Two mucosal–parenteral schedules to coadminister a multiantigenic formulation against HIV-1 in Balb/c mice

Iglesias, Enrique V.; García, Daymir; Márquez, Gabriel; Prieto, Yayrí C.; Sánchez, Jorge; Trimiño, Lian; Soria, Yordanka; García, Duniesky Martinez

doi:10.1016/j.intimp.2011.12.026

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Co-administration using an oral subunit has not previously been shown. However, there are reports of co-administration with oral-or nasal delivered nucleic acid vaccine candidates coupled with injections [37][38][39][40]. Preliminary data here suggest our oral-parenteral coadministration may be a more effective route for providing protection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Co-Administration of Injected and Oral Vaccine Candidates Elicits Improved Immune Responses over Either Route Alone

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Infectious diseases continue to be a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, and although efficacious vaccines are available for many diseases, some parenteral vaccines elicit little or no mucosal antibodies which can be a significant problem since mucosal tissue is the point of entry for 90% of pathogens. In order to provide protection for both serum and mucosal areas, we have tested a combinatorial approach of both parenteral and oral administration of antigens for diseases caused by a viral pathogen, Hepatitis B, and a fungal pathogen, Coccidioides. We demonstrate that co-administration by the parenteral and oral routes is a useful tool to increase the overall immune response. This can include achieving an immune response in tissues that are not elicited when using only one route of administration, providing a higher level of response that can lead to fewer required doses or possibly providing a better response for individuals that are considered poor or non-responders.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Co-Administration of Injected and Oral Vaccine Candidates Elicits Improved Immune Responses over Either Route Alone

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[23], s.c. [25] and even s.c./i.n. coadministration [24]. In this regard, the experimental evidence pointed out to the nucleic acid (doublestranded RNA, dsRNA) content inside the HBcAg as the primary cause [32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ten days after the last doses, the frequency of CR3 (HIV)specifi c IFN- secreting cells was detected in spleen of mice using an enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay as described [24]. Briefl y, nitrocellulose-backed 96-well plates In some experiments 20x10 6 of splenocytes at 2 x10 6 cells/ mL where re-stimulated ex vivo with 2.5μg/mL CR3 protein at 37°C in 5% CO 2 .…”

Section: Quantifi Cation Of Ifn-γ Secreting Cellsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For subcutaneous immunization the antigens were adjuvated in aluminum hydroxide (AlOOH) and nasal administration were carried out with physiological buffers [23]. Furthermore, simultaneous administration of the above mentioned multiantigenic mixture (named TERAVAC) through the nasal and subcutaneous routes to Balb/c mice promoted a Th1-biased CR3 (HIV)-specifi c cellular and humoral immune responses [17,24]. In this regard, the VLP of HBV behaves as Th1 adjuvants enhancing the specifi c anti-CR3 (HIV) immune response and as delivery antigens for effective nasal inoculation [23,25] Considering the high HBV-HIV co-infection rate in some geographic areas, the multiantigenic formulation TERAVAC might elicit protective immunity against both pathogens.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

IMS 4112 and VLP of HBV as Th1 Adjuvants for a Recombinant Protein of HIV-1

Rodríguez-Alonso¹,

García²,

Brown³

et al. 2016

J Vaccines Immunol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Current thinking suggests that vaccination approaches against the HIV-1 should be directed to elicit a Th1 cell-mediated immunity, neutralizing antibodies and/or ADCC mediating antibody responses. Also, experimental evidences suggest that both the systemic and mucosal compartments of the immune system must be stimulated to achieve protection. In this regard, effective adjuvants are necessary. Thus, we developed the multiantigenic vaccine candidate TERAVAC that comprise the recombinant protein CR3 of HIV-1 and the surface (S) and core (C) virus like particles (VLP) of Hepatitis B virus (HBV) as adjuvant to promote a Th1 immune response. On the other side, the new Th1 adjuvant Montanide® IMS 4112 (IMS 4112), an oil-in-water micro-emulsion was developed by SEPPIC. Purpose of study: The aim of this work was to compare the adjuvant effect of IMS 4112 versus HBV VLP on the CR3(HIV-1)-specifi c immune response in Balb/c mice using schedules that combine nasal and/or subcutaneous inoculations. Results: We found a better Th1 response with HBV VLP but a higher IgG response in vagina with IMS 4112 after i.n. inoculation. In s.c. immunization similar immune responses were detected using both adjuvants. When combining i.n. and s.c. coadministration, the HBV VLP seemed to require less immunization doses to achieve detectable proliferation of CD4+ and CD8+ lymphocytes in the systemic compartment. Conclusion: Overall, HBV VLP seem to be a better adjuvant for the recombinant CR3 protein of HIV-1 than the IMS 4112 at the concentration it was used in this study.

show abstract

“…But, to our knowledge, no one has evaluated the coadministration of inactivated vaccine candidates through a parenteral (e.g., intramuscular) and intranasal route in the same schedule of immunization. Previous studies have shown that it produced an enhancement of the immune response in the mucosal and systemic compartment compared with single route schedules of immunization [14][15][16][17]. But, after all, it is maybe not necessary because in a rhesus macaque model of infection after parenteral immunization with PiCoVacc (inactivated vaccine candidate for SARS-CoV-2 developed by Sinovac) and BBIBP-CorV (developed by Sinopharm) the viral replication in throat, the gut and lung tissue was aborted [18,19].…”

Section: Which Previous Research Is Relevant To Develop An Inactivated Vaccine Candidate Against Sars-cov-2 Infection or Covid-19 Diseasementioning

confidence: 99%