Cargando…

Sublingual Vaccination with Live Influenza Virus Induces Better Protection Than Oral Immunization in Mice

Both sublingual (SL) and oral vaccine administration modalities are convenient, easy, and safe. Here, we have investigated the differences in vaccine efficacy that are induced by oral and sublingual immunization with live influenza virus (A/Hong Kong/1/1968, H3N2) in mice. Intranasally administering...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mao, Jie, Eom, Gi-Deok, Yoon, Keon-Woong, Kang, Hae-Ji, Chu, Ki-Back, Quan, Fu-Shi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9321673/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35888065
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12070975
_version_ 1784756105918808064
author Mao, Jie
Eom, Gi-Deok
Yoon, Keon-Woong
Kang, Hae-Ji
Chu, Ki-Back
Quan, Fu-Shi
author_facet Mao, Jie
Eom, Gi-Deok
Yoon, Keon-Woong
Kang, Hae-Ji
Chu, Ki-Back
Quan, Fu-Shi
author_sort Mao, Jie
collection PubMed
description Both sublingual (SL) and oral vaccine administration modalities are convenient, easy, and safe. Here, we have investigated the differences in vaccine efficacy that are induced by oral and sublingual immunization with live influenza virus (A/Hong Kong/1/1968, H3N2) in mice. Intranasally administering a lethal dose of the influenza virus resulted in the deaths of the mice, whereas viral replication in the lungs did not occur upon SL or oral administration. At 30 days post-immunization through the SL or oral route, the mice were intranasally challenge-infected with the lethal dose of the homologous influenza virus. Both SL and oral immunizations with the influenza virus elicited significantly higher levels of virus-specific IgG and IgA antibody responses, as well as HAI titers in the sera. Upon challenge infection, the SL immunization elicited higher levels of pulmonary IgG antibody and CD8(+) T cell responses than the oral immunization. Enhanced splenic germinal center B (GC B) and B cell proliferation were also detected from the SL immunization, both of which were significantly greater than those of the oral immunization. Importantly, compared to oral immunization, significantly lessened lung viral loads and bodyweight reductions were observed from the SL immunization and these parameters contributed to prolonging the survival of the immunized mice. These results indicate that both SL and oral administration could be effective routes in inducing protective immunity against influenza virus infection, with SL immunization being the better of the two delivery routes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9321673
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93216732022-07-27 Sublingual Vaccination with Live Influenza Virus Induces Better Protection Than Oral Immunization in Mice Mao, Jie Eom, Gi-Deok Yoon, Keon-Woong Kang, Hae-Ji Chu, Ki-Back Quan, Fu-Shi Life (Basel) Article Both sublingual (SL) and oral vaccine administration modalities are convenient, easy, and safe. Here, we have investigated the differences in vaccine efficacy that are induced by oral and sublingual immunization with live influenza virus (A/Hong Kong/1/1968, H3N2) in mice. Intranasally administering a lethal dose of the influenza virus resulted in the deaths of the mice, whereas viral replication in the lungs did not occur upon SL or oral administration. At 30 days post-immunization through the SL or oral route, the mice were intranasally challenge-infected with the lethal dose of the homologous influenza virus. Both SL and oral immunizations with the influenza virus elicited significantly higher levels of virus-specific IgG and IgA antibody responses, as well as HAI titers in the sera. Upon challenge infection, the SL immunization elicited higher levels of pulmonary IgG antibody and CD8(+) T cell responses than the oral immunization. Enhanced splenic germinal center B (GC B) and B cell proliferation were also detected from the SL immunization, both of which were significantly greater than those of the oral immunization. Importantly, compared to oral immunization, significantly lessened lung viral loads and bodyweight reductions were observed from the SL immunization and these parameters contributed to prolonging the survival of the immunized mice. These results indicate that both SL and oral administration could be effective routes in inducing protective immunity against influenza virus infection, with SL immunization being the better of the two delivery routes. MDPI 2022-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9321673/ /pubmed/35888065 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12070975 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Mao, Jie
Eom, Gi-Deok
Yoon, Keon-Woong
Kang, Hae-Ji
Chu, Ki-Back
Quan, Fu-Shi
Sublingual Vaccination with Live Influenza Virus Induces Better Protection Than Oral Immunization in Mice
title Sublingual Vaccination with Live Influenza Virus Induces Better Protection Than Oral Immunization in Mice
title_full Sublingual Vaccination with Live Influenza Virus Induces Better Protection Than Oral Immunization in Mice
title_fullStr Sublingual Vaccination with Live Influenza Virus Induces Better Protection Than Oral Immunization in Mice
title_full_unstemmed Sublingual Vaccination with Live Influenza Virus Induces Better Protection Than Oral Immunization in Mice
title_short Sublingual Vaccination with Live Influenza Virus Induces Better Protection Than Oral Immunization in Mice
title_sort sublingual vaccination with live influenza virus induces better protection than oral immunization in mice
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9321673/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35888065
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12070975
work_keys_str_mv AT maojie sublingualvaccinationwithliveinfluenzavirusinducesbetterprotectionthanoralimmunizationinmice
AT eomgideok sublingualvaccinationwithliveinfluenzavirusinducesbetterprotectionthanoralimmunizationinmice
AT yoonkeonwoong sublingualvaccinationwithliveinfluenzavirusinducesbetterprotectionthanoralimmunizationinmice
AT kanghaeji sublingualvaccinationwithliveinfluenzavirusinducesbetterprotectionthanoralimmunizationinmice
AT chukiback sublingualvaccinationwithliveinfluenzavirusinducesbetterprotectionthanoralimmunizationinmice
AT quanfushi sublingualvaccinationwithliveinfluenzavirusinducesbetterprotectionthanoralimmunizationinmice