PLGA encapsulated inactivated-viral vaccine: Formulation and evaluation of its protective efficacy against viral haemorrhagic septicaemia virus (VHSV) infection in olive flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus) vaccinated by mucosal delivery routes

Kole, Sajal; Qadiri, Syed Shariq Nazir; Shin, Su-Mi; Kim, Wi‐Sik; Lee, Jehee; Jung, Sung‐Ju

doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.12.063

Cited by 40 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many variables for vaccine efficacy are present and should be considered when conducting immersion vaccination trials [2]. These include vaccine (antigen) dose, duration of immersion, particulate/soluble antigen uptake during immersion immunization of fish [3], adjuvant performance [4][5][6][7][8][9], temperature [10], fish size (age) [10,11], osmolarity, prime boost strategy [1], mucosal integrity [12,13], replicative vs. non-replicative vaccines [1] and how the experimental pathogen challenges are carried out (e.g., virulence of the challenge pathogen, high or low pathogen pressure/load).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review on Immersion Vaccines for Fish: An Update 2019

Bøgwald

Dalmo

2019

Microorganisms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immersion vaccines are used for a variety of aquacultured fish to protect against infectious diseases caused by bacteria and viruses. During immersion vaccination the antigens are taken up by the skin, gills or gut and processed by the immune system, where the resulting response may lead to protection. The lack of classical secondary responses following repeated immersion vaccination may partly be explained by the limited uptake of antigens by immersion compared to injection. Administration of vaccines depends on the size of the fish. In most cases, immersion vaccination is inferior to injection vaccination with regard to achieved protection. However, injection is problematic in small fish, and fry as small as 0.5 gram may be immersion vaccinated when they are considered adaptively immunocompetent. Inactivated vaccines are, in many cases, weakly immunogenic, resulting in low protection after immersion vaccination. Therefore, during recent years, several studies have focused on different ways to augment the efficacy of these vaccines. Examples are booster vaccination, administration of immunostimulants/adjuvants, pretreatment with low frequency ultrasound, use of live attenuated and DNA vaccines, preincubation in hyperosmotic solutions, percutaneous application of a multiple puncture instrument and application of more suitable inactivation chemicals. Electrostatic coating with positively charged chitosan to obtain mucoadhesive vaccines and a more efficient delivery of inactivated vaccines has also been successful.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review on Immersion Vaccines for Fish: An Update 2019

Bøgwald

Dalmo

2019

Microorganisms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The vaccine consisted in lyophilized virus surrounded by polyethylene glycol (PEG) and then extruded under low temperature ( 99 ). In olive flounder fingerlings, specific anti-VHSV antibody titers were significantly enhanced in serum, and also in the skin and intestinal mucus following vaccination with a poly lactic-co-glycolic acid (PLGA) or chitosan encapsulated formalin-inactivated VHSV vaccine administered together with the feed or by immersion ( 100 , 101 ). Additionally, a significant upregulation of IgM, IgT, pIgR, MHC I, MHC II transcripts was detected in the kidney, skin, and intestine of vaccinated fish ( 100 , 101 ).…”

Section: Comparison Of the Local And Systemic Effects After Immunizatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systemic and Mucosal B and T Cell Responses Upon Mucosal Vaccination of Teleost Fish

Muñoz-Atienza¹,

Díaz‐Rosales²,

Tafalla³

2021

Front. Immunol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development of mucosal vaccines against pathogens is currently a highly explored area of research in both humans and animals. This is due to the fact that mucosal vaccines have the potential to best elicit protective responses at these mucosal surfaces, which represent the frontline of host defense, thus blocking the pathogen at its initial replication sites. However, in order to provide an efficient long-lasting protection, these mucosal vaccines have to be capable of eliciting an adequate systemic immune response in addition to local responses. In aquaculture, the need for mucosal vaccines has further practical implications, as these vaccines would avoid the individual manipulation of fish out of the water, being beneficial from both an economic and animal welfare point of view. However, how B and T cells are organized in teleost fish within these mucosal sites and how they respond to mucosally delivered antigens varies greatly when compared to mammals. For this reason, it is important to establish which mucosally delivered antigens have the capacity to induce strong and long-lasting B and T cell responses. Hence, in this review, we have summarized what is currently known regarding the adaptive immune mechanisms that are induced both locally and systemically in fish after mucosal immunization through different routes of administration including oral and nasal vaccination, anal intubation and immersion vaccination. Finally, based on the data presented, we discuss how mucosal vaccination strategies could be improved to reach significant protection levels in these species.

show abstract

“…Common macromolecules used in nano-capsules include PLGA (poly lactic-co-glycolic acid) (Kole et al, 2019a) and variations of chitosan (Kole et al, 2019b), which have been utilized to target haemorrhagic septicaemia virus (VHSV), Yersinia ruckeri (Dezfuly et al, 2020) and Vibrio (Listonella) anguillarum bacteria (Rajesh Kumar et al, 2008). aptamers that bind with high specificity to the bacteria were affixed to a sensor chip surface.…”

Section: Nanotechnology For Fish Immune Health and Advanced Vaccinementioning

confidence: 99%

Nano‐scale applications in aquaculture: Opportunities for improved production and disease control

Sabo‐Attwood

Apul

Bisesi

et al. 2021

Journal of Fish Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aquaculture has evolved from its earliest documented forms in the Fan Li Dynasty ca 4000 BC (Nash, 2011), to a multi-sector industry, supporting vital food production, globally. With the world's population expected to near 10 billion by 2050 (Anderson, 2010; Conforti et al., 2011), food, energy and water needs have surfaced as the most profound challenges in this new millennium. Global food shortages are exacerbated by reduced crop yields due to global warming and limited availability of water for agriculture. To ensure food security, increases in production volume of staple foods (rice, wheat, etc.), alongside with high calorie protein-based products (meat and fish) are needed. Fish are the most effective protein sources for humans with the highest edible yield (nearly 70% of the body mass utilized) and protein retention (31% vs. 18% for red meat) (Kaiser, 2012). Global production of protein from aquatic species is partially accomplished by marine and freshwater aquaculture practices with the latter producing 50 million metric tons, valued at $100 billion, annually (Bostock et al., 2010). This makes aquaculture the fastest growing food-production sector, comprising nearly 50% of the current seafood supply (Bostock et al., 2010). In addition to food security, aquaculture also plays an important role in habitat restoration, recreation, and threatened and endangered species conservation. Aquaculture is practiced on a global scale using varied approaches (i.e. intensive, extensive) and scales (i.e. high density, low density). Regardless of the application, sustainable aquaculture operations have production-specific challenges and bottlenecks. The ability to manage aquatic disease agents, monitor and maintain animal health constitutes an assemblage of notable challenges

show abstract

PLGA encapsulated inactivated-viral vaccine: Formulation and evaluation of its protective efficacy against viral haemorrhagic septicaemia virus (VHSV) infection in olive flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus) vaccinated by mucosal delivery routes

Cited by 40 publications

References 44 publications

Review on Immersion Vaccines for Fish: An Update 2019

Review on Immersion Vaccines for Fish: An Update 2019

Systemic and Mucosal B and T Cell Responses Upon Mucosal Vaccination of Teleost Fish

Nano‐scale applications in aquaculture: Opportunities for improved production and disease control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About