Carpenter C M, Hall E R, Randall R, McKenzie R, Cassels F, Diaz N, Thomas N, Bedford P, Darsley M, Gewert C, Howard C, Sack R B, Sack D A, Chang H S, Gomes G, Bourgeois A L
Center for Immunization Research, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 N. Broadway, HH, Rm 205, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Vaccine. 2006 May 1;24(18):3709-18. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2005.07.022. Epub 2005 Jul 26.
In the present study we compared the ELISPOT and antibody in lymphocyte supernatants (ALS) assays as surrogate measures of mucosal immunity. In separate studies, 20 inpatient volunteers received oral doses of 6 x 10(8) or 4 x 10(9)cfu of ETEC strain E24377A (LT+, ST+, CS1+, CS3+) and 20 subjects received 1 (n = 9) or 2 (n = 11) oral doses of the attenuated ETEC vaccine, PTL-003 expressing CFA/II (CS1+ and CS3+) (2 x 10(9)cfu/dose). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from all subjects were assayed for anti-colonization factor or toxin-specific IgA antibody responses using the ALS and ELISPOT procedures. ALS responses were measured using a standard ELISA, as well as by time-resolved fluorescence (TRF). Following challenge with E24377A, significant anti-CS3, CS1 and LT ALS responses were detected in the lymphocyte supernatants of 75-95% of the subjects. A similar proportion (75%) of subjects mounted an ALS response to CFA/II antigen after vaccination with the PTL-003 vaccine. Inter-assay comparisons between ALS and ELISPOT methods also revealed a high degree of correlation in both immunization groups. ALS sensitivity versus the ELISPOT assay for LT, CS3 and CS1-specific responses following challenge were 95%, 94% and 78%, respectively and 83% for the ALS response to CFA/II antigen after vaccination with PTL-003. Correlation coefficients for the LT and CS3 antigens were 0.94 (p<0.001) and 0.82 (p<0.001), respectively after challenge and 0.78 (p<0.001) after vaccination. The association between ALS and ELISPOT for the CS1 antigen was however, significant only when ALS supernatants were tested by TRF (r = 0.91, p<0.001). These results demonstrate the value and flexibility of the ALS assay as an alternative to ELISPOT for the measurement of mucosal immune responses to ETEC antigens, particularly when the complexities of ELISPOT may make it impractical to perform.
在本研究中,我们比较了ELISPOT和淋巴细胞上清液中的抗体(ALS)检测,作为粘膜免疫的替代指标。在单独的研究中,20名住院志愿者口服剂量为6×10⁸或4×10⁹cfu的肠毒素大肠杆菌(ETEC)菌株E24377A(LT⁺、ST⁺、CS1⁺、CS3⁺),20名受试者口服1次(n = 9)或2次(n = 11)减毒ETEC疫苗PTL - 003,其表达CFA/II(CS1⁺和CS3⁺)(2×10⁹cfu/剂量)。使用ALS和ELISPOT方法检测所有受试者外周血单个核细胞(PBMC)中抗定植因子或毒素特异性IgA抗体反应。使用标准ELISA以及时间分辨荧光(TRF)测量ALS反应。在用E24377A攻击后,在75 - 95%的受试者淋巴细胞上清液中检测到显著的抗CS3、CS1和LT ALS反应。在用PTL - 003疫苗接种后,类似比例(75%)的受试者对CFA/II抗原产生了ALS反应。ALS和ELISPOT方法之间的检测间比较也显示两个免疫组具有高度相关性。攻击后针对LT、CS3和CS1特异性反应的ALS敏感性与ELISPOT检测分别为95%、94%和78%,在用PTL - 003疫苗接种后对CFA/II抗原的ALS反应为83%。攻击后LT和CS3抗原的相关系数分别为0.94(p<0.001)和0.82(p<0.001),接种后为0.78(p<0.001)。然而,仅当通过TRF检测ALS上清液时,CS1抗原的ALS和ELISPOT之间的相关性才显著(r = 0.91,p<0.001)。这些结果证明了ALS检测作为ELISPOT的替代方法在测量对ETEC抗原的粘膜免疫反应方面的价值和灵活性,特别是当ELISPOT的复杂性可能使其难以实施时。