Antibody avidity, persistence, and response to antigen recall: comparison of vaccine adjuvants
Rattachement africain : be, fr, de, ch. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Differences in innate immune ‘imprinting’ between vaccine adjuvants may mediate dissimilar effects on the quantity/quality of persisting adaptive responses. We compared antibody avidity maturation, antibody/memory B cell/CD4 + T cell response durability, and recall responses to non-adjuvanted fractional-dose antigen administered 1-year post-immunization (Day [D]360), between hepatitis B vaccines containing Adjuvant System (AS)01 B , AS01 E , AS03, AS04, or Alum (NCT00805389). Both the antibody and B cell levels ranked similarly (AS01 B/E /AS03 > AS04 > Alum) at peak response, at D360, and following their increases post-antigen recall (D390). Proportions of high-avidity antibodies increased post-dose 2 across all groups and persisted at D360, but avidity maturation appeared to be more strongly promoted by AS vs. Alum. Post-antigen recall, frequencies of subjects with high-avidity antibodies increased only markedly in the AS groups. Among the AS, total antibody responses were lowest for AS04. However, proportions of high-avidity antibodies were similar between groups, suggesting that MPL in AS04 contributes to avidity maturation. Specific combinations of immunoenhancers in the AS, regardless of their individual nature, increase antibody persistence and avidity maturation.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Antibody avidity, persistence, and response to antigen recall: comparison of vaccine adjuvants
- Date Crossref
- 21/05/2021
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.