Comparative analysis of the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV nucleocapsid DNA vaccine administrated with different routes in mouse model

Abstract

The development of strategies to augment the immunogenicity of DNA vaccines is critical for improving their clinical utility. One such strategy involves using the different immune routes with DNA vaccines. In the present study, the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV nucleocapsid DNA vaccine, induced by using the current routine vaccination routes (intramuscularly, by electroporation, or orally using live-attenuated Salmonella typhimurium), was compared in mouse model. The comparison between the three vaccination routes indicated that immunization intramuscularly induced a moderate T cell response and antibody response. Mice administrated by electroporation induced the highest antibody response among the three immunization groups and a mid-level of cellular response. In contrast, the orally DNA vaccine evoked vigorous T cell response and a weak antibody production. These results indicated that the distinct types of immune responses were generated by the different routes of DNA immunization. In addition, our results also show that the delivery of DNA vaccines by electroporation and orally using live-attenuated Salmonella in vivo is an effective method to increase the immune responses. Further studies could be carried out using a combination strategy of both oral and electroporation immunizations to stimulate higher cellular and humoral immune responses.

Mouse STAT2 Restricts Early Dengue Virus Replication

“…One of the primary obstacles to developing such a tool is the lack of robust animal models in which efficacy of a given vaccine or drug can be tested prior to its administration in humans (Chaturvedi et al, 2005). Mouse models have proven useful in this respect for many human viral pathogens including influenza, SARS and Ebola virus (Halfmann et al, 2009; Hu et al, 2009; van der Laan et al, 2008). In addition, mice provide a convenient system for study due to their relative small size, inexpensive maintenance costs and the extensive array of mouse specific genetic tools and reagents available.…”

Enhancing immune responses against SARS-CoV nucleocapsid DNA vaccine by co-inoculating interleukin-2 expressing vector in mice

“…In our previous study, SARS-CoV N DNA vaccination approaches were investigated using different immunization routes in mouse model. We clearly showed that the administration of the N DNA vaccine candidate via different immunization routes could induce a qualitatively different immune response profile (Hu et al 2009). Here, we have shown that intramuscularly vaccination with SARS-CoV N DNA can elicit SARS-CoV N-specific humoral and cellular immune responses, and these responses could be significantly enhanced by co-administrating an IL-2expressing vector.…”

Establishment of functional influenza virus-specific CD8+ T cell memory pools after intramuscular immunization

“…While one inoculation route may be efficacious for a particular vaccine, such route may not be as effective for vaccine-induced protection in a different disease context [34,35]. This notion holds true for the use of live-virus vaccines, where different inoculation routes not only affect the overall protective effect of the vaccine but also the type, range and localization of ensuing responses [36][37][38].…”