Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Sep 21:9:215.
doi: 10.1186/1743-422X-9-215.

Sublingual immunization with recombinant adenovirus encoding SARS-CoV spike protein induces systemic and mucosal immunity without redirection of the virus to the brain

Affiliations

Sublingual immunization with recombinant adenovirus encoding SARS-CoV spike protein induces systemic and mucosal immunity without redirection of the virus to the brain

Byoung-Shik Shim et al. Virol J. .

Abstract

Background: Sublingual (s.l.) administration of soluble protein antigens, inactivated viruses, or virus-like particles has been shown to induce broad immune responses in mucosal and extra-mucosal tissues. Recombinant replication-defective adenovirus vectors (rADVs) infect mucosa surface and therefore can serve as a mucosal antigen delivery vehicle. In this study we examined whether s.l. immunization with rADV encoding spike protein (S) (rADV-S) of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV) induces protective immunity against SARS-CoV and could serve as a safe mucosal route for delivery of rADV.

Results: Here, we show that s.l. administration of rADV-S induced serum SARS-CoV neutralizing and airway IgA antibodies in mice. These antibody responses are comparable to those induced by intranasal (i.n.) administration. In addition, s.l. immunization induced antigen-specific CD8+ T cell responses in the lungs that are superior to those induced by intramuscular immunization. Importantly, unlike i.n. administration, s.l. immunization with rADV did not redirect the rADV vector to the olfactory bulb.

Conclusion: Our study indicates that s.l. immunization with rADV-S is safe and effective in induction of a broad spectrum of immune responses and presumably protection against infection with SARS-CoV.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Construction of rADV vector expressing SARS-CoV S glycoprotein and expression of S proteins in 293 T cells and bacteria. (A) The gene encoding codon-optimized SARS-S protein without helical regions, transmembrane domain and cytoplasmic domain was inserted into pShuttle vector to construct the rADV expressing the SARS-S protein. (B) 293 T cells were infected with rADV-S or rADV-EGFP and the S protein in the cell lysate was detected by Western blot. (C) DNA for SARS-S protein (amino acids 201–510) was inserted into pET15b vector to express recombinant S protein from E. coli. The protein was purified by His-tag affinity chromatography and detected by Western blot.
Figure 2
Figure 2
SARS-CoV S-specific humoral immune responses in the immunized mice. Mice were immunized with rADV-S by s.l., i.n., or i.m. route. Sera were collected two weeks after each vaccination and BAL was collected two weeks after the last immunization. S-specific IgG titers in sera (A) and S-specific IgA titers in BAL (B) were determined by ELISA. The results are expressed as the means + SD. The data are representative of three separate experiments.
Figure 3
Figure 3
SARS-CoV neutralizing activity of Sera. Mice were immunized three times with rADV-S 2 × 107 PFU by s.l., i.n., or i.m. route. Sera were tested to measure the Abs that would neutralize the infectivity of 100 TCID50 of SARS-CoV in Vero cell monolayers. Neutralization titers were determined by the CPE of SARS-CoV on Vero cell. The dotted line indicates the limitation of detection. The results are expressed as the means + SD.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Detection of S366-374epitope-specific and IFN-γ secreting CD8+T lymphocytes in the mice vaccinated with rADV-S. Mice were immunized three times with rADV-S 1 × 108 PFU by s.l., i.n., or i.m. route. Lung (A) and spleen (B) lymphocytes were harvested 10 days after the final immunization and were tested by flow cytometric analysis after staining with S366-374 tetramer, IFN-γ, CD8 and CD44.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Osek J, Truszczynski M. [Mucosal immunity with implications for use in developing a new generation of vaccines] Postepy Hig Med Dosw. 1995;49:469–486. - PubMed
    1. Holmgren J, Czerkinsky C. Mucosal immunity and vaccines. Nat med. 2005;11:S45–S53. doi: 10.1038/nm1213. - DOI - PubMed
    1. See R, Zakhartchouk A, Petric M, Lawrence D, Mok C, Hogan R, Rowe T, Zitzow L, Karunakaran K, Hitt M. Comparative evaluation of two severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) vaccine candidates in mice challenged with SARS coronavirus. J Gen Virol. 2006;87:641–650. doi: 10.1099/vir.0.81579-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Armstrong ME, Lavelle EC, Loscher CE, Lynch MA, Mills KH. Proinflammatory responses in the murine brain after intranasal delivery of cholera toxin: implications for the use of AB toxins as adjuvants in intranasal vaccines. J Infect Dis. 2005;192:1628–1633. doi: 10.1086/491739. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fujihashi K, Koga T, van Ginkel FW, Hagiwara Y, McGhee JR. A dilemma for mucosal vaccination: efficacy versus toxicity using enterotoxin-based adjuvants. Vaccine. 2002;20:2431–2438. doi: 10.1016/S0264-410X(02)00155-X. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms