Limits...
Developing Universal Influenza Vaccines: Hitting the Nail, Not Just on the Head.

Wiersma LC, Rimmelzwaan GF, de Vries RD - Vaccines (Basel) (2015)

Bottom Line: Current influenza vaccines need to be updated annually and protect poorly against antigenic drift variants or novel emerging subtypes.Vaccination against influenza can be improved in two important ways, either by inducing more broadly protective immune responses or by decreasing the time of vaccine production, which is relevant especially during a pandemic outbreak.In this review, we outline the current efforts to develop so-called "universal influenza vaccines", describing antigens that may induce broadly protective immunity and novel vaccine production platforms that facilitate timely availability of vaccines.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Viroscience, Erasmus Medical Center, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands. l.wiersma@erasmusmc.nl.

ABSTRACT
Influenza viruses have a huge impact on public health. Current influenza vaccines need to be updated annually and protect poorly against antigenic drift variants or novel emerging subtypes. Vaccination against influenza can be improved in two important ways, either by inducing more broadly protective immune responses or by decreasing the time of vaccine production, which is relevant especially during a pandemic outbreak. In this review, we outline the current efforts to develop so-called "universal influenza vaccines", describing antigens that may induce broadly protective immunity and novel vaccine production platforms that facilitate timely availability of vaccines.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Schematic representation of possible immunological correlates of protection. Numerals in red show various immunological correlates of protection as indicated below. (A) Cartoon of an influenza virion, showing the hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoprotein (stem and head), the neuraminidase (NA) surface glycoprotein, the matrix 2 (M2) ion channel, the matrix 1 (M1) structural protein and the ribonucleoproteins (RNPs: the combination of genomic RNA, viral polymerases PA, PB1 and PB2 and nucleoproteins (NP)). Antibodies directed against HA can either target the globular head (1A) or stem region (1B). (B) Interference of production of progeny virus by infected cells by various immunological correlates of protection, including (1) antibodies against HA head, interfering with binding or HA stem, potentially interfering with post-entry functions of HA, like endosomal membrane fusion; (2) antibodies against NA, limiting the production of progeny virus; (3) antibodies against M2e, HA or NA, followed by ADCC through CD16 signaling in NK cells (or phagocytosis, not shown); (4) virus-specific CD4+ T lymphocytes; and (5) virus-specific CD8+ T lymphocytes that possess cytolytic activity.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4494343&req=5

vaccines-03-00239-f001: Schematic representation of possible immunological correlates of protection. Numerals in red show various immunological correlates of protection as indicated below. (A) Cartoon of an influenza virion, showing the hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoprotein (stem and head), the neuraminidase (NA) surface glycoprotein, the matrix 2 (M2) ion channel, the matrix 1 (M1) structural protein and the ribonucleoproteins (RNPs: the combination of genomic RNA, viral polymerases PA, PB1 and PB2 and nucleoproteins (NP)). Antibodies directed against HA can either target the globular head (1A) or stem region (1B). (B) Interference of production of progeny virus by infected cells by various immunological correlates of protection, including (1) antibodies against HA head, interfering with binding or HA stem, potentially interfering with post-entry functions of HA, like endosomal membrane fusion; (2) antibodies against NA, limiting the production of progeny virus; (3) antibodies against M2e, HA or NA, followed by ADCC through CD16 signaling in NK cells (or phagocytosis, not shown); (4) virus-specific CD4+ T lymphocytes; and (5) virus-specific CD8+ T lymphocytes that possess cytolytic activity.

Mentions: Compared to current regimens, novel approaches to vaccination against influenza can be improved in two important ways, either by inducing more broadly protective immune responses or by decreasing the time of production. To outline the current efforts in the field of development of so-called “universal influenza vaccines” in this review (Figure 1), we distinguish between two approaches: the approaches based on identifying targets that induce broadly protective immunity and those based on integrating these targets into novel vaccine platforms. Although these categories are artificial and there is of course substantial overlap between the two, together they roughly encompass the state of the art of universal vaccine development.


Developing Universal Influenza Vaccines: Hitting the Nail, Not Just on the Head.

Wiersma LC, Rimmelzwaan GF, de Vries RD - Vaccines (Basel) (2015)

Schematic representation of possible immunological correlates of protection. Numerals in red show various immunological correlates of protection as indicated below. (A) Cartoon of an influenza virion, showing the hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoprotein (stem and head), the neuraminidase (NA) surface glycoprotein, the matrix 2 (M2) ion channel, the matrix 1 (M1) structural protein and the ribonucleoproteins (RNPs: the combination of genomic RNA, viral polymerases PA, PB1 and PB2 and nucleoproteins (NP)). Antibodies directed against HA can either target the globular head (1A) or stem region (1B). (B) Interference of production of progeny virus by infected cells by various immunological correlates of protection, including (1) antibodies against HA head, interfering with binding or HA stem, potentially interfering with post-entry functions of HA, like endosomal membrane fusion; (2) antibodies against NA, limiting the production of progeny virus; (3) antibodies against M2e, HA or NA, followed by ADCC through CD16 signaling in NK cells (or phagocytosis, not shown); (4) virus-specific CD4+ T lymphocytes; and (5) virus-specific CD8+ T lymphocytes that possess cytolytic activity.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4494343&req=5

vaccines-03-00239-f001: Schematic representation of possible immunological correlates of protection. Numerals in red show various immunological correlates of protection as indicated below. (A) Cartoon of an influenza virion, showing the hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoprotein (stem and head), the neuraminidase (NA) surface glycoprotein, the matrix 2 (M2) ion channel, the matrix 1 (M1) structural protein and the ribonucleoproteins (RNPs: the combination of genomic RNA, viral polymerases PA, PB1 and PB2 and nucleoproteins (NP)). Antibodies directed against HA can either target the globular head (1A) or stem region (1B). (B) Interference of production of progeny virus by infected cells by various immunological correlates of protection, including (1) antibodies against HA head, interfering with binding or HA stem, potentially interfering with post-entry functions of HA, like endosomal membrane fusion; (2) antibodies against NA, limiting the production of progeny virus; (3) antibodies against M2e, HA or NA, followed by ADCC through CD16 signaling in NK cells (or phagocytosis, not shown); (4) virus-specific CD4+ T lymphocytes; and (5) virus-specific CD8+ T lymphocytes that possess cytolytic activity.
Mentions: Compared to current regimens, novel approaches to vaccination against influenza can be improved in two important ways, either by inducing more broadly protective immune responses or by decreasing the time of production. To outline the current efforts in the field of development of so-called “universal influenza vaccines” in this review (Figure 1), we distinguish between two approaches: the approaches based on identifying targets that induce broadly protective immunity and those based on integrating these targets into novel vaccine platforms. Although these categories are artificial and there is of course substantial overlap between the two, together they roughly encompass the state of the art of universal vaccine development.

Bottom Line: Current influenza vaccines need to be updated annually and protect poorly against antigenic drift variants or novel emerging subtypes.Vaccination against influenza can be improved in two important ways, either by inducing more broadly protective immune responses or by decreasing the time of vaccine production, which is relevant especially during a pandemic outbreak.In this review, we outline the current efforts to develop so-called "universal influenza vaccines", describing antigens that may induce broadly protective immunity and novel vaccine production platforms that facilitate timely availability of vaccines.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Viroscience, Erasmus Medical Center, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands. l.wiersma@erasmusmc.nl.

ABSTRACT
Influenza viruses have a huge impact on public health. Current influenza vaccines need to be updated annually and protect poorly against antigenic drift variants or novel emerging subtypes. Vaccination against influenza can be improved in two important ways, either by inducing more broadly protective immune responses or by decreasing the time of vaccine production, which is relevant especially during a pandemic outbreak. In this review, we outline the current efforts to develop so-called "universal influenza vaccines", describing antigens that may induce broadly protective immunity and novel vaccine production platforms that facilitate timely availability of vaccines.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus