• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Vaccine . Evaluation of a nanoparticle influenza vaccine in the pig model

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Vaccine


. 2025 Feb 12:49:126844.
doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.126844. Online ahead of print. Evaluation of a nanoparticle influenza vaccine in the pig model

Pauline M van Diemen[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Fabian Z X Lean[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Andrew Ramsay[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Benjamin C Mollett[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Alexander M P Byrne[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Alejandro Núñez[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Eleanor Herbert[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Syed M Moin[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Michelle C Crank[SUP] 7 [/SUP], Barney S Graham[SUP] 8 [/SUP], Masaru Kanekiyo[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Helen E Everett[SUP] 9 [/SUP]



Affiliations
Abstract

Influenza A virus (IAV) infection causes substantial disease burden and vaccines capable of conferring broad immunity are lacking, necessitating frequent reformulation of seasonal vaccines. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the immunogenicity and efficacy of an influenza nanoparticle vaccine developed to confer immunity against human seasonal H1N1 viruses from the pandemic 2009 (1A.3.3.2) clade and to compare this vaccine with a conventional, whole inactivated virus (WIV) vaccine. Using the pig model of human influenza, both vaccines were found to be immunogenic and elicited humoral and cellular immune responses that reflected the differences in vaccine design. Vaccine efficacy was evaluated by challenging vaccinated or unvaccinated, control pigs with a swine-origin 1A.3.3.2 virus and monitoring these groups longitudinally. Nasal shedding of viral RNA was reduced in the vaccinated groups compared to controls, although a statistically significant reduction was only observed on certain days in WIV-vaccinated pigs. To better understand correlates of immune protection, expression of porcine Mx1, CCL2 and TNFa mRNA was assessed in tissues. Virus infection of unvaccinated pigs induced mRNA expression of porcine Mx1, an innate IAV inhibitor protein, in lung tissue. In contrast, elevated Mx1 mRNA levels were not observed in lung tissue from WIV-vaccinated and, to a lesser extent, nanoparticle vaccinated pigs. These findings suggest that, although reduction in virus shedding was limited following challenge, vaccination elicited an immunoprotective response in the lower respiratory tract of challenged animals.

Keywords: H1N1; Influenza; Nanoparticle; Pig; Vaccine.

 
Back
Top Bottom