Advanced search
1 file | 7.48 KB

Protection of pigs against genital Chlamydia trachomatis challenge by parenteral or mucosal DNA immunization

Katelijn Schautteet (UGent) , Evelien De Clercq (UGent) , Yannick Jönsson (UGent) , Eric Cox (UGent) and Daisy Vanrompay (UGent)
Author
Organization
Abstract
We have evaluated protection against a genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection in a pig challenge model. Protection was promoted by the porcine granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), the Escherichia coli thermo-labile enterotoxin LT as an exceptionally potent mucosa-binding molecule and by a major outer membrane protein (MOMP)-based DNA vaccine carrying CpG motifs incorporated in the plasmid backbone. Protection achieved by mucosal (vaginal and nasal) immunization will be compared to systemic (intradermal) immunization. We could demonstrate that mucosal administration leads to significant protection against genital C. trachomatis challenge as significantly less severe macroscopic lesions, less chlamydial shedding and replication in the urogenital tract was demonstrated in the vaccinated animals. Also, significantly higher proliferative responses of peripheral blood lymphocytes were observed. Furthermore, the combination of nasal and vaginal immunization could induce serum antibody titers upon immunization and early upon challenge with C. trachomatis serovar E. However, the infection could not be eradicated. Systemic immunization was significantly less efficient at eliciting protection, which emphasizes the need for a mucosal vaccine in order to obtain significant protection against genital C. trachomatis infection.

Downloads

  • Abstract Ascona .pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 7.48 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Schautteet, Katelijn, Evelien De Clercq, Yannick Jönsson, Eric Cox, and Daisy Vanrompay. 2011. “Protection of Pigs Against Genital Chlamydia Trachomatis Challenge by Parenteral or Mucosal DNA Immunization.” In 9th German Chlamydia Workshop, Abstracts.
APA
Schautteet, K., De Clercq, E., Jönsson, Y., Cox, E., & Vanrompay, D. (2011). Protection of pigs against genital Chlamydia trachomatis challenge by parenteral or mucosal DNA immunization. 9th German chlamydia workshop, Abstracts. Presented at the 9th German Chlamydia Workshop.
Vancouver
1.
Schautteet K, De Clercq E, Jönsson Y, Cox E, Vanrompay D. Protection of pigs against genital Chlamydia trachomatis challenge by parenteral or mucosal DNA immunization. 9th German chlamydia workshop, Abstracts. 2011.
MLA
Schautteet, Katelijn, Evelien De Clercq, Yannick Jönsson, et al. “Protection of Pigs Against Genital Chlamydia Trachomatis Challenge by Parenteral or Mucosal DNA Immunization.” 9th German Chlamydia Workshop, Abstracts. 2011. Print.
@inproceedings{1181972,
  abstract     = {We have evaluated protection against a genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection in a pig challenge model. Protection was promoted by the porcine granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), the Escherichia coli thermo-labile enterotoxin LT as an exceptionally potent mucosa-binding molecule and by a major outer membrane protein (MOMP)-based DNA vaccine carrying CpG motifs incorporated in the plasmid backbone. Protection achieved by mucosal (vaginal and nasal) immunization will be compared to systemic (intradermal) immunization. We could demonstrate that mucosal administration leads to significant protection against genital C. trachomatis challenge as significantly less severe macroscopic lesions, less chlamydial shedding and replication in the urogenital tract was demonstrated in the vaccinated animals. Also, significantly higher proliferative responses of peripheral blood lymphocytes were observed. Furthermore, the combination of nasal and vaginal immunization could induce serum antibody titers upon immunization and early upon challenge with C. trachomatis serovar E. However, the infection could not be eradicated. Systemic immunization was significantly less efficient at eliciting protection, which emphasizes the need for a mucosal vaccine in order to obtain significant protection against genital C. trachomatis infection.},
  author       = {Schautteet, Katelijn and De Clercq, Evelien and J{\"o}nsson, Yannick and Cox, Eric and Vanrompay, Daisy},
  booktitle    = {9th German chlamydia workshop, Abstracts},
  language     = {eng},
  location     = {Locarno, Switzerland},
  title        = {Protection of pigs against genital Chlamydia trachomatis challenge by parenteral or mucosal DNA immunization},
  year         = {2011},
}