Abstract
Maternal antibody is the major form of protection from disease in early life when the neonatal immune system is still immature; however, the presence of maternal antibody also interferes with active immunization, placing infants at risk for severe bacterial and viral infection. We tested the ability of intramuscular and gene gun immunization with DNA expressing influenza virus hemagglutinin (HA) and nucleoprotein (NP) to raise protective humoral and cellular responses in the presence or absence of maternal antibody. Neonatal mice born to influenza virus-immune mothers raised full antibody responses to NP but failed to generate antibody responses to HA. In contrast, the presence of maternal antibody did not affect the generation of long-lived CD8+ T-cell responses to both HA and NP. Thus, maternal antibody did not affect cell-mediated responses but did affect humoral responses, with the ability to limit the antibody response correlating with whether the DNA-expressed immunogen was localized in the plasma membrane or within the cell.
Neonates are deficient in several components of inflammatory, innate, and specific immune responses. The presence of high-titer maternal antibody in newborns is the major form of protection from disease in early life. Maternal immunoglobulin G (IgG) crosses the placenta from mother to fetus during development (12) and typically exceeds titers of the same antibody in the mother. This passive antibody slowly declines over the first year of life, a period during which the infant's immune system matures, becomes more experienced, and develops its own repertoire of protective memory immune responses. However, maternal antibody can also interfere with active immunization of the offspring (1). Immunization protocols are often delayed several months and/or require multiple booster immunizations to achieve the desired protective immune response. Thus, a window of time exists when maternal antibody levels are too low to reliably protect an infant from infectious disease but are high enough to prevent responses to vaccines.
DNA vaccination is an attractive method for immunization in the presence of maternal antibody. Maternal antibody is thought to interfere with traditional vaccine efficacy by reducing the amount of antigen available for processing and presentation by antigen-presenting cells. The ability of DNA vaccines to directly transfect cells bypasses this problem. The maternal antibody will not inhibit the DNA vaccine itself because antigen is not available until de novo synthesis occurs. Both DNA and subsequent antigen expression persists for several weeks (4, 6). Thus, DNA-raised immune responses could occur as maternal antibody titers wane. Some groups have reported success following neonatal DNA immunization in the presence of maternal antibody (14), while others have failed (11, 15, 21, 25).
We have previously shown that intramuscular (i.m.) and gene gun (g.g.) immunization of mice as neonates or adults with an influenza hemagglutinin (HA)-expressing DNA generates long-lasting protective IgG responses (18). In this study, we address the ability of DNAs expressing HA and nucleoprotein (NP) to generate humoral and cellular responses in the presence of maternal antibody. Our results show an inhibition of DNA-raised antibody responses to HA that correlates with the amount of maternal antibody present at the time of immunization. However, the presence of maternal antibody did not affect the generation of antibody to NP or the generation of long-lived cellular immune responses to HA or NP.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Mice.
BALB/c mice (Harlan Sprague-Dawley, Indianapolis, Ind.) were housed in microisolator cages at the Emory University Winship Animal Facility (Atlanta, Ga.). Six- to eight-week-old female mice were infected intranasally (i.n.) with a sublethal dose of influenza A/PR/8/34 and allowed to recover from infection. Approximately 3 months later, these influenza virus-immune mice, as well as naive females, were bred. Pregnant females were separated into individual cages and monitored daily for births. Birth dates were recorded as the dates the litters were discovered. Pups were weaned and sex separated at 3 to 4 weeks of age.
Plasmid DNA.
pJW4303/H1 (HA DNA) and pCMV/NP (NP DNA) plasmid vector construction and purification procedures have been previously described (8, 17). Both vectors are under the transcriptional control of the cytomegalovirus (CMV) immediate-early promoter. The empty pJW4303 vector was used as a negative control. Plasmids were grown in either Escherichia coli DH5α or HB101 and purified using Qiagen (Chatsworth, Calif.) UltraPure-100 columns.
DNA immunizations.
Twelve-week-old young adult mice were anesthetized with 0.03 to 0.04 ml of a mixture of 5 ml of ketamine HCl (100 mg/ml) and 1 ml of xylazine (20 mg/ml). i.m. DNA immunizations involved the injection of 0.04 ml of sterile 0.9% saline containing 50 μg of total DNA into a surgically exposed quadriceps muscle (17). One-day-old unanesthetized neonatal mice were injected with an equivalent DNA-saline injection combination into the gluteus maximus muscle. Surgical exposures were not performed in the neonatal animals. g.g. immunizations were performed on abdominal skin using the hand-held Accell gene delivery system as described previously (17). Adult mice were anesthetized, and abdominal skin was shaved with electric clippers. Neonatal mice were neither anesthetized nor shaved. Both groups of mice were immunized with a single g.g. dose containing a total of 2 μg of DNA per 0.5 mg of 1-μm gold beads (Bio-Rad, Hercules, Calif.) at a helium pressure setting of 400 lb/in2. Neonatal g.g. immunization parameters were optimized prior to experiments to determine the proper target location and appropriate pressure for bead penetration into the epidermal skin layer (data not shown). The doses of DNAs given i.m. were as follows: 25 μg of pJW4303/HA plus 25 μg of pJW4303 (HA DNA), 25 μg of pCMV/NP plus 25 μg of pJW4303 (NP DNA), and 25 μg of pJW4303/HA plus 25 μg of pCMV/NP (HA + NP DNA). The doses of DNA given via g.g. were as follows: 1 μg of pJW4303/HA plus 1 μg of pJW4303 (HA DNA), 1 μg of pCMV/NP plus 1 μg of pJW4303 (NP DNA), and 1 μg of pJW4303/HA plus 1 μg of pCMV/NP (HA + NP DNA).
Detection of serum IgG by ELISA.
At various times postimmunization, mice from each group were bled and individual mouse serum was assayed by standard quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) to assess anti-HA- and anti-NP-specific IgG levels in immune serum, as described elsewhere (8). Data are shown as geometric mean titers (GMT).
Preparation and stimulation of splenocytes for cytokine production.
Spleens were harvested from groups of immunized mice (n = 2 to 3) and pooled in p60 petri dishes containing ∼4 ml of RPMI 10 medium (RPMI, 10% fetal bovine serum, and 20 μg of gentamicin per ml). All steps in splenocyte preparations and stimulations were done aseptically. Spleens were minced with curved scissors into fine pieces and then drawn through a 5-ml syringe attached to an 18-gauge needle several times to thoroughly resuspend the cells. Then cells were expelled through a nylon mesh strainer into a 50-ml polypropylene tube. Cells were washed with RPMI 10, and red blood cells were lysed with ACK lysis buffer (Sigma, St. Louis, Mo.) and washed three more times with RPMI 10. Cells were then counted by trypan blue exclusion and resuspended in RPMI 10 plus 80 U rat interleukin-2 (Sigma) per ml to a final cell concentration of 2 × 107 cells/ml. Cells to be used for intracellular cytokine staining were stimulated in 96-well flat-bottom plates (Becton Dickenson Labware, Lincoln Park, N.J.), and cells to be used for cytokine analysis of bulk culture supernatants were stimulated in 96-well U-bottom plates (Becton Dickinson Labware, Lincoln Park, N.J.). Then, 100-μl portions of cells were dispensed into wells of a 96-well tissue culture plate to a final concentration of 2 × 106 cells/well. Stimulations were conducted by adding 100 μl of the appropriate peptide diluted in RPMI 10. CD8+ T cells were stimulated with either a Kd-restricted HA peptide (IYSTVASSL) (26) or a Kd-restricted NP peptide (TYQRTRALV) (20). Negative control stimulations were done with media alone. Cells were then incubated as described below to detect extracellular cytokines by ELISA or intracellular cytokines by fluorescence-activated cell sorter (FACS) staining.
Detection of IFN-γ in bulk culture supernatants by ELISA.
Pooled splenocytes were incubated for 2 days at 37°C in an humidified atmosphere containing 6% CO2. Supernatants were harvested, pooled, and stored at −80°C until assayed by ELISA. All ELISA antibodies and purified cytokines were purchased from Pharmingen (San Diego, Calif.). Then, 50 μl of purified rat anti-mouse gamma interferon (IFN-γ) monoclonal antibody diluted to 5 μg/ml in coating buffer (0.1 M NaHCO3, pH 8.2) was distributed per well of a 96-well ELISA plate (Corning, Corning, N.Y.) and incubated overnight at 4°C. Plates were washed three times with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS)–0.025% Tween 20 (PBS-T) and blocked with 250 μl of 2% dry milk–PBS for 90 min at 37°C. Plates were washed three times with PBS-T. Standards (recombinant mouse cytokine) and samples were added to wells at various dilutions in RPMI 10 and incubated overnight at 4°C for maximum sensitivity. Plates were washed three times with PBS-T. Biotinylated rat anti-mouse cytokine detecting antibody was diluted in PBS-T to a final concentration of 2 μg/ml, and 100 μl was distributed per well. Plates were incubated for 1 h at 37°C and then washed three times with PBS-T. Streptavidin-AP (Gibco BRL, Grand Island, N.Y.) was diluted 1:2,000 according to manufacturer's instructions, and 100 μl was distributed per well. Plates were incubated for 30 min and washed an additional three times with PBS-T. Plates were developed by adding 100 μl of AP Developing Solution (Bio-Rad, Hercules, Calif.) per well and incubating the mixtures at room temperature for 50 min. Reactions were stopped by addition of 100 μl of 0.4 M NaOH and read at an optical density at 405 nm. Data was analyzed using Softmax Pro version 2.21 computer software (Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, Calif.).
Intracellular cytokine staining and FACS analysis.
Pooled splenocytes were incubated for 5 to 6 h at 37°C in a humidified atmosphere containing 6% CO2. A Golgi transport inhibitor, Monensin (Pharmingen, San Diego, Calif.), was added at 0.14 μl/well according to the manufacturer's instructions, and the cells were incubated for an additional 5 to 6 h (24). Cells were thoroughly resuspended and transferred to a 96-well U-bottom plate. All reagents (GolgiStop kit and antibodies) were purchased from Pharmingen unless otherwise noted, and all FACS staining steps were done on ice with ice-cold reagents. Plates were washed two times with FACS buffer (1× PBS, 2% bovine serum albumin, 0.1% [wt/vol] sodium azide). Cells were surface stained with 50 μl of a solution containing 1:100 dilutions of rat anti-mouse CD8-allophycocyanin (APC), CD8-CD69-phycoerythrin (PE), and CD16/CD32 (FcγIII/RII; “Fc Block”) in FACS buffer. Cells were incubated in the dark for 30 min and washed three times with FACS buffer. Cells were permeabilized by thoroughly resuspending them in 100 μl of Cytofix/Cytoperm solution per well and incubating them in the dark for 20 min. Cells were washed three times with Permwash solution. Intracellular staining was completed by incubating 50 μl per well of a 1:100 dilution of rat anti-mouse IFN-γ–fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) in Permwash solution in the dark for 30 min. Cells were washed two times with Permwash solution and one time with FACS buffer. Cells were fixed in 200 μl of 1% paraformaldehyde solution and transferred to microtubes arranged in a 96-well format. Tubes were wrapped in foil and stored at 4°C until use (<2 days). Samples were analyzed on a FACScan flow cytometer (Becton Dickinson). Compensations were done using single-stained control cells stained with rat anti-mouse CD8-FITC, CD8-PE, CD8-TriColor, or CD8-APC. Results were analyzed using FlowJo version 2.7 software (Tree Star, San Carlos, Calif.).
Influenza virus A/PR/8/34 challenge.
Metofane-anesthetized mice were challenged by i.n. inoculation of 50 μl of influenza virus A/PR/8/34 (H1N1) containing allantoic fluid diluted 10−4 in PBS (50 to 100 50% lethal dose; 0.25 hemagglutinating unit). Mice were weighed daily and sacrificed following >20% loss of prechallenge weight. At this dose of challenge virus, 100% of naive mice succumbed to influenza virus infection by 4 to 6 days. Sublethal infections were done similarly using a 10−7 dilution of virus.
RESULTS
Maternal antibody inhibits IgG responses to HA but not to NP.
Mice born to influenza virus-immune mothers and vaccinated on the day of birth were deficient in the generation of DNA-raised IgG to HA but not to NP (Fig. 1, Table 1). One-day-old mice born to naive mothers or influenza virus-immune mothers were immunized on the day of birth by i.m. or g.g. inoculation with HA, NP, or HA + NP DNA. At the time of DNA immunization, the GMT of anti-influenza virus maternal IgG in the neonates was 128.5 μg/ml. By 12 weeks of age, the titers had fallen to background levels. At 30 weeks postpriming, the neonates immunized in the presence of maternal antibody showed different patterns of IgG responses to HA and NP than those immunized in the absence of maternal antibody. In the maternal-antibody-positive groups, the highest antibody responses were seen for NP, the second highest antibody responses were seen for HA + NP, and the lowest antibody responses were seen for HA (Fig. 1A and B). In contrast, in the maternal-antibody-negative groups, the highest antibody responses were seen for HA plus NP, the second highest antibody responses were seen for HA, and the lowest antibody responses were seen for NP (Fig. 1A and B).
FIG. 1.
Effects of maternal antibody on DNA-raised IgG responses. Mice born to influenza virus-immune or naive mothers were immunized on the day of birth either i.m. (A) or g.g. (B) or as young adults either i.m. (C) or g.g. (D) with HA, NP, or HA-NP DNAs. Serum samples were tested over a course of 30 weeks for anti-influenza virus IgG levels by ELISA. Results are shown as the GMT for IgG for groups of 7 to 14 mice. The standard errors of the mean for the GMT at 30 weeks postpriming are given in Table 1.
TABLE 1.
IgG responses after DNA immunization in the presence or absence of maternal antibodya
| Age at time of immunization | DNA type | Method | GMT (lower limit, upper limit) of IgG in μg/ml with:
|
Ratiod | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maternal Ab presentb | Maternal Ab absentc | ||||
| 1 day | HA | i.m. | 0.6 (0.2, 0.9) | 9.2 (6.8, 12.3) | 0.06 |
| g.g. | 0.4 (0.1, 0.7) | 7.1 (3.9, 12.4) | 0.06 | ||
| NP | i.m. | 2.5 (1.9, 3.1) | 6.3 (5.7, 6.9) | 0.4 | |
| g.g. | 2.4 (1.9, 3.0) | 1.1 (0.9, 1.4) | 2.2 | ||
| 12 wk | HA | i.m. | 7.2 (5.7, 10.0) | 12.9 (10.2, 16.3) | 0.6 |
| g.g. | 2.0 (1.5, 2.6) | 4.5 (2.7, 6.9) | 0.4 | ||
| NP | i.m. | 4.3 (3.6, 5.0) | 4.5 (3.8, 5.4) | 1.0 | |
| g.g. | 4.6 (4.0, 5.2) | 3.5 (2.6, 4.5) | 1.3 | ||
Mice were immunized and IgG levels were assayed as described in Fig. 1. Results are shown as the GMT of IgG for groups of 7 to 14 mice at 30 weeks postprime. Ab, antibody.
GMT (lower limit, upper limit based on retransformation of 1 SEM) of IgG of mice born to influenza virus-immune mothers.
GMT (lower limit, upper limit based on retransformation of 1 SEM) of IgG of mice born to naive mothers.
Ratio = (IgG levels in DNA-immunized mice born to influenza virus-immune mothers)/(IgG levels in DNA-immunized mice born to naive mothers). Differences between the effects of maternal antibody on HA- and NP-raised IgG responses in 1-day-old mice were significant: i.m., P < 0.02; g.g., P < 0.001 (significant interaction term as indicated by analysis of variance on log-transformed values).
Direct comparison of the titers of the antibody responses for HA and NP in the groups immunized as neonates revealed that maternal antibody had limited antibody responses to HA but not to NP (P < 0.02, i.m. immunizations; P < 0.001, g.g. immunizations) (Table 1). In both g.g.- and i.m.-immunized neonates, the levels of anti-HA IgG had been reduced by 16-fold. By contrast, the maternal antibody had not significantly reduced antibody responses in the groups immunized with NP.
Mice born to influenza virus-immune mothers and DNA immunized as young adults, when maternal antibody had decreased to background levels, generated antibody to both HA and NP (Fig. 1C and D). The ratios of antibody responses to HA and NP revealed that the blocking effect of maternal antibody on the raising of anti-HA IgG had been largely lost (Table 1).
Analysis of the kinetics of antibody responses in the various groups revealed that the method of DNA delivery, the age of the mouse at the time of DNA immunization, and the presence or absence of maternal antibody all affected the time course of the appearance of antibody (Fig. 1). Naive mice immunized i.m. on the day of birth developed IgG responses within 8 weeks, whereas g.g.-immunized mice did not generate detectable responses until 12 weeks of age (Fig. 1A and B). Mice immunized as neonates required approximately 4 weeks longer to generate IgG than mice immunized as young adults. Neonates developed antibody by 8 weeks following i.m. delivery of DNA; whereas young adults developed antibody by 4 weeks. Following g.g. immunizations, neonates developed antibody by 12 weeks, whereas young adults generated antibody within 8 weeks. The presence of residual maternal antibody in the young adults also slowed the appearance of antibody by about 4 weeks (Fig. 1C and D).
Maternal antibody does not block the generation of long-lived CD8+ T-cell responses.
We next determined if anti-influenza virus antibody was capable of preventing DNA-raised T-cell responses. Mice born to naive or influenza virus-immune mothers were DNA immunized as described for Fig. 1 i.m. or g.g. with HA- and/or NP-expressing DNA. One year later, mice were inoculated with a sublethal dose of influenza virus A/PR/8/34 to activate memory T cells. Mice were sacrificed 7 days later, and spleens from each group (n = 2 to 3) were pooled. Splenocytes were cultured for 10 to 12 h with Kd-restricted HA or NP peptides. The final 5 or 6 h of culture included monensin (Pharmingen), which inhibits protein transport and allows for the accumulation of intracellular cytokines. The cells were surface stained for CD8 and CD69 (an early activation antigen), permeabilized, stained for intracellular IFN-γ, and analyzed by flow cytometry.
Maternal antibody did not block the generation of long-term CD8+ T-cell responses to DNA expressed HA or NP (Fig. 2, Table 2). Immunizations with HA, NP, or HA + NP DNA in the presence or absence of maternal antibody generated overall comparable frequencies of antigen-specific CD8+ T cells. Variation was seen between groups in the frequencies of responding T cells. However, this variation had no consistent pattern between groups born to naive or influenza virus-immune mothers. Data were also similar between mice immunized as neonates or as young adults. In both the i.m.- and g.g.-immunized groups, NP yielded higher frequencies of responding CD8+ T cells than HA DNA. Overall, the frequencies of responding cells for HA and NP were not affected by HA + NP codelivery.
FIG. 2.
Effects of maternal antibody on DNA-raised CD8+ T-cell responses, as determined by intracellular cytokine staining. Mice born to naive or influenza virus-immune mothers were immunized either i.m. (A) or g.g. (B) on the day of birth or in adulthood with HA and/or NP DNA or pJW4303 control DNA (C). One year later, all mice were inoculated with a sublethal dose of influenza virus. Mice were sacrificed 7 days later, and spleens from each group (n = 2 to 3) were pooled. Splenocytes were cultured for 10 to 12 h with a Kd-restricted HA or NP peptide as appropriate. The final 5 or 6 h of culture included monensin, which inhibits protein transport by the Golgi and allows for the accumulation of intracellular cytokines. The cells were surface stained for CD8 and CD69 (early activation antigen), permeabilized and stained for intracellular IFN-γ, and analyzed by flow cytometry. Data are shown as dot plots, with numbers in quadrants representing the respective percentage of the CD8+ cell population.
TABLE 2.
CD8+ T-cell responses after DNA immunization in the presence or absence of maternal antibodya
| Method | DNA | Stimulation | CD8+ CD69+ IFN-γ (%)b at:
|
IFN-γ (pg/ml)c at:
|
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 day
|
12 weeks
|
1 day
|
12 weeks
|
|||||||
| Naive | Flu | Naive | Flu | Naive | Flu | Naive | Flu | |||
| i.m. | HA | Kd HA | 0.06 | 0.12 | 0.08 | 0.30 | 3,470 | 6,775 | 808 | 9,570 |
| NP | Kd NP | 0.59 | 0.37 | 0.16 | 0.60 | 24,950 | 17,621 | ND | 15,095 | |
| HA+NP | Kd HA | 1.15 | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.07 | 83,760 | 310 | 7,030 | 3,170 | |
| Kd NP | 0.23 | 0.09 | 0.20 | 0.06 | 10,900 | 100 | 4,275 | 3,730 | ||
| g.g. | HA | Kd HA | 0.73 | 0.11 | 0.76 | 0.54 | 40,345 | 13,090 | 31,970 | 28,960 |
| NP | Kd NP | 0.65 | 0.23 | 2.16 | ND | 26,310 | 30,700 | 219,530 | 165,765 | |
| HA+NP | Kd HA | 0.19 | 1.41 | 0.21 | 0.39 | 10,910 | 91,805 | 45,655 | 24,700 | |
| Kd NP | 0.35 | 1.21 | 0.28 | 1.30 | 14,940 | 155,080 | 157,275 | 151,235 | ||
Mice were immunized and CD8+ T-cell responses were analyzed by FACS or ELISA as described in Fig. 2 and 3, respectively. The age at the time of immunization (1 day or 12 weeks) and the immune status of the mother (naive or influenza virus immune [Flu]) are as indicated. ND, not determined.
Percentage of CD8+ T cells that were CD69+ and IFN-γ+ following 10 to 12 h of peptide stimulation.
IFN-γ in cell culture supernatants following 2 days of peptide stimulation.
The production of IFN-γ in culture supernatants correlated with intracellular cytokine FACS data (Fig. 3, Table 2). The same groups of pooled splenocytes from DNA-immunized mice described in Fig. 2 were cultured for 2 days with the Kd-restricted HA or NP peptides. Supernatants from duplicate wells were pooled and assessed for IFN-γ by ELISA. IFN-γ production was easily scored for all groups.
FIG. 3.
Effects of maternal antibody on the generation of DNA-raised CD8+ T-cell responses, as determined by IFN-γ production. Splenocytes from the same mice used in Fig. 2 were cultured for 2 days with the appropriate Kd-restricted HA or NP peptide. Bulk culture supernatants were harvested, pooled, and assayed for IFN-γ production by ELISA. Results are for mice immunized with HA plus NP DNA (A), HA DNA (B), or NP DNA (C).
Maternal antibody inhibits protection from influenza virus challenge.
Maternal antibody inhibited the protective efficacy of DNA immunizations, with protection correlating with HA-specific IgG (Fig. 4, Table 3). All mice DNA immunized as neonates in the presence of maternal antibody succumbed to i.n. influenza virus challenge, as did mice immunized with the control DNA. In contrast, mice born to naive mothers and immunized with HA or HA + NP DNA were protected. Codelivery of HA and NP DNAs provided slightly better protection than HA DNA alone. NP DNA failed to protect any mice, regardless of the presence of NP-specific IgG and CD8+ T-cell responses.
FIG. 4.
Protection correlates with antibody to HA. Mice born to naive or influenza virus-immune mothers were immunized on the day of birth or in adulthood by i.m. or g.g. with HA plus NP (A), HA (B), or NP DNA (C). Thirty weeks later, groups of four to eight mice were challenged i.n. with a lethal dose of influenza A/PR/8/34 and weighed daily. Mice were sacrificed following >20% loss of prechallenge body weight. Results are shown as the percent survival at 7 days postchallenge versus the prechallenge GMT of IgG.
TABLE 3.
Effect of maternal antibody on protection from influenza challenge
| Age at time of immunization | Immune status of mother | DNA | No. of survivors/ total no. tested
|
% Protectiona | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| i.m. | g.g. | ||||
| 1 day | Flu-immuneb | HA+NP | 0/7 | 0/4 | 0 |
| HA | 0/8 | 0/4 | 0 | ||
| NP | 0/7 | 0/4 | 0 | ||
| Naive | HA+NP | 3/6 | 4/7 | 54 | |
| HA | 2/7 | 2/4 | 36 | ||
| NP | 0/6 | 0/4 | 0 | ||
| 12 weeks | Flu-immune | HA+NP | 1/4 | 1/5 | 22 |
| HA | 1/4 | 0/4 | 25 | ||
| NP | 0/4 | 0/4 | 0 | ||
| Naive | HA+NP | 4/5 | 4/5 | 80 | |
| HA | 4/5 | 1/4 | 56 | ||
| NP | 0/4 | 0/5 | 0 | ||
19 of 19 mice immunized at birth with control DNA and 16 of 16 mice immunized as adults with control DNA succumbed to infection by 7 days postchallenge.
Flu-immune, influenza virus immune.
Young adult DNA-immunized mice born to influenza virus-immune mothers also were afforded less protection from influenza virus challenge than were mice born to naive mothers (Fig. 4). For instance, adult mice coimmunized with HA + NP DNAs in the presence of residual maternal antibody had <30% survival, whereas adult mice immunized in the absence of maternal antibody had an 80% survival rate. The levels of protection directly correlated with the levels of anti-HA antibody (Fig. 4).
DISCUSSION
Recent studies from our lab have shown that immunization of neonatal mice with influenza HA DNA generates strong, long-lasting, protective IgG responses (18). Here we extend these studies to evaluate the effects of maternal antibody on the efficacy of neonatal DNA immunizations. Our results show that maternal antibody inhibits the magnitude of IgG responses to HA but not to NP (Fig. 1, Table 1). They also show that maternal antibody does not interfere with the raising of CD8+ T-cell responses (Fig. 2 and 3, Table 2). Finally, we show that protection against a lethal challenge correlates with the presence of antibody to HA (Table 3, Fig. 4). Cellular immune responses in the absence of antibody to HA failed to protect against the highly virulent A/PR/8/34 influenza virus challenge (Fig. 4, Table 3).
Interestingly, the presence of maternal antibody at the time of DNA immunization inhibited the generation of antibody responses to HA more strongly than to NP (Fig. 1, Table 1). DNA-raised IgG responses to HA were reduced by at least 16-fold, whereas antibody responses to NP were not significantly affected by the presence of maternal antibody (Table 1). This was true both for g.g. (P < 0.001) and i.m. (P < 0.02) deliveries of DNA. This difference is unlikely to be due to the absence of maternal antibody to NP because approximately 40% of the total antibody response to influenza virus is directed against NP (3). When expressed in a DNA vaccine, the influenza virus HA localizes to the plasma membrane, whereas the influenza virus NP is intracellular. This suggests that maternal antibody inhibits the generation of IgG responses to plasma membrane proteins more strongly than to intracellular proteins.
The ability of maternal antibody to inhibit DNA-raised IgG responses to plasma membrane, but not intracellular proteins, is consistent with some, but not all, prior literature (Table 4). The one other study of a DNA-expressed intracellular protein, LCMV NP, is consistent with our findings with influenza virus NP (10; Table 1). Thus, in general, intracellular proteins may be protected against the blocking activity of maternal antibody. Five other studies have been done on the ability of maternal antibody to block humoral responses to DNA-expressed plasma membrane proteins (Table 4). These studies varied with regard to the ability to raise IgG in the presence of maternal antibody. Similar to our findings with influenza HA, maternal antibody blocked DNA-raised IgG responses to measles virus HA and pseudorabies virus gD. In contrast, maternal antibody failed to block DNA-raised IgG responses to herpes simplex virus gB, bovine herpesvirus gD or rabies virus glycoprotein (13, 14, 23, 25; Table 4). The differences in the ability of plasma membrane proteins to raise antibody may be due to differences in the levels of maternal antibody in the different model systems. This is suggested in the rabies virus studies, where the level of passive antibody affected the extent of blocking (25). A second, more interesting possibility would be that plasma membrane proteins differ in how antibody affects their interactions with the immune system. If this is so, plasma membrane proteins that are sensitive to blocking by maternal antibody may be able to be engineered for resistance.
TABLE 4.
Studies of neonatal DNA immunization in the presence of maternal antibody
| Type of protein | Gene | Immunogen | Model | Presence (+) or absence (−) ofa:
|
Source or reference(s) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ab | CTL | Th | |||||
| Internal | NP | LCMVb | Mouse | + | + | ND | 10 |
| NP | Influenza virus | Mouse | + | + | ND | This study | |
| Plasma | HA | Measles virus | Mouse | − | + | + | 21 |
| Membrane | HA | Influenza virus | Mouse | − | + | ND | This study |
| gD | Pseudorabies virus | Pig | − | ND | ND | 11, 15 | |
| gp | Rabies virus | Mouse | + | ND | ND | 25 | |
| gD | Bovine herpesvirus | Mouse, sheep | + | ND | + | 13, 23 | |
| gB | Herpesvirus | Mouse | + | ND | + | 14 | |
| Secreted | C fragment | Tetanus toxin | Mouse | − | + | + | 21 |
Ab, antibody; CTL, cytotoxic T lymphocytes; Th, T helper cell; ND, not done.
LCMV, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus.
In contrast to antibody responses, all DNA-expressed proteins have raised cell-mediated immunity in the presence of maternal antibody (Fig. 2 to 4, Tables 2 and 4). This ability to raise cellular immunity is independent of the ability to raise antibody (Table 4). These findings imply that maternal antibody does not block processing and presentation of DNA-expressed antigens.
In agreement with prior studies using the highly virulent A/PR/8/34 challenge, HA DNA immunization afforded protection whereas NP DNA immunization failed to protect against influenza challenge (Fig. 4 [5, 19]). The ability of HA to protect correlated with the level of anti-HA antibody (Fig. 4). Anti-HA antibody differs from anti-NP antibody or cell-mediated responses to HA or NP in that it can block virus entry. Thus, antibody to HA can limit the incoming infection. By contrast, cytotoxic T lymphocytes to HA and NP are unable to block infection but can play a role in the recovery from influenza virus infection. Other groups have shown a ≥50% greater survival rate than for controls using NP DNA immunizations (9, 22). These studies differed from ours in using multiple booster immunizations and challenging with a low dose (20% survival rate in nonimmunized controls) of the more attenuated A/HK/68 (H3N2) influenza virus (16, 22). In agreement with prior studies, coimmunization with HA + NP DNAs enhanced protective immunity (Table 3, Fig. 4 [2, 7]).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We are indebted to James Herndon for assistance with statistical analyses, John Altman for helpful discussion on intracellular cytokine assays, and H. Drake-Perrow for outstanding administrative assistance.
This study was supported by U.S. Public Health Service grants R01 AI 34946-06, AI 07349, and RR 00165.
REFERENCES
- 1.Albrecht P, Ennis F A, Saltzman E J, Krugman S. Persistence of maternal antibody in infants beyond 12 months: mechanism of measles vaccine failure. J Pediatr. 1977;91:715–718. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(77)81021-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Bot A, Bot S, Bona C. Enhanced protection against influenza virus of mice immunized as newborns with a mixture of plasmids expressing hemagglutinin and nucleoprotein. Vaccine. 1998;16:1675–1682. doi: 10.1016/s0264-410x(98)00054-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Boyle C M, Morin M, Webster R G, Robinson H L. Role of different lymphoid tissues in the initiation and maintenance of DNA-raised antibody responses to the influenza virus H1 glycoprotein. J Virol. 1996;70:9074–9078. doi: 10.1128/jvi.70.12.9074-9078.1996. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Boyle C M, Robinson H L. Basic mechanisms of DNA-raised antibody responses. DNA Cell Biol. 2000;19:157–165. doi: 10.1089/104454900314546. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Chen Z, Sahashi Y, Matsuo K, Asanuma H, Takahashi H, Iwasaki T, Suzuki Y, Aizawa C, Kurata T, Tamura S. Comparison of the ability of viral protein-expressing plasmid DNAs to protect against influenza. Vaccine. 1998;16:1544–1549. doi: 10.1016/s0264-410x(98)00043-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Doe B, Selby M, Barnett S, Baenziger J, Walker C M. Induction of cytotoxic T lymphocytes by intramuscular immunization with plasmid DNA is facilitated by bone marrow-derived cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1996;93:8578–8583. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.16.8578. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Donnelly J J, Friedman A, Martinez D, Montgomery D L, Shiver J W, Motzel S L, Ulmer J B, Liu M A. Preclinical efficacy of a prototype DNA vaccine: enhanced protection against antigenic drift in influenza virus. Nat Med. 1995;1:583–587. doi: 10.1038/nm0695-583. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Feltquate D M, Heaney S, Webster R G, Robinson H L. Different T helper cell types and antibody isotypes generated by saline and gene gun DNA immunization. J Immunol. 1997;158:2278–2284. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Fu T M, Guan L, Friedman A, Schofield T L, Ulmer J B, Liu M A, Donnelly J J. Dose dependence of CTL precursor frequency induced by a DNA vaccine and correlation with protective immunity against influenza virus challenge. J Immunol. 1999;162:4163–4170. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Hassett D E, Zhang J, Whitton J L. Neonatal DNA immunization with a plasmid encoding an internal viral protein is effective in the presence of maternal antibodies and protects against subsequent viral challenge. J Virol. 1997;71:7881–7888. doi: 10.1128/jvi.71.10.7881-7888.1997. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Le Potier M F, Monteil M, Houdayer C, Eloit M. Study of the delivery of the gD gene of pseudorabies virus to one-day-old piglets by adenovirus or plasmid DNA as ways to by-pass the inhibition of immune response by colostral antibodies. Vet Microbiol. 1997;55:75–80. doi: 10.1016/s0378-1135(96)01296-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Leach J L, Sedmak D D, Osborne J M, Rahill B, Lairmore M D, Anderson C L. Isolation from human placenta of the IgG transporter, FcRn, and localization to the syncytiotrophoblast: implications for maternal-fetal antibody transport. J Immunol. 1996;157:3317–3322. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Lewis P J, Cox G J, van Drunen Littel-van den Hurk S, Babiuk L A. Polynucleotide vaccines in animals: enhancing and modulating responses. Vaccine. 1997;15:861–864. doi: 10.1016/s0264-410x(96)00279-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Manickan E, Yu Z, Rouse B T. DNA immunization of neonates induces immunity despite the presence of maternal antibody. J Clin Investig. 1997;100:2371–2375. doi: 10.1172/JCI119777. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Monteil M, Le Potier M F, Cariolet R, Houdayer C, Eloit M. Effective priming of neonates born to immune dams against the immunogenic pseudorabies virus glycoprotein gD by replication-incompetent adenovirus-mediated gene transfer at birth. J Gen Virol. 1997;78:3303–3310. doi: 10.1099/0022-1317-78-12-3303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Montgomery D L, Shiver J W, Leander K R, Perry H C, Friedman A, Martinez D, Ulmer J B, Donnelly J J, Liu M A. Heterologous and homologous protection against influenza A by DNA vaccination: optimization of DNA vectors. DNA Cell Biol. 1993;12:777–783. doi: 10.1089/dna.1993.12.777. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Pertmer T M, Eisenbraun M D, McCabe D, Prayaga S K, Fuller D H, Haynes J R. Gene gun-based nucleic acid immunization: elicitation of humoral and cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses following epidermal delivery of nanogram quantities of DNA. Vaccine. 1995;13:1427–1430. doi: 10.1016/0264-410x(95)00069-d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Pertmer T M, Robinson H L. Studies on antibody responses following neonatal immunization with influenza hemagglutinin DNA or protein. Virology. 1999;257:406–414. doi: 10.1006/viro.1999.9666. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Robinson H L, Boyle C A, Feltquate D M, Morin M J, Santoro J C, Webster R G. DNA immunization for influenza virus: studies using hemagglutinin- and nucleoprotein-expressing DNAs. J Infect Dis. 1997;176:S50–S55. doi: 10.1086/514176. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Rotzschke O, Falk K, Deres K, Schild H, Nordon M, Metzger J, Jung G, Rammensee H G. Isolation and analysis of naturally processed viral peptides as recognized by cytolytic T cells. Nature. 1990;348:252–254. doi: 10.1038/348252a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Siegrist C A, Barrios C, Martinez X, Brandt C, Berney M, Cordova M, Kovarik J, Lambert P H. Influence of maternal antibodies on vaccine responses: inhibition of antibody but not T cell responses allows successful early prime-boost strategies in mice. Eur J Immunol. 1998;28:4138–4148. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-4141(199812)28:12<4138::AID-IMMU4138>3.0.CO;2-L. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Ulmer J B, Donnelly J J, Parker S E, Rhodes G H, Felgner P L, Dwarki V J, Gromkowski S H, Deck R R, De Witt C M, Friedman A, et al. Heterologous protection against influenza by injection of DNA encoding a viral protein. Science. 1993;259:1745–1749. doi: 10.1126/science.8456302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Van Drunen Littel-van den Hurk S, Braun R P, Lewis P J, Karvonen B C, Babiuk L A, Griebel P J. Immunization of neonates with DNA encoding a bovine herpesvirus glycoprotein is effective in the presence of maternal antibodies. Viral Immunol. 1999;12:67–77. doi: 10.1089/vim.1999.12.67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Waldrop S L, Davis K A, Maino V C, Picker L J. Normal human CD4+ memory T cells display broad heterogeneity in their activation threshold for cytokine synthesis. J Immunol. 1998;161:5284–5295. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Wang Y, Xiang Z, Pasquini S, Ertl H C. Effect of passive immunization or maternally transferred immunity on the antibody response to a genetic vaccine to rabies virus. J Virol. 1998;72:1790–1796. doi: 10.1128/jvi.72.3.1790-1796.1998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Winter G, Fields S, Brownlee G G. Nucleotide sequence of the haemagglutinin gene of a human influenza virus H1 subtype. Nature. 1981;292:72–75. doi: 10.1038/292072a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]