 | days 0, 7, and 14 | 10 μL | 1.5 μg | 1000 μg of PA | |
| 12 | days 0, 7, and 14 | 10 μL | 1.5 μg | 5 μL of MF59 |
* The description of each immunization.
Fig 1Antigen-specific serum IgG GMTs in the different groups.
Mice were administered PBS (Control), ITIV (0.5 μg A/H1N, A/H3N2, and B HA/mouse; Vaccine), ITIV plus PA (500 μg/mouse; LPA-V or 1000 μg/mouse; HPA-V) or MF59 (5 μL/mouse; MF59-V) intranasally once a week for 3 weeks. Blood plasma was prepared from the mice 1 week after the final vaccination, and the antigen-specific IgG levels were determined by ELISA. For each ITIV strain, three serial dilutions were prepared for each serum sample in duplicate. A curve with the diluted factor on the X-axis and the optical densities (ODs) on the Y-axis and the associated linear equation were obtained. Based on the linear equation, the antigen-specific serum IgG antibody titer of each sample was calculated when the OD was 5×ODmean background. Finally, the geometric mean titer (GMT) was calculated. The data are shown as the GMT ± SE (n = 12). *P<0.05, **P<0.01, ***P<0.001 vs. Control group; ΔP<0.05, ΔΔP<0.01, ΔΔΔP<0.001 vs. Vaccine group; ▲▲▲P<0.001 vs. MF59-V group.
Fig 2Antigen-specific serum IgA GMTs in the different groups.
The mice received intranasal administrations as described in Fig 1. The serum antigen-specific IgA levels were determined by ELISA as described in Fig 1 and presented as the GMT ± SE (n = 12). *P<0.001 vs. Control or Vaccine group; ▲P<0.05, ▲▲P<0.01 vs. LPA-V group; ΔP<0.05, ΔΔP<0.01 vs. MF59-V group.
Fig 3Antigen-specific nasal and trachea wash SIgA GMTs in the different groups.
The mice received intranasal administrations as described in Fig 1. The antigen-specific nasal and wash SIgA levels were determined by ELISA as described in Fig 1 and presented as the GMT ± SE (n = 12). *P< 0.05, **P< 0.01 vs. Control group or Vaccine group.
Serum HI GMTs following intranasal immunization in the different groups.
| Groups | Pre-vaccination (95% CI) | Post-vaccination (95% CI) | Fold increases |
|---|---|---|---|
| | 5.25 (3.71–7.14) | 4.57 (2.29–9.12) | 0.87 |
| | 3.72 (2.41–5.73) | 2.29 (1.68–3.13) | 0.62 |
| | 4.64 (2.45–8.79) | 3.98 (2.34–6.77) | 0.86 |
| | 5.25 (3.26–8.46) | 5.27 (2.11–13.15) | 1.00 |
| | 5.12 (4.05–6.47) | 5.46 (2.48–12.02) | 1.07 |
| | 3.98 (2.50–6.34) | 5.26 (2.80–9.87) | 1.32 |
| | 5.01 (3.16–7.94) | 20.28 (9.97–41.21) | 4.05 |
| | 4.57 (2.90–7.20) | 21.13 (10.35–43.15) | 4.62 |
| | 4.64 (2.98–7.22) | 5.84 (3.41–10.00) | 1.26 |
| | 5.12 (3.74–7.00) | 20.65 (10.54–40.36) | 4.04 |
| | 4.81 (3.56–6.49) | 28.38 (14.26–56.49) | 5.90 |
| | 4.57 (3.34–6.25) | 6.92 (5.06–9.46) | 1.51 |
| | 5.62 (4.33–7.30) | 21.29 (13.80–32.21) | 3.75 |
| | 4.90 (3.26–7.36) | 27.99 (12.94–60.53) | 5.71 |
| | 5.25 (3.71–7.41) | 13.87 (8.76–21.93) | 2.64 |
* P<0.05
** P<0.01
*** P<0.001 vs. Control group
▼P<0.05
▼▼P<0.01
▼▼▼P<0.001 vs. Vaccine group.
GMT fold increases were defined as the GMT ratio of the post-vaccination titer to the pre-vaccination titer.
Antibody responses following intranasal immunization in the different groups.
| Groups | Seroprotection rate | Seroconversion rate | Mucosal response | Total response | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | n/N | % | n/N | % | n/N | % | n/N | |
| | 0.00 | 0/10 | 0.00 | 0/10 | 16.67 | 2/12 | 16.67 | 2/12 |
| | 0.00 | 0/10 | 0.00 | 0/10 | 16.67 | 2/12 | 16.67 | 2/12 |
| | 0.00 | 0/9 | 0.00 | 0/9 | 8.33 | 1/12 | 8.33 | 1/12 |
| | 0.00 | 0/9 | 0.00 | 0/9 | 58.33 | 7/12 | 58.33 | 7/12 |
| | 0.00 | 0/11 | 0.00 | 0/11 | 58.33 | 7/12 | 58.33 | 7/12 |
| | 0.00 | 0/10 | 0.00 | 0/10 | 50.00 | 6/12 | 50.00 | 6/12 |
| | 9.09 | 1/11 | 9.09 | 1/11 | 40.00 | 4/10 | 40.00 | 4/10 |
| | 20.00 | 2/10 | 20.00 | 2/10 | 60.00 | 6/10 | 70.00 | 7/10 |
| | 0.00 | 0/9 | 0.00 | 0/9 | 70.00 | 7/10 | 70.00 | 7/10 |
| | 18.18 | 2/11 | 18.18 | 2/11 | 63.64 | 7/11 | 63.64 | 7/11 |
| | 40.00 | 4/10 | 40.00 | 4/10 | 100.00 | 11/11 | 100.00 | 11/11 |
| | 0.00 | 0/10 | 0.00 | 0/10 | 54.55 | 6/11 | 54.55 | 6/11 |
| | 10.00 | 1/10 | 10.00 | 1/10 | 63.64 | 7/11 | 60.00 | 6/10 |
| | 36.36 | 4/11 | 36.36 | 4/11 | 63.64 | 7/11 | 90.91 | 10/11 |
| | 0.00 | 0/10 | 0.00 | 0/10 | 63.64 | 7/11 | 63.64 | 7/11 |
a Seroprotection rate defined as the proportion of mice with a titer level ≥1:40 post-vaccination.
b Seroconversion rate defined as the proportion of mice with a ≥4-fold increase in titer from baseline or a post-vaccination titer level ≥1:40 if the baseline titer was <1:40.
c Mucosal response defined as the proportion of mice with a 1.4-fold increase in the SIgA titer compared to the mean titer of the control group.
d Total response in reference to any response (mucosal and/or serum antibody response) following intranasal immunization.
* P<0.05 vs. Vaccine group
▼P<0.05
▼▼P<0.01
▼▼▼P<0.001 vs. Control group
† P<0.05 vs. LPA-V group.
Fig 4Splenic lymphocyte proliferative rates of the different groups after 72 h of culture under stimulation with three influenza virus antigens.
The mice received intranasal administrations as described in Fig 1. The spleens were harvested on day 21, and splenic lymphocyte were cultured with a final concentration of 40 μg/mL of HA or without ITIV antigens. After 72 h, splenic lymphocyte proliferation was measured using the MTT assay. The splenic lymphocyte proliferative rate (%) was calculated according to the following formula: the splenic lymphocyte proliferative rate (%) = (the mean ODITIV treatment group—the mean ODcontrol group)/the mean ODcontrol group (n = 12). *P<0.001 vs. Control group; ΔP<0.05, ΔΔP<0.01 vs. Vaccine group.
Fig 5IFN-γ levels in the splenic lymphocyte supernatants induced by stimulation with three influenza virus antigens after 72 h in culture.
After culture for 72 h with a final concentration of 40 μg/mL of HA or without ITIV antigens, the splenic lymphocyte supernatants were collected by centrifugation. According to the ELISA kit manufacturer's instructions, 50 μL of the cell supernatant was added to each well of the plate for IFN-γ cytokine analysis (n = 5). *P<0.05, ***P<0.001 vs. Control or Vaccine group.
Fig 6The body weights of the mice in the different groups.
After the first vaccination, the body weight of each mouse was examined on days 0, 7, 14, and 21. The mean body weight of the mice in each group was calculated at the indicated time point (mean ± SD, n = 12; an = 6).
Fig 7The nose mucosa histopathology of the mice in the different groups on day 15.
After three intranasal immunizations at 1-week intervals, the nose tissues of the mice were examined by light microscopy on day 15 or day 21. Representative histopathology of the HE-stained nose tissue on day 15 is shown. A: Normal structure of the nose mucosa in the different groups; B: Hyperemia with the infiltration of a few inflammatory cells in the lamina propria of the nose of one mouse from the control and HPA-V groups.