Inactivated enterovirus 71 with poly-γ-glutamic acid/Chitosan nano particles (PC NPs) induces high cellular and humoral immune responses in BALB/c mice

  • Prabuddha S. Pathinayake
  • W. A. Gayan Chathuranga
  • Hyun-Cheol Lee
  • Mohammed Y. E. Chowdhury
  • Moon-Hee Sung
  • Jong-Soo Lee
  • Chul-Joong Kim
Original Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

Enterovirus 71 (EV71) is the major causative agent of hand-foot-and-mouth disease (HFMD) and many neurological manifestations. Recently, this virus has become a serious concern because of consecutive epidemics in the Asia-Pacific region. However, no effective vaccine for EV71 has been discovered except two EV71 vaccines which are being used in local communities of China. To develop a safe and efficient EV71 vaccine candidate, we generated inactivated EV71 and evaluated its efficacy with γ-PGA/Chitosan nanoparticles (PC NPs), which are safe, biodegradable and effective as an adjuvant. The subcutaneous administration of inactivated EV71 with PC NPs adjuvant induces higher levels of virus-specific humoral (IgG, IgG1, and IgG2a) and cell-mediated immune responses (IFN-γ and IL-4). Additionally, inactivated EV71 with PC NPs adjuvant induces significantly higher virus neutralizing antibody responses compared to the virus only group, and resulted in a long lasting immunity without any noticeable side effects. Together, our findings demonstrate that PC NPs are safe and effective immunogenic adjuvants which may be promising candidates in the development of more efficacious EV71 vaccines.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Chungnam National University

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants by any of the authors. All animal experiments were conducted strictly in accordance with Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (National Research Council, 2011) with the approval of Institutional Animal Care and Use committee of Bioleaders Corporation, Daejeon, South Korea. (reference number: BSL-ABSL-14-000).

References

  1. 1.
    Chua KB, Kasri AR (2011) Hand foot and mouth disease due to enterovirus 71 in Malaysia. Virol Sin 4:221–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Solomon T, Lewthwaite P, Perera D, Cardosa MJ, McMinn P, Ooi MH (2010) Virology, epidemiology, pathogenesis, and control of enterovirus 71. Lancet Infect Dis 10:778–790CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee KY (2016) Enterovirus 71 infection and neurological complications. Korean J Pediatr 59:395–401CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yu CK, Chen CC, Chen CL, Wang JR, Liu CC, Yan JJ, Su IJ (2000) Neutralizing antibody provided protection against enterovirus type 71 lethal challenge in neonatal mice. J Biomed Sci 7:523–528CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wu CN, Lin YC, Fann C, Liao NS, Shih SR, Ho MS (2001) Protection against lethal enterovirus 71 infection in newborn mice by passive immunization with subunit VP1 vaccines and inactivated virus. Vaccine 20:895–904CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Foo DG, Alonso S, Chow VT, Poh CL (2007) Passive protection against lethal enterovirus 71 infection in newborn mice by neutralizing antibodies elicited by a synthetic peptide. Microbes Infect 9:1299–1306CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bek EJ, Hussain KM, Phuektes P, Kok CC, Gao Q, Cai F, Gao Z, McMinn PC (2011) Formalin-inactivated vaccine provokes cross-protective immunity in a mouse model of human enterovirus 71 infection. Vaccine 29:4829–4838CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen CW, Lee YP, Wang YF, Yu CK (2011) Formaldehyde-inactivated human enterovirus 71 vaccine is compatible for co-immunization with a commercial pentavalent vaccine. Vaccine 29:2772–2776CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ong KC, Devi S, Cardosa MJ, Wong KT (2010) Formaldehyde-inactivated whole-virus vaccine protects a murine model of enterovirus 71 encephalomyelitis against disease. J Virol 84:661–665CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Arita M, Shimizu H, Nagata N, Ami Y, Suzaki Y, Sata T, Iwasaki T, Miyamura T (2005) Temperature-sensitive mutants of enterovirus 71 show attenuation in cynomolgus monkeys. J Gen Virol 86:1391–1401CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Arita M, Ami Y, Wakita T, Shimizu H (2008) Cooperative effect of the attenuation determinants derived from poliovirus sabin 1 strain is essential for attenuation of enterovirus 71 in the NOD/SCID mouse infection model. J Virol 82:1787–1797CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Arita M, Nagata N, Iwata N, Ami Y, Suzaki Y, Mizuta K, Iwasaki T, Sata T, Wakita T, Shimizu H (2007) An attenuated strain of enterovirus 71 belonging to genotype a showed a broad spectrum of antigenicity with attenuated neurovirulence in cynomolgus monkeys. J Virol 81:9386–9395CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen HF, Chang MH, Chiang BL, Jeng ST (2006) Oral immunization of mice using transgenic tomato fruit expressing VP1 protein from enterovirus 71. Vaccine 24:944–2951Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chen HL, Huang JY, Chu TW, Tsai TC, Hung CM, Lin CC, Liu FC, Wang LC, Chen YJ, Lin MF, Chen CM (2008) Expression of VP1 protein in the milk of transgenic mice: a potential oral vaccine protects against enterovirus 71 infection. Vaccine 26:2882–2889CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hu YC, Hsu JT, Huang JH, Ho MS, Ho YC (2003) Formation of enterovirus-like particle aggregates by recombinant baculoviruses co-expressing P1 and 3CD in insect cells. Biotechnol Lett 25:919–925CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chung YC, Huang JH, Lai CW, Sheng HC, Shih SR, Ho MS, Hu YC (2006) Expression, purification and characterization of enterovirus-71 virus-like particles. World J Gastroenterol 12:921–927CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chung YC, Ho MS, Wu JC, Chen WJ, Huang JH, Chou ST, Hu YC (2008) Immunization with virus-like particles of enterovirus 71 elicits potent immune responses and protects mice against lethal challenge. Vaccine 26:1855–1862CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Keith LS, Jones DE, Chou CH (2002) Aluminum toxicokinetics regarding infant diet and vaccinations. Vaccine 20(Suppl 3):S13–S17CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Clements CJ, Griffiths E (2002) The global impact of vaccines containing aluminium adjuvants. Vaccine 20(Suppl 3):S24–S33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jefferson T, Rudin M, Di Pietrantonj C (2004) Adverse events after immunisation with aluminium-containing DTP vaccines: systematic review of the evidence. Lancet Infect Dis 4:84–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tomljenovic L, Shaw CA (2011) Aluminum vaccine adjuvants: are they safe? Curr Med Chem 18:2630–2637CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Meiri H, Banin E, Roll M (1991) Aluminum ingestion—is it related to dementia? Rev Environ Health 9:191–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mold M, Shardlow E, Exley C (2016) Insight into the cellular fate and toxicity of aluminium adjuvants used in clinically approved human vaccinations. Sci Rep 6:31578CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lin YH, Chung CK, Chen CT, Liang HF, Chen SC, Sung HW (2005) Preparation of nanoparticles composed of chitosan/poly-gamma-glutamic acid and evaluation of their permeability through Caco-2 cells. Biomacromolecules 6:1104–1112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hamasaki T, Uto T, Akagi T, Akashi M, Baba M (2010) Modulation of gene expression related to Toll-like receptor signaling in dendritic cells by poly(gamma-glutamic acid) nanoparticles. Clin Vaccine Immunol 17:748–756CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kim S, Yang JY, Lee K, Oh KH, Gi M, Kim JM, Paik DJ, Hong S, Youn J (2009) Bacillus subtilis-specific poly-gamma-glutamic acid regulates development pathways of naive CD4(+) T cells through antigen-presenting cell-dependent and -independent mechanisms. Int Immunol 21:977–990CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Moon HJ, Lee JS, Talactac MR, Chowdhury MY, Kim JH, Park ME, Choi YK, Sung MH, Kim CJ (2012) Mucosal immunization with recombinant influenza hemagglutinin protein and poly gamma-glutamate/chitosan nanoparticles induces protection against highly pathogenic influenza A virus. Vet Microbiol 160:277–289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chowdhury MY, Kim TH, Uddin MB, Kim JH, Hewawaduge CY, Ferdowshi Z, Sung MH, Kim CJ, Lee JS (2017) Mucosal vaccination of conserved sM2, HA2 and cholera toxin subunit A1 (CTA1) fusion protein with poly gamma-glutamate/chitosan nanoparticles (PC NPs) induces protection against divergent influenza subtypes. Vet Microbiol 201:240–251CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yang J, Shim SM, Nguyen TQ, Kim EH, Kim K, Lim YT, Sung MH, Webby R, Poo H (2017) Poly-γ-glutamic acid/chitosan nanogel greatly enhances the efficacy and heterosubtypic cross-reactivity of H1N1 pandemic influenza vaccine. Sci Rep 7:44839CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Baine MJ, Mallya K, Batra SK (2013) Quantitative real-time PCR expression analysis of peripheral blood mononuclear cells in pancreatic cancer patients. Methods Mol Biol 980:157–173CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD (2001) Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-Delta Delta C(T)) method. Methods 25(4):402–408CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yamada A, Ziese MR, Young JF, Yamada YK, Ennis FA (1985) Influenza virus hemagglutinin-specific cytotoxic T cell response induced by polypeptide produced in Escherichia coli. J Exp Med 162:663–674CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Khajuria A, Gupta A, Singh S, Malik F, Singh J, Suri KA, Satti NK, Qazi GN, Srinivas VK, Gopinathan Ella K (2007) RLJ-NE-299A: a new plant based vaccine adjuvant. Vaccine 25:2706–2715CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Brown WF (1964) Variance estimation in the Reed-Muench fifty per cent end-point determination. Am J Hyg 79:37–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Broos S, Lundberg K, Akagi T, Kadowaki K, Akashi M, Greiff L, Borrebaeck CA, Lindstedt M (2010) Immunomodulatory nanoparticles as adjuvants and allergen-delivery system to human dendritic cells: Implications for specific immunotherapy. Vaccine 28:5075–5085CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pasquale AD, Preiss S, Silva FTD, Garçon N (2015) Vaccine Adjuvants: from 1920 to 2015 and Beyond. Vaccines 3:320–343CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shaw CA, Tomljenovic L (2013) Aluminum in the central nervous system (CNS): toxicity in humans and animals, vaccine adjuvants, and autoimmunity. Immunol Res 56:304–316CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shaw CA, Li Y, Tomljenovic L (2013) Administration of aluminium to neonatal mice in vaccine-relevant amounts is associated with adverse long term neurological outcomes. J Inorg Biochem 128:237–244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tomljenovic L (2011) Aluminum and Alzheimer’s disease: after a century of controversy, is there a plausible link? J Alzheimers Dis 23:567–598PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Crepeaux G, Eidi H, David MO, Baba-Amer Y, Tzavara E, Giros B, Authier FJ, Exley C, Shaw CA, Cadusseau J, Gherardi RK (2017) Non-linear dose-response of aluminium hydroxide adjuvant particles: Selective low dose neurotoxicity. Toxicology 375:48–57CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Exley C (2016) The toxicity of aluminium in humans. Morphologie 100:51–55CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Marrack P, McKee AS, Munks MW (2009) Towards an understanding of the adjuvant action of aluminium. Nat Rev Immunol 9:287–293CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Poo H, Park C, Kwak MS, Choi DY, Hong SP, Lee IH, Lim YT, Choi YK, Bae SR, Uyama H, Kim CJ, Sung MH (2010) New biological functions and applications of high-molecular-mass poly-gamma-glutamic acid. Chem Biodivers 7:1555–1562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bacon A, Makin J, Sizer PJ, Jabbal-Gill I, Hinchcliffe M, Illum L, Chatfield S, Roberts M (2000) Carbohydrate biopolymers enhance antibody responses to mucosally delivered vaccine antigens. Infect. Immun. 68:5764–5770CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gogev S, de Fays K, Versali MF, Gautier S, Thiry E (2004) Glycol chitosan improves the efficacy of intranasally administrated replication defective human adenovirus type 5 expressing glycoprotein D of bovine herpesvirus 1. Vaccine 22:1946–1953CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Jabbal-Gill I, Fisher AN, Rappuoli R, Davis SS, Illum L (1998) Stimulation of mucosal and systemic antibody responses against Bordetella pertussis filamentous haemagglutinin and recombinant pertussis toxin after nasal administration with chitosan in mice. Vaccine 16:2039–2046CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Westerink MA, Smithson SL, Srivastava N, Blonder J, Coeshott C, Rosenthal GJ (2001) ProJuvant (Pluronic F127/chitosan) enhances the immune response to intranasally administered tetanus toxoid. Vaccine 20:711–723CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Duque GA, Descoteaux A (2014) Macrophage cytokines: involvement in immunity and infectious diseases. Front Immunol 5:491Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Denkers EY, Ricardo T, Gazzinelli RT (1998) Regulation and function of T-cell-mediated immunity during Toxoplasma gondii infection. Clin Microbiol Rev 11:569–588PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Liu ML, Lee YP, Wang YF, Lei HY, Liu CC, Wang SM, Su IJ, Wang JR, Yeh TM, Chen SH, Yu CK (2005) Type I interferons protect mice against enterovirus 71 infection. J Gen Virol 86:3263–3269CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Welsh RM, Bahl K, Marshall HD, Stina L (2012) Type 1 interferons and antiviral CD8 T-cell responses. PLoS Pathog 8:e1002352CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Okamoto S, Yoshii H, Akagi T, Akashi M, Ishikawa T, Okuno Y et al (2007) Influenza hemagglutinin vaccine with poly(gamma-glutamic acid) nanoparticles enhances the protection against influenza virus infection through both humoral and cell-mediated immunity. Vaccine 25(49):8270–8278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Chang LY, Hsiung CA, Lu CY, Lin TY, Huang FY, Lai YH, Chiang YP, Chiang BL, Lee CY, Huang LM (2006) Status of cellular rather than humoral immunity is correlated with clinical outcome of enterovirus 71. Pediatr Res 60:466–471CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Cao RY, Dong DY, Liu RJ, Han JF, Wang GC, Zhao H, Li XF, Deng YQ, Zhu SY, Wang XY, Lin F, Zhang FJ, Chen W, Qin ED, Qin CF (2013) Human IgG subclasses against enterovirus Type 71: neutralization versus antibody dependent enhancement of infection. PLoS One 8:e64024CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Prabuddha S. Pathinayake
    • 1
    • 2
  • W. A. Gayan Chathuranga
    • 1
  • Hyun-Cheol Lee
    • 1
  • Mohammed Y. E. Chowdhury
    • 1
    • 3
  • Moon-Hee Sung
    • 4
  • Jong-Soo Lee
    • 1
  • Chul-Joong Kim
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Veterinary MedicineChungnam National UniversityDaejeonRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Hunter Medical Research InstituteUniversity of NewcastleNewcastleAustralia
  3. 3.Faculty of Veterinary MedicineChittagong Veterinary and Animal Sciences UniversityChittagongBangladesh
  4. 4.BioLeaders CorporationDaejeonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations