Background Snakebite envenomation exerts a heavy toll in sub-Saharan Africa. The design and production of effective polyspecific antivenoms for this region demand a better understanding of the immunological characteristics of the different venoms from the most medically important snakes, to select the most appropriate venom combinations for generating antivenoms of wide neutralizing scope. Bitis spp. and Echis spp. represent the most important viperid snake genera in Africa. Methodology/Principal findings Eight rabbit-derived monospecific antisera were raised against the venoms of four species of Bitis spp. and four species of Echis spp. The effects of immunization in the rabbits were assessed, as well as the development of antibody titers, as judged by immunochemical assays and neutralization of lethal, hemorrhagic, and in vitro coagulant effects. At the end of immunizations, local and pulmonary hemorrhage, together with slight increments in the plasma activity of creatine kinase (CK), were observed owing to the action of hemorrhagic and myotoxic venom components. Immunologic analyses revealed a considerable extent of cross-reactivity of monospecific antisera against heterologous venoms within each genus, although some antisera provided a more extensive cross-reactivity than others. The venoms that generated antisera with the broadest coverage were those of Bitis gabonica and B. rhinoceros within Bitis spp. and Echis leucogaster within Echis spp. Conclusions/Significance The methodology followed in this study provides a rational basis for the selection of the best combination of venoms for generating antivenoms of high cross-reactivity against viperid venoms in sub-Saharan Africa. Results suggest that the venoms of B. gabonica, B. rhinoceros, and E. leucogaster generate antisera with the broadest cross-reactivity within their genera. These experimental results in rabbits need to be translated to large animals used in antivenom production to assess whether these predictions are reproduced in horses or sheep.
The lethality neutralization assay in mice is the gold standard for the evaluation of the preclinical efficacy and specification fulfillment of snake antivenoms. However, owing to the animal suffering involved, this assay is a candidate to be replaced by in vitro alternatives or, at least, improved by the reduction of the number of animals used per experiment, the introduction of analgesia, and the refinement of the test. Since these tests are usually run for 24 or 48 h, one possibility to refine it is to shorten the endpoint observation time of the assay and so limiting the duration of suffering. To assess the effect of this modification of the standard procedure on the analytical properties of the assay, we compared the median lethal dose (LD 50 ) and median effective dose (ED 50 ) values, estimated through observation times of 6, 24 and 48 h. We used African and Latin American snake venoms and several batches of two polyspecific antivenoms. A significant correlation was found between LD 50 and ED 50 values estimated at the three observation times. Although some LD 50 and ED 50 values were significantly different at these time points, results of 6 h were robust enough to be used in the characterization of new antivenoms, the verification of specification compliance, and the parallel comparison of formulations. Our observations support the modification of the standard procedures used for assessing neutralizing ability of antivenoms by carrying out the observations at 6 h instead of 24 or 48 h, with the consequent reduction in the suffering inflicted upon mice during these assays. However, the shortening of the observation time in the lethality tests must be validated for each venom and antivenom before its introduction in the routine procedures.
Background Envenomations by African snakes represent a high burden in the sub-Sahara region. The design and fabrication of polyspecific antivenoms with a broader effectiveness, specially tailored for its use in sub-Saharan Africa, require a better understanding of the immunological features of different Naja spp. venoms of highest medical impact in Africa; and to select the most appropriate antigen combinations to generate antivenoms of wider neutralizing scope. Methodology/principal findings Rabbit-derived monospecific antisera were raised against the venoms of five spitting cobras and six non-spitting cobras. The effects of immunization in the animal model were assessed, as well as the development of antibody titers, as proved by immunochemical assays and neutralization of lethal, phospholipase A2 and dermonecrotic activities. By the end of the immunization schedule, the immunized rabbits showed normal values of all hematological parameters, and no muscle tissue damage was evidenced, although alterations in aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) suggested a degree of hepatic damage caused mainly by spitting cobra venoms. Immunologic analyses revealed a considerable extent of cross-reactivity of monospecific antisera against heterologous venoms within the spitting and no-spitting cobras, yet some antisera showed more extensive cross-reactivity than others. The antisera with the widest coverage were those of anti-Naja ashei and anti-N. nigricollis for the spitting cobras, and anti-N. haje and anti-N. senegalensis for the non-spitting cobras. Conclusions/significance The methods and study design followed provide a rationale for the selection of the best combination of venoms for generating antivenoms of high cross-reactivity against cobra venoms in sub-Saharan Africa. Results suggest that venoms from N. ashei, N. nigricollis within the spitting cobras, and N. haje and N. senegalensis within the non-spitting cobras, generate antisera with a broader cross-reactivity. These experimental results should be translated to larger animal models used in antivenom elaboration to assess whether these predictions are reproduced.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.