|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||






* Department of Microbiology,
Department of Biochemistry, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China;
State Key Laboratory of Pathogen and Biosecurity, Beijing Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology, Beijing, China;
Lindsley F. Kimball Research Institute, New York Blood Center, New York, NY 10021; and
¶ Department of Immunology, Zhongshan School of Medicine, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-producing CD3+/CD8+ T cells in both lungs and spleen; 3) the i.n. vaccination induced similar protection as the i.m. vaccination against SARS-CoV challenge in mice; 4) higher titers of mucosal IgA and serum-neutralizing Ab were associated with lower viral load and less pulmonary pathological damage, while no Ab-mediated disease enhancement effect was observed; and 5) the vaccination could provide long-term protection against SARS-CoV infection. Taken together, our findings suggest that RBD-rAAV can be further developed into a vaccine candidate for prevention of SARS and that i.n. vaccination may be the preferred route of administration due to its ability to induce SARS-CoV-specific systemic and mucosal immune responses and its better safety profile. | Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Among four structural proteins encoded by SARS-CoV, spike protein (S protein) plays an important role in SARS-CoV infection (7, 8, 9). It interacts with the cellular receptor(s) to mediate membrane fusion, allowing viral entry into host cells (10, 11). The S protein is also a major inducer of neutralizing Abs (NA) and protective immunity which prevent SARS-CoV infection (12, 13, 14). Thus, SARS-CoV S protein is a key factor for developing SARS vaccines.
Several vaccine strategies proposed for prevention of SARS include inactivated virus-based vaccines (15), DNA-based vaccines (16), recombinant subunit vaccines (17), and viral vector-based vaccines (18). These vaccine candidates are able to induce protective immune responses against SARS-CoV, including NA and T cell immune responses (14, 19, 20, 21). A majority of these vaccines are based on the SARS-CoV S protein (22, 23, 24, 25).
Recently reported SARS vaccines are based on the full-length or fragments of SARS-CoV S protein (20, 25, 26). They can effectively induce NA, cellular, and/or protective immune responses against SARS-CoV (16, 17, 22). However, some may cause liver damage in those vaccinated animals, in which SARS-CoV infection was not prevented by the mobilized immune responses (27, 28). Thus, vaccines encoding truncated fragments of SARS-CoV S protein may prove to be more promising. In this regard, the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV S protein has been shown to harbor multiple conformation-dependent epitopes that induce highly potent NA responses, and vaccines based on the RBD elicit long-term protective immunity in immunized animals (29, 30, 31, 32), suggesting that candidates based on the RBD can be developed into safe and effective SARS vaccines.
Recombinant adeno-associated virus (rAAV) has emerged as a promising viral vector for vaccine development. As a nonpathogenic parvovirus containing a ssDNA, AAV infects a wide variety of human cell lines, with long-term transgene expression and high transduction efficiency (33, 34, 35). The rAAV encoding different pathogenic Ags can induce vaccinated animals to produce strong immune responses via various delivery methods (36, 37). These appealing qualities have promoted vectors based on the rAAV to be widely used for vaccine development (38, 39, 40). Up to now, eight serotypes of AAV vectors have been described and characterized as vectors for gene therapy, among which the most extensively studied is serotype 2 (AAV-2) (41). In light of this, we used AAV-2 as a vector for delivery of SARS-CoV immunogen.
Our previous study has demonstrated that a rAAV expressing the RBD of SARS-CoV S protein (RBD-rAAV) elicited humoral immune response with neutralizing activity in i.m.-vaccinated BALB/c mice (42). In this study, we further investigated local and systemic immune responses and long-term protective immunity that might be induced by the RBD-rAAV vaccine via i.m. and intranasal (i.n.) administration routes. These two routes were also compared for immunogenicity and protection from SARS-CoV challenge.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
HEK293T cells, for packaging of RBD-rAAV recombinant viral vector, and Vero E6 cells, for neutralization assay, were purchased from American Type Culture Collection. Female BALB/c mice at the age of 4–6 wk were used for i.m. and i.n. vaccinations. All mice for the study were purchased from the Laboratory Animal Unit (University of Hong Kong). Animals were housed in the animal facility of the Department of Microbiology (University of Hong Kong), and maintained in accordance with the animal care protocol. All of the animal studies were approved by the Department of Health (Government of Hong Kong Special Administration Region).
Construction and titration of RBD-rAAV viral vector
The rAAV encoding a 193-aa RBD domain (residues 318–510) of SARS-CoV S protein (RBD-rAAV) was produced as described previously (42). Briefly, RBD-rAAV plasmid was cotransfected with pHelper and pAAV-RC plasmids into HEK293T cells using a calcium phosphate transfection method (Stratagene) according to the manufacturers protocol. Transfected cells and supernatant were harvested 72 h posttransfection. rAAV was purified by chloroform-NaCl-PEG8000 method and titrated by real-time quantitative PCR (Q-PCR) following protocols described in a previous study (42). RBD-rAAV vector was adjusted to 1012 viral particles (VP)/ml in PBS and used for the following vaccinations.
Mice vaccination via i.m. and i.n. routes and sample collection
As shown in Table I, six groups of mice were vaccinated with RBD-rAAV or blank AAV, respectively, via the i.m. and i.n. routes, following the protocols described previously with some modifications (42, 43, 44). For the i.m. vaccination, BALB/c mice were given with a single prime dose (i.m.P) or prime-boost doses at 1.5-mo interval (i.m.B) of RBD-rAAV (2 x 1011 VP/200 µl/dose). For the i.n. vaccination, mice were immunized with a single prime dose (i.n.P) or prime-boost doses at an interval of 0.5 mo (i.n.B) of RBD-rAAV (2 x 1010 VP/20 µl/dose). Two groups of mice i.m. or i.n. vaccinated with prime-boost doses of blank AAV were used as negative controls. Samples were collected as shown in Fig. 1. Four mice per group were challenged with SARS-CoV 1 mo after the booster vaccination (young mice), and five mice/group were boosted at the end of 12 mo postvaccination and challenged with SARS-CoV 15 days later (aged mice).
|
|
Specific IgG and IgA against SARS-CoV in mouse sera and lung flush were tested by ELISA using the protocol described previously with some modifications (42). Briefly, serially diluted mouse sera were added to 96-well microtiter plates precoated with the protein mixture from SARS-CoV viral lysates. The plates were incubated at 37°C for 30 min, followed by four washes with PBS containing 0.1% Tween 20 (PBST). Bound Abs were then reacted with HRP-conjugated goat anti-mouse IgG (DakoCytomation) at 37°C for 20 min. After four washes, the substrate 3,3',5,5'-tetramethylbenzidine (Zymed Laboratories) was added to the plates and the reaction was stopped by adding 1 N H2SO4. The absorbance at 450 nm was measured by an ELISA plate reader (Victor 1420 Multilabel Counter; PerkinElmer). In the case of IgA detection, collected mouse lung flush was added to precoated 96-well microtiter plates and incubated for 1 h. HRP-conjugated goat anti-mouse IgA Ab (Zymed Laboratories) was then added at a dilution of 1/1000 and incubated for 1 h, followed by measurement of absorbance at 450 nm.
Neutralization assay
Titers of NA in sera and lung flush of mice immunized with RBD-rAAV or blank AAV via i.m. and i.n. pathways were detected in Vero E6 cells as previously described (42). Briefly, Vero E6 cells were seeded at 104/well in 96-well culture plates and cultured at 37°C to form a monolayer. Serial 2-fold dilutions of serum samples were mixed separately with 100 TCID50 (50% tissue-culture infectious dose) of SARS-CoV strain GZ50 (GenBank accession no. AY304495), incubated at 37°C for 1 h, and added to the monolayer of Vero E6 cells in tetrad. Cells infected with 100 TCID50 SARS-CoV and without the virus were applied as positive and negative controls, respectively. The cytopathic effect (CPE) in each well was observed daily and recorded on day 3 postinfection. The neutralizing titers of mouse antisera and lung flush that completely prevented CPE in 50% of the wells were calculated by the Reed-Muench method.
IL-2 and IFN-
ELISPOT assay
The assay was performed using an ELISPOT mouse kit (Mabtech) according to the manufacturers protocol and our previous work (45). In brief, 96-well ELISPOT plates were coated with anti-IL-2 and -IFN-
mAbs overnight at 4°C, and blocked by sterile RPMI 1640 containing 10% FBS for 2 h at room temperature. Single-cell suspensions prepared from the spleens of vaccinated mice were added to the wells at the concentration of 2 x 105 cells/well. Cells were incubated for 24 h in the presence or absence of an identified MHC-H-2d-restricted SARS-CoV-specific CTL peptide (N50: S365–374, KCYGVSATKL) (46) plus anti-mouse CD28 mAb (1 µg/ml; BD Pharmingen) at 37°C with 5% CO2. Plates were washed with PBS, followed by incubation with biotinylated-labeled anti-mouse IL-2 and IFN-
mAbs at 1/1000 for 2 h at room temperature. After additional washes, wells were incubated with streptavidin-conjugated HRP for 1 h at room temperature. Wells were extensively washed again, and developed with 3,3',5,5'-tetramethylbenzidine substrate solutions included in the kit. Spots of IL-2 and IFN-
-producing T cells were counted by using an automated ELISPOT reader system and ImmunoSpot 3 software (Cellular Technology). Results were expressed as the number of spot-forming cells (SFC) per 106 input cells.
Cell surface markers/intracellular cytokine staining and FACS
Single-cell suspensions (2 x 106) from spleens and lungs of vaccinated mice were stimulated with or without SARS-CoV S-specific CTL peptide (N50, 1 µg/ml) plus anti-mouse CD28 (1 µg/ml). PMA (5 ng/ml; Sigma-Aldrich) and ionomycin (250 ng/ml; Sigma-Aldrich) were used as positive controls. Cells with stimulatory agents were incubated for 5 h at 37°C with 5% CO2 in the presence of GolgiPlug containing brefeldin A (1 µl/ml; BD Pharmingen). The cells were fixed using a Cytofix/Cytoperm Plus kit in accordance with the manufacturers protocol (BD Pharmingen), and stained directly with conjugated mAbs specific for cell surface Ags (anti-mouse-CD3 (PerCP) and anti-mouse-CD8 (allophycocyanin)) and intracellular cytokines (anti-mouse-IL-2 (PE) and anti-mouse-IFN-
(FITC; BD Pharmingen)) for 30 min at 4°C. Appropriate isotype-matched controls for cytokines were included in each staining. The stained cells were analyzed using a flow cytometer (FACSCalibur; BD Biosciences). Lymphocyte population was gated by forward light scatter vs side light scatter, and 10,000 events for the CD3+/CD8+ lymphocyte subpopulation were acquired to determine the percentage of CD3+/CD8+ T cells positive for specific cytokines. FACS data were analyzed by CellQuest software (BD Biosciences).
SARS-CoV challenge in mice
Mice were anesthetized with isoflurane and i.n. inoculated with 50 µl of SARS-CoV strain GZ50 (100 TCID50) according to national animal care and use guidelines in an approved animal BSL-3 laboratory. The mice were sacrificed 3 days (for young mice) or 8 days (for aged mice) after virus challenge, and the lungs were removed. The lung tissues were stored at –80°C for virological tests or were fixed immediately with 10% buffered formalin for histopathological analysis.
Quantitative RT-PCR
The viral RNA copies in lung tissues of challenged mice were determined by quantitative RT-PCR according to the protocol described previously with some modifications (42, 47). Briefly, total RNA was extracted from 20 mg of lung tissue using an RNeasy Mini kit (Qiagen). Then cDNA was synthesized using random primers and the SuperScript II RT kit (Invitrogen Life Technologies). Extracted RNA (10 µl) was reverse transcribed in a 20-µl reaction mixture containing 1x first strand buffer, 100 mM DTT, 10 mM each dNTP, 50 ng of random primers, 40 U of RNaseOUT, and 200 U of SuperScript II RT at 42°C for 50 min, followed by 15 min at 70°C. The solution was incubated with RNase H (Invitrogen Life Technologies) at 37°C for 20 min. Synthesized cDNA was quantified using Power SYBR Green PCR Master Mix (Applied Biosystems) in a 20-µl mixture containing 5 µl of cDNA (1/10), 10 µl of 2 x Power SYBR Green PCR Master Mix, 3 µl of RNase-free H2O, 10 µM forward primer F (5'-GCT TAG GCC CTT TGA GAG AGA CA-3') and reverse primer R (5'-GCC AAT GCC AGT AGT GGT GTA A-3') in a Mx3000 QPCR System (Stratagene).
Histopathological analysis
The lung tissues of challenged mice were immediately fixed in 10% buffered formalin and embedded in paraffin wax. Sections were made of 4- to 6-µm thickness and mounted on slides. Histopathological changes caused by SARS-CoV infection were examined by H&E staining and viewed under the light microscope as described previously (48, 49).
Statistical analysis
Values were presented as mean with SE. Statistical significance among different vaccination groups was calculated by the Student t test using Stata statistical software. Values of p < 0.05 were considered significant.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To evaluate the long-term systemic humoral immune response to RBD-rAAV vaccination, and to compare the differences between immune responses to vaccination via i.m. and i.n. routes, serum samples collected from vaccinated mice at different time points were detected by ELISA for specific IgG Ab to SARS-CoV. As shown in Fig. 2A, a single prime dose i.m. vaccination of RBD-rAAV (RBD.im.P) induced a moderate level of specific IgG and sustained this during the 12-mo observation period, while i.m. prime-boost immunization of RBD-rAAV (RBD.im.B) induced a high level of IgG Ab response, which reached the peak within 3 mo, maintained the plateau level for 3 more months, and gradually decreased to a moderate level at 12 mo postimmunization. A single prime dose i.n. vaccination of RBD-rAAV did not induce significant Ab response (data not shown). After booster (RBD.in.B), the vaccination quickly elicited a high level of IgG Ab response, reaching the highest titer 1 mo postvaccination, which was almost the same level as that of RBD.im.B. between months 3 and 6. However, the IgG Ab level also dropped down to a low level a month later and was maintained at a similar level thereafter. NA levels in these serum samples were further detected by neutralization assay using SARS-CoV, which showed a similar pattern as that of the IgG Ab responses (Fig. 2B). These results indicated that i.n. vaccination induced a similar NA level but shorter duration systemic humoral immune response than i.m. immunization.
|
|
Intranasal vaccination induced strong CTL responses in spleen and lungs
To examine CTL responses induced by RBD-rAAV vaccination, splenocytes and lung lymphocytes were measured by ELISPOT and FACS. As shown in Fig. 4, i.n. vaccination of RBD-rAAV (RBD.in.B) induced a markedly higher level of Ag-specific IL-2+ T cells but a slightly lower level of IFN-
+ T cells in the spleen, as compared with those from the i.m. vaccination group (RBD.im.B). Nevertheless, splenocytes from mice receiving i.n. or i.m. vaccinations of blank AAV did not show Ag-specific CTL responses, resembling the negative controls that were significantly less responsive than RBD-rAAV vaccination groups (p < 0.05). In contrast, single dose i.m. or i.n. vaccination with RBD-rAAV did not induce significant IL-2+ and IFN-
+ T cell response (data not shown), suggesting that booster immunization is necessary for inducing Ag-specific CTL response. The above data showed that i.n. vaccination could induce much stronger systemic IL-2+ CTL response than i.m. vaccination, while IFN-
+ CTL response elicited by i.m and i.n. routes was of comparable strength. Specific CTL responses induced by RBD-rAAV vaccinations were further evaluated in the mouse splenocytes and lung lymphocytes by cell surface marker and intracellular cytokine staining followed by FACS. As shown in Fig. 5, RBD-rAAV i.n. vaccination (RBD.in.B) induced a markedly higher frequency of IL-2+ cells in the CD3+/CD8+ T cell population in both splenocytes and lung cells, as compared with RBD-rAAV i.m. vaccination (RBD.im.B). In addition, IFN-
-producing CD3+/CD8+ T cells were significantly higher in splenocytes of RBD-rAAV i.n.-vaccinated vs i.m.-vaccinated mice, but were similar or slightly lower in lung lymphocytes of i.n.-vaccinated vs i.m.-immunized mice. However, a single prime dose i.m. and i.n. vaccinations with RBD-rAAV merely yielded low or undetectable levels of IL-2+ and IFN-
+ CTL responses (data not shown). These results demonstrated that both i.m. and i.n. vaccination with RBD-rAAV could induce SARS-CoV specific CTL responses, and the i.n. route elicited higher systemic (in splenocytes) and local (in lungs) CTL responses than the i.m. route.
|
|
The protective efficacies of the vaccinations were further investigated in the mice challenged with 100 TCID50 of SARS-CoV strain GZ50. Mice were sacrificed 3 days postchallenge, and virus replication was assessed by viral load in challenged mouse lung tissue by Q-RT-PCR. Fig. 6 shows that viral loads (RNA copies/µg of lung tissues) in all mice immunized with RBD-rAAV were significantly lower than that of the corresponding control group immunized with blank AAV via i.m. and i.n. routes (p < 0.05), indicating that SARS-CoV replication was suppressed in vaccinated mice.
|
To understand the relationship between immune responses, vaccination pathways, and virus protection, mouse sera were collected before virus challenge to detect serum-specific IgG Ab levels and NA activities. Lung flush from corresponding mice was also collected for detecting specific IgA Ab. It was shown in Table II that there were clear correlations among the levels of SARS-CoV-specific serum IgG Ab, lung flush IgA Ab, NA, and the protection against i.n. virus challenge with live SARS-CoV. In general, a higher serum IgG titer correlated with a higher NA titer, resulting in a higher protection from virus challenge. For example, i.m. prime boost of RBD-rAAV (RBD.im.B) induced a higher serum IgG titer of 8.0 ± 1.6 x 103 and a higher NA titer of 3.7 ± 1.4 x 102 at the time of virus challenge, accompanied by a lower viral load of 0.6 ± 0.6 x 102 detected in the mouse lung tissue after challenge. In contrast, i.m. single prime dose of RBD-rAAV (RBD.im.P) elicited a lower serum IgG titer (3.2 x 103) and a lower NA titer (1.2 ± 0.4 x 102), leading to a higher virus replication (1.1 ± 0.2 x 102) in the mouse lung tissue. However, IgA produced in mouse lungs in i.n.-vaccinated mice (RBD.in.B) could also play a part in suppressing SARS-CoV replication, even though serum IgG Ab or NA levels were lower than that of the i.m.-vaccinated mice. For instance, RBD.in.B induced a much higher titer of IgA in mouse lungs, but lower serum IgG Ab and NA titers than RBD.im.B, while virus replication in i.n. prime boost (0.5 ± 0.2 x 102) was lower than in i.m. prime boost. These data indicated that both mucosal- (local) and serum- (systemic) specific Abs, especially NAs, could provide some protection for vaccinated mice from subsequent virus challenge, while mucosal immune response was indispensable for controlling SARS-CoV infection.
|
To detect the long-term protective effect of the candidate vaccine against SARS-CoV infection, mice (five mice per group) were boosted with RBD-rAAV 12 mo after the first RBD-rAAV immunization, and challenged with 100 TCID50 of SARS-CoV. Challenged mice were sacrificed 8 days postchallenge for examination of histopathological changes. Serious pulmonary interstitial pneumonias were observed in the lung tissues of all control mice vaccinated with blank AAV after SARS-CoV challenge (Fig. 7A). The lung showed broadening interstitial spaces, focal fusions with some alveolar compensatory expansion, pulmonary vascular dilatation and congestion, focal hemorrhage and exudation, scattered lymphocytic infiltration, especially perivascular infiltration. Focal desquamation of epithelial cells into alveolar spaces was found with scattered RBC and variable numbers of macrophages. Multinucleate giant cells were found in the alveoli and pulmonary interstitial space. Bronchial epithelial showed cytopathic effect, including necrosis and desquamation with a small amount of exudation and lymphocytic infiltration. In contrast, mice that had received RBD-rAAV vaccination showed no significant pulmonary effect after virus challenge. Three mice (three of five) in i.m. single prime dose and four mice (four of five) in i.m. or i.n. prime-boost doses presented normal lung structures or developed slightly interstitial pneumonia in the lung tissues with occasionally lymphocytic infiltration. Other mice in RBD-rAAV-vaccinated groups developed mild pulmonary interstitial pneumonia compared with those of the control AAV group (Fig. 7B). The above results demonstrated that RBD-rAAV vaccinations lessened the alveolar damage of challenged mouse lungs, and provided long-term protective immunity to prevent vaccinated mice from SARS-CoV infection.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The rAAV vector has been recently applied for delivering vaccine Ags of various pathogens, with production of specific serum and mucosal Abs without the help of an adjuvant (38, 54). It is the only nonpathogenic viral vector now available and has been used successfully to establish long-term gene expression without toxicity in both dividing and nondividing cells (37). In addition, rAAV has the capacity of highly efficient transduction of target cell types such as muscles (33, 55) and low intrinsic adjuvant properties. These features have placed rAAV in a unique position over other contemporary candidates in SARS vaccine development.
Our previous study has shown that RBD-rAAV vaccination can elicit high humoral immune response with neutralizing activities through the i.m. route (42). This study was designed to further determine whether this candidate vaccine can provide protective immunity by different vaccination pathways, which pathway provides better protection, as well as record any side effects the vaccination may have. Thus, we compared the systemic, local humoral and cellular immune responses of BALB/c mice vaccinated with RBD-rAAV via i.m. and i.n. routes, and challenged the vaccinated animals with SARS-CoV to investigate the protective immunity and potential side effects.
Compared with i.m. vaccination, a single prime dose i.n. vaccination with RBD-rAAV could not induce detectable systemic humoral immune response (results not shown). After booster immunization, however, i.n. vaccination induced systemic Ab response of a similar level with shorter duration (Fig. 2), but much stronger and prolonged (lasting at least 5 mo) mucosal IgA Ab response with neutralizing activity (Fig. 3). One advantage of using viral vectors to deliver vaccine candidates is that the live viral vectors may induce strong mucosal humoral immune response (56), which may not be achieved by other types of vaccine candidates, such as protein and DNA vaccines (57, 58). Because the respiratory tract is the natural infection site of SARS-CoV, RBD-rAAV vaccination of the lung via the i.n. route may play an important role for prevention of SARS-CoV infection by inducing a high level of IgA Ab with neutralizing activity. This has been confirmed in our study. Our results showed that the protective efficacy of RBD-rAAV vaccination against SARS-CoV infection is correlated with the Ab level, especially lung IgA Ab level (Table II). Although the i.n. vaccination induced lower systemic Ab responses than the i.m. vaccination, it provided higher protection against virus challenge (Fig. 6).
AAV-based vaccines have been shown to be able to induce both strong humoral and cell-mediated immunity (37). Our study also demonstrated that RBD-rAAV vaccination can induce not only strong humoral but also strong CTL responses. Surprisingly, the i.n. vaccination of RBD-rAAV also elicited stronger specific CTL responses, as indicated by higher frequencies of IL-2 and/or IFN-
-producing CD3+/CD8+ cells not only in the lung but also in the spleen, than the i.m. vaccination (Fig. 5). It is well-known that cellular immune responses, especially CTL responses, play an important role in antiviral immunity (59, 60). It has been further reported that pulmonary T cell immunity is important in protecting naive natural hosts against pulmonary viral infections (61). Thus, higher frequencies of SARS-CoV-specific CTL induced by the i.n. vaccination, especially those pulmonary CTL, may also contribute to higher protective efficacy mediated by the i.n. immunization. However, potential functional differences between IL-2 and IFN-
-producing CTL in suppressing SARS-CoV infection are unclear and should be further investigated.
Although humoral responses induced by RBD-rAAV vaccination dropped down to very low levels at 12 mo postvaccination, the Ab levels increased quickly after the animals received booster immunization, reaching the highest level (Fig. 2), which provided a potent protection against SARS-CoV challenge in the animals (Fig. 7). This may be attributed to the low antigenicity of the AAV vector itself, which does not induce significant immunity against AAV to interfere with the booster immunization, and administrated with AAV-based vaccines via the i.n. route may ward off the humoral immune response against AAV capsid proteins (62). In contrast, for other viral vectors with high antigenicity, such as adenovirus, the immune effects of vaccination may be significantly affected by the pre-existing immunity against adenovirus acquired through either natural infection or primary vaccination (53, 63).
It should be noted that some viral vector-based SARS vaccine candidates might have a harmful impact or side effects. For example, rMVA-based SARS vaccine candidate has been shown to produce strong Ab-mediated disease enhancement (ADE) effects, in which NA induced by SARS-CoV S protein did not protect ferrets from SARS-CoV challenge, but increased viral replication, or inflammatory responses (27, 28). Our study showed that both i.n. and i.m. vaccinations with RBD-rAAV did not cause ADE. In contrast, the higher IgG/IgA Ab and NA levels were associated with lower viral replication (Fig. 6, Table II) and less pathological damage (Fig. 7).
It has been reported that the wild-type AAV DNA is able to integrate into the human genome at specific sites, preferentially on chromosome 19q, and rAAV vectors may integrate randomly into nonchromosome 19q locations, although with low frequency (64). In this regard, mucosal immunization offers greater advantage in preventing potential long-term side effects which may be induced by i.m. vaccination of the rAAV vector, because the regenerated AAV-gene integrated surface mucosal cells are rapidly replaced by basal cells from mucosa.
As a vaccine vector for delivering Ags of various pathogens, rAAV has the characteristics of eliciting specific serum and mucosal Abs without the help of an adjuvant (38, 54). Likewise, rAAV vector expressing the RBD of SARS-CoV S protein was able to induce serum IgG and/or mucosal IgA immune responses as well as protection against SARS-CoV infection in the established mouse model. The major limitation of the rAAV vector is its inability to package DNA inserts >4.7 kb (65). However, for a RBD-based vaccine, only an insert of <1.0 kb is needed to be packaged in the RBD-rAAV vector. Therefore, the function of the RBD-rAAV vector is not affected by the insert size limitation. Further studies are warranted to determine the immune responses of RBD-rAAV in the presence of long-term RBD Ag expression and using different vaccination regimens, e.g., priming with DNA vaccine expressing the RBD and boosting with RBD-rAAV, as the adenovirus vector-based vaccine strategies (66).
Taken together, our study demonstrated that i.n. vaccination with RBD-rAAV can induce systemic humoral immune response of comparable strength but shorter duration, much stronger local humoral immune response, and stronger systemic and pulmonary CTL response, as compared with i.m. vaccination. The immune responses elicited by i.n. route can provide similar protection as i.m. route against SARS-CoV challenge in vaccinated mice. It is well-known that SARS is a pulmonary infection and the respiratory tract is the portal of entry for SARS-CoV. As the first line of defense to combat respiratory tract pathogens, the i.n. vaccination pathway can induce both local and systemic immune responses (54). Furthermore, it has also been demonstrated that this vaccination strategy did not cause ADE in the animals, and the risk of long-term side effects potentially resulting from the integration of the AAV gene into the host chromosome might also be minimized. Therefore, compared with the i.m. route, i.n. vaccination with RBD-rAAV may fulfill multiple criteria for an effective and safe SARS-CoV vaccine.
| Disclosures |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
1 This work was supported by the Research Fund for the Control of Infectious Diseases, the Health, Welfare and Food Bureau of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government; by the National 973 Basic Research Program of China (2005CB523001); and by the National Institutes of Health of the United States (RO1 AI68002). ![]()
2 Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Bo-Jian Zheng, Department of Microbiology, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, China. E-mail address: bzheng{at}hkucc.hku.hk or Dr. Yusen Zhou, State Key Laboratory of Pathogen and Biosecurity, Beijing Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology, Beijing 100071, China. E-mail address: yszhou{at}nic.bmi.ac.cn ![]()
3 Abbreviations used in this paper: SARS, severe acute respiratory syndrome; SARS-CoV, SARS coronavirus; S protein, spike protein; NA, neutralizing Ab; RBD, receptor-binding domain; rAAV, recombinant adeno-associated virus; i.n., intranasal; TCID50, 50% tissue culture infectious dose; VP, viral particle; CPE, cytopathic effect; SFC, spot-forming cell; Q-RT-PCR, quantitative RT-PCR; ADE, Ab-mediated disease enhancement. ![]()
Received for publication June 8, 2007. Accepted for publication October 30, 2007.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. Jung, G. J. Renukaradhya, K. P. Alekseev, Y. Fang, Y. Tang, and L. J. Saif Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus modifies innate immunity and alters disease outcome in pigs subsequently infected with porcine respiratory coronavirus: implications for respiratory viral co-infections J. Gen. Virol., November 1, 2009; 90(11): 2713 - 2723. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Khanolkar, S. M. Hartwig, B. A. Haag, D. K. Meyerholz, L. L. Epping, J. S. Haring, S. M. Varga, and J. T. Harty Protective and Pathologic Roles of the Immune Response to Mouse Hepatitis Virus Type 1: Implications for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome J. Virol., September 15, 2009; 83(18): 9258 - 9272. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. He, S. J. Barker, A. J. MacDonald, Y. Yu, L. Cao, J. Li, R. Parhar, S. Heck, S. Hartmann, D. T. Golenbock, et al. Recombinant Ov-ASP-1, a Th1-Biased Protein Adjuvant Derived from the Helminth Onchocerca volvulus, Can Directly Bind and Activate Antigen-Presenting Cells J. Immunol., April 1, 2009; 182(7): 4005 - 4016. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Yasui, C. Kai, M. Kitabatake, S. Inoue, M. Yoneda, S. Yokochi, R. Kase, S. Sekiguchi, K. Morita, T. Hishima, et al. Prior Immunization with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)-Associated Coronavirus (SARS-CoV) Nucleocapsid Protein Causes Severe Pneumonia in Mice Infected with SARS-CoV J. Immunol., November 1, 2008; 181(9): 6337 - 6348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B.-J. Zheng, K.-W. Chan, Y.-P. Lin, G.-Y. Zhao, C. Chan, H.-J. Zhang, H.-L. Chen, S. S. Y. Wong, S. K. P. Lau, P. C. Y. Woo, et al. Delayed antiviral plus immunomodulator treatment still reduces mortality in mice infected by high inoculum of influenza A/H5N1 virus PNAS, June 10, 2008; 105(23): 8091 - 8096. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |