Prophylactic immunization against experimental leishmaniasis. IV. Subcutaneous immunization prevents the induction of protective immunity against fatal Leishmania major infection

Durable immunity against fatal L. major infection in genetically susceptible mice can be induced by immunization with 150,000-rad irradiated or heat-killed promastigotes administered i.v. or to a lesser extent i.p. Conversely, subcutaneous (s.c.) and intramuscular (i.m.) injections are not only totally ineffective but generally increase susceptibility to and enhance the progression of the disease, leading to earlier mortality. This detrimental effect is particularly evident with lower infecting challenge doses. Disease exacerbation is apparent in mice given 4 X s.c. injections of as few as 2 X 10(4) irradiated promastigotes, but it appears most potent after doses of 2 X 10(7). When mice given 4 X s.c. injections were subsequently immunized i.v. with 2 X 10(7) irradiated promastigotes, they failed to develop any evidence of protection against infection with 2 X 10(5) promastigotes, whereas mice given i.v. immunization alone were strongly protected. Thus, s.c. injections are capable of blocking the prophylactic effect of i.v. immunization with irradiated parasites. This inhibitory effect can be achieved with a single s.c. injection, although rather less potently than with four, and is even effective against four repeated weekly i.v. immunizations. Once induced, the effect persists undiminished after 100 days. A weaker effect is also inducible by s.c. injection given after i.v. immunization. The blocking effect of s.c. injection is not dependent on continuing viability of the promastigotes, as it can be induced equally readily with heat-killed, formalin-fixed, or sonicated parasites. The phenomenon extends to mouse strains genetically resistant as well as susceptible to L. major infection and, in congenic mice of BALB background, is independent of the major histocompatibility (H-2) gene complex.     

Prophylactic immunization against experimental leishmaniasis. VI. Comparison of protective and disease-promoting T cells

In previous studies, we reported that mice immunized i.v. with lethally irradiated Leishmania major promastigotes developed substantial resistance to a subsequent L. major infection. However, such protection could be totally suppressed by prior s.c. injection with the same antigens. Both the protective immunity and the inhibition of its induction could be adoptively transferred with specific Lyt-2- T cells. Here, we present evidence showing that protection and disease promotion resulting from i.v. or s.c. immunization, respectively, are mediated by functionally distinct subsets of T cells. In a series of titration experiments, it was found that freshly isolated T cells derived from prophylactically i.v. immunized BALB/c mice were either protective (greater than 10(7) cells/recipient) or ineffective (less than 10(7) cells/recipient). No exacerbation of disease was observed at any dose. Conversely, T cells from mice immunized s.c. either accelerated disease development and inhibited protective immunization (greater than 10(7) cells/recipient) or had no effect (less than 10(7) cells/recipient). No protection was observed at any dose tested. In mixed transfer experiments, increasing numbers of T cells from s.c. immunized donors progressively inhibited the protective effect of T cells from i.v. immunized donors. Supernatant of T cell cultures from protectively immunized donors contained substantial macrophage-activating factor whereas such activity was not detectable in the supernatant of T cell culture from s.c. immunized donors. Analysis by flow cytometry showed that the spleen and lymph nodes of normal, i.v., or s.c. immunized BALB/c mice contained similar ratios of L3T4+ cells and Lyt-2+ cells.     

Sublingual immunization with M2-based vaccine induces broad protective immunity against influenza

Background

The ectodomain of matrix protein 2 (M2e) of influenza A virus is a rationale target antigen candidate for the development of a universal vaccine against influenza as M2e undergoes little sequence variation amongst human influenza A strains. Vaccine-induced M2e-specific antibodies (Abs) have been shown to display significant cross-protective activity in animal models. M2e-based vaccine constructs have been shown to be more protective when administered by the intranasal (i.n.) route than after parenteral injection. However, i.n. administration of vaccines poses rare but serious safety issues associated with retrograde passage of inhaled antigens and adjuvants through the olfactory epithelium. In this study, we examined whether the sublingual (s.l.) route could serve as a safe and effective alternative mucosal delivery route for administering a prototype M2e-based vaccine. The mechanism whereby s.l. immunization with M2e vaccine candidate induces broad protection against infection with different influenza virus subtypes was explored.

Methods and Results

A recombinant M2 protein with three tandem copies of the M2e (3M2eC) was expressed in Escherichia coli. Parenteral immunizations of mice with 3M2eC induced high levels of M2e-specific serum Abs but failed to provide complete protection against lethal challenge with influenza virus. In contrast, s.l. immunization with 3M2eC was superior for inducing protection in mice. In the latter animals, protection was associated with specific Ab responses in the lungs.

Conclusions

The results demonstrate that s.l. immunization with 3M2eC vaccine induced airway mucosal immune responses along with broad cross-protective immunity to influenza. These findings may contribute to the understanding of the M2-based vaccine approach to control epidemic and pandemic influenza infections.