Rubella reimmunization: comparative analysis of the immunoglobulin G response to rubella virus vaccine in previously seronegative and seropositive individuals

Mitchell, Leslie A.; Ho, Mhk; Rogers, Justin; Tingle, Aubrey J.; Marusyk, R. G.; Weber, J. M.; Duclos, Philippe; Tepper, Martin; Lacroix, Martial; Zrein, Maan

doi:10.1128/jcm.34.9.2210-2218.1996

Cited by 24 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast to the immunodominant E1 glycoprotein, antibodies to E2 have limited neutralizing activity and E2 lacks the ability to elicit antibodies that inhibit hemagglutination. [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ] While antibodies to E1 are functional in virus neutralization by hampering virus attachment/cell entry and E1 conformational changes/trimerization during cell entry, the neutralization mechanism of anti-E2 antibodies remains largely unknown. [ 48 ] Glycoprotein E2 function warrants additional studies, but this protein is likely involved in conformational changes during virus entry and maturation, E1 activation, E1 trafficking, and virus membrane budding.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[ 6 ] The E1 protein, in particular, is considered to be the immunodominant and hemagglutation-eliciting antigen that predominantly contributes to protective immunity. [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 ] Assays such as whole- rubella virus, recombinant protein and synthetic peptide-based enzyme immunoassays (including immunoblot), hemagglutination inhibition assays, and neutralization assays (including a high-throughput immunocolorimetric-based neutralization assay) have been used in large studies for surveillance of rubella vaccine-induced immunity. [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ] Recent papers and expert reviews from the literature point to the lack of standardization of the international rubella antibody standard and the currently used commercial anti-rubella IgG antibody (Ab) assays (leading to misinterpretation of results), and recommend improved and/or alternative approaches in rubella serology testing (including qualitative testing and/or testing without the use of the existing RUBI-1-94 international rubella Ab standard for calibration of assays).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Characterization of rubella-specific humoral immunity following two doses of MMR vaccine using proteome microarray technology

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction//BackgroundThe lack of standardization of the currently used commercial anti-rubella IgG antibody assays leads to frequent misinterpretation of results for samples with low/equivocal antibody concentration. The use of alternative approaches in rubella serology could add new information leading to a fuller understanding of rubella protective immunity and neutralizing antibody response after vaccination.MethodsWe applied microarray technology to measure antibodies to all rubella virus proteins in 75 high and 75 low rubella virus-specific antibody responders after two MMR vaccine doses. These data were used in multivariate penalized logistic regression modeling of rubella-specific neutralizing antibody response after vaccination.ResultsWe measured antibodies to all rubella virus structural proteins (i.e., the glycoproteins E1 and E2 and the capsid C protein) and to the non-structural protein P150. Antibody levels to each of these proteins were: correlated with the neutralizing antibody titer (p<0.006); demonstrated differences between the high and the low antibody responder groups (p<0.008); and were components of the model associated with/predictive of vaccine-induced rubella virus-specific neutralizing antibody titers (misclassification error = 0.2).ConclusionOur study supports the use of this new technology, as well as the use of antibody profiles/patterns (rather than single antibody measures) as biomarkers of neutralizing antibody response and correlates of protective immunity in rubella virus serology.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of rubella-specific humoral immunity following two doses of MMR vaccine using proteome microarray technology

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Immunity against rubella is directed against the E1 protein with neutralizing antibody titres most accurately correlating with protection from infection. However, SNA titres are less commonly measured than for measles; thus, binding IgG measured by enzyme-linked immunoassay (EIA) are also used to assess levels of rubella-specific immunity [36][37][38][39]. Furthermore, as with measles, although genotypic variation exists, these are not associated with antigenic differences in key epitopes; thus, only a single serotype consistently susceptible to vaccineinduced neutralizing antibodies has been identified [24].…”

Section: Rubellamentioning

confidence: 99%

Study protocol for a phase 1/2, single-centre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, active-controlled, age de-escalation trial to assess the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of a measles and rubella vaccine delivered by a microneedle patch in healthy adults (18 to 40 years), measles and rubella vaccine-primed toddlers (15 to 18 months) and measles and rubella vaccine-naïve infants (9 to 10 months) in The Gambia [Measles and Rubella Vaccine Microneedle Patch Phase 1/2 Age De-escalation Trial]

Adigweme

Akpalu

Yisa

et al. 2022

Trials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background New strategies to increase measles and rubella vaccine coverage, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, are needed if elimination goals are to be achieved. With this regard, measles and rubella vaccine microneedle patches (MRV-MNP), in which the vaccine is embedded in dissolving microneedles, offer several potential advantages over subcutaneous delivery. These include ease of administration, increased thermostability, an absence of sharps waste, reduced overall costs and pain-free administration. This trial will provide the first clinical trial data on MRV-MNP use and the first clinical vaccine trial of MNP technology in children and infants. Methods This is a phase 1/2, randomized, active-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, age de-escalation trial. Based on the defined eligibility criteria for the trial, including screening laboratory investigations, 45 adults [18–40 years] followed by 120 toddlers [15–18 months] and 120 infants [9–10 months] will be enrolled in series. To allow double-blinding, participants will receive either the MRV-MNP and a placebo (0.9% sodium chloride) subcutaneous (SC) injection or a placebo MNP and the MRV by SC injection (MRV-SC). Local and systemic adverse event data will be collected for 14 days following study product administration. Safety laboratories will be repeated on day 7 and, in the adult cohort alone, on day 14. Unsolicited adverse events including serious adverse events will be collected until the final study visit for each participant on day 180. Measles and rubella serum neutralizing antibodies will be measured at baseline, on day 42 and on day 180. Cohort progression will be dependent on review of the unblinded safety data by an independent data monitoring committee. Discussion This trial will provide the first clinical data on the use of a MNP to deliver the MRV and the first data on the use of MNPs in a paediatric population. It will guide future product development decisions for what may be a key technology for future measles and rubella elimination. Trial registration Pan-African Clinical Trials Registry 202008836432905. ClinicalTrials.govNCT04394689

show abstract

“…The E1 and E2 rubella protein spikes are anchored to the external layer of the membrane, with membrane-bound E2 proteins bridging rows of E1 proteins, considered as the main immunodominant antigens responsible for controlling receptor-mediated endocytosis (Petruzziello et al, 1996;Katow and Sugiura, 1985). Antibody levels against the neutralizing domain of E1 correlate with protection against rubella virus (Mitchell et al, 1996;Cordoba et al, 2000;Wilson et al, 2006). Rubella virus is spread from person-to-person via the respiratory route and is the causative agent of rubella disease, commonly known as German measles (Lambert et al, 2015).…”

Section: Rubella Virus Classification Epidemiology Immunology and mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Late immunity is shifted to predominantly proinflammatory cytokine profiles via increased concentrations of IL-6, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, and TNF-a, in combination with decreases in IL-10 (Dhiman et al, 2010). Human leukocyte antigens (HLAs), known to play critical roles in immune response to viruses, contribute to the heterogeneity of the immune response to rubella virus as a result of their polymorphic nature, whereby HLA class I and II polymorphisms restrict the available repertoire of rubella antigens presented to T cells and therefore influence the subsequent immune response (Mitchell et al, 1996;Ou et al, 1994Ou et al, , 1998. Current efforts are placed on deciphering the immunogenetics of antirubella humoral and cell-mediated immune responses, with a focus on better understanding HLA polymorphisms toward the development of vaccine candidates that utilize constructs comprised of HLA-specific epitopes that can induce immunity across heterogenetic populations, reviewed in Lambert et al (2015).…”

Section: Rubella Virus Classification Epidemiology Immunology and mentioning

confidence: 99%

T Lymphocytes as Measurable Targets of Protection and Vaccination Against Viral Disorders

Monette

Mouland

2019

International Review of Cell and Molecular Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Continuous epidemiological surveillance of existing and emerging viruses and their associated disorders is gaining importance in light of their abilities to cause unpredictable outbreaks as a result of increased travel and vaccination choices by steadily growing and aging populations. Close surveillance of outbreaks and herd immunity are also at the forefront, even in industrialized countries, where previously eradicated viruses are now at risk of re-emergence due to instances of strain recombination, contractions in viral vector geographies, and from their potential use as agents of bioterrorism. There is a great need for the rational design of current and future vaccines targeting viruses, with a strong focus on vaccine targeting of adaptive immune effector memory T cells as the gold standard of immunity conferring long-lived protection against a wide variety of pathogens and malignancies. Here, we review viruses that have historically caused large outbreaks and severe lethal disorders, including respiratory, gastric, skin, hepatic, neurologic, and hemorrhagic fevers. To observe trends in vaccinology against these viral disorders, we describe viral genetic, replication, transmission, and tropism, host-immune evasion strategies, and the epidemiology and health risks of their associated syndromes. We focus on immunity generated against both natural infection and vaccination, where a steady shift in conferred vaccination immunogenicity is observed from quantifying activated and proliferating, long-lived effector memory T cell subsets, as the prominent biomarkers of long-term immunity against viruses and their associated disorders causing high morbidity and mortality rates.

show abstract

Rubella reimmunization: comparative analysis of the immunoglobulin G response to rubella virus vaccine in previously seronegative and seropositive individuals

Cited by 24 publications

References 39 publications

Characterization of rubella-specific humoral immunity following two doses of MMR vaccine using proteome microarray technology

Characterization of rubella-specific humoral immunity following two doses of MMR vaccine using proteome microarray technology

T Lymphocytes as Measurable Targets of Protection and Vaccination Against Viral Disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About