tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 18;10(6):e0130684. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130684. eCollection 2015.
[h=1]Microneedle Vaccination Elicits Superior Protection and Antibody Response over Intranasal Vaccination against Swine-Origin Influenza A (H1N1) in Mice.[/h] Shin JH[SUP]1[/SUP], Park JK[SUP]2[/SUP], Lee DH[SUP]2[/SUP], Quan FS[SUP]3[/SUP], Song CS[SUP]2[/SUP], Kim YC[SUP]1[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Influenza is one of the critical infectious diseases globally and vaccination has been considered as the best way to prevent. In this study, immunogenicity and protection efficacy between intranasal (IN) and microneedle (MN) vaccination was compared using inactivated swine-origin influenza A/H1N1 virus vaccine. Mice were vaccinated by MN or IN administration with 1 μg of inactivated H1N1 virus vaccine. Antigen-specific antibody responses and hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) titers were measured in all immunized sera after immunization. Five weeks after an immunization, a lethal challenge was performed to evaluate the protective efficacy. Furthermore, mice were vaccinated by IN administration with higher dosages (> 1 μg), analyzed in the same manner, and compared with 1 μg-vaccine-coated MN. Significantly higher antigen-specific antibody responses and HI titer were measured in sera in MN group than those in IN group. While 100% protection, slight weight loss, and reduced viral replication were observed in MN group, 0% survival rate were observed in IN group. As vaccine dose for IN vaccination increased, MN-immunized sera showed much higher antigen-specific antibody responses and HI titer than other IN groups. In addition, protective immunity of 1 μg-MN group was similar to those of 20- and 40 μg-IN groups. We conclude that MN vaccination showed more potential immune response and protection than IN vaccination at the same vaccine dosage.
PMID: 26086590 [PubMed - in process]
[h=1]Microneedle Vaccination Elicits Superior Protection and Antibody Response over Intranasal Vaccination against Swine-Origin Influenza A (H1N1) in Mice.[/h] Shin JH[SUP]1[/SUP], Park JK[SUP]2[/SUP], Lee DH[SUP]2[/SUP], Quan FS[SUP]3[/SUP], Song CS[SUP]2[/SUP], Kim YC[SUP]1[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Influenza is one of the critical infectious diseases globally and vaccination has been considered as the best way to prevent. In this study, immunogenicity and protection efficacy between intranasal (IN) and microneedle (MN) vaccination was compared using inactivated swine-origin influenza A/H1N1 virus vaccine. Mice were vaccinated by MN or IN administration with 1 μg of inactivated H1N1 virus vaccine. Antigen-specific antibody responses and hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) titers were measured in all immunized sera after immunization. Five weeks after an immunization, a lethal challenge was performed to evaluate the protective efficacy. Furthermore, mice were vaccinated by IN administration with higher dosages (> 1 μg), analyzed in the same manner, and compared with 1 μg-vaccine-coated MN. Significantly higher antigen-specific antibody responses and HI titer were measured in sera in MN group than those in IN group. While 100% protection, slight weight loss, and reduced viral replication were observed in MN group, 0% survival rate were observed in IN group. As vaccine dose for IN vaccination increased, MN-immunized sera showed much higher antigen-specific antibody responses and HI titer than other IN groups. In addition, protective immunity of 1 μg-MN group was similar to those of 20- and 40 μg-IN groups. We conclude that MN vaccination showed more potential immune response and protection than IN vaccination at the same vaccine dosage.
PMID: 26086590 [PubMed - in process]