2018
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciy327
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Imprinting of Repeated Influenza A/H3 Exposures on Antibody Quantity and Antibody Quality: Implications for Seasonal Vaccine Strain Selection and Vaccine Performance

Abstract: Our results suggest that repeated H3 exposures imprinted not only antibody quantity but also antibody quality. The "naive" ferret model currently used for vaccine strain selection does not recapitulate the complexity of human preexisting immunity. Vaccine strains identified hereby may not provide coverage sufficient for those who were frequently infected and/or vaccinated, leading to the reduced VE observed.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
69
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(70 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
(75 reference statements)
1
69
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this regard, ferrets that were vaccinated with a split-virion influenza vaccine following influenza A (H1N1) A/USSR/90/1977 infection earlier in their life showed less illness after infection with influenza A (H1N1)pdm09 A/California/07/2009 as compared with vaccinated ferrets who were not previously infected with influenza A (H1N1) A/USSR/90/1977 [25]. Moreover, it was recently shown that recurring exposures to influenza A (H3) in humans was associated with higher antibody titers, enhanced antibody affinity, as well as enhanced antibody avidity following influenza vaccination, as compared with individuals not previously exposed [26]. Additional research may be required to further explain the differences in VE point estimates between the younger and older age groups found in the present study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, ferrets that were vaccinated with a split-virion influenza vaccine following influenza A (H1N1) A/USSR/90/1977 infection earlier in their life showed less illness after infection with influenza A (H1N1)pdm09 A/California/07/2009 as compared with vaccinated ferrets who were not previously infected with influenza A (H1N1) A/USSR/90/1977 [25]. Moreover, it was recently shown that recurring exposures to influenza A (H3) in humans was associated with higher antibody titers, enhanced antibody affinity, as well as enhanced antibody avidity following influenza vaccination, as compared with individuals not previously exposed [26]. Additional research may be required to further explain the differences in VE point estimates between the younger and older age groups found in the present study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This increase in breadth was also observed after sequential infections with ELISA titers to total antibody binding [78]. This back-boosting is what contributed to the difference in the naïve vs. pre-immune antigenic maps of different A(H3N2) viruses [79]. The exact mechanism of back-boosting is not completely elucidated [113].…”
Section: Pre-immunity On the Immune Responsementioning
confidence: 92%
“…This illustrated the importance of using a pre-immune model for antigenic characterization and vaccine testing. In fact, when A(H3N2) antigenic maps were produced using sera from naïve or pre-immune ferrets the maps poorly correlated; the classification of whether two viruses were antigenically distinct or similar varied with the model (naïve or pre-immune) [79]. The broader antibody response characterized with A(H1N1) or A(H3N2) sequential infections was extremely informative at the hetero-subtype level [78].…”
Section: Contemporary A(h1n1)/a(h3n2) Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The key to our study design was the elongated recovery period. Previous studies investigating the immune re-encounter with influenza viral antigens or live virus infection are frequently designed with short recoveries of 14 to 28 days separating primary and secondary challenges [34][35][36]. These time frames do not properly account for the actual immunological recovery.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%