• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
virology blog

virology blog

About viruses and viral disease

mucosal immunity

Spikevax Induces Durable Protection from the Delta Variant in Rhesus Macaques

4 November 2021 by Gertrud U. Rey

by Gertrud U. Rey

It is currently not clear how long SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-induced immunity lasts. The gold standard for determining the efficacy of a vaccine is the “challenge” study, which involves intentionally infecting immunized subjects with the pathogen against which they were immunized. Such studies are typically done in non-human primates, because it is unethical to deliberately infect humans with pathogens that cause serious morbidity and mortality.

A recent preprint by Kizzmekia Corbett and others describes experiments done to assess the efficacy of Moderna’s SARS-CoV-2 “Spikevax” vaccine in rhesus macaques one year after vaccination. The authors immunized eight animals with two doses of Spikevax at four-week intervals and then collected blood samples, nasal swabs, and lung wash samples at various time points over the course of the following year. The macaques were then challenged with the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant virus at 49 weeks, and more samples were collected at different time points after challenge.

Blood samples collected at 6, 24, and 48 weeks post-vaccination were used to analyze the ability of IgG antibodies in these samples to bind the receptor-binding domains of three different viruses: 1) “ancestral” SARS-CoV-2, which had the exact spike protein antigen encoded in the vaccine, 2) the delta variant, and 3) the beta variant. These latter two had variant spike proteins. IgG antibodies are mostly blood-resident and provide the majority of antibody-based immunity against invading pathogens. IgG levels were highest at 6 weeks after vaccination for all three viruses; they then declined rapidly between 6 weeks and 24 weeks, and more slowly between 24 weeks and 48 weeks. Most IgG detected at 6 weeks bound ancestral virus, with 5.4-fold and 8-fold fewer IgG molecules binding the delta and beta variants, respectively. However, when delta and beta variant-specific IgG antibodies were tested for their ability to block binding between SARS-CoV-2 and its cognate ACE2 receptor, they inhibited almost 100% of binding of both delta and beta variant viruses, suggesting that the antibodies were still functional in preventing infection, in spite of their diminished quantity.

The ability of blood-resident IgG antibodies to neutralize the three respective viruses followed a similar trend, with a gradual decline in neutralizing activity against all viruses by 48 weeks post-vaccination. Interestingly, even though the quantity of total binding and neutralizing antibodies targeting the delta variant decreased over time, the number of antibodies targeting regions associated with neutralization increased. In addition, the binding avidity of antibodies to ancestral virus increased significantly between week 6 and 24 and remained steady through week 48 post-vaccination. In contrast to affinity, which measures the strength of the binding interaction between antigen and antibody at a single binding site, avidity measures the total binding strength of an antibody at every binding site. These two shifts – the increase in the number of antibodies binding targets associated with neutralization and the increase in antibody avidity over time in spite of a decrease in total antibody levels – are suggestive of a maturing immune response that is more focused on viral regions of high immunological relevance. It is noteworthy to mention that the regions associated with neutralization are outside of areas where the variant viruses have accumulated changes in the spike protein, further implying that Spikevax and other SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are just as effective against viral variants as they are against ancestral virus.

Next, the authors analyzed lung wash samples and nasal swabs for delta-binding IgG and IgA antibodies. IgA antibodies are predominantly found in mucus membranes and their fluids, where they protect against invasion by inhaled and ingested pathogens. IgG kinetics in the lung were similar to those observed in the blood – both binding and neutralizing IgG to all three viruses were highest at 6 weeks after vaccination and decreased steadily over time until they were indistinguishable to those observed in unvaccinated animals. In contrast, IgG levels in the nose increased through week 25, plateaued, and remained stable through week 42 post-vaccination. IgA levels in the lung were highest at week 6 post-vaccination, but decreased to levels similar to those observed in unvaccinated animals by week 24. IgA levels in the nose were similar to those in unvaccinated animals at all time points. These results suggest that although SARS-CoV-2 vaccination may not induce a detectable mucosal immune response in the nose, it does induce good initial mucosal immunity in the lung, which is typically the site of severe COVID-19. This immunological difference between the lung and the nose might also explain why SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are more effective at preventing severe disease than at preventing infection.

The authors also analyzed blood samples from vaccinated animals for the presence of SARS-CoV-2-specific memory B cells, which can quickly produce spike-specific antibodies upon subsequent exposure to SARS-CoV-2. At week 6 post-vaccination, about 0.14% of all memory B cells were specific for the ancestral virus, and about 0.09% were specific for the delta variant. In comparison, about 2.5% of all memory B cells were specific for both the ancestral virus and the delta variant, and this high proportion of dual-binding to single-binding cells remained constant through week 42 post-vaccination.

To see whether these vaccine-induced immune parameters are protective after viral challenge, the authors infected the animals with delta variant virus at 49 weeks after the initial immunization. Lung washes and nasal swabs were collected on days 2, 4, 7, and 14 after challenge to monitor viral replication. On day 2 after challenge, vaccinated animals had about 11-fold fewer viral RNA copies per milliliter in their lungs than unvaccinated animals, and these RNA levels declined rapidly over the following days. In contrast, viral RNA levels in unvaccinated animals remained significantly elevated through day 7 post-infection. Viral RNA levels in the nose followed a similar trend; however, their decline in vaccinated animals was not as dramatic as that observed in the lung.

Antibodies to all three viruses in the lungs of vaccinated animals were significantly higher on day 4 after challenge than at week 42 after immunization, suggesting that memory B cell responses to infection were quick and robust. Viral challenge after vaccination also induced both T helper cells, which stimulate B cells to make antibodies, and cytotoxic T cells, which kill virus-infected cells. Analysis of lung tissue also revealed that vaccination prevented lung pathology and protected the lower respiratory tract from severe inflammation after infection.

Perhaps the most interesting observation in the study relates to whether vaccinated individuals who become infected replicate and transmit virus to others. When the authors analyzed lung wash samples for T cells specific for the SARS-CoV-2 N protein, which is not encoded in the Spikevax vaccine, they only found these cells in unvaccinated animals. This suggests that even though it had been one year since vaccination, immunized animals that were then infected did not replicate the challenge virus to a sufficient extent to produce T cells specific for the SARS-CoV-2 N protein – a response that would only be elicited by actual infection with whole virus. In other words, the memory response to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein induced by the vaccine eliminated incoming virus so quickly that the immune system had no chance to mount a response to the viral N protein encoded in the challenge virus, presumably because the virus was cleared quickly.

In summary, vaccinated animals appear to be better protected from severe disease and to clear virus faster than unvaccinated animals. This result aligns with data published in a previous preprint, which showed that viral RNA levels in delta variant-infected people who had been vaccinated prior to infection declined more rapidly than in people who were not vaccinated. And although monkeys are not human, previous studies assessing the protective efficacy of Spikevax have shown that rhesus macaques are reliably predictive of outcomes in humans, making them a great model for determining the effects of waning antibody levels on long-term protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

[Kizzmekia Corbett, a viral immunologist at Harvard who was central to the development of the Moderna mRNA vaccine, was previously a guest on TWiV 670. The preprint described in this post was also discussed on TWiV 824.]

Filed Under: Basic virology, Gertrud Rey Tagged With: ACE2, antibody, antibody affinity, antibody avidity, delta variant, human challenge model, IgA, IgG, immunity, memory B cell, Moderna, mRNA-1273, mucosal immunity, neutralizing antibody, rhesus macaque, SARS-CoV-2, spike protein, vaccine, viral replication, viral RNA

The Route Matters

3 September 2020 by Gertrud U. Rey

by Gertrud U. Rey

There are currently 315 therapeutic drugs and 210 vaccine candidates in development to treat or prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection. Many of these vaccines are designed to be administered by injection into the muscle. 

Intramuscular injection of a vaccine antigen typically induces a systemic (serum) immune response that involves the action of IgM and IgG antibodies. IgM antibodies appear first and typically bind very strongly to antigens, to the extent that they often cross-react with other, non-specific antigens. IgG antibodies arise later, are a lot more specific than IgM, and provide the majority of antibody-based immunity against invading pathogens. Intramuscular immunization usually does not induce very high levels of serum IgA, a type of antibody that is more prevalent in mucosal surfaces and represents a first line of defense against invasion by inhaled and ingested pathogens. The role of IgA in the serum is mostly secondary to IgG, in that IgA mediates elimination of pathogens that have breached the mucosal surface.    

Several of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates currently in clinical trials consist of a replication-deficient adenovirus with an inserted gene that encodes a SARS-CoV-2 antigen. The suitability of adenoviruses as vectors for delivering foreign genes into cells was discussed in a previous post, which summarized preliminary phase I/II clinical trials assessing the safety and efficacy of a chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored replication-deficient SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate encoding the full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (AZD1222). The spike protein has been the primary antigenic choice for a number of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates because it mediates binding of the virus to the ACE2 host cell receptor via its receptor-binding domain (RBD), and it also mediates fusion of the viral particle with the host cell membrane via its fusion domain. Both of these spike domains are highly immunogenic and are targeted by neutralizing antibodies, which bind viral antigens, inactivating virus and preventing infection of new cells. However, preliminary results suggest that AZD1222 only protects against SARS-CoV-2 lung infection and pneumonia but doesn’t appear to prevent upper respiratory tract infection and viral shedding.

To mediate fusion of the virus particle to the host cell membrane, the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein undergoes a structural rearrangement from its pre-fusion conformation. Because the pre-fusion form is more immunogenic, vaccines encoding the spike protein often contain a mutation that locks the translated spike protein into this pre-fusion structure. In a recent publication, virologist Michael Diamond and colleagues analyzed the efficacy of an adenovirus-vectored SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate and compared its protective effects after intramuscular injection to those after administration by the intranasal route. The vaccine, named ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S, is similar to AZD1222 except that its spike gene encodes the pre-fusion stabilized spike protein. To assess the antibody responses induced by intramuscular vaccination with ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S, the authors injected mice with 10 billion viral particles of either ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S or a control vaccine consisting of the same adenovirus shell, but lacking the spike protein gene insert. They found that one dose of ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S induced strong serum IgG responses against both the entire spike protein and the RBD, but no IgA responses in the serum or in mucosal lung cells.

While antibodies are an important part of the adaptive immune response, cell-mediated immunity is just as important and at the very least results in activation of white blood cells that destroy ingested microbes and also produces cytotoxic T cells that directly kill infected target cells. During a first exposure to a pathogen, T helper cells typically sense the presence of antigens on the surface of the invading pathogen and release a variety of signals that ultimately stimulate B cells to secrete antibodies to those antigens and also stimulate cytotoxic T cells to kill infected target cells. Analysis of these T cells in mice immunized with one or two doses of intramuscularly administered ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S revealed that two vaccine doses induced both T helper and cytotoxic T cell responses against the whole spike protein. Collectively, these results suggest that although intramuscular vaccination produces strong systemic adaptive immune responses against SARS-CoV-2, it induces little, if any, mucosal immunity.

To determine whether intramuscular immunization with ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S protects mice from infection, the authors intentionally infected (“challenged”) immunized mice with SARS-CoV-2. Although a single vaccine dose protected the mice from SARS-CoV-2 infection and lung inflammation, the mice still had high levels of viral RNA in the lung after infection, suggesting that intramuscular administration of the vaccine does not lead to complete protection from infection.  

In an effort to see whether vaccination by the intranasal route provides more complete protection, the authors inoculated mice with a single dose of ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S or control vaccine through the nose. Analysis of serum samples and mucosal lung cells four weeks after vaccination revealed that recipients of ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S had high spike- and RBD-specific levels of neutralizing IgG and IgA in both the serum and the lung mucosa, and that the number of B cells producing IgA was about five-fold higher than that of B cells producing IgG. Interestingly, the neutralizing antibodies were also able to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 viruses containing a D614G change in the spike protein, suggesting that ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S can effectively protect against other circulating SARS-CoV-2 viruses. Intranasal vaccination also induced SARS-CoV-2-specific cytotoxic T cells in the lung mucosa, specifically T cells that produce interferon gamma, an important activator of macrophages and inhibitor of viral replication.

The ideal immune response is “sterilizing” – meaning that it completely protects against a new infection and does not allow the virus to replicate at all. To evaluate the ability of a single intranasal dose of ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S to induce sterilizing immunity, the authors analyzed immunized and infected mice for serum antibodies produced against the viral NP protein. Because the vaccine does not encode the NP protein, any antibodies produced against this protein would be induced by translation of the NP gene from the challenge virus and active replication of the virus. All of the mice immunized with a single dose of intranasally administered ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S had very low levels of anti-NP antibodies compared to recipients of the control vaccine, suggesting that ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S induced strong mucosal immunity that prevented SARS-CoV-2 infection in both the upper and lower respiratory tract. This means that if intranasally immunized mice were to be exposed to SARS-CoV-2, they would not be able to replicate the virus or transmit it to others. 

The study has some notable limitations. First, it is well known that mice can be poor predictors of human disease outcomes. Second, because the mouse ACE2 receptor doesn’t easily bind SARS-CoV-2, the mice were engineered to express the human ACE2 receptor, which added a further artificial variable to an already imperfect model system. Third, it is presently unknown how long the observed immune responses would last. That being said, studies with influenza virus have shown that mucosal immunization through the nose can elicit strong local protective IgA-mediated immune responses. Further, there are clear advantages to intranasal vaccine administration: inoculation is simple, painless, and does not require trained professionals. The adequacy of a single dose would also lead to more widespread compliance. Lastly, a vaccine that prevents viral shedding would be ideal, because in addition to preventing disease in the exposed individual, it would prevent transmission to others. 

None of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates currently in clinical trials are delivered by the intranasal route. If the results observed in these mouse experiments can be duplicated in humans, ChAd-SARS-CoV-2-S would clearly be superior to other SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates. 

Filed Under: Gertrud Rey Tagged With: adenovirus-vectored vaccine, antibodies, IgA, IgG, IgM, infection, intramuscular, intranasal, mucosal immunity, SARS-CoV-2, spike protein, sterilizing immunity, T cells, transmission, vaccine

TWiV 655: Minority health with Robert Fullilove

21 August 2020 by Vincent Racaniello

Sociomedical scientist Robert Fullilove joins TWiV to discuss disparities in minority health; FDA announces an EUA on Yale’s SalivaDirect, protection of the upper and respiratory tract of mice after intranasal inoculation with an adenovirus-vectored SARS-CoV-2 spike gene, and listener questions.

Click arrow to play
Download TWiV 655 (88 MB .mp3, 147 min)
Subscribe (free): iTunes, Google Podcasts, RSS, email

Become a patron of TWiV!

Show notes at microbe.tv/twiv

Filed Under: This Week in Virology Tagged With: adenovirus, coronavirus, COVID-19, HIV/AIDS, minority health, mucosal immunity, pandemic, SalivaDirect, SARS-CoV-2, vaccine, viral, virology, virus, viruses

Whole plant cells producing viral capsid protein as a poliovirus vaccine candidate

19 August 2016 by Vincent Racaniello

poliovirusAlthough the use of the live, attenuated (Sabin) poliovirus vaccines has been instrumental in nearly eradicating the virus from the planet, the rare reversion to virulence of these strains has lead to the World Health Organization to recommend their replacement with inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV). Unfortunately IPV is also not without shortcomings, including high cost, failure to induce intestinal immunity, and the need to keep the vaccine at low temperatures. An experimental poliovirus vaccine produced in plants could overcome these problems.

A new vaccine candidate was made by producing the poliovirus capsid protein VP1 in the chloroplast of tobacco plants (nuclear-directed antigen synthesis is often inefficient). VP1 was fused to the cholera toxin B (CTB) subunit which allows good transmucosal delivery of the protein. Leaves were freeze dried, ground to a powder, mixed with saline and fed to mice after subcutaneous inoculation with IPV. The results show that boosting with the plant-derived VP1-CTB protein lead to higher antibody neutralizing titers (against all three poliovirus serotypes) both in the blood and in fecal extracts, compared with mice inoculated with IPV alone.

The VP1-CTP protein within lyophilized plant cells was stable for 8 months at ambient temperatures. If immunogenicity is maintained under these conditions, it would eliminate the need for a cold chain to maintain vaccine potency, an important achievement.

The authors propose that plant-produced VP1-CTP protein could substitute for IPV once the use of OPV is discontinued. Whether this suggestion is true depends on confirmation, by clinical trial, of these findings in humans. Furthermore, oral administration of VP1-CTP plant cells alone produces no serum neutralizing antibodies, and whether VP1-CTP boosts immunity in OPV recipients remains to be determined. Because VP1-CTP does not provide protection in children who have never received IPV or OPV, it cannot be used if poliovirus circulation continues indefinitely in the face of a growing cohort that has not been immunized with IPV or OPV. Nevertheless the technology has promise for the development of other vaccines that are inexpensive and do not need low temperature storage.

Filed Under: Basic virology, Information Tagged With: IPV, mucosal immunity, OPV, oral vaccine, plant cell vaccine, poliovirus, vaccine, viral, virology, virus, viruses

TWiV #356: Got viruses?

27 September 2015 by Vincent Racaniello

On episode #356 of the science show This Week in Virology, Stephanie joins the super professors to discuss the gut virome of children with serious malnutrition, caterpillar genes acquired from parasitic wasps, and the effect of adding chemokines to a simian immunodeficiency virus DNA vaccine.

You can find TWiV #356 at www.microbe.tv/twiv.

Filed Under: This Week in Virology Tagged With: adjuvant, baculovirus, bracovirus, caterpillar, chemokine, Cortesia congregata, DNA, dna vaccine, gut virome, horizontal gene transfer, IgA, in vivo electroporation, kwashiorkor, lepidoptera, Malawi, malnutrition, marasmus, mucosal immunity, nudivirus, parasitic wasp, ready to use therapeutic food, rutf, simian immunodeficiency virus, siv, viral, virology, virus

An unexpected benefit of inactivated poliovirus vaccine

6 January 2015 by Vincent Racaniello

Poliovirus by Jason Roberts
Poliovirus by Jason Roberts

The polio eradication and endgame strategic plan announced by the World Health Organization in 2014 includes at least one dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV). Since 1988, when WHO announced the polio eradication plan, it had relied exclusively on the use of oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV). The rationale for including a dose of IPV was to avoid outbreaks of vaccine-derived type 2 poliovirus. This serotype had been eradicated in 1999 and had consequently been removed from OPV. However IPV, which is injected intramuscularly and induces highly protective humoral immunity, is less effective in producing intestinal immunity than OPV. This property was underscored by the finding that wild poliovirus circulated in Israel during 2013, a country which had high coverage with IPV. Furthermore, in countries that use only IPV, over 90% of immunized children shed poliovirus after oral challenge. I have always viewed this shortcoming of IPV as problematic, in view of the recommendation of the World Health Organization to gradually shift from OPV to IPV. Even if the shift to IPV occurs after eradication of wild type polioviruses, vaccine-derived polioviruses will continue to circulate because they cannot be eradicated by IPV. My concerns are now mitigated by new results from a study in India which indicate that IPV can boost intestinal immunity in individuals who have already received OPV.

To assess the ability of IPV to boost mucosal immunity, 954 children in three age groups (6-11 months, 5 and 10 years) were immunized with IPV, bivalent OPV (bOPV, containing types 1 and 3 only), or no vaccine. Four weeks later all children were challenged with bOPV, and virus shedding in the feces was determined 0, 3, 7, and 14 days later. The results show that 8.8, 9.1, and 13.5% of children in the 6-11 month, 5-year and 10-year old groups shed type 1 poliovirus in feces, compared with 14.4, 24.1, and 52.4% in the control group. Immunization with IPV reduced fecal shedding of poliovirus types 1 (39-74%) and 3 (53-76%). The reduction of shedding was greater after immunization with IPV compared with bOPV.

This study shows that a dose of IPV is more effective than OPV at boosting intestinal immunity in children who have previously been immunized with OPV. Both IPV and OPV should be used together in the polio eradication program. WHO therefore recommends the following vaccine regimens:

  • In all countries using OPV only, at least 1 dose of type 2 IPV should be added to the schedule.
  • In polio-endemic countries and in countries with a high risk for wild poliovirus importation and spread: one OPV birth dose, followed by 3 OPV and at least 1 IPV doses.
  • In countries with high immunization coverage (90-95%) and low wild poliovirus importation risk: an IPV-OPV sequential schedule when VAPP is a concern, comprising 1-2 doses of IPV followed by 2 or mores doses of OPV.
  • In countries with both sustained high immunization coverage and low risk of wild poliovirus importation and transmission: an IPV only schedule.

Type 2 OPV will be gradually removed from the global immunization schedules. There have been no reported cases of type 3 poliovirus since November 2012. If this wild type virus is declared eradicated later this year, presumably WHO will recommend withdrawal of type 3 OPV and replacement with type 3 IPV.

All 342 confirmed cases of poliomyelitis in 2014 were caused by type 1 poliovirus in 9 countries, mainly Pakistan and Afghanistan. Given the social and political barriers to immunization, it will likely take many years to eradicate this serotype.

Filed Under: Basic virology, Information Tagged With: Albert Sabin, eradication, humoral immunity, inactivated poliovirus vaccine, IPV, jonas salk, mucosal immunity, OPV, oral poliovirus vaccine, polio, poliomyelitis, poliovirus, vaccine, vaccine associated paralytic polio, vaccine-derived poliovirus, vapp, viral, virology, virus

  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

by Vincent Racaniello

Earth’s virology Professor
Questions? virology@virology.ws

With David Tuller and
Gertrud U. Rey

Follow

Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram
Get updates by RSS or Email

Contents

Table of Contents
ME/CFS
Inside a BSL-4
The Wall of Polio
Microbe Art
Interviews With Virologists

Earth’s Virology Course

Virology Live
Columbia U
Virologia en Español
Virology 101
Influenza 101

Podcasts

This Week in Virology
This Week in Microbiology
This Week in Parasitism
This Week in Evolution
Immune
This Week in Neuroscience
All at MicrobeTV

Useful Resources

Lecturio Online Courses
HealthMap
Polio eradication
Promed-Mail
Small Things Considered
ViralZone
Virus Particle Explorer
The Living River
Parasites Without Borders

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.