Article

The relative immunogenicity of DNA vaccines delivered by the intramuscular needle injection, electroporation and gene gun methods.

China-US Vaccine Research Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210029, China.
Vaccine (Impact Factor: 3.49). 05/2008; 26(17):2100-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.02.033
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Immunogenicity of DNA vaccines varies significantly due to many factors including the inherent immunogenicity of the protein antigen encoded in the DNA vaccine, the optimal immune responses that can be achieved in different animal models and in humans with different genetic backgrounds and, to a great degree, the delivery methods used to administer the DNA vaccines. Based on published results, only the gene gun-mediated delivery approach has been able to elicit protective levels of immune responses in healthy, adult volunteers by DNA immunization alone without the use of another vaccine modality as a boost. Recent results from animal studies suggest that electroporation is also effective in eliciting high level immune responses. However, there have been no reports to identify the similarities and differences between these two leading physical delivery methods for DNA vaccines against infectious disease targets. In the current study, we compared the relative immunogenicity of a DNA vaccine expressing a hemagglutinin (HA) antigen from an H5N1 influenza virus in two animal models (rabbit and mouse) when delivered by either intramuscular needle immunization (IM), gene gun (GG) or electroporation (EP). HA-specific antibody, T cell and B cell responses were analyzed. Our results indicate that, overall, both the GG and EP methods are more immunogenic than the IM method. However, EP and IM stimulated a Th-1 type antibody response and the antibody response to GG was Th-2 dominated. These findings provide important information for the further selection and optimization of DNA vaccine delivery methods for human applications.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Shan Lu, Jun 16, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
67 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Tuberculosis (TB) remains a major health problem and novel vaccination regimens are urgently needed.Areas covered: DNA vaccines against TB have been tested in various preclinical models and strategies have been developed to increase their immunogenicity in large animal species. DNA vaccines are able to induce a wide variety of immune responses, including CD8+ T-cell-mediated cytolytic and IFN-γ responses. DNA vaccination may be valuable in heterologous prime-boost strategies with the currently used bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) vaccine. This approach could broaden the antigenic repertoire of BCG and enhance its weak induction of MHC class I-restricted immune responses.Expert opinion: DNA vaccines offer a number of advantages over certain other types of vaccines, such as the induction of robust MHC class I-restricted cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL), their generic manufacturing platform and their relatively low manufacturing costs. Because of their strong potential for inducing memory responses, DNA vaccines are particularly suited for priming immune responses. Furthermore, DNA vaccine technology may help antigen discovery by facilitating screening of candidate vaccines. Co-administration of BCG with plasmid DNA coding for immunodominant, subdominant and phase-specific antigens, poorly expressed by BCG, may lead to the development of improved TB vaccines.
    Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 08/2014; DOI:10.1517/14712598.2014.951630 · 3.65 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mutant Kras (V-Ki-ras2 Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog) is observed in more than 20% of non-small-cell lung cancers; however, no effective Kras target therapy is available at present. The Kras DNA vaccine may represent as a novel immunotherapeutic agent in lung cancer. In this study, we investigated the antitumor efficacy of the Kras DNA vaccine in a genetically engineered inducible mouse lung tumor model driven by Kras(G12D). Lung tumors were induced by doxycycline, and the therapeutic effects of Kras DNA vaccine were evaluated with delivery of Kras(G12D) plasmids. Mutant Kras(G12D) DNA vaccine significantly decreased the tumor nodules. A dominant-negative mutant Kras(G12D)N17, devoid of oncogenic activity, achieved similar therapeutic effects. The T-helper 1 immune response was enhanced in mice treated with Kras DNA vaccine. Splenocytes from mice receiving Kras DNA vaccine presented an antigen-specific response by treatment with peptides of Kras but not Hras or OVA. The number of tumor-infiltrating CD8(+) T cells increased after Kras vaccination. In contrast, Kras DNA vaccine was not effective in the lung tumor in transgenic mice, which was induced by mutant L858R epidermal growth factor receptor. Overall, these results indicate that Kras DNA vaccine produces an effective antitumor response in transgenic mice, and may be useful in treating lung cancer-carrying Ras mutation.Gene Therapy advance online publication, 31 July 2014 doi:10.1038/gt.2014.67.
    Gene Therapy 07/2014; DOI:10.1038/gt.2014.67 · 4.20 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Electroporation refers to the ability of electric fields to cause the formation of reversible or irreversible pores in the membranes of cells. Reversible electroporation (RE) is now in widespread use as a method of delivering chemicals and large molecules to cells, both as a research tool and a clinical technique. Recently, irreversible electroporation (IRE) has garnered interest as a stand-alone ablation device that may have a role in the treatment of various cancers. This book attempts to illustrate the current state of the art of electroporation and authors a number of areas of growing interest currently being studied. KeywordsElectroporation-Reversible electroporation-Irreversible electroporation-Electrochemotherapy-Gene delivery-Ablation
    12/2010: pages 3-7;