Humoral and cellular immunity to measles and rubella virus antigens in healthy subjects

Смердова, М. А.; Топтыгина, А. П.; Andreev, I; Сенникова, С. В.; Зеткин, А. Ю.; Клыкова, Т. Г.; Беляков, С. И.

doi:10.15789/2220-7619-2019-3-4-607-611

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nozdracheva et al, the proportions of individuals with seronegative anti-measles antibody levels among healthy adults aged between 18 and 60 ranges between 23.4% and 29%, with a predominance of seronegative individuals (40.4–45.3%) among young adults [ 22 ], while one of the provisions for a favorable epidemiological situation is no more than 7% seronegative results among the vaccinated population [ 23 ]. In a study, only 32% of healthy adults, aged between 18 and 30, had protective levels of anti-measles antibodies [ 24 ]. According to foreign authors, herd immunity rates ranges between 84.6% and 89.9%, also with a predominance of seronegative individuals in young adults [ 25 , 26 , 27 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics of Anti-Measles Immunity in Lung Transplant Candidates

Polishchuk,

Kostinov,

Ryzhov

et al. 2023

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measles has not yet been eradicated; therefore, its outbreaks are still reported throughout the world. Like any infection, measles is dangerous for immunocompromised patients. Levels of anti-measles IgG antibodies were measured in 157 patients aged 17 to 72, who were placed on the lung transplant waiting list. Measurements were undertaken by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using the VectoMeasles-IgG kit (Russia). The proportion of patients seronegative for measles was 19% (30/157). Correlation was detected between patients’ age and their levels of anti-measles antibodies, with higher proportions of patients having undetectable titers (25.5–28.9%) or low antibody levels (38.3–44.4%) in the young age groups (17–29 and 30–39 years old). There were no differences between male and female patients in levels of anti-measles antibodies or in the proportion of seronegative individuals. Analyses of antibody levels with regard to type of disease revealed the highest rate of seronegative results in cystic fibrosis patients (34.4%, 11/32). Overall, 19% of lung transplant candidates, mostly young people and cystic fibrosis patients, did not have protective immunity against measles.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics of Anti-Measles Immunity in Lung Transplant Candidates

Polishchuk,

Kostinov,

Ryzhov

et al. 2023

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Оценку специфического клеточного иммунитета к антигенам вируса кори осуществляли по ранее описанному методу [6,12] Ранее было показано, что первичный и вторичный иммунный ответ различается по соотношению субклассов специфических IgG-антител. Так для первичного иммунного ответа характерно преобладание IgG3-субкласса, а для вторичного -IgG1-субкласса [8,9,10].…”

Section: материалы и методыunclassified

Formation of humoral and cellular immunity to measles vaccine in adults

Топтыгина

Andreev

Смердова

et al. 2020

Russian Journal of Infection and Immunity

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite adherence to the policy of mass measles vaccination in the majority of countries, this infection still remains far from being fully eradicated. Measles outbreaks are reported worldwide, when the vast majority of cases are recorded in subjects of 18—35 years of age. Studies on assessing measles IgG antibody level in different regions of Russia reveal increased percentage of measles seronegative subjects among young adults. Current study was aimed at investigating formation of humoral and cellular immunity after measles vaccination in seronegative adults aged 18 to 30 years old. There were enrolled 50 measles seronegative healthy volunteers aged 18 to 30 years old. Level of anti-measles IgM and IgG antibodies was measured by ELISA (Vector-Best, Russia). Subclasses of measles specific IgG antibodies were analyzed by ELISA, by replacing IgG conjugate for IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, IgG4 conjugates, whereas measles specific IgA antibodies were estimated by ELISA with IgA conjugate (Polygnost, Russia) at a concentration of 1 μg/ml. Antibody avidity was assessed by ELISA (Euroimmun, Germany). Cell-mediated measles immunity was estimated by CD107a surface expression on CD8hi T cell subset stimulated by measles virus-derived antigens. A specific cellular response to measles antigens before vaccination was detected in 50% of examined subjects, whereas 40% samples showed no signs of cellular immune response, with 10% of remaining cases described as equivocal. It was found that 6 weeks after vaccination all vaccinated subjects developed measles specific IgG antibodies at protective level reaching 1.33 (0.85—1.82) IU/ml [Me (LQ—UQ)]. Anti-measles IgA antibodies were of 0.655 (0.423—1.208) IU/ml [Me (LQ—UQ)]. However, no measles specific IgM antibodies were detected 6 weeks after vaccination. In addition, primary type of immune response (dominant low-avidity anti-measles antibodies IgG3 subclass) to measles vaccination was observed in 24 out of 50 subjects, whereas 26 subjects developed secondary type of immune response (high-avidity anti-measles antibodies dominated by IgG1 subclass). A measles specific cellular immune response was observed in 47 of the 50 examined subjects, and in 3 volunteers it was equivocal. Further analysis revealed a cohort of subjects who were not vaccinated against measles (18 subjects), although 60% of them provided medical record on previous dual measles vaccination occurred in childhood. Another cohort consisted of subjects who had medical record of measles vaccination in childhood (32 subjects), but lost protective measles antibodies produced by plasma cells (23 subjects), and memory T cells (3 subjects), or measles antibodies and memory B cells (6 subjects) over time. Such pattern evidences that measles-specific cellular and humoral arms immune responses were developed and maintained independently of each other.

show abstract

Comparison of different techniques for evaluation of cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2 virus

Afridonova,

Toptygina,

Bogolyubova

et al. 2023

Med. immunol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most techniques for evaluation of T-cell immunity are laborious and unsuitable for routine laboratory diagnostics, thus encouraging researchers to look for accessible and reproducible tests. The purpose of our study is to compare three methods aimed for evaluation of cellular immune response levels to the SARS-CoV-2 viral antigens in patients who have been ill and vaccinated against a new coronavirus infection. We have examined 26 persons who experienced mild or moderate COVID-19 (group 1); 19 people vaccinated twice with Sputnik V, who did not have clinical COVID-19 (group 2); 21 subjects who had COVID-19 and were twice vaccinated with Sputnik V (group 3), and 14 persons who had COVID-19 twice (group 4). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were isolated by gradient centrifugation. The first tested technique was performed as follows: the mononuclear cells were incubated with the S-protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and stained with fluorescently labeled antibodies. The percentage of CD8highCD107a was counted by means of BD FACS Canto II flow cytometer. When assessed by the ELISpot method with “Human IFN-γ ELISpot” kit, IFNγ production was stimulated by SARS-CoV-2 S-protein, or a mixture of SARS-CoV-2 protein peptides in the “Corona-T-test” kit. There were no significant differences in the levels of CD107a expression on CD8high cells between the groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, as well as in amounts of IFNγ producers against SARS-CoV-2 S-protein when using “Human IFN-γ ELISpot” kit. Production of IFN was significantly lower in group 3 (hybrid immunity), i.e., 317.29±19.04 pg/ml compared to groups 1 and 2 (post-infection and post-vaccination immunity), i.e., 454.95±20.32 and 470.77±26.24 pg /ml, respectively. The relative level of IFNγ -producing cells in group 2 was higher (22.34±3.77) versus 16.83±2.35 in group 1, and 15.46±1.83 in group 3, whereas the relative levels of IFNγ did not differ in these groups. Stimulation with full-length S-protein showed a significant reduction in the number of spots in group 4 (breakthrough immunity), i.e., 30.59±2.29 vs 58.97±4.47 in group 3. Stimulation with a mixture of SARS-CoV-2 peptides in group 4 vs group 3 revealed a significantly increased number of IFNγ -producing cells (86.72±7.20 versus 69.38±5.53) and higher IFNγ production (991.25±65.18 pg/ml versus 760.76±50.70 pg/ml). Appropriate relative values were as follows: 10.30±2.77 versus 8.61±2.66, and 68.10±9.41 versus 48.35±8.15, respectively. The results of three methods for evaluation of cellular immune response correlate positively with each other, but at different significance levels.

show abstract

Humoral and cellular immunity to measles and rubella virus antigens in healthy subjects

Cited by 10 publications

References 7 publications

Characteristics of Anti-Measles Immunity in Lung Transplant Candidates

Characteristics of Anti-Measles Immunity in Lung Transplant Candidates

Formation of humoral and cellular immunity to measles vaccine in adults

Comparison of different techniques for evaluation of cellular immunity to SARS-CoV-2 virus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About