Mucosal antibody response induced with a nasal virosome-based influenza vaccine

Durrer, Peter; Glück, Ulrich; Spyr, Christian; Lang, Aloïs B.; Zurbriggen, Rinaldo; Herzog, Christian; Glück, Reinhard

doi:10.1016/s0264-410x(03)00457-2

Cited by 70 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, others have observed that inactivated influenza antigens administered intranasally are poorly immunogenic without some mucosal carrier or adjuvant. 10 Despite these limitations, the formulation tested was well tolerated and induced serum and mucosal antibodies against the vaccine antigens. Rates of adverse events were not substantially different than those reported in children given the cold-adapted live nasal influenza vaccine now licensed in the United States.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although delivery of inactivated virus alone to the nasal mucosa does not induce substantial antibody responses, inclusion of a mucosal adjuvant such as the heat-labile toxin of Escherichia coli enhances the mucosal response, resulting in a highly efficacious vaccine. 10,11 One such vaccine was licensed in Switzerland; however, it was withdrawn from the market after an increased incidence of Bell's palsy was associated with its use. 12 It has been hypothesized that the Bell's palsy and other neurological toxicities may be a result of the known neurotropism of the E. coli heat-labile toxin and other similar toxins such as cholera toxin.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Phase I, Randomized, Controlled Trial to Study the Reactogenicity and Immunogenicity of a Nasal, Inactivated Trivalent Influenza Virus Vaccine in Healthy Adults

Halperin¹,

Smith²,

Clarke³

et al. 2005

Human Vaccines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We performed a randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-escalating clinical trial to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated, split virion, trivalent, nasal influenza vaccine using lipid/polysaccharide molecules as carriers. A total of 64 adults (mean age 29; range 19-69 years) were randomly allocated to receive a mixture of lipid/polysaccharide carrier molecules and 7.5, 15, or 30 µg hemagglutinin antigen of each of the three influenza strains (A/Johannesburg/82/96 [H1N1], A/Nanchang/ 933/95 [H3N2], B/Harbin/07/94) or placebo via nasal spray on two occasions separated by 28 days. Adverse events were assessed immediately after immunization and for 14 days after each dose. Nasal and serum antibodies were measured before and two weeks after each dose. All but three participants completed the study; no withdrawals were because of adverse events. Adverse events were similar immediately after immunization except for anterior nasal dripping after the first dose which was more common in the combined vaccine groups (64.4%) than in the placebo group (31.3%; p < 0.05). A similar trend was observed after the second dose. Nasal dripping was also more common in the first two days after immunization in the vaccine groups than the placebo group (31.3%-50% vs. 0%) with no difference with increasing vaccine dose. The vaccine elicited a modest serum antibody response against all three viruses, with the highest dose eliciting the highest serum antibody levels. In contrast, significant nasal antibody rises were observed for all three viruses; again, the 30 µg group achieved the highest mucosal antibody levels at the earliest time points. We conclude that this trivalent, split virion, inactivated nasal influenza vaccine formulated with lipid/polysaccharide molecule carriers is well tolerated and modestly immunogenic in healthy adults.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Phase I, Randomized, Controlled Trial to Study the Reactogenicity and Immunogenicity of a Nasal, Inactivated Trivalent Influenza Virus Vaccine in Healthy Adults

Halperin¹,

Smith²,

Clarke³

et al. 2005

Human Vaccines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…91 Liposomes that also comprise lipid or other material derived from virus are known as virosomes, with material from influenza virus such as hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase being commonly used. [92][93][94][95][96][97][98][99][100][101][102] Currently there is more evidence to support the hypothesis that particles smaller than 300nm are the most effective at crossing mucus, 103 but there is also evidence to suggest that larger particles are also able to penetrate. Results from intranasal administration of mucoadhesive microparticles suggest that penetration of the entire particle may not be necessary to induce an immune response.…”

Section: Formulation Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current prospects and future challenges for nasal vaccine delivery

Yusuf

Kett

2016

Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nasal delivery offers many benefits over traditional approaches to vaccine administration. These include ease of administration without needles that reduces issues associated with needlestick injuries and disposal. Additionally, this route offers easy access to a key part of the immune system that can stimulate other mucosal sites throughout the body. Increased acceptance of nasal vaccine products in both adults and children has led to a burgeoning pipeline of nasal delivery technology. Key challenges and opportunities for the future will include translating in vivo data to clinical outcomes. Particular focus should be brought to designing delivery strategies that take into account the broad range of diseases, populations and healthcare delivery settings that stand to benefit from this unique mucosal route. In this review the current state of the art in nasal vaccine delivery will be described along with future prospects. A brief introduction to the anatomy and physiology of the nasal cavity will highlight the advantages and disadvantages of the route. Encapsulation and presentation methods along with particular formulation considerations for the nasal route will also be discussed.There are many mucosal routes which have been regarded as potential sites for vaccine delivery such as oral, nasal, pulmonary, conjunctival, rectal and vaginal mucosa. However, for practical and cultural reasons researchers have tended to focus only on oral, nasal, and pulmonary administration. 1 Needlefree vaccines offer many advantages over traditional vaccination approaches including convenience, cost, ease of administration and disposal.There are several needle free methods of vaccination such as transdermal delivery and mucosal delivery. 2,3 Mucosal immunization has been successfully used in human vaccination. The human mucosal immune system is large and specialized in performing inspection for foreign antigens to protect the surfaces themselves and of course human body interior. Since most infections affect or start from mucosal surfaces, using a mucosal route of vaccination is of great interest and provides a rational reason to induce a protective immune response. 3 Nasal delivery of vaccine offers an easily accessible route to the immune system.The nose has the function of olfactory detection (sense of smell) and also filtration, humidification and temperature control of air as it enters the respiratory system. Moving from front to back the areas of the nasal cavity are the nasal vestibule, the respiratory region, and the olfactory region. The nasal cavity is divided by the septum to form the left and right nares, which lead into the left and right choana before opening onto the nasopharynx at the top of the throat. The turbinates bound the nasal walls and are responsible for air conditioning and the large mucosal surface area of the nasal cavity. The nose is also the main port of entry for many pathogens. The first barrier to foreign bodies is hair at the entrance to the nares, the nostrils, which successfully keeps ou...

show abstract

“…The vaccines were given once or twice by intranasal spray, with an interval of 1 week between vaccinations in the latter case (73)(74)(75). They found that the use of HLT as a mucosal adjuvant was necessary to induce a humoral immune response comparable with that observed after parenteral vaccination.…”

Section: -3-2 Characteristics Of Ha-specific S-iga Absmentioning

confidence: 99%