Srivastava Indresh, Goodsell Amanda, Zhou Fengmin, Sun Yi, Burke Brian, Barnett Susan, Vajdy Michael
Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Inc., 4560 Horton Street, M/S 4.3, Emeryville, CA 94563, USA.
Vaccine. 2008 May 23;26(22):2796-806. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.11.083. Epub 2007 Dec 26.
In this study, immunizations at 2 weeks vs. 6 weeks intervals, with an HIV-1 envelope protein in adjuvants, through intra-nasal (IN), intra-muscular (IM), IN followed by IM (IN/IM) and IM/IN, were compared for induction of mucosal and systemic immune responses. IN/IM immunizations at 2, but not at 6, week intervals induced the highest mucosal and systemic immune responses compared to other immunization routes. Following a resting memory phase, IN boosting of IN/IM-immunized mice, compared to IM-boosting of IM-immunized mice, induced increased IgA responses. Thus, depending on the immunization intervals, IN/IM may be more effective than IM immunizations for short- and long-term immunity.
在本研究中,比较了以2周和6周为间隔,通过鼻内(IN)、肌肉内(IM)、先鼻内后肌肉内(IN/IM)以及先肌肉内后鼻内(IM/IN)途径,用佐剂中的HIV-1包膜蛋白进行免疫接种,以诱导黏膜和全身免疫反应的情况。与其他免疫途径相比,2周(而非6周)间隔的IN/IM免疫接种诱导了最高的黏膜和全身免疫反应。在静止记忆期后,与IM免疫小鼠的IM加强免疫相比,IN/IM免疫小鼠的IN加强免疫诱导了更高的IgA反应。因此,根据免疫间隔时间,IN/IM在短期和长期免疫方面可能比IM免疫更有效。