Immunological memory ≠ protective immunity

Abstract

So-called 'immunological memory' is, in my view, a typical example where a field of enquiry, i.e. to understand long-term protection to survive reexposure to infection, has been overtaken by 'l'art pour l'art' of 'basic immunology'. The aim of this critical review is to point out some key differences between academic text book-defined immunological memory and protective immunity as viewed from a co-evolutionary point of view, both from the host and the infectious agents. A key conclusion is that 'immunological memory' of course exists, but only in particular experimental laboratory models measuring 'quicker and better' responses after an earlier immunization. These often do correlate with, but are not the key mechanisms of, protection. Protection depends on pre-existing neutralizing antibodies or pre-activated T cells at the time of infection-as documented by the importance of maternal antibodies around birth for survival of the offspring. Importantly, both high levels of antibodies and of activated T cells are antigen driven. This conclusion has serious implications for our thinking about vaccines and maintaining a level of protection in the population to deal with old and new infectious diseases.