Dendritic cell targeted Ccl3- and Xcl1-fusion DNA vaccines differ in induced immune responses and optimal delivery site.

靶向树突状细胞的 Ccl3 和 Xcl1 融合 DNA 疫苗在诱导的免疫反应和最佳递送部位方面存在差异

阅读:15
作者:Lysén Anna, Braathen Ranveig, Gudjonsson Arnar, Tesfaye Demo Yemane, Bogen Bjarne, Fossum Even
Fusing antigens to chemokines to target antigen presenting cells (APC) is a promising method for enhancing immunogenicity of DNA vaccines. However, it is unclear how different chemokines compare in terms of immune potentiating effects. Here we compare Ccl3- and Xcl1-fusion vaccines containing hemagglutinin (HA) from influenza A delivered by intramuscular (i.m.) or intradermal (i.d.) DNA vaccination. Xcl1 fusion vaccines target cDC1s, and enhance proliferation of CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells in vitro. In contrast, Ccl3 target both cDC1 and cDC2, but only enhance CD4(+) T cell proliferation in combination with cDC2. When Ccl3- or Xcl1-HA fusion vaccines were administered by i.m. DNA immunization, both vaccines induced Th1-polarized immune responses with antibodies of the IgG2a/IgG2b subclass and IFNγ-secreting T cells. After i.d. DNA vaccination, however, only Xcl1-HA maintained a Th1 polarized response and induced even higher numbers of IFNγ-secreting T cells. Consequently, Xcl1-HA induced superior protection against influenza infection compared to Ccl3-HA after i.d. immunization. Interestingly, i.m. immunization with Ccl3-HA induced the strongest overall in vivo cytotoxicity, despite not inducing OT-I proliferation in vitro. In summary, our results highlight important differences between Ccl3- and Xcl1- targeted DNA vaccines suggesting that chemokine fusion vaccines can be tailor-made for different diseases.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。