Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

    http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/swineflu/news/aug1809originalpwm.html


    'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

    Robert Roos News Editor

    Aug 18, 2009 (CIDRAP News) –

    Half a century ago, scientists reported evidence of some curious behavior by the immune system in humans and animals: If a host was exposed to an influenza virus and later encountered a variant strain of the same virus, the immune system responded to the second attack largely with the same weapons it used against the first one.

    Like an army still fighting by the tactics of the last war, the host immune system mostly produced antibodies matched to the first virus instead of the second, resulting in a less effective defense. With a nod to theology, this phenomenon was labeled "original antigenic sin."

    Today, in the face of the pandemic H1N1 flu virus, many countries are preparing to launch H1N1 vaccination campaigns this fall. Millions of people are in groups recommended to receive both seasonal flu immunizations and H1N1 vaccinations. Seasonal flu vaccine—which contains an H1N1 component, distantly related to the novel H1N1 virus—will be available sooner in most places.

    This timing has caused some observers to wonder: If a person gets a seasonal flu shot and then an H1N1 dose a few weeks later, will original antigenic sin come into play and cause a poor response to the H1N1 vaccine?
    Nobody knows the answer for sure, but leading flu and immunization experts say they aren't especially worried at this point. At the same time, they suggest the possibility bears watching.

    "For the time being there is no cause for worry especially for vaccines because the influenza vaccines are really . . . very well known in terms of the seasonal use of these," said Dr. Marie-Paule Kieny, director of the World Health Organization's Initiative for Vaccine Research, in a recent news briefing.

    But there is enough concern so that the H1N1 vaccine clinical trials recently announced by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) will look into the question. Two of the trials will examine whether giving an H1N1 vaccine and seasonal flu vaccine sequentially or simultaneously affects the immune response to either vaccine, according to the NIAID's descriptions of the trials.

    Study raises issue anew
    A study published recently by the Journal of Immunology raised anew the question of original antigenic sin. Saying that some recent studies have raised doubts about the existence of the phenomenon, scientists at the Emory University Vaccine Center in Atlanta used three different approaches to look for evidence of original antigenic sin in mice. They found evidence of it under certain conditions.

    The scientists used two human H1N1 viruses, labeled PR8 and FM1, that emerged in the 1930s and 1940s. They sequentially immunized mice with conventional vaccines using inactivated viruses, and they immunized other mice with DNA vaccines that encoded the hemagglutinin proteins from the two strains. In a third experiment, they sequentially exposed mice to the live viruses. The interval between the two inoculations in most cases was 1 month.

    In the mice sequentially immunized with conventional vaccines, the team found minimal differences in antibody responses to the two strains. However, when the mice were then challenged with a high dose of the FM1 virus, the virus multiplied in their lungs far more than it did in the lungs of control mice that had received only the FM1 vaccine.

    When mice were sequentially immunized with the DNA vaccines, the team found that the antibody response to the FM1 vaccine was oriented to the PR8 (original) vaccine, and antibodies to the FM1 strain were reduced, according to the report.

    However, the original antigenic sin effect was much stronger in the mice that were infected with the two live viruses. "Sequential infection with live viruses generated severely reduced neutralization Ab [antibody] responses and compromised memory responses to the second virus," the report states. The authors suggest that this phenomenon helps explain the success and prevalence of flu viruses: when they mutate, the host immune system is fooled into responding to the predecessor strain instead of the mutated one.

    Antigenic distance is key
    On the other hand, original antigenic sin occurs only when the new strain is closely related to one the host has seen before, the scientists write. It is not known exactly how much antigenic similarity (likeness in the amino acid sequences of the hemagglutinin protein of the two strains) between the two strains is necessary to fool the immune system, but past studies have shown that antigenically distant or dissimilar strains fail to trigger original antigenic sin.

    That finding seems to suggest that original antigenic sin would not be induced by a novel H1N1 immunization soon after getting a seasonal flu vaccine, as the new virus is not considered a close relative of the H1N1 strain in the seasonal vaccine.

    In fact, that's the view of Robert G. Webster, PhD, a highly respected virologist and flu expert who did some of the original research on original antigenic sin decades ago. He is based at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis.

    "The antigenic distance between the seasonal H1N1 and swine flu is very large, so I don't think original antigenic sin is going to be a problem," Webster said in a recent interview.

    He said that even if the phenomenon did arise, it might be possible to overcome it by using one of the newer vaccine adjuvants or by increasing the dose of vaccine. "With a larger dose, you can negate the original sin by sort of flooding the receptors with sufficient antigen to negate it," he said.

    Jin H. Kim, PhD, a postdoctoral research associate at Emory and the lead author of the recent study, said the type of vaccine is important. He noted his finding that original antigenic sin was minimal when inactivated virus vaccines were used. Similarly, he said by e-mail, two recent studies found little evidence of original antigenic sin when humans received an inactivated vaccine against one seasonal flu strain and later were vaccinated against a drifted variant of that strain.

    What about live-virus vaccines?
    However, the finding that sequential exposure to live viruses invoked a greatly reduced response to the second virus raises the question whether the use of live attenuated vaccines for seasonal flu and the novel virus could lead to a similar response, Kim noted by e-mail. MedImmune, maker of the live attenuated seasonal vaccine FluMist,<ins datetime="2009-08-18T16:12" cite="mailto:paul&#37;20mamula"> </ins>is also making a live version of novel H1N1 vaccine.

    "It is [an] intriguing question whether the live attenuated vaccines would induce original antigenic sin," Kim said. "Our data show that sequential infection with related H1N1 viruses causes significant original antigenic sin and dampens the development of protective immunity. Therefore, it is possible that live attenuated swine origin H1N1 virus vaccine may behave similarly. However, it is important to note that we have not tested this in humans, thus this would be an immature conclusion at this point."<ins datetime="2009-08-18T16:13" cite="mailto:paul%20mamula"> </ins>

    What if seasonal flu and novel H1N1 immunizations are given at the same time? John Treanor, MD, a vaccine researcher at the University of Rochester, said interference between the two vaccines is not likely to be a problem.

    He noted that the seasonal vaccine itself normally contains three different strains of flu virus, and interference isn't a big concern. "In the absence of data, it's hard to be completely confident about the potential for interference when the seasonal vaccine is given at the same time as the H1N1 vaccine, but I think the hypothesis is that there will not be interference between components," he said.

    Treanor commented that when two vaccines must be given in sequence rather than simultaneously, his view is that they should be separated by at least 2 weeks, mainly to prevent any confusion about attributing side effects. Cautioning that he is not an expert on original antigenic sin, he added, "I do not know if there is really any data that would suggest that such a schedule would or would not result in a decrease in the response to the novel H1N1 (or who knows, maybe an increase)," he said.

    For Webster, original antigenic sin is only a minor concern in the current situation with regard to H1N1 vaccination.

    "At the moment it's not a big issue, in my opinion," he said. "It's something we have at the back of our minds that we'll watch for. The new H1N1 is antigenically stable, vastly different from the seasonal H1N1, and we need to have vaccine for it wiki-wiki [very fast]."

    See also:
    Kim JH, Skountzou I, Compans R, et al. Original antigenic sin responses to influenza viruses. J Immunol 2009 (early online publication Jul 31) [Abstract]
    Transcript of Aug 6 WHO news briefing

    Description of NIAID-sponsored trial examining sequential and simultaneous immunization of adults with seasonal and H1N1 vaccines from Sanofi Pasteur

    Description of NIAID-sponsored trial examining sequential and simultaneous immunization of children with seasonal and H1N1 vaccines from Sanofi Pasteur
    Last edited by Niko; August 19, 2009, 10:29 PM. Reason: formatting
    "In the beginning of change, the patriot is a scarce man (or woman https://flutrackers.com/forum/core/i...ilies/wink.png), and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for it then costs nothing to be a patriot."- Mark TwainReason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it. -Thomas Paine

  • #2
    Re: 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

    Abstract

    Original antigenic sin describes a phenomenon in which the antibody response elicited in an individual after a secondary viral infection reacts more strongly to the viral variant that originally infected the individual. As T helper cells play critical roles in promoting antibody responses, a similar phenomenon may hold true for T helper cell responses. This concept is particularly relevant to the development of vaccines against viruses such as human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C virus, in which myriad viral variants are present throughout the human population. We have compared the effects of priming the immune system with a single peptide epitope or with a cocktail of related peptides based on the epitope. Our data demonstrate that immunization with multiple peptide variants expands a more broadly reactive and durable T helper cell response than does immunization with a single peptide. This vaccine strategy may circumvent original antigenic sin.
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...=0&_userid=10&
    md5=37ec66e45743e318524ea92307c67177

    Original antigenic sin
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Jump to: navigation, search

    Original antigenic sin (first described in 1960 by Thomas Francis, Jr. in the article On the Doctrine of Original Antigenic Sin,[1] according to Richard Krause,[2] also known as the Hoskins effect[3]) refers to the propensity of the body's immune system to preferentially utilize immunological memory based on a previous infection when a second slightly different version, of that foreign entity (e.g. a virus or bacterium) is encountered. This leaves the immune system "trapped" by the first response it has made to each antigen, and unable to mount potentially more effective responses during subsequent infections. The phenomenon of original antigenic sin has been described in relation to influenza virus, dengue fever, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and to several other viruses.[4]
    A high affinity memory B cell, specific for Virus A, is preferentially activated by a new strain, Virus A1, to produce antibodies that ineffectively bind to the A1 strain. The presence of these antibodies inhibits activation of a naive B cell that produces more effective antibodies against Virus A1. This effect leads to a diminished immune response against Virus A1, and heightens the potential for serious infection.

    Original antigenic sin is named by analogy to the theological concept of original sin. According to Thomas Francis who originally described the idea [1] and cited by Richard Krause:[2]

    "The antibody of childhood is largely a response to dominant antigen of the virus causing the first type A influenza infection of the lifetime. [...] The imprint established by the original virus infection governs the antibody response thereafter. This we have called the Doctrine of the Original Antigenic Sin."

    [edit] In B cells

    During a primary infection, long-lived memory B cells are generated, which remain in the body, and provide protection from subsequent infections.
    These memory B cells respond to specific epitopes on the surface of viral proteins in order to produce antigen-specific antibodies, and are able to respond to infection much faster than B cells are able to respond to novel antigens. This effect shortens the amount of time required to clear subsequent infections.

    Between primary and secondary infections
    , or following vaccination, a virus may undergo antigenic drift, in which the viral surface proteins (the epitopes) are altered through natural mutation, allowing the virus to escape the immune system. When this happens, the altered virus preferentially reactivates previously activated high-affinity memory B cells and spur antibody production. However, the antibodies produced by these B cells generally ineffectively bind to the altered epitopes. In addition, these antibodies inhibit the activation of lower-affinity naive B cells that would be able to make more effective antibodies to the second virus. This leads to a less effective immune response and recurrent infections may take longer to clear.[5]

    Original antigenic sin is of particular importance in the application of vaccines. The specificity and the quality of the immune response is often diminished in individuals who are repeatedly immunized (by vaccination or recurrent infections). However, the impact of antigenic sin on protection has not been well established, and appears to differ with each infectious agent vaccine, geographic location, and age.[5]

    [edit] In cytotoxic T cells

    A similar phenomenon has been described in cytotoxic T cells (CTL).[6] Several groups have attempted to design vaccines for HIV and hepatitis C based on induction of cytotoxic (CTL) responses. The finding that CTL may be biased by original antigenic sin, may help to explain the limited effectiveness of these vaccines. Viruses like HIV are highly variable and undergo mutation frequently, and thus, due to original antigenic sin, HIV infection induced by viruses that express slightly different epitopes (than those in a viral vaccine) would fail to be controlled by the vaccine. In fact, the vaccine might make the infection even worse, by "trapping" the immune response into the first, ineffective, response it made against the virus.[6]


    I was under the impression that the first viral introduction of a given type, eg. influenza A, would be the most efficiently "defended". A novel influenza A infection would be recognized[ less than an infection closely resembling the primary introduced virus (whether by vaccination of infection) Of course timing is key. It is much easier to get "run down" if you have one "infection" closely following another.
    "The only security we have is our ability to adapt."

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

      Quote #1:
      <i>
      "Antigenic distance is key
      On the other hand, original antigenic sin occurs only when the new strain is closely related to one the host has seen before, the scientists write. It is not known exactly how much antigenic similarity (likeness in the amino acid sequences of the hemagglutinin protein of the two strains) between the two strains is necessary to fool the immune system, but past studies have shown that antigenically distant or dissimilar strains fail to trigger original antigenic sin.

      That finding seems to suggest that original antigenic sin would not be induced by a novel H1N1 immunization soon after getting a seasonal flu vaccine, as the new virus is not considered a close relative of the H1N1 strain in the seasonal vaccine.

      In fact, that's the view of Robert G. Webster, PhD, a highly respected virologist and flu expert who did some of the original research on original antigenic sin decades ago. He is based at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital in Memphis.

      "The antigenic distance between the seasonal H1N1 and swine flu is very large, so I don't think original antigenic sin is going to be a problem," Webster said in a recent interview.

      He said that even if the phenomenon did arise, it might be possible to overcome it by using one of the newer vaccine adjuvants or by increasing the dose of vaccine. "With a larger dose, you can negate the original sin by sort of flooding the receptors with sufficient antigen to negate it," he said.

      Jin H. Kim, PhD, a postdoctoral research associate at Emory and the lead author of the recent study, said the type of vaccine is important. He noted his finding that original antigenic sin was minimal when inactivated virus vaccines were used. Similarly, he said by e-mail, two recent studies found little evidence of original antigenic sin when humans received an inactivated vaccine against one seasonal flu strain and later were vaccinated against a drifted variant of that strain.

      What about live-virus vaccines?
      However, the finding that sequential exposure to live viruses invoked a greatly reduced response to the second virus raises the question whether the use of live attenuated vaccines for seasonal flu and the novel virus could lead to a similar response, Kim noted by e-mail. MedImmune, maker of the live attenuated seasonal vaccine FluMist,<ins datetime="2009-08-18T16:12" cite="mailto:paul%20mamula"> </ins>is also making a live version of novel H1N1 vaccine."</i>

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

        Click image for larger version

Name:	immune-memory.jpg
Views:	4
Size:	27.9 KB
ID:	650009



        (snipped)

        During the first encounter with a virus, a primary antibody response occurs. IgM antibody appears first, followed by IgA on mucosal surfaces or IgG in the serum. The IgG antibody is the major antibody of the response and is very stable, with a half-life of 7 to 21 days. When an infection occurs with the same or a similar virus, a rapid antibody response occurs that is called the secondary antibody response. The specificity and memory of the antibody response are illustrated in the following graph.

        A typical adaptive antibody response is shown as the relative concentration of serum antibodies weeks after injection of an animal with antigen A or a mixture of antigens A and B. Maximal primary response to antigen A occurs in 3 to 4 weeks. When the animal is injected with a mixture of both antigens A and B at 7 weeks, the secondary response to antigen A is more rapid and stronger than the primary response, demonstrating immunological memory. As expected, the primary response to antigen B requires 3 ? 4 weeks. Antibody levels (also called antibody titers) decline with time after each immunization, a property known as self-limitation or resolution.
        http://www.virology.ws/2009/07/22/ad...es-antibodies/
        "The next major advancement in the health of American people will be determined by what the individual is willing to do for himself"-- John Knowles, Former President of the Rockefeller Foundation

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

          Associative memory:

          An important characteristic of immune memory is that it is associative: B-cells adapted to some type of pathogen A can provide a rapid secondary response not only to A, but also to some structurally related pathogen B. This associative memory underlies the concept of inoculation (see figure 7): introduction of a benign pathogen such as cowpox induces a primary response that results in memory of the cowpox. Smallpox is similar enough to cowpox to induce a secondary response, resulting in very rapid elimination of the smallpox.


          Click image for larger version

Name:	ASS-MEM.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	23.2 KB
ID:	650010



          .
          "The next major advancement in the health of American people will be determined by what the individual is willing to do for himself"-- John Knowles, Former President of the Rockefeller Foundation

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

            Good discussion on OAS:

            Donate to MicrobeTV Featured Episode It's been a long time since TWiV released an all listener email episode. If you've been waiting for one, then this episode is for you! (And everyone else of course.) More TWiV episodes More BTN episodes More IMMUNE episodes More Puscast Episodes More MM episodes More TWiEVO episodes Looking for

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

              Welcome to FluTrackers quadjlm!
              Separate the wheat from the chaff

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

                Originally posted by Farmer View Post
                Welcome to FluTrackers quadjlm!
                Why thank you

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

                  Welcome Quad and thanks for the reference.

                  .
                  "The next major advancement in the health of American people will be determined by what the individual is willing to do for himself"-- John Knowles, Former President of the Rockefeller Foundation

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

                    Thanks quadjlm and welcome - they sound a very interesting pair. Looking forward to listening.
                    "The only security we have is our ability to adapt."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 'Original antigenic sin': A threat to H1N1 vaccine effectiveness?

                      #5: "similar enough to cowpox to induce a secondary response"

                      Even for that bug scourge varieties existed diferent vaccines.

                      How long the pandemic vaccine will hold the new pandemic variants nobody can say.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X