4.4 Article

Influenza virus-like particles as a new tool for vaccine immunogenicity testing: Validation of a neuraminidase neutralizing antibody assay

Journal

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGICAL METHODS
Volume 173, Issue 2, Pages 364-373

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2011.03.011

Keywords

Neuraminidase neutralizing antibody; Influenza virus-like particle; Assay validation; Vaccine immunogenicity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Detection of neutralizing antibody to viral neuraminidase (NA) by testing for enzyme inhibition has been recognized as an important part of the immunogenicity of influenza vaccines. However, the absence of a well characterized standard source of active NA and validated assays has significantly limited clinical studies of NA immunity. Influenza virus-like particles (VLPs) containing hemagglutinin (HA), NA, and M1 proteins were produced from insect cells infected with a recombinant baculovirus and used as the NA source for the NA inhibition (NAI) assay. The NA activity of 6 different VLP strains varied from 0.43 to 1.61 (x10(-3)) enzyme units per mu g of HA and was stable over 6 months of storage at 2-8 degrees C. The NAI assay using 2'(4-methylumbelliferyl)-alpha-D-N-acetylneuraminic acid as a substrate was modified for testing the antibody titer in clinical samples and validated. The advantages of the assay include: (1) stable, reproducible, and standardized source of NA; (2) testing the antibody titer specific to each subtype of NA in serum from subjects immunized with trivalent vaccines (H1N1, H3N2, B) with no interference from antibodies specific to the HA and to heterologous subtypes of the NA; (3) suitability for conducting long-term clinical trials as a result of low intra- and inter-assay variability, and (4) a wide analytical range due to 25% inhibition cut-off value for the NAI titer estimation. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available