Limits...
Examination of influenza specific T cell responses after influenza virus challenge in individuals vaccinated with MVA-NP+M1 vaccine.

Powell TJ, Peng Y, Berthoud TK, Blais ME, Lillie PJ, Hill AV, Rowland-Jones SL, McMichael AJ, Gilbert SC, Dong T - PLoS ONE (2013)

Bottom Line: A potential strategy is to induce CD8(+) and CD4(+) T cells that recognize epitopes within internal proteins that are less subject to antigenic drift.Augmenting humoral responses to HA with T cell responses to more conserved antigens may result in a more broadly protective vaccine.These data indicate that antigen specific T cells are a useful additional measure for use in human vaccination or immunization studies.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: MRC Human Immunology Unit, Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, United Kingdom. timothy.powell@imm.ox.ac.uk

ABSTRACT
Current influenza vaccines stimulate neutralising antibody to the haemagglutinin antigen but as there is antigenic drift in HA it is difficult to prepare a vaccine in advance against an emergent strain. A potential strategy is to induce CD8(+) and CD4(+) T cells that recognize epitopes within internal proteins that are less subject to antigenic drift. Augmenting humoral responses to HA with T cell responses to more conserved antigens may result in a more broadly protective vaccine. In this study, we evaluate the quality of influenza specific T cell responses in a clinical trial using MVA-NP+M1 vaccination followed by influenza virus challenge. In vaccinated volunteers, the expression of Granzyme A, Perforin and CD57 on influenza HLA A*02 M158-66 antigen specific cells was higher than non-vaccinated volunteers before and after challenge despite a similar frequency of antigen specific cells. BCL2 expression was lower in vaccinated volunteers. These data indicate that antigen specific T cells are a useful additional measure for use in human vaccination or immunization studies.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Analysis of markers that are not different between vaccinated and control volunteers and analysis of CMV specific T cells after influenza challenge.A) Cells were labeled for flow cytometry and percentage positive calculated using FlowJo. All donors are shown in the figures and indicate positivity for various markers after vaccination and or challenge with influenza virus. All groups were compared using repeated measures ANOVA. B) Analysis of phenotypic markers on CMV tetramer positive CD8 T cells showing different marker expression on these antigen specific cells.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3643913&req=5

pone-0062778-g004: Analysis of markers that are not different between vaccinated and control volunteers and analysis of CMV specific T cells after influenza challenge.A) Cells were labeled for flow cytometry and percentage positive calculated using FlowJo. All donors are shown in the figures and indicate positivity for various markers after vaccination and or challenge with influenza virus. All groups were compared using repeated measures ANOVA. B) Analysis of phenotypic markers on CMV tetramer positive CD8 T cells showing different marker expression on these antigen specific cells.

Mentions: Shown in figure 4A is the phenotype data that we obtained from the vaccinated/control and then influenza infected volunteers examining different surface and intracellular markers. Overall there are a number of proteins that show trends of difference that are similar to the statistically different changes shown in earlier figures, illustrating an overall picture that the M158–66 specific CD8+ T cells are more responsive from the vaccinated volunteers than those from the control volunteers. Analysis of total CD4+ or CD8+ T cell populations could be useful but because of the unknown specificity of these cells we considered that it was better to measure either influenza or CMV antigen specific cells.


Examination of influenza specific T cell responses after influenza virus challenge in individuals vaccinated with MVA-NP+M1 vaccine.

Powell TJ, Peng Y, Berthoud TK, Blais ME, Lillie PJ, Hill AV, Rowland-Jones SL, McMichael AJ, Gilbert SC, Dong T - PLoS ONE (2013)

Analysis of markers that are not different between vaccinated and control volunteers and analysis of CMV specific T cells after influenza challenge.A) Cells were labeled for flow cytometry and percentage positive calculated using FlowJo. All donors are shown in the figures and indicate positivity for various markers after vaccination and or challenge with influenza virus. All groups were compared using repeated measures ANOVA. B) Analysis of phenotypic markers on CMV tetramer positive CD8 T cells showing different marker expression on these antigen specific cells.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3643913&req=5

pone-0062778-g004: Analysis of markers that are not different between vaccinated and control volunteers and analysis of CMV specific T cells after influenza challenge.A) Cells were labeled for flow cytometry and percentage positive calculated using FlowJo. All donors are shown in the figures and indicate positivity for various markers after vaccination and or challenge with influenza virus. All groups were compared using repeated measures ANOVA. B) Analysis of phenotypic markers on CMV tetramer positive CD8 T cells showing different marker expression on these antigen specific cells.
Mentions: Shown in figure 4A is the phenotype data that we obtained from the vaccinated/control and then influenza infected volunteers examining different surface and intracellular markers. Overall there are a number of proteins that show trends of difference that are similar to the statistically different changes shown in earlier figures, illustrating an overall picture that the M158–66 specific CD8+ T cells are more responsive from the vaccinated volunteers than those from the control volunteers. Analysis of total CD4+ or CD8+ T cell populations could be useful but because of the unknown specificity of these cells we considered that it was better to measure either influenza or CMV antigen specific cells.

Bottom Line: A potential strategy is to induce CD8(+) and CD4(+) T cells that recognize epitopes within internal proteins that are less subject to antigenic drift.Augmenting humoral responses to HA with T cell responses to more conserved antigens may result in a more broadly protective vaccine.These data indicate that antigen specific T cells are a useful additional measure for use in human vaccination or immunization studies.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: MRC Human Immunology Unit, Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, United Kingdom. timothy.powell@imm.ox.ac.uk

ABSTRACT
Current influenza vaccines stimulate neutralising antibody to the haemagglutinin antigen but as there is antigenic drift in HA it is difficult to prepare a vaccine in advance against an emergent strain. A potential strategy is to induce CD8(+) and CD4(+) T cells that recognize epitopes within internal proteins that are less subject to antigenic drift. Augmenting humoral responses to HA with T cell responses to more conserved antigens may result in a more broadly protective vaccine. In this study, we evaluate the quality of influenza specific T cell responses in a clinical trial using MVA-NP+M1 vaccination followed by influenza virus challenge. In vaccinated volunteers, the expression of Granzyme A, Perforin and CD57 on influenza HLA A*02 M158-66 antigen specific cells was higher than non-vaccinated volunteers before and after challenge despite a similar frequency of antigen specific cells. BCL2 expression was lower in vaccinated volunteers. These data indicate that antigen specific T cells are a useful additional measure for use in human vaccination or immunization studies.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus