Signe Tandrup Schmidt1,2, Malene Aaby Neustrup1, Stine Harloff-Helleberg1, Karen Smith Korsholm2, Thomas Rades1, Peter Andersen2, Dennis Christensen2, Camilla Foged3. 1. Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. 2. Statens Serum Institut, Department of Infectious Disease Immunology, Artillerivej 5, 2300, Copenhagen S, Denmark. 3. Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 2, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. camilla.foged@sund.ku.dk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Induction of cell-mediated immune (CMI) responses is crucial for vaccine-mediated protection against difficult vaccine targets, e.g., Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct). Adjuvants are included in subunit vaccines to potentiate immune responses, but many marketed adjuvants stimulate predominantly humoral immune responses. Therefore, there is an unmet medical need for new adjuvants, which potentiate humoral and CMI responses. The purpose was to design an oil-in-water nanoemulsion adjuvant containing a synthetic CMI-inducing mycobacterial monomycoloyl glycerol (MMG) analogue to concomitantly induce humoral and CMI responses. METHODS: The influence of emulsion composition was analyzed using a systematic approach. Three factors were varied: i) saturation of the oil phase, ii) type and saturation of the applied surfactant mixture, and iii) surfactant mixture net charge. RESULTS: The emulsions were colloidally stable with a droplet diameter of 150-250 nm, and the zeta-potential correlated closely with the net charge of the surfactant mixture. Only cationic emulsions containing the unsaturated surfactant mixture induced concomitant humoral and CMI responses upon immunization of mice with a Ct antigen, and the responses were enhanced when squalene was applied as the oil phase. In contrast, emulsions with neutral and net negative zeta-potentials did not induce CMI responses. The saturation degree of the oil phase did not influence the adjuvanticity. CONCLUSION: Cationic, MMG analogue-containing nanoemulsions are potential adjuvants for vaccines against pathogens for which both humoral and CMI responses are needed.
PURPOSE: Induction of cell-mediated immune (CMI) responses is crucial for vaccine-mediated protection against difficult vaccine targets, e.g., Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct). Adjuvants are included in subunit vaccines to potentiate immune responses, but many marketed adjuvants stimulate predominantly humoral immune responses. Therefore, there is an unmet medical need for new adjuvants, which potentiate humoral and CMI responses. The purpose was to design an oil-in-water nanoemulsion adjuvant containing a synthetic CMI-inducing mycobacterial monomycoloyl glycerol (MMG) analogue to concomitantly induce humoral and CMI responses. METHODS: The influence of emulsion composition was analyzed using a systematic approach. Three factors were varied: i) saturation of the oil phase, ii) type and saturation of the applied surfactant mixture, and iii) surfactant mixture net charge. RESULTS: The emulsions were colloidally stable with a droplet diameter of 150-250 nm, and the zeta-potential correlated closely with the net charge of the surfactant mixture. Only cationic emulsions containing the unsaturated surfactant mixture induced concomitant humoral and CMI responses upon immunization of mice with a Ct antigen, and the responses were enhanced when squalene was applied as the oil phase. In contrast, emulsions with neutral and net negative zeta-potentials did not induce CMI responses. The saturation degree of the oil phase did not influence the adjuvanticity. CONCLUSION: Cationic, MMG analogue-containing nanoemulsions are potential adjuvants for vaccines against pathogens for which both humoral and CMI responses are needed.
Entities:
Keywords:
adjuvant; drug delivery; emulsion; immune response; vaccine
Authors: Samuele Calabro; Marco Tortoli; Barbara C Baudner; Alessandra Pacitto; Mario Cortese; Derek T O'Hagan; Ennio De Gregorio; Anja Seubert; Andreas Wack Journal: Vaccine Date: 2011-01-06 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: S A Romera; L A Hilgers; M Puntel; P I Zamorano; V L Alcon; M J Dus Santos; J Blanco Viera; M V Borca; A M Sadir Journal: Vaccine Date: 2000-08-15 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Else Marie Agger; Ida Rosenkrands; Jon Hansen; Karima Brahimi; Brian S Vandahl; Claus Aagaard; Kerstin Werninghaus; Carsten Kirschning; Roland Lang; Dennis Christensen; Michael Theisen; Frank Follmann; Peter Andersen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2008-09-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Emma Lorenzen; Frank Follmann; Sarah Bøje; Karin Erneholm; Anja Weinreich Olsen; Jørgen Steen Agerholm; Gregers Jungersen; Peter Andersen Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2015-12-16 Impact factor: 7.561
Authors: Signe Tandrup Schmidt; Gabriel Kristian Pedersen; Malene Aaby Neustrup; Karen Smith Korsholm; Thomas Rades; Peter Andersen; Camilla Foged; Dennis Christensen Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 7.561