| Literature DB >> 35214656 |
Limin Yang1,2, Aibo Xiao3, Hu Wang3, Xiaojuan Zhang4, Yuan Zhang2, Yunlong Li2, Yanqiu Wei2, Wenjun Liu2,5, Chuangfu Chen1.
Abstract
Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV) is the leading cause of epidemic encephalitis in Asia, and vaccination is the most effective way to prevent JE. Although several licensed vaccines were widely used, there is still a demand for developing safer, cheaper, and more effective JE vaccines. In the current study, a virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine candidate containing the envelope structural protein of JEV expressed by the Pichia pastoris was assembled in vitro. It elicited a robust humoral and cellular immune response in mice model, conferring immunodeficient mice complete protection against lethal doses of JEV challenge. Furthermore, pigs immunized with VLP alone without adjuvant via intramuscular produced high neutralizing antibodies against JEV. Consequently, this study showed a new design of JEV subunit vaccine based on VLP strategy and demonstrated the potential for clinical application.Entities:
Keywords: Japanese encephalitis; VLP; cellular immune; envelope; yeast
Year: 2022 PMID: 35214656 PMCID: PMC8877874 DOI: 10.3390/vaccines10020197
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vaccines (Basel) ISSN: 2076-393X
Figure 1Construction and characterization of Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV) virus-like particle (VLP). (a) Schematic design of JEV VLP vaccine candidate. (b) purified recombinant prM/Env protein was analyzed by SDS-PAGE. (c) Immunoblot analysis of recombinant prM/Env protein with polyclonal antibodies against JEV. (d) VLP shape and size were tested by electron microscopy with negative staining method. spherical VLP size was 20–30 nm in diameter and mainly in ~30 nm. Scale bar: 100 nm, 50 nm.
Figure 2JEV VLP induced robust humoral and T cell immune responses in BALB/c mice. (a) Flow chart of JEV VLP immunogenicity evaluation in mice model. Solid vertical lines indicate weeks of immunization (black), sacrifice (green), and syringe symbols indicate blood sampling time points. (b) JEV specific binding antibodies were assessed by ELISA. Dotted lines indicate detection limit. (c) Neutralizing antibodies against JEV SA 14-14-2 strain were measured by PRNT assay. Dotted lines indicate detection limit. (d) Spleens and splenocytes were collected at weeks 7 for IFN-γ detection by ELISPOT after stimulation with JEV Env peptide pools. Data are shown as means ± SEM (standard errors of means). p values were analyzed by Student’s t-test (ns, p > 0.05; ****, p < 0.0001).
Figure 3Passive protection of anti-VLP sera in immunocompromised mice model. (a) Flow chart of experimental design. Each A129 mouse was given 200 μL sera from JEV VLP or PBS vaccinated mice via IV route. After 1 h of injection, each mouse was infected via i.p. with 1 × 105 TCID50 of SA 14-14-2 strain. Solid vertical lines indicate timeline of immunization (black), challenge (red), and sacrifice (green). Serum collected within 6 DPI were used for viral loads detection by qRT-PCR (b). Dotted lines indicate detection limit. Bodyweight changes (c) and survival rates (d) of mice in all groups were monitored daily after challenge. Data are shown as means ± SEM. A two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s multiple-comparison tests was performed to statistically analyze significant difference of viral loads between JEV VLP and PBS-Mock. Weight change was analyzed by Tukey-Kramer multiple comparison test. Survival data were analyzed by two-sided log-rank test. (***, p < 0.001; ****, p < 0.0001).
Figure 4Humoral immune response elicited by different doses of JEV VLP in pigs. (a) Flow chart of JEV VLP immunogenicity evaluation in pigs. Groups of 4-week-old pigs were immunized three times by IM route with 2.5 μg, 5 μg, 10 μg, or 20 μg JEV VLP, or PBS as control. Solid vertical lines indicate weeks of immunization (black), and syringe symbols indicate blood sampling time points. (b) JEV specific binding antibodies were assessed by ELISA. (c) Neutralizing antibodies against JEV SA 14-14-2 strain were measured by PRNT assay. Dotted lines indicate detection limit. Data are shown as means ± SEM. NAb differences between immunized and control groups were analyzed by Tukey–Kramer multiple comparison test. (*, p < 0.05; ***, p < 0.001).