Protective Effects of Human Gamma-Globulin Preparations against Experimental Aerosol Infections of Mice with Bordetella pertussis

Abstract

The protective effects of three types of pooled human gamma-globulin preparations (intact; GG, S-sulfonated: GGS, and pepsin-treated: GGP) for intravenous use against experimental aerosol infection of mice with Bordetella pertussis have been evaluated. The gamma-globulin preparations GG and GGS showed significant protective activity whereas GGP did not, as evaluated by survival numbers, body weight gains and suppression of leucocytosis. GG and GGS but not GGP also possessed neutralizing activity against leucocytosis-promoting and histamine-sensitizing activities of pertussis toxin (PT). Evaluation of protective activities of GG, GGS and GGP prepared from rabbit gamma-globulin, highly immunized with PT and not containing any anti-F-HA (filamentous haemagglutinin) or agglutinin antibodies, demonstrated that anti-PT-GG and anti-PT-GGS but not anti- PT-GGP protected against experimental infection by B. pertussis. These studies showed that the protective activity was correlated with anti-PT titre but that the Fc portion of the gamma-globulin molecule is necessary for actual protection against whooping cough by B. pertussis.

Treatment of severe pertussis by administration of specific gamma globulin with high titers anti‐toxin antibody

“…It was reported that intact and sulfonated human gamma globulin preparations showed significant protective activity against aerosol infection of mice with B. pertussis, but pepsin-treated gamma globulin had no effect (7,8). It is thought that FHA is related to the attachment of B. pertussis to susceptible cells and PT has many physiologic function, for example leukocyte promotion, histamine sensitization and the secretion of insulin (6).…”

Effect of Human Immunoglobulin Preparations on Experimental Bordetella pertussis Infection in Mice

“…As all the preparations employed had almost equal amounts of anti-LPF and anti-FHA antibodies (table III), it could not be concluded that the differences in the efficacy were due to the differences in the amounts of antibodies contained in these IGIV preparations. Imaizumi et al [ 19] have reported that a Pep-G preparation was hardly effective, although a S-G preparation showed sig nificant protective activity against aerosol infection of mice with B. pertussis. The Pep-G results of Imaizumi et al are in agreement with ours but the S-G results are inconsistent.…”