| Literature DB >> 30687751 |
Rui Yu1, Chong Ji2,3, Junjie Xu1, Denghai Wang2, Ting Fang1, Yue Jing4,5, Clifton Kwang-Fu Shen4,5, Wei Chen1.
Abstract
The demand of tetanus antitoxin (TAT) as tetanus treatment in developing and underdeveloped countries is still great since it is relatively easy to achieve and affordable. However, there are still issues in the preparation of highly effective TAT with tetanus toxoid (TT) as the immunogen. The tetanus toxin native C-fragment (TeNT-Hc) retains many properties and it is a very promising candidate for the development of tetanus human vaccine. In this study, we tested the immunogenicity of TeNT-Hc in the preparation of tetanus antibodies, by TeNT-Hc alone or in different combinations with TT. The antibody titers and components in horse serum or plasma in different groups were analyzed and compared with those immunized by the conventional TT and it showed comparability with the results of traditional methods. The plasma efficacy and in vivo tetanus toxin neutralization were also tested. After two stages of immunizations, the average potency in plasma of all groups reached more than 1,000 IU / mL except that in group 4. In group 5, the first two basic immunizations with TT and the subsequent immunizations with TeNT-Hc, it showed slightly higher antibody titers and potency. This study demonstrated that TeNT-Hc is a safe, effective, and yet easy-to-produce low-cost immunogen and suitable for TT replacement in tetanus antitoxin production.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30687751 PMCID: PMC6330821 DOI: 10.1155/2018/6057348
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Nonreducing (a) and reducing (b) SDS–PAGE analysis of TT and TeNT-Hc. Lane M: molecular weight markers; lane 1: TT; lane 2: TeNT-Hc.
Horse groups and immunization schedule and doses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1 | TeNT-Hc 0.625 | TeNT-Hc 1.25 | TeNT-Hc 0.625 | TeNT-Hc 0.625 | TT 0.625 | Mix Ag 0.625 | TT 0.625 |
| 2 | TeNT-Hc 1.875 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 1.875 | TeNT-Hc 1.875 | TT 1.875 | Mix Ag 1.875 | TT 1.875 | |
|
| ||||||||
|
| 1 | TeNT-Hc 1.25 | TeNT-Hc 1.875 | TT 1.25 | TeNT-Hc 1.25 | TeNT-Hc 1.25 | Mix Ag 1.25 | TT 1.25 |
| 2 | TeNT-Hc 2.5 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TT 2.5 | TeNT-Hc 2.5 | TeNT-Hc 2.5 | Mix Ag 2.5 | TT 2.5 | |
| 3 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 5.625 | TT 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | Mix Ag 3.75 | TT 3.75 | |
| 4 | TeNT-Hc 5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 5 | TT 5 | TeNT-Hc 5 | Mix Ag 5 | TT 5 | |
| 5 | TeNT-Hc 5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 5 | TT 5 | TeNT-Hc 5 | Mix Ag 5 | TT 5 | |
| 6 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 11.25 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | Mix Ag 7.5 | TT 7.5 | |
| 7 | TeNT-Hc 10 | TeNT-Hc 15 | TeNT-Hc 10 | TeNT-Hc 10 | TeNT-Hc 10 | Mix Ag 10 | TT 10 | |
|
| ||||||||
|
| 1 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | Mix Ag 3.75 | TT 3.75 |
| 2 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | Mix Ag 7.5 | TT 7.5 | |
| 3 | TeNT-Hc 15 | TeNT-Hc 15 | TeNT-Hc 15 | TeNT-Hc 15 | TeNT-Hc 15 | Mix Ag 15 | TT 15 | |
|
| ||||||||
|
| 1 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | TeNT-Hc 3.75 | Mix Ag 3.75 | TT 3.75 |
| 2 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | TeNT-Hc 7.5 | Mix Ag 7.5 | TT 7.5 | |
| 3 | TeNT-Hc 15 | TeNT-Hc 15 | TeNT-Hc 15 | TeNT-Hc 10 | TeNT-Hc 15 | Mix Ag 15 | TT 15 | |
Figure 2The summary of the immunization schedule and the shots.
Figure 3Nonreducing (a) and reducing (b) SDS–PAGE analysis of horse plasmas. Lane M: molecular weight markers; lanes 1 to 6: plasma from horses in groups 1 to 6; lane 7: plasma from routine TT immunized horses.
Figure 4Serum antibody titers after different immunization stages. (a) Anti-TT IgG titers in serum; (b) anti-TeNT-Hc IgG titers in serum; (c) anti-TT IgM titers in serum; (d) anti-TeNT-Hc IgM titers in serum. Unpaired two-tailed Student's t-test was used to determine the significance of the differences in antibody titers between the groups. P values ≤ 0.05 were considered to be significant.
Figure 5Plasma antibody titers after different immunization stages. (a) Anti-TT IgG titers in plasma from group 1-6; (b) anti-TeNT-Hc IgG titers in plasma; (c) anti-TT IgG titers in plasma after three stages immunization and TT routine immunized plasma; (d) anti-TeNT-Hc IgG titers in plasma after three stages immunization and TT routine immunized plasma. Unpaired two-tailed Student's t-test was used to determine the significance of the differences in antibody titers between the groups. P values ≤ 0.05 were considered to be significant. P<0.01 was considered to be very significant and marked as ∗∗.
Figure 6Plasma antibody titers tested by agarose diffusion method. Unpaired two-tailed Student's t-test was used to determine the significance of the differences in antibody titers between the groups. P ≤ 0.05 was considered to be significant and marked as ∗.
Figure 7Antitoxin titers in plasma measured by flocculation. Unpaired two-tailed Student's t-test was used to determine the significance of the differences in antibody titers between the groups. P≤ 0.05 was considered to be significant and marked as ∗.
Figure 8Neutralizing potency of the corresponding antibodies in plasma from group 1-6. (a) Plasma collected after the first immunization stage; (b) plasma collected after the second stage; (c) plasma collected after the third stage. Unpaired two-tailed Student's t-test was used to determine the significance of the differences in antibody titers between the groups.