| Literature DB >> 36059505 |
Yang Xu1, Ziyou Zhou1, Brad Brooks1, Tammy Ferguson1, Judy Obliosca1, Jing Huang2,3, Izumi Kaneko4, Shiroh Iwanaga5, Masao Yuda4, Yukiko Tsuji2, Huitang Zhang6, Christina C Luo6, Xunqing Jiang6, Xiang-Peng Kong6, Moriya Tsuji2,3, Christopher K Tison1.
Abstract
Developing a safe and effective malaria vaccine is critical to reducing the spread and resurgence of this deadly disease, especially in children. In recent years, vaccine technology has seen expanded development of subunit protein, peptide, and nucleic acid vaccines. This is due to their inherent safety, the ability to tailor their immune response, simple storage requirements, easier production, and lower expense compared to using attenuated and inactivated organism-based approaches. However, these new vaccine technologies generally have low efficacy. Subunit vaccines, due to their weak immunogenicity, often necessitate advanced delivery vectors and/or the use of adjuvants. A new area of vaccine development involves design of synthetic micro- and nano-particles and adjuvants that can stimulate immune cells directly through their physical and chemical properties. Further, the unique and complex life cycle of the Plasmodium organism, with multiple stages and varying epitopes/antigens presented by the parasite, is another challenge for malaria vaccine development. Targeting multistage antigens simultaneously is therefore critical for an effective malaria vaccine. Here, we rationally design a layer-by-layer (LbL) antigen delivery platform (we called LbL NP) specifically engineered for malaria vaccines. A biocompatible modified chitosan nanoparticle (trimethyl chitosan, TMC) was synthesized and utilized for LbL loading and release of multiple malaria antigens from pre-erythrocytic and erythrocytic stages. LbL NP served as antigen/protein delivery vehicles and were demonstrated to induce the highest Plasmodium falciparum Circumsporozoite Protein (PfCSP) specific T-cell responses in mice studies as compared to multiple controls. From immunogenicity studies, it was concluded that two doses of intramuscular injection with a longer interval (4 weeks) than traditional malaria vaccine candidate dosing would be the vaccination potential for LbL NP vaccine candidates. Furthermore, in PfCSP/Py parasite challenge studies we demonstrated protective efficacy using LbL NP. These LbL NP provided a significant adjuvant effect since they may induce innate immune response that led to a potent adaptive immunity to mediate non-specific anti-malarial effect. Most importantly, the delivery of CSP full-length protein stimulated long-lasting protective immune responses even after the booster immunization 4 weeks later in mice.Entities:
Keywords: chitosan; layer-by-layer; malaria vaccine; multiple antigens; releases
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36059505 PMCID: PMC9428560 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.900080
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 8.786
Vaccine candidate formulation compositions in Immunogenicity Study. 1-12 group animals were injected by two doses of vaccine candidates, but 13-24 group animals were injected by three doses.
| Groups: | Immunization regimens |
|---|---|
| 1, 13 | LbL NP-CSP + ISA720 |
| 2, 14 | LbL NP-AMA-1/CSP + ISA720 |
| 3, 15 | LbL NP-CSP/AMA-1/MSP-1 + ISA720 |
| 4, 16 | LbL NP + ISA720 only |
| 5, 17 | LbL NP-CSP + 7DW8-5 |
| 6, 18 | LbL NP-AMA-1/CSP + 7DW8-5 |
| 7, 19 | LbL NP-CSP/AMA-1/MSP-1 + 7DW8-5 |
| 8, 20 | LbL NP + 7DW8-5 only |
| 9, 21 | LbL NP-CSP |
| 10, 22 | LbL NP-AMA-1/CSP |
| 11, 23 | LbL NP-CSP/AMA-1/MSP-1 |
| 12, 24 | LbL NP only |
Figure 1(A) Characteristic 1H-NMR spectrum of Chitosan and N-trimethyl chitosan (TMC) in the D2O. (B) FTIR spectra of Chitosan and N-trimethyl chitosan (TMC).
Figure 2(A-C) Scanning electron microscope images of LbL NP formations at different reaction time (15, 30 and 60 min). 60 min was found to be the optimized time for the core-shell structural nanoparticle formation. (D) SEM image of LbL NP encapsulated with protein.
Figure 3(A) Schematic of dye Alexa Fluor 488 (green) and Texas-red labelled BSA LbL loading on NPs (red circle) by two approaches without and with second protection layer coating (Blue); UV-Vis spectra of two dye labelled protein mixture. (B) Release profile of NP formulation with and without PSS as the protective layer. (C) Release profile of LbL NP formulation with different mass amount of PSS or HA as the protective layer.
LbL NP composition and encapsulation and loading efficiency for each of the vaccine candidates.
| Sample | TMC (mg) | TPP (mg) | PSS (mg) | HA (mg) | BSA (red, mg) | LE (%) | BSA (Green,mg) | LE (%) | Zeta potential (mV) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High PSS | 1 | 0.2 | 0.05 | 0.25 | 98.5 | 0.25 | 93.4 | 5.0 | |
| Low PSS | 1 | 0.2 | 0.01 | 0.25 | 74.2 | 0.25 | 64.3 | 12.1 | |
| High HA | 1 | 0.2 | 0.05 | 0.25 | 97.0 | 0.25 | 97.3 | 3.0 | |
| Low HA | 1 | 0.2 | 0.01 | 0.25 | 70.2 | 0.25 | 54.6 | 10.5 |
Figure 4Dye-labelled protein release profiles for different formulations of LbL NP by tuning of amount of outside of PSS or HA protective layer (insert is the schematic for two layers of loading of dye labelled proteins by coated with protective layers).
Parameters for the formulations for the efficacy studies.
| Formulations(Main components) | Ratio of each component (weight ratio) | DLS (nm) | Zeta potential |
|---|---|---|---|
| LbL NP | 10 | 129.1± 45.6 | 28.1 ± 5.8 |
| LbL NP-CSP | 10:2.5 | 236.6 ± 97.6 | 14.2 ± 9.3 |
| LbL NP-AMA-CSP | 10:1.5:1.5 | 305.5 ± 92.6 | 13.2 ± 5.6 |
| LbL NP-AMA-MSP-CSP | 10:1.5:1.5:1.5 | 339.1 ± 121.4 | 11.2 ± 4.9 |
Figure 5(A) ELISA antigenicity test for comparison of released AMA, (B) CSP and (C) MSP-1 antigens from TMC nanoparticles with corresponding malaria antigens.
Figure 6Sensorgram fits and corresponding images of (A, B) CSP/3C1 and CSP/2A10 malaria antigen/antibody pairs using a 1:1 biomolecular interaction model to obtain kinetic parameters ka, kd and KD as shown in the insert Table. Anti-CSP antibody (3C1 or 2A10) was spotted as capture antibody (CAb) in 4 different concentrations. CSP protein (10 µg/mL) was then injected in the flow cell and allowed to interact with the immobilized CAb on the chip surface to determine association and dissociation of protein. (C, E) Sensorgrams for the detection of CSP and (D, F) 2-day released CSP from chitosan nanoparticles. Anti-CSP 3C1 as a capture antibody while anti-CSP 2A10 as detection antibody.
Figure 7Mean body weight and organ weight changes over time after IM injection of two doses of LbL NP at concentration of 0-25mg/kg in Sprague‐Dawley rats.
Figure 8ELISA of anti-CSP (A), anti-AMA-1 (B) and anti-MSP-1 (C) induced by 2 doses of immunization of different vaccine candidates incorporated with and without adjuvant ISA 720 and 7DW8-5. Each group has four mice, and the data were averaged from these 4 mouse sera at 20,000 dilutions. (D) PfCSP of P. falciparum -specific T cell responses (IFN-γ ELISPOT) induced by immunization with LbL NP formulations and compared with two other adjuvants ISA 720 and 7DW8-5 using in the vaccine formulations for BALB/c mice study by 2-dose intramuscular injection.
Protection of mice immunized with vaccine candidates against transgenic PfCSP/Py sporozoites administrated intravenously.
| Vaccine formulations | Protected/Challenged | p Value |
|---|---|---|
| Group 1: Naive | 0/6 | |
| Group 2: CSP+ISA720 | 6/6 | 0.061 |
| Group 3: CSP/AMA1/MSP1+ISA720 | 2/6 | 1 |
| Group 4: ISA720 only | 2/6 | |
| Group 5: CSP+7DW8-5 | 5/6 | 0.008 |
| Group 6: CSP/AMA1/MSP1+7DW8-5 | 4/6 | 0.24 |
| Group 7: 7DW8-5 only | 1/6 | |
| Group 8: CSP+LbL NPs | 5/6 | 0. 008 |
| Group 9: CSP/AMA1/MSP1+LbL NPs | 4/6 | 0.24 |
| Group 10: LbL NPs only | 1/6 |
The p value between vaccine candidate group to each adjuvant group.
The p value between vaccine candidate group to naïve group.
*p<0.05 significant.