3.9 Article

An H7N1 Influenza Virus Vaccine Induces Broadly Reactive Antibody Responses against H7N9 in Humans

期刊

CLINICAL AND VACCINE IMMUNOLOGY
卷 21, 期 8, 页码 1153-1163

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/CVI.00272-14

关键词

-

资金

  1. Erwin Schrodinger fellowship from the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [J3232]
  2. Centers for Excellence for Influenza Research and Surveillance (CEIRS) [HHSN26620070010C]
  3. NIH [U19 AI109946, HHSN272200900032C]
  4. Ministry of Health and Care Services Helse Vest Influenza A(H7) studies
  5. K. G. Jebsen Centre for Influenza Vaccine Research
  6. EU FP7 UniVax [601738]
  7. RCN Globvac [220670]
  8. Health Protection Agency
  9. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [J3232] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Emerging H7N9 influenza virus infections in Asia have once more spurred the development of effective prepandemic H7 vaccines. However, many vaccines based on avian influenza viruses-including H7-are poorly immunogenic, as measured by traditional correlates of protection. Here we reevaluated sera from an H7N1 human vaccine trial performed in 2006. We examined cross-reactive antibody responses to divergent H7 strains, including H7N9, dissected the antibody response into head-and stalkreactive antibodies, and tested the in vivo potency of these human sera in a passive-transfer H7N9 challenge experiment with mice. Although only a low percentage of vaccinees induced neutralizing antibody responses against the homologous vaccine strain and also H7N9, we detected strong cross-reactivity to divergent H7 hemagglutinins (HAs) in a large proportion of the cohort with a quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Furthermore, H7N1 vaccination induced antibodies to both the head and stalk domains of the HA, which is in sharp contrast to seasonal inactivated vaccines. Finally, we were able to show that both neutralizing and nonneutralizing antibodies improved in vivo virus clearance in a passive-transfer H7N9 challenge mouse model.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据