Humoral Antibodies and Resistance of Vaccinated and Convalescent Monkeys to Poliomyelitis Virus

Abstract

The observation has been made frequently (1-5) that monkeys actively immunized with different preparations of the virus of poliomyelitis while developing humoral antibodies, often do not resist either intracerebral or intranasal inoculations of the virus. In this paper we shall present our experiences with the nasal instillation in monkeys which have passed through clinically perceptible attacks of experimental poliomyelitis and the correlation of the effects produced with humoral antibodies present as quantitatively ascertained. The study has practical significance in determining whether a certain concentration of antiviral bodies in vaccinated monkeys has the same value as regards protection to infection as it has in convalescents.The question of reinfection in convalescent monkeys has been studied by F1exner (6) in relation especiaUy to second attacks of the disease in children. Contrary to accepted views, he has found that reinfection takes place in nasally instilled monkeys, and that the second attack may sometimes be induced by the same although apparently oftener by a foreign strain of virus; and he has also made tests for the presence of humoral antibodies to both kinds of strains in the reinfected animals (personal communication). E X P E I~N T A LReaction of Convalescent Monkeys to Nasal Instillation of Virus.--As early as 1910, Flexner (7) and later others (8 a, 9) showed that monkeys convalescent from experimental poliomyelitis are, with only rare exceptions, resistant to intracerebral inoculation of the same strain of virus.

Antibody Response of Patients With Poliomyelitis to Virus Recovered From Their Own Alimentary Tract

“…Sabin and Olitsky (23) found that the sera of convalescent paralyzed monkeys failed to neutralize as little as 20 infective doses of virus at 4 to 5 weeks after the attack and that the antibodies did not appear until 2 or 3 months after intracerebral or intranasal inoculation of "M.V. "…”

Immunization Against Poliomyelitis

“…From the observations of Jungeblut (30) and of Sabin and Olitsky (31), already cited, it appears that convalescent monkeys are resistant to intranasal or intracerebral challenge in the absence of demonstrable serum antibody. This has been interpreted as evidence of a local cellular form of immunity in tissues that have survived one invasion by the virus.…”

“…The route of inoculation used for the original infection and the virus strain were unspecified. Sabin and Olitsky (31) used 9 monkeys convalescent from paralytic attacks induced by the MV virus strain (inoculated intranasally in 5, intracerebrally in 4). All were challenged intranasally with homologous virus.…”

“…Both Jungeblut (30) and Sabin and Olitsky (31) tested the sera of monkeys at varying intervals during the incubation period, the acute illness, and convalescence. Jungeblut There are discrepancies between these two sets of data in regard to the neutralization tests in the early stages, but it seems clear that the neutralizing agent appears in the serum of monkeys in response to the infection, even though its appearance is delayed.…”

Neutralization Tests in Poliomyelitis. Sera Taken During the Acute and Convalescent Stages of the Disease and Tested With a Passage Virus and a Strain Isolated During the 1935 New York City Outbreak 1

“…It has been shown (27,28) that sera of monkeys injected subcutaneously with a subinfective dose of virus may after a few weeks neutralize poliomyelitis virus in vitro, even though the animals are not able to resist an intracerebral or intranasal instillation of potent virus. Further, convalescent monkeys which are refractory to reinoculation may show no neutralizing substance in their sera (29,30,31). Evidence has been presented previously to support the contention that protective substances were present in 14 of 82 paralytic patients when the disease developed.…”