Mucosal Adjuvants

Characterization of aSalmonellaTyphimurium ghost carrying an adjuvant protein as a vaccine candidate for the protection of chickens against virulent challenge

“…As the LTB protein is genetically coupled with the ghost cells, it might be associated with improved presentation of the coupled Salmonella Typhimurium antigens by antigen-presenting cells, thereby enhancing the induction of antigen-specific mucosal and systemic immune responses (Martin et al, 2001;Ekong et al, 2009). The role of the LTB protein as a mucosal adjuvant has been widely studied (Freytag & Clements 2005); however, because LTB binds to the GM1 receptors of all dividing eukaryotic cells, it can act as an adjuvant protein via parenteral delivery (Yamamoto et al, 1997;Agren et al, 1999;Weltzin et al, 2000;Conceição et al, 2006).…”

“…The coupling of the Escherichia coli heat-labile enterotoxin B subunit (LTB) with Salmonella Typhimurium ghosts could enhance the immunogenicity of ghost formulation (Ekong et al, 2009;. The increased immunogenicity derives from the fact that LTB binds to GM1 ganglioside receptors on the surface of eukaryotic cells, and this stable cross-linking of GM1 at cell surfaces has been shown to increase the uptake of co-administered antigens with resultant enhancement of the immune response (Freytag & Clements, 2005).…”

Harnessing the antibacterial and immunological properties of mucosal-associated invariant T cells in the development of novel oral vaccines against enteric infections

“…Experimental oral adjuvants such as ADP-ribosylating enterotoxins (cholera toxin (CT) and the heatlabile enterotoxin of E. coli (LT)), have shown very promising results in animal models [5,6]. It has also been reported that synthetic oligodeoxynucleotides containing unmethylated CpG dinucleotides (CpG ODN), and monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL) have mucosal adjuvant properties [3]. CT has been the gold standard experimental oral adjuvant for many decades and it has been a very useful tool in demonstrating the protective potential of oral vaccination.…”

“…To date the majority of vaccines are administered by injection and this has been successful for a number of pathogens, however there are a number of benefits to developing mucosally administered vaccines (reviewed by Freytag and Clements [3]). Firstly, many pathogens gain access via the Enteric infections are a major cause of mortality and morbidity with significant social and economic implications worldwide and particularly in developing countries.…”

Current prospects and future challenges for nasal vaccine delivery

“…26 Mucosal adjuvants that have been tested for intranasal vaccine delivery including: MF59 emulsion (containing squalene oil, the surfactants Span 85 and Tween 80 and citrate buffer), 105,106 lipopolysaccharide, 84,107 TLR agonists, 41,108,109 chitosan, 110 trimethylchitosan, 91,110 bacterial outer membrane protein 111 and cholera toxin 112 or heat-labile enterotoxin (LT) from E.coli. 113 Some side effects have been found with the use of bacterial toxin when given intranasally, including Bell's palsy (Facial paralysis) and other adverse events related to disorders of the facial nerves. [114][115][116] It has been suggested that the central nervous system was involved in the palsy as the bacterial toxin was re-directed into the brain.…”