Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: Antiviral Res. 2012 Feb 15;94(1):1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2012.02.001

Table 3.

Prophylactic dose-response comparison of m2C9 and 2C9-H4 IgG in 17D-204 challenged AG129 mice.

Group μg Antibodya Survivors/Total Mice (% Survivors) Brain Viral Loadb ASTc
Survivors Dead
PBS Controls n/a 0/5 (0) n.a. 6.9 (0.6) 18.8 (5.9)
2C9-H4 IgG 127 4/5 (80)d 2.2 (2.5)d,e 6.74 28.8 (4.9)d
12.7 10/10 (100)d 1.0 (0.4)d n.a. 31 (0)d
1.27 2/10 (20) 5.1 (0.7)d,e 6.7 (0.3) 19.2 (6.9)
m2C9 IgG 127 5/5 (100)d 0.9 (0.3)d n.a. 31 (0)d
12.7 8/10 (80)d 1.5 (1.3)d,e 6.5 (0.1) 27.0 (6.9)d
1.27 6/10 (60)d 3.9 (2.4)d,e 6.7 0.5) 26.1 (6.8)d
a

Mice were inoculated i.p. with varying doses of purified MAb 24 hours prior to i.p. virus challenge. Experiments were terminated at 31 days post-infection.

b

Expressed as mean (s.d.) of the genomic copies (log10)/g tissue.

c

Average survival time (AST) in days (s.d.).

d

ρ <0.05 by two-tailed t-test statistic vs. paired PBS control mice.

e

ρ <0.05 by two-tailed t-test statistic vs. paired dead mice.

HHS Vulnerability Disclosure