Skip to main content
PLOS Pathogens logoLink to PLOS Pathogens
. 2023 Feb 17;19(2):e1011082. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1011082

Broad protective vaccination against systemic Escherichia coli with autotransporter antigens

Yikun Xing 1,2, Justin R Clark 1,2, James D Chang 1,2, Dylan M Chirman 1,2, Sabrina Green 1,2, Jacob J Zulk 1,2, Joseph Jelinski 1,2, Kathryn A Patras 1,3, Anthony W Maresso 1,2,*
Editor: Kimberly A Kline4
PMCID: PMC9937491  PMID: 36800400

Abstract

Extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli (ExPEC) is the leading cause of adult life-threatening sepsis and urinary tract infections (UTI). The emergence and spread of multidrug-resistant (MDR) ExPEC strains result in a considerable amount of treatment failure and hospitalization costs, and contribute to the spread of drug resistance amongst the human microbiome. Thus, an effective vaccine against ExPEC would reduce morbidity and mortality and possibly decrease carriage in healthy or diseased populations. A comparative genomic analysis demonstrated a gene encoding an invasin-like protein, termed sinH, annotated as an autotransporter protein, shows high prevalence in various invasive ExPEC phylogroups, especially those associated with systemic bacteremia and UTI. Here, we evaluated the protective efficacy and immunogenicity of a recombinant SinH-based vaccine consisting of either domain-3 or domains-1,2, and 3 of the putative extracellular region of surface-localized SinH. Immunization of a murine host with SinH-based antigens elicited significant protection against various strains of the pandemic ExPEC sequence type 131 (ST131) as well as multiple sequence types in two distinct models of infection (colonization and bacteremia). SinH immunization also provided significant protection against ExPEC colonization in the bladder in an acute UTI model. Immunized cohorts produced significantly higher levels of vaccine-specific serum IgG and urinary IgG and IgA, findings consistent with mucosal protection. Collectively, these results demonstrate that autotransporter antigens such as SinH may constitute promising ExPEC phylogroup-specific and sequence-type effective vaccine targets that reduce E. coli colonization and virulence.

Author summary

Extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli is the leading cause of adult life-threatening sepsis and urinary tract infections. A vaccine against E. coli is essential to both prevent the spread to susceptible hosts and reduce death and disease. Using a comprehensive computational virulome and metagenomics approach, we identified a surface-exposed, pathogen-specific autotransporter protein, SinH, as a potential vaccine candidate for E. coli infection. The known virulence functions of autotransporters include adhesion, aggregation, and invasion, all critical functions for systemic dissemination, thus highlighting their potential as prophylactic vaccines. We found that vaccination with SinH-based recombinant antigens is sufficient to elicit a broad protective immunity against colonization, bacteremia, and acute urinary tract infection while also lowering the risk of translocation from the intestinal tract. Induction of both systemic and mucosal antibodies likely play a role in protection against infection. The targeting of autotransporters shows promise to combat the increasing global burden caused by multi-drug resistant pathogens, especially against highly pleiotropic bacteria such as Escherichia coli.

Introduction

Extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli (ExPEC) is the leading cause of invasive bacteremia and urinary tract infections (UTI), and the second leading cause of neonatal meningitis [1,2]. In human intestinal microbiota, the ExPEC group includes uropathogenic E. coli (UPEC), neonatal meningitis E. coli (NMEC), and sepsis-associated E. coli (SEPEC) [36]. ExPEC acquired specific virulence factors that confer them an ability to cause infections at nonintestinal alternative ecological niches, such as the urinary tract, bloodstream, and prostate [7,8]. Clinically, from 1999-to 2014, 6% of all deaths in the U.S. were sepsis-related deaths [9]. ExPEC is still the most common gram-negative organism resulting in severe sepsis, which caused 20% of severe sepsis cases from 1999-to 2008 [10]. In addition, septic patients represent a disproportionately high burden in cost and hospital utilization. In 2013 alone, nearly over 970,000 sepsis cases were admitted annually in the U.S, and sepsis accounted for more than $24 billion in hospital expenses, representing 13% of total U.S. hospital costs [11]. A recent report assessing 204 countries and territories showed antibiotic-resistant pathogenic E. coli to be a leading cause of mortality associated with drug resistance (approximately 200,000 deaths attributable to AMR E. coli and approximately 800,000 deaths associated with AMR E. coli in 2019) [12].

The emergence and increasing prevalence of multidrug-resistance (MDR) ExPEC strains are considered one of the primary drivers behind the global antimicrobial resistance (AMR) crisis [13]. This crisis adds millions of AMR infections annually and a 20-billion-dollar surplus in direct healthcare costs in the United States [14]. A single ExPEC clone, sequence type 131 (ST131), produces an extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL), specifically an enzyme named CTX-M-15, which has fueled the emergence of resistance ExPEC strains globally [15,16]. Additionally, unlike the other non-ST131 ESBL-producing E. coli lineages (ST38, ST405, and ST648), ST131 genomes showed unique virulence profiles. For example, the presence of several serine proteases, autotransporters, and UPEC-specific virulence genes were identified exclusively in ST131 isolates [17]. Furthermore, ST131 has an expanded number of virulence genes in contrast to the non-ST131 isolates, which shared similar but varied and lower numbers of virulence genes [7,17]. These advantages possess the ability of ST131 to make a balance between broad colonization, virulence, and antibiotic resistance without a fitness cost, which might serve as the potential driver of ST131 success in causing an enormous number of human infections globally [7,17]. In the U.S., the ST131 clonal group is now considered the most prevalent and extensively dominant antimicrobial-resistant E. coli strain overall [18].

An ExPEC-specific vaccine would provide a prophylactic option to reduce mortality associated with severe E. coli infections. Indeed, several groups have sought to induce protective immunity against pathogenic E. coli with efforts focused on heat-killed inactivated bacteria vaccines or conjugates of O-antigens to elicit protective immune responses [1922]. However, due to the failure of heat-killed inactivated bacterial vaccines to prevent uncomplicated UTI and the antigenic heterogeneity of the surface polysaccharide of the E. coli, these attempts have had limited further development [19,2124]. Recent studies indicate that some surface-exposed molecules, such as FimH adhesin (Type I fimbriae adhesin) [2527], P fimbriae (PapDG complex), Dr fimbriae [26,2830], iron receptors (FyuA, Hma, lutA, IreA) [3135], adhesin FdeC [28], or siderophores (iron-chelating compounds) [36] have been shown to induce protective immunity. Despite numerous anti-E. coli vaccine studies spanning greater than five decades, no E. coli vaccine has been approved by the US FDA. Therefore, there is an urgency to identify a novel, phylogroup-specific, conserved, immunogenic, and protective vaccine against ExPEC.

Building off the work of others [37], we established criteria for the selection of vaccine candidates, including that the antigens be (i) pathogen-specific (able to identify the pathogenic E.coli from commensals), (ii) surface-exposed (to be able to be recognized by the immune system), have (iii) high prevalence in clinical isolates (since these strains contain pleiotropic virulence which makes monovalent antigen identification more challenging), (iv) be involved in critical steps in E. coli pathogenesis, including either adherence, invasion, translocation, or survival and growth in blood or urine and finally (v) facilitate robust production that is scalable and economic. Our lab has screened a collection of 107 complete E. coli genome sequences representing all defined phylogroups and established a manually curated database housing the genetic information of many virulence factors from E. coli and other pathogenic bacteria. This allowed for a heat-map like approach that facilitated the identification and frequency of genes and alleles across phylogroup, sequence type, and pathotype. Of the approximate 400 virulence factors assessed from this test group, and scaled for over 20,000 additional genomes in public databases, a gene encoding for a structural invasin-like autotransporter protein [38], termed sinH, was observed to be widely distributed in ExPEC pathotypes and ExPEC-associated phylogenetic group B2/D. Of particular interest, this gene is not commonly found in putative commensal E. coli or phylogenetic groups associated with systemic dissemination [39]. AlphaFold2 and homology analysis predicted SinH structure to resemble that of invasin of Y. pseudotuberculosis or intimin of Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli, with three Ig-like domains of SinH predicted to be extracellular. sinH was also highly prevalent in clinical E. coli isolates obtained from pyelonephritis and urosepsis patients [38,40]. Furthermore, a recent paper indicates the sinH gene is upregulated during urinary tract infections in women, and the sinH mutant strain displayed a significant fitness defect and inflammation reduction in the bladder in the murine model of ascending UTI [38]. Based on the comparative genomic and AlphaFold simulated protein structure information and the critical function of this gene for bladder colonization and E. coli infection, we believe SinH is a potential vaccine candidate for E. coli infection. Here we present data that suggests SinH elicits robust and broad protection from various ExPEC strains and sequence types in multiple murine models of infection.

Materials and methods

Ethics statement

All methods performed on mice were conducted in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations from “The Guide and Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” (National Institute of Health). The Animal Use Protocol number AN-5177 was approved by Baylor College of Medicine’s Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee.

Bacterial strains and culture conditions

The E. coli strains used in this study were cultured overnight from a single colony in Lysogeny broth plate (LB; 10 g/l tryptone, 0.5 g/l sodium chloride (NaCl), and 5 g/l yeast extract) at 37°C after resuscitation from a frozen stock (−80 °C, 10% glycerol). ExPEC ST131 strains JJ1886, JJ2050, JJ2528, and JJ2547 were kindly provided by James R. Johnson [41]. Uropathogenic E. coli (UPEC) strains UTI89 (O18:K1:H7, ST95) [42] and CFT073 (O6: K2:H1; ATCC 118 #700928, ST73) [43] were kindly provided by Kathryn Patras. E. coli strains. W0060 (ST95-like), W0040, W0088, W0116 (ST73-like) were isolated from the blood or feces of hospitalized patients with bacteremia. The number of CFU delivered was calculated by correlating the OD at 600 nm to the number of colonies after plating.

Plasmid construction

The genes encoding the candidate vaccine antigens were cloned from ExPEC sequence type 131 (ST131) strain JJ1887 genomic DNA (SinH-Ig-like domains-123, encoding the C-terminal passenger Ig-like domains-1,2 and 3 fragments of sinH, amino acid residues 337 to 724, hereinafter called SinH-123; SinH-Ig-like domains-3, encoding the C-terminal passenger Ig-like domain-3 fragment of sinH, amino acid residues 602 to 724, hereinafter called SinH-3). Both candidate vaccine sequences were sent to the GENEWIZ company (South Plainfield, NJ) for plasmid construction. Both protein domains were cloned into the BamHI and SmaI restriction sites of pGEX-2TK to produce N-terminally glutathione-S-transferase (GST)-tagged fusions (GST-SinH-3, in short SinH-3 in following; GST-SinH-123, in short SinH-123 in following). The resulting constructs were verified by sequencing.

Vaccine antigens preparation

Both recombinant proteins were produced by E. coli BL21(DE3) cultured in Lysogeny broth (LB) to an optical density at 600 nm (OD600) of 0.6–0.8. The gene expression was induced with 1mM Isopropyl β-D-1-thiogalactopyranoside (IPTG) (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) and the culture was then incubated overnight at 30°C. The cells were harvested by centrifugation (10,000 × g for 30 min at 4°C), and bacterial pellets were resuspended in 1× phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). Bacterial suspensions were lysed by two passages through a French pressure cell press (1500 PSIG) (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA) and the lysate was cleared by centrifugation (16,000 × rpm, for 60 min at 4°C). GST fusion proteins in the supernatant were filter-sterilized (0.22 μm) and purified using an immobilized glutathione Sepharose column (Cytiva, Marlborough, MA) under native conditions according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Antigens were eluted by the high concentration of reduced glutathione (GSH) (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO), and then proteins were concentrated using 10 kDa Centrifugal Filter Units (Millipore Sigma, Burlington, MA). All elutions were subjected to SDS-PAGE, and concentration was determined using the Nanodrop (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA) and Bradford assay.

Mass spectrometry analysis

The purified protein lysate was resolved on NuPAGE 10% Bis-Tris Gel (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA), target band (~40 kDa and ~70 kDa size) was excised and processed for in-gel digestion using trypsin enzyme. The tryptic peptides were analyzed on nano-LC 1000 system (Thermo Fisher Scientific, San Jose, CA) coupled to Orbitrap Fusion mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, San Jose, CA). The peptides were loaded on a two-column setup using a pre-column trap of 2 cm x 100 μm size (Reprosil-Pur Basic C18 1.9 μm, Dr. Maisch GmbH, Germany) and a 20 cm x 75 μm analytical column (Reprosil-Pur Basic C18 1.9 μm, Dr. Maisch GmbH, Germany) with a 110 min gradient of 2–30% acetonitrile/0.1% formic acid at a flow rate of 200 nl/min. The eluted peptides were directly electro-sprayed into mass spectrometer operated in the data-dependent acquisition (DDA) with top 35 mode. The full MS scan was acquired in Orbitrap in the range of 300–1400 m/z at 120,000 resolutions followed by MS2 in Ion Trap (HCD 30% collision energy) with 5 sec dynamic exclusion time. The RAW file from mass spectrometer was processed with Proteome Discoverer 1.4 (Thermo Scientific) using Mascot 2.4 algorithm (Matrix Science) with Fixed Value PSM validator against the recombinant GST-SinH protein sequence. The precursor ion tolerance and product ion tolerance were set to 20 ppm and 0.5 Da respectively. Maximum cleavage of 2 with Trypsin enzyme, dynamic modification of Oxidation on methionine, protein N-terminal Acetylation and Destreak on cysteine was allowed.

Prediction of protein structure for SinH with AlphaFold2

The nucleotide sequence of SinH was used to recreate the translated amino acid sequence using ExPASy. All six possible reading frames (three forward, three backward) were generated and the frame that had the sequence for complete SinH was used as the amino acid sequence for structure prediction. ColabFold’s AlphaFold2-Advanced Google Notebook (Google, Mountain View, CA) was used to generate predictions from amino acid sequence [44]. For multiple sequence alignment (MSA) necessary to build the consensus model for the structure of SinH, we used DeepMind’s (DeepMind, London) original MSA jackhammer database previously generated for CASP14 using the complete Protein Data Bank (PDB) structure library [4446]. Five prediction runs were run, with each run using a randomly chosen initiation point for the start of prediction runs. These models were ranked using the following two metrics: 1. pLDDT (predicted lDDT-Cα) with its ability to quantify the confidence of model per residue calculated by utilizing distances between Cα atoms in multiple reference models, and 2. AlphaFold-generated PAE (Predicted Aligned Error) for every residue, a numerical value of expected position error per residue [47]. The model with highest average pLDDT and lowest PAE was chosen as the best predicted structure of SinH. This structure was compared against previously solved structures of proteins deposited on PDB with similar functions by aligning spatial coordinates of models through RCSB Structural Alignment webserver, with the jFATCAT-rigid algorithm for alignment and TM-score as the metric for assessing alignment quality [4850]. UCSF ChimeraX was used for analyzing structural features of the predicted model, determining local physical properties within domains, and visualizing the model [51]. BioRender was used for annotating models. Structure Prediction: SinH full length [dataset]. 2023 Jan 6 [cited 2023 Jan 22]. Dryad Digital Repository. Available from https://datadryad.org/resource/doi:10.5601/dryad.jm63xsjfx [52].

Sequence alignment

A total of 334 sinH nucleotide sequences were extracted using megaBLAST to align the ST131 reference sinH sequence with our previously published phylogroup database of 1,348 E. coli chromosomes [39,53]. Once the sinH sequences were extracted, they were translated and sequences with premature stop codons were removed, leaving 308 sequences. In addition to these strains, the sinH nucleotide sequence from 26 sinH positive E. coli strains available in the Maresso lab were also extracted and translated, and duplications between the two datasets were removed. As an outgroup, Salmonella SinH amino acid sequence was used (accession: WP_023204198.1). Extracted SinH amino acid sequences were then aligned using MAFFT (version 7.450) with default settings and the “auto” setting for algorithm selection. The resulting amino acid alignment was then used to create a phylogenetic tree with RAxML (version 8) with the GAMMA BLOSUM62 protein model and the Rapid Bootstrapping algorithm with 100 replicates [54]. The resulting trees were then used to create a consensus tree with 50% support threshold using the Consensus Tree Builder software in Geneious version 2022.0 created by Biomatters. The consensus tree was then annotated in BioRender. The SinH amino acid sequence from strains available to the lab were also aligned and a phylogenetic tree created using the same MAFFT and RAxML method outlined above. This alignment was exported from Geneious and annotated using BioRender.

Experimental animals

The mouse strain used in this study was BALB/cJ mice (Jackson Laboratories, Bar Harbor, ME). All mice were female, 6 weeks of age. They received sterile food and water ad libitum and were housed 3–4 in filtered cages. All methods performed on mice were approved in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations from “The Guide and Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” (National Institute of Health) and approved by Baylor College of Medicine’s Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (AN-5177).

Vaccination

Purified proteins were mixed with alum adjuvant (G-Bioscience, St. Louis, MO) at a ratio of 2:1 (Antigen/adjuvant) according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. Six-week-old female BALB/cJ mice were given three subcutaneous injections of 50 μg antigens on days 0, 14, and 28. Control groups were vaccinated with equivalent doses of GST (50 μg), alum adjuvant (30 μl), LPS (lipopolysaccharides, 3 EU, Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA), or unvaccinated [55].

Murine model of ST131 bacteremia

ExPEC sequence type 131 (ST131) strains, JJ1886, JJ2050, and JJ2547, were grown under the indicated conditions the day before injection. On the day of injection (day 42), the optical density (OD) was measured using a spectrophotometer set to 600 nm, and the overnight ExPEC strains were subcultured in LB broth at the ratio of 1:100 to an OD600≈0.6 (Log phase, ~1 × 108 CFU/ml). Then ExPEC strains were harvested by centrifugation (3,500 × g for 20 min at 4°C) and resuspended in equivalent 1× PBS. Mice were injected intraperitoneally by 50 μl of one of the ExPEC strains suspension (5 × 107 CFU) on day 42 [56]. The inoculum was quantified by plating dilutions onto LB agar. After twenty-four hours, mice were euthanized and necropsied to collect their kidney, spleen, and liver. Organs were homogenized in 1 ml 1× PBS using BeadBlaster Refrigerated Homogenizer (Benchmark Scientific Inc, Sayreville, NJ, USA) and organ homogenates were plated on LB agar plates and incubated at 37°C to determine the number of bacteria or CFU per milliliter (mL). The schematic diagram was made in BioRender.

Murine model of ST131 mortality study

For the mortality study, ExPEC sequence type 131 (ST131) strain JJ2050 was grown under the indicated conditions the day before injection as described above. On the day of injection (day 42), mice were injected intraperitoneally with 50 μl of the ExPEC strain JJ2050 suspension (5 × 107 CFU) [56]. Mice were monitored twice a day for 10 days. Murine survival was followed with time, and moribund animals were euthanized/necropsied to determine bacterial levels in the kidneys, spleen, and liver. The organs were homogenized, and the JJ2050 bacterial load in the infected organs was quantified by the determination of CFU. The schematic diagram was made in BioRender.

Murine model of acute urinary tract infection (acute UTI)

UPEC strains, UTI89 and CFT073, were grown and prepared under the indicated conditions. On day 42, Mice were inoculated transurethrally by 50 μl of one of the UPEC strains suspension (108 CFU) as described previously [57]. The inoculum was quantified by plating dilutions onto LB agar. After twenty-four hours, mice were euthanized and necropsied to collect bladders. Bladders were homogenized in 500 μl 1× PBS using BeadBlaster Refrigerated Homogenizer and organ homogenates were plated on LB agar plates and incubated at 37°C to determine the number of bacteria or CFU per milliliter (mL). The schematic diagram was made in BioRender.

Murine model of GI tract colonization in healthy mice

ExPEC sequence type 131 (ST131) strains were grown and prepared under the indicated conditions. Mice were subjected to gavage with 100 μl of a bacterial suspension (109 CFU) with a sterile (20-gauge, 38-mm-long) flexible needle on day 42. The inoculum was quantified by plating dilutions onto LB agar. After twenty-four hours, mice feces were collected and homogenized in 1 ml 1× PBS using BeadBlaster Refrigerated Homogenizer (Benchmark Scientific Inc, Sayreville, NJ, USA) and feces homogenates were plated on LB agar plates and incubated at 37°C to determine the number of bacteria or CFU per milliliter (mL). The schematic diagram was made in BioRender.

Murine model of GI tract colonization in immunosuppressed mice

ExPEC sequence type 131 (ST131) strains were grown and prepared under the indicated conditions. Mice were subjected to gavage with 100 μl of a bacterial suspension (109 CFU) with a sterile (20-gauge, 38-mm-long) flexible needle on day 42. The inoculum was quantified by plating dilutions onto LB agar. Then cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan [CTX]) (United States Pharmacopeia) was dissolved in sterile water and diluted with filter-sterilized 1× PBS to a final concentration of 10 mg/ml, and the mice were given a total dose of 450 mg/kg of body weight (three 150-mg/kg doses administered at 1-day intervals (day 43, 45, 47) intraperitoneally (i.p.) at the indicated time points [56,58]. On the day of 48, mice feces were collected and homogenized in 1 ml 1× PBS using BeadBlaster Refrigerated Homogenizer and feces homogenates were plated on LB agar plates and incubated at 37°C to determine the number of bacteria or CFU per milliliter (mL). The schematic diagram was made in BioRender.

Murine model of multiple sequence-type (ST) model

Different sequence-type (ST) of ExPEC strains were grown and prepared under the indicated conditions as described in the previous model. Mice were injected intraperitoneally with 50 μl of a different sequence-type (ST) E. coli suspension, either ST73-mixture (Mix of CFT073, W0040, W0088, W0116 equally) or ST95-mixture (Mix of UTI89 and W0060 equally) (in total 5 × 107 CFU of each mixture), on day 42 [56]. The inoculum was quantified by plating dilutions onto LB agar. Mice were monitored twice a day for 5 days, and moribund animals were euthanized/necropsied to determine bacterial levels in the kidneys, spleen, and liver. Organs were homogenized in 1 ml 1× PBS using BeadBlaster Refrigerated Homogenizer and organ homogenates were plated on LB agar plates and incubated at 37°C to determine the number of bacteria or CFU per milliliter (mL). Moribundity was determined through the observation of multiple features, including rough coat, hunched posture, lethargy and hyperpnea. The schematic diagram was made in BioRender.

ELISA

For the indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), 100 μl of 20 μg/ml or 2 μg/ml purified proteins were coated onto Thermo Fisher 96-well Nunc plates and incubated at 4°C overnight. The plate was washed three times by flooding all wells with wash buffer (0.05% Tween 20 in 1× PBS), and nonspecific binding sites were blocked with 150 μl 5% milk solution in 1× PBS for 2 hours. Serum was taken from individual mice after complete immunization and ExPEC infection and urine were taken from individual mice after complete immunization. Then the wells were coated with serum diluted 1:5000 in 5% milk or 50 μl undiluted urine, and the plate was incubated with gentle rocking overnight at 4°C. The following day, the plate was washed three times with wash buffer, and then a volume of 100 μl secondary antibodies (anti-mouse IgG generated in rabbit conjugated to horseradish peroxidase, diluted in 1:5000 in 1× PBS or anti-Mouse IgA Cross-Adsorbed Secondary Antibody generated in goat, diluted in 1:2000 in 1× PBS) was added into each well, and entire sample gently rocked at 4°C for 1 hr. The plate was washed 3 times with wash buffer and 1× PBS before 100 μl TMB (3,3’,5,5’-Tetramethylbenzidine) solution was added to the wells and allowed then incubate at room temperature for 5 to 10 minutes until color developed. The reaction was stopped by adding 50 μl 2M sulfuric acid (H2SO4) to the well. The absorbance of each well was measured at 450 nm by using the BioTek Synergy HT plate reader [55]. All experiments were performed with three replicates, and ELISA readouts were normalized to the same mole.

Statistical analyses

Graphing and statistical analyses were performed using Graphpad Prism version 9 (GraphPad Software, Inc.). Significance was determined using the Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Dunn’s multiple comparisons correction. All survival curves were compared using the Genhan-Breslow-Wilcoxon curve comparison. All statistics were conducted using 95% confidence intervals, alpha values were set to 0.05 and statistical significance was determined if calculated P values were below 0.05. The lines of all the bar graphs were at the median with a 95% confidence interval (CI). One star (*) P < 0.05, two stars (**) P < 0.01, three stars (***) P < 0.001, four stars (****) P < 0.0001. The Box-and-whisker plots and Kaplan Meier survival curves were exported from Graphpad Prism 9 and annotated using BioRender.

Dryad DOI

10.5601/dryad.jm63xsjfx [52]

Results

Identification of SinH as vaccine target

Pathogenic Escherichia coli is a significant cause of global human morbidity and mortality. The overarching vaccine challenge with this pathogen is its propensity to readily take in or lose genes associated with antibiotic resistance and virulence, in addition to a pangenome that deviates by as much as 30% between strains [59,60]. Using a comparative genomics approach, we previously reported an analysis of sinH prevalence amongst E. coli pathotypes, phylogroups, and sequence types (Fig 1A). Pathotypes are groups of pathogenic strains that share the same phenotype of the disease, which broadly can divide into extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli (ExPECs) or intestinal pathogenic E. coli (InPECs) [46]. E. coli also is characterized by their genetic lineage into phylogenetic groups, of which there are four major (A, B1, B2, and D) and five minor (C, E, F, G, and cryptic clade I) [6163]. The sequence types (STs) were established following the multilocus sequence typing (MLST) scheme of Achtman [6466]. SinH was strongly associated with ExPECs pathotypes and also has a tight association with phylogroup B2/D/F/G (Fig 1A). B2 and D strains from this clade are a major source of ExPEC infections [67], suggesting that SinH might be associated with ExPEC infections directly or indirectly. In addition, the sinH sequence is also detected in B2 commensal strains, but not detected in A and B1 phylogroup commensal strains, which are the source of most human commensal E. coli strains [68]. Furthermore, our previous work verified the association of the sinH sequence with the phylogroup B2, where it is found in 98% of strains, but is also strongly associated with other phylogroups, such as phylogroup F (100%), G (100%), and D (67%) [39]. The B2 E. coli strains harboring the sinH sequence included all members of sequence type 131 (ST131), sequence type 73 (ST73), sequence type 95 (ST95), and sequence type 127 (ST127). These sequence types have become the most prevalent and common lineages in E. coli isolates that were recovered from the hospital and community patients with bacteremia or UTI worldwide [6973]. Furthermore, we observed a phylogenetic relationship between all SinH protein sequences found in the previously curated database of 1,348 complete E. coli chromosome sequences [39]. SinH encoded by ST131 E. coli appear to have somewhat diverged compared to other ExPEC causing-sequence types of the B2 phylogroup such as ST73 (88.6% identical, 93.2% similar), ST95 (88.8% identical, 92.9% similar), and ST127 (90.6% identical, 95.2% similar), especially in domain 3 (Fig 1B and 1C). The ST131 allele appears to be nearly identical to those found in the F phylogroup, including the ExPEC-causing ST62 and ST648 sequence types, whereas SinH from other B2 strains is more similar to those from phylogroup D and G. The determination of all pathotypes, phylogroups and sequence type (ST) listed above was carried out by the scheme of our lab previous work [39]. The sinH sequences were located using megaBLAST (version 2.11). BLAST hits were elongated to the first stop codon, extracted, translated, and then aligned using MAFFT (version 7.450) (Fig 1B). The resulting alignment was used to create a phylogenetic tree was created using Geneious Prime’s Consensus Tree Maker using RAxML(version 8.2.11) trees with 100 bootstrap replicates (Fig 1C). Together, these results indicate that, while sinH has been evolving across different phylogroups, there is conservation within the same phylogroup.

Fig 1. Comparative genomics heatmap, amino acid sequence alignment, and phylogenetic tree of sinH sequence.

Fig 1

(A) Pathotype, phylogroup, sequence types of distribution of sinH sequence. Heatmap showing nonpathogenic E. coli, ExPECs and InPECs. Columns are organized by pathotypes, and rows are organized first by phylogroups, then by sequence types. Each cell in the heatmap is colored based on percent nucleotide identity compared to the reference used to generate the alignments, and the black boxes indicate there is no sequence type (ST) present for the listed pathotype whereas white boxes indicate there is a sequence type but it does not contain a sinH homolog. (B) MAFFT alignment of the amino acid sequence of SinH. Alignment is annotated with phylogroup and sequence type. An identity histogram is shown at the top, and black represents amino acid differences from the majority consensus. (C) Consensus maximum-likelihood phylogenetic tree of SinH generated from alignment shown in Fig 1B using RAxML and rooted with Salmonella SinH. Branch labels indicate percentage support from 100 rapid bootstrap replicates. The consensus tree and alignment were annotated in BioRender.

Structural and functional analysis of SinH

Recent work suggests that SinH shares a similar structural and evolutionary history with intimin and invasin as a virulence-associated bacterial outer membrane protein [74,75]. We used AlphaFold2 to predict the structure of full-length SinH and compared the structure (blue) to solved structures of Y. pseudotuberculosis invasin and Enterohemorrhagic (EHEC) Escherichia coli intimin to gain insights into the function of SinH in host-pathogen interactions. To determine the characteristics of surface-exposed of SinH, we used as Pairwise Structure Alignment at RCSB with the jFATCAT-rigid algorithm to align predicted SinH structures against existing structures from the Protein Data Bank (PDB) [48,49]. The predicted structure of full-length SinH is organized into four distinct domains (from left to right): translocation β-barrel transmembrane domain (purple), Ig-like domain-1 (green), Ig-like domain-2 (red), and Ig-like domain-3 (referred as the Receptor binding domain hereafter, blue). Also shown here is the calculated electrostatic density map (blue: positive charge, red: negative charge) for SinH (Fig 2A). To quantify the alignment of each SinH domain to known structures, we used a template modeling score (TM-score), a metric for assessing topological similarity of protein folds as calculated by distances between corresponding amino acid residues, which ranges in value from 0 to 1 with scores greater than 0.5 indicating two proteins generally having the same fold [76]. The TM-score for transmembrane β-barrel domains of SinH and Y. pseudotuberculosis invasin was 0.96 (PDB: 4E1S), while SinH and EHEC intimin was 0.95 (PDB: 4E1T) [77]. The SinH transmembrane domain also had amino acid sequence similarities of 66% to invasin and 62% to intimin, and these numbers are reflected upon the same fold these proteins assume (Fig 2B). The closest match to Ig-like domain 1 of SinH was domain-3 of Y. pseudotuberculosis invasin (PDB: 1CWV), with a TM-score of 0.54 that indicated high likelihood of the same protein fold [78]. Unlike transmembrane domains, the amino acid makeup of these structurally related domains differed considerably, with low sequence identity of 9% and similarity of 29%, which suggests divergence in amino acids between these two proteins that nonetheless conserved the structure fold (Fig 2C). This disparity between the fold and amino acid composition preservation was also observed when comparing Ig-like domain-2 of SinH to the domain-3 of Y. pseudotuberculosis invasin, with a TM-score of 0.55 with amino acid sequence identity of 13% and similarity of 24% (Fig 2D). This suggests that domain-2 also follows the trend of domain-1 in structural similarity and sequence dissimilarity to invasin. Given that the structures of domains 1 and 2 both matched to invasin domain 3, we aligned domains 1 and 2 of SinH against each other to confirm that these two domains have similar folds (DOI: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.jm63xsjfx). These two domains indeed had very similar structures (TM-score of 0.5), hinting that the role of domains 1 and 2 in SinH is to serve as a scaffold for positioning the receptor binding domain (RBD). In the Ig-like domain-3 (RBD) of SinH, a lectin-like domain is observed which incidentally is not found in both invasin and intimin. We thus decided to run the alignment between only RBD of SinH against its counterpart domains in invasin and intimin (PDB: 1F00) with a lectin-like domain to determine similarities in these analogous domains [79] (Fig 2E). Matching RBD to invasin gave TM-score of 0.45 with sequence identity of 10% and sequence similarity of 24%, while intimin gave TM-score of 0.41 with sequence identity of 8% and sequence similarity of 25%. On the other hand, aligning these domains from solved structures of invasin and intimin yielded high TM-score of 0.71 with sequence identity of 21% and sequence similarity of 37% (DOI: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.jm63xsjfx). These results suggest that the SinH RBD is phylogenetically more distant from invasin and intimin than these two are to each other as far as structure is concerned, a finding that hints that RBD of SinH may have a different function and target than invasin and intimin, where this Ig-like domain may participate in the binding of SinH to a novel receptor on the host. In summary, our alignment statistics of the predicted SinH structure indicate high structural similarity of the SinH to intimin and invasin even with very poor sequence homology, thus explaining why there are few reports linking these two genes expressing structurally very similar proteins. Our predictions of the surface-exposed Ig-like domains of SinH were supported by a recently published work, which demonstrated IatB (SinH) is located on the cell surface and contributes to biofilm formation [80].

Fig 2. Structural alignment of predicted full-length SinH and expression and purification of SinH-based candidate antigens.

Fig 2

Structural alignments were generated by Pairwise Structure Alignment webserver, and aligned structures were visualized using ChimeraX and annotated with BioRender. (A) Predicted structure of full-length SinH protein (excluding disordered residues 1 through 101) with four distinct domains (Translocation β-barrel transmembrane domain: purple, Ig-like domain-1: green, Ig-like domain-2: red, Ig-like domain-3 (Receptor binding domain): blue). (B) Alignment between transmembrane β-barrel domains of predicted SinH protein structure (blue) and transmembrane domains of Y. pseudotuberculosis invasin (PDB: 4E1T) (red, left) and EHEC intimin (PDB: 4E1S) (red, right). (C) Alignment between domain-1 of SinH (blue) and domain-3 of Y. pseudotuberculosis invasin (red). (D) Alignment between domain-2 of SinH (blue) and domain-3 of Y. pseudotuberculosis invasin (red). (E) Alignment between the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SinH (blue) and Ig-like domain-1 of EHEC intimin (red, left) and Ig-like domain-4 of Y. pseudotuberculosis invasin (red, right). (F) Genes encoding SinH-based antigens (Ig-like domain-1,2,3 or Ig-like domain-3) were cloned from ExPEC ST131 strain JJ1887. SinH-based antigens were recombinantly expressed with a glutathione-S-transferase (GST) tag and purified using immobilized GST-affinity chromatography. Purified antigens were separated and analyzed by SDS-PAGE and stained with Coomassie blue stain buffer. Predicted sizes of tagged proteins are as follows: GST-SinH-3, 40 kDa; GST-SinH-123, 70 kDa. Circle symbols indicate the locations of the GST-SinH Domain-3 and GST-SinH Domain-123, respectively, for each individual gel. The SDS-PAGE were annotated in BioRender.

SinH-based candidate antigens expression and purification

In preparation for immunization, the genes for SinH-based antigens, SinH-3 (Ig-like domain-3 fragment of SinH, amino acid residues 602 to 724) and SinH-123 (Ig-like domain-1,2 and 3 fragments of SinH, amino acid residues 337 to 724) were cloned as glutathione-S-transferase (GST)-tagged fusions, expressed, and purified under native conditions as N-terminal GST-tagged recombinant proteins. Bacterial cultures expressing recombinant vaccine antigens were lysed, and supernatant which contained the SinH-antigens were collected. Recombinant proteins were purified by GST-affinity chromatography and visualized by SDS-PAGE. Two dominant bands assumed to be GST-SinH-3 and GST-SinH-123 (40 kDa, 70 kDa) were observed after Coomassie blue staining of the gels (Fig 2F). To verify their authenticity, the putative SinH-3 and SinH-123 proteins were subjected to Mass Spectrometry (S1 Fig). Purified protein bands were resolved and digested in gel. The tryptic peptides were analyzed on nanospray LC-MS (liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry) system. The eluted peptides were directly electro-sprayed into mass spectrometer and analyzed by data-dependent acquisition (DDA). For the GST-SinH-3, the coverage (the percentage of the protein sequence by identified peptides) was approximate 98%; and for the GST-SinH-123, the coverage was approximate 97% (S1 Fig). In summary, high sequence coverage was detected in each band and was sufficient to confirm the identity of both GST-SinH-3 and GST-SinH-123 recombinant proteins (GST-SinH-3, in short SinH-3 in following; GST-SinH-123, in short SinH-123 in following).

Immunization with SinH-based antigens confers protection against ExPEC sequence type 131 (ST131) bacteremia

ExPEC ST131 strains are drug-resistant and are responsible for millions of global antimicrobial-resistant (AMR) infections annually and comprise a significant risk of bloodstream infections worldwide [15,16]. To verify the protective efficacy of SinH-based antigens in a systemic model of ExPEC ST131 bacteremia, purified antigens were mixed with alum as an adjuvant at a ratio of 2:1 (antigen/alum), followed by subcutaneous immunization of mice with either antigens (SinH-3 or SinH-123) or GST alone on days 0, 14, 28. Mice were then intraperitoneally injected on day 42 with three ExPEC ST131 strains, JJ1886, JJ2050, or JJ2547 (5 × 107 CFU). These strains were chosen because they represent a diverse range of strains from the genetically distinct and epidemic clade—clade C2, or H30Rx—of the ST131 clonal group [81]. The vaccination schematic used in this experiment is shown in Fig 3A. The infection was allowed to progress for 24 hours before the mice were euthanized and their kidney, spleen, and liver collected. The organs were homogenized, and the ExPEC bacterial load in the infected organs was quantified by the determination of CFU (Fig 3B–3D). Combining the counts from all cohorts (as a way to assess the total effect of vaccination across all organs and strains), both SinH-based vaccines showed a clear and statistically significant reduction in bacterial burden (Adjusted P value, SinH-3, P<0.0001; SinH-123, P<0.0001). In comparison to the mice that received GST alone, SinH-3 vaccinated mice had a 55-fold decrease, and SinH-123 vaccinated mice had an 88-fold decrease in the median levels of total ExPEC (Fig 3B), thereby demonstrating the results were rigorous across multiple strains, multiple organs, and for at least two antigens of the target autotransporter. A reduction in bacterial levels was also observed in all three organs when each bacterial strain was parsed into separate data (Fig 3C) thereby suggesting the reduction was likely regardless of the genetic background of this sequence type. For example, these reductions were for SinH-3 37-fold (194.29, 37.18, and 88.68) and for SinH-123 at least a 54-fold reduction (111.48, 54.72, and 870.37) in the median level of each ExPEC strain. In addition, in combining the counts from all ExPEC strains, mice vaccinated with SinH-based antigens significantly reduced bacterial levels in each type of organ. For example, SinH-3 vaccinated mice had at least a 38-fold reduction (38.83, 85.96, and 96.67), and SinH-123 vaccinated mice had at least a 65-fold reduction (65.57, 80.33, and 100) in the median level of ExPEC for the liver, spleen and kidney compared to the GST-only control (Fig 3D), a result that was equivalent for both SinH antigens.

Fig 3. Assessment of the protective efficacy and immunogenicity of SinH-based vaccines against ExPEC sequence type 131 (ST131) bacteremia.

Fig 3

(A) The vaccination scheme was used in this experiment. BALB/cJ, 6 weeks old, female mice were subcutaneously immunized with SinH-based antigens (SinH-3, SinH-123, N = 15) or GST alone (N = 15) and injected with an intraperitoneal (IP) injection of 5 × 107 CFU of different ExPEC ST131 strains (JJ1886, JJ2547, JJ2050). Organs were harvested and plated to determine bacteria levels. Serum was taken from individual mice after immunization and ExPEC infection. The schematic diagram was made in BioRender. (B) Box-and-whisker plots of the bacterial levels (CFU/ml) in combining the counts from all organs (liver, spleen, kidney) and all ExPEC strains (JJ1886, JJ2547, JJ2050); (C) or the bacterial levels (CFU/ml) of each ExPEC ST131 strain in combining the counts from all organs; (D) or the bacterial levels (CFU/ml) of all ExPEC strains in each type of organ following necropsy. (E) ELISA analysis of sera from SinH-based antigens vaccinated animals using antigens, SinH-3 or SinH-123 (GST-tag removed), as the capture antigen. Error bars indicate the median with 95% confidence interval (CI). Significant was determined by theKruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Dunn’s multiple comparisons correction. Symbols represent data of individual mice. One star (*) P < 0.05, two stars (**) P < 0.01, three stars (***) P < 0.001, four stars (****) P < 0.0001. The Box-and-whisker plots were exported from Graphpad Prism 9 and annotated using BioRender.

In addition, to determine whether subcutaneous immunization with SinH-based vaccines induces a vaccine-specific humoral immune response, serum samples were collected from each mouse on the day of euthanasia. The levels of vaccine antigen-specific serum IgG were quantified via indirect ELISA. Of note, SinH-123 induced statistically significant production of IgG specific for the immunogen over the GST control (Fig 3E, Adjusted P value, P<0.0001, P<0.0001). When SinH-3 (GST-tag removed) was used as the ELISA antigen, SinH-3 vaccinated mice showed higher antigen-specific serum IgG responses than the control group mice (Adjusted P value, P = 0.0319) (Fig 3E). Interestingly, vaccination with SinH-123 produced the most robust serum IgG response, perhaps due to the construct being composed of three domains, thereby providing more antibody-recognition sites than SinH-3. This result might explain the reason SinH-123 antigens demonstrated more stable protection against the colonization of ExPEC sequence type 131 in the murine model of bacteremia, which positively correlates to the protective efficacy of antigen.

Immunization with SinH-based antigens reduces the mortality of ExPEC ST131 bacteremia

Next, we determined whether subcutaneous immunization with SinH decreased the mortality of the vaccinated mouse after being challenged by the ST131 E. coli. We used alum-only (30 μl/mouse) and LPS-only (3 EU/mouse) as the control group. LPS-only or alum-only was added in this experiment to control for the possibility that endotoxin or adjuvant might contribute to the overall protection observed in SinH vaccinated animals. Mice were vaccinated with SinH antigens (SinH-3 or SinH-123), alum, or LPS, followed by intraperitoneal injection on day 42 with ST131 JJ2050 E. coli strain (5 × 107 CFU). Mice were monitored twice a day for 10 days. Murine survival was followed with time, and moribund animals were euthanized/necropsied to determine bacterial levels in the kidneys, spleen, and liver. The organs were homogenized, and the JJ2050 bacterial load in the infected organs was quantified by the determination of CFU. The vaccination schematic used in this experiment is shown in Fig 4A. The results showed that mice vaccinated with an LPS-only or alum-only control died within 1 d.p.i. In contrast, animals immunized with either of the SinH antigens demonstrated a survival rate of 33.3% after 10-days (Adjusted P value, SinH-3, P = 0.0037; SinH-123, P = 0.0090) (Fig 4B).

Fig 4. Assessment of the protective efficacy of SinH-based vaccines reduced the mortality of ExPEC sequence type 131 (ST131) bacteremia.

Fig 4

(A) The vaccination scheme was used in this experiment. BALB/cJ, 6 weeks old, female mice were subcutaneously immunized with SinH-based antigens (SinH-3, SinH-123, N = 12), alum-only (N = 8) or LPS-only (N = 8) and injected with an intraperitoneal (IP) injection of 5 × 107 CFU of ExPEC ST131 strain JJ2050. Mice were monitored twice a day for 10 days, and moribund animals were euthanized/necropsied to determine bacterial levels in the kidneys, spleen, and liver. The schematic diagram was made in BioRender. (B) The survival rate of ST131 ExPEC strain JJ2050 was determined using the Gehan-Breslow-Wilcoxon comparison. (C) Box-and-whisker plots of the JJ2050 bacterial levels (CFU/ml) of the SinH-3 vaccinated group and SinH-123 vaccinated group in combining the counts from all organs (liver, spleen, kidney) at 2 d.p.i and 10 d.p.i. Error bars indicate the median with 95% confidence interval (CI). Significant was determined by the Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Dunn’s multiple comparisons correction. Symbols represent data of individual mice. One star (*) P < 0.05, two stars (**) P < 0.01, three stars (***) P < 0.001, four stars (****) P < 0.0001. The Box-and-whisker plots and Kaplan Meier survival curves were exported from Graphpad Prism 9 and annotated using BioRender.

The bacterial levels in SinH vaccinated animals showed results consistent with the survival data. Combining the counts from all organs, compared to the mice vaccinated with LPS-only (moribund within 1 d.p.i), the mice vaccinated with SinH-3 significantly reduced the bacterial burden of JJ2050 in organs after 2 d.p.i (moribund within 2 d.p.i, Adjusted P value, P = 0.0248) and after 10 d.p.i (surviving mice, Adjusted P value, P<0.0001). Also, compared to the mice vaccinated with alum-only, the mice vaccinated with SinH-3 significantly reduced the bacterial burden of JJ2050 in organs after 10 d.p.i (surviving mice, Adjusted P value, P<0.0001). In comparison to the bacterial level of the mice that moribund within 1 d.p.i which received LPS-only or alum-only, those surviving SinH-3 vaccinated mice had a 4-log reduction or 3.8-log reduction in the median level of JJ2050 strain after 10 d.p.i (Fig 4C).

Likewise, compared to the mice vaccinated with LPS-only or alum-only (moribund within 1 d.p.i), the SinH-123 vaccinated mice also had significantly reduced bacterial burdens in organs after 2 d.p.i (moribund within 2 d.p.i, Adjusted P value, P = 0.0023, P = 0.0281) and 10 d.p.i (surviving mice, Adjusted P value, P<0.0001, P<0.0001). In comparison to the bacterial level of the mice that moribund within 1 d.p.i which received LPS-only or alum-only, those surviving SinH-123 vaccinated mice had a 6.6-log reduction or 6.4-log reduction in the median level of JJ2050 strain after 10 d.p.i (Fig 4C).

Immunization with SinH-3 confers protection against the bacteremia of multiple ExPEC sequence types

Although ST131 is now a pandemic clonal lineage of ExPEC, other clonal ExPEC lineages, such as ST95 and ST73 were the second and third most common clonal ExPEC group isolated from urine and blood from patients with bloodstream infections [7173]. MegaBLAST and MAFFT were used to align the sinH sequence from the ST95 and ST73 sequence types. A total of 30 amino acid mutations were observed in the domain-3 of the SinH sequence (Fig 5A) compared to ST131, the most varied domain of the three. To determine if SinH-3 is effective against multiple ExPEC sequence types in the murine model of bacteremia, mice were vaccinated with this domain as described in Fig 3, followed by intraperitoneal injection on day 42 with a mixture of strains of ST73 (CFT073) and ST73-like (W0040, W0088, W0116) equally or a mixture of strains of ST95 (UTI89) and ST95-like (W0060) equally (ST73-mixture or ST95-mixture, each measure total at 5 × 107 CFU—Fig 5B). On day 48, mice were euthanized, their liver, spleen, and kidney organs were collected and homogenized. The ExPEC bacterial load in the infected organs was quantified by the determination of CFU. Of the mice immunized with the SinH-3, at least 75% (Adjusted P value, ST73-mixture, P = 0.0221) and 86% (Adjusted P value, ST95-mixture, P = 0.0024) of the subjects survived the 5-day challenge period (Fig 5C and 5D), a number highly favorable compared to all the subjects failing to survive in the control cohort (0% survival). In addition, combining the counts from all organs, mice vaccinated with SinH-3 significantly reduced bacterial burden in organs of both ExPEC ST73-mixture and ST95-mixture (Adjusted P value, ST73, P = 0.0085; ST95, P = 0.0005) (Fig 5E). In comparison to the unvaccinated mice, SinH-3 vaccinated mice had an approximate 4-log reduction of ExPEC ST73-mixture strains and an approximate 4.3-log reduction of ExPEC ST95-mixture strains in the median level of ExPEC colonization (Fig 5E).

Fig 5. Assessment of the protective efficacy of SinH-3 against the bacteremia of multiple ExPEC sequence types (STs).

Fig 5

(A) Sequence alignment of sinH in different sequence types of ExPEC. The alignment was exported from Geneious and annotated using BioRender. (B) The vaccination scheme was used in this experiment. BALB/cJ, 6 weeks old, unvaccinated female mice (N = 4) and female mice were subcutaneously immunized with SinH-3 (N = 8), were both injected with an intraperitoneal (IP) injection of 5 × 107 CFU of multiple ExPEC sequence type strains (ST73-mixture, ST95-mixture). Mice were monitored twice a day for 5 days, and moribund animals were euthanized/necropsied to determine bacterial levels in the kidneys, spleen, and liver. Organs were harvested and plated to determine bacteria levels. The schematic diagram was made in BioRender. The survival rate curve of (C) ST73-mixture or (D) ST95-mixture was determined using the Gehan-Breslow-Wilcoxon comparison. (E) Box-and-whisker plots of the bacterial levels (CFU/ml) of the counts from all organs following necropsy. Error bars indicate the median with 95% confidence interval (CI). Significant was determined by the Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Dunn’s multiple comparisons correction. Symbols represent data of individual mice. One star (*) P < 0.05, two stars (**) P < 0.01, three stars (***) P < 0.001, four stars (****) P < 0.0001. The Box-and-whisker plots and Kaplan Meier survival curves were exported from Graphpad Prism 9 and annotated using BioRender.

Immunization with SinH-3 confers protection against cystitis in the murine model of acute UTI

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are one of the most common diseases globally [82]. To examine the protective efficacy of SinH-based antigens against ExPEC in the murine model of acute UTI, female BALB/cJ mice were immunized subcutaneously on days 0, 14, and 28 as described in the previous model. Mice were transurethrally inoculated on day 42 with 108 CFU of UPEC strains (UTI89 or CFT073, Fig 6A). After 24 hours, bladders were homogenized, and the UPEC bacterial load in the infected organs was quantified (Fig 6B and 6C). SinH-3 vaccination significantly protected the mice against UTI89 colonization. SinH-3 vaccinated mice had a 44-fold reduction in the median levels of UTI89 colonization in the bladder in comparison to the mice that were given GST alone (Adjusted P value, P = 0.0430), Fig 6B). Although an approximately 20-fold reduction in the median levels of UTI89 colonization in the bladder compared to the control group was observed for the three-domain antigen SinH-123, the effect was not statistically significant (Adjusted P value, P = 0.2843, Fig 6B). For the experimental UPEC strain CFT073, there was no difference between the experimental groups and the control group (Fig 6C). To evaluate the humoral immune response at the site of UPEC colonization, urine samples were collected from individual mice following a series of subcutaneous immunization with either SinH-based antigens or GST, and the levels of vaccine-specific urinary IgG and IgA were quantified via indirect ELISA. For the urinary IgG, SinH-3 vaccinated mice induced significantly higher levels of antigen-specific urinary IgG than those in the control group (Adjusted P value, P<0.0001; P = 0.0001). In addition, SinH-3 vaccinated mice demonstrated a higher level of urinary IgG than SinH-123 vaccinated mice, which might explain the reason that SinH-3 showed better protection against the colonization of UPEC in the murine model of acute UTI (Fig 6D). For the urinary IgA, the total ELISA signal is lower than the urinary IgG, and SinH-123 vaccinated mice induced a statistically higher level of antigen-specific urinary IgA response than those in the control group when SinH-123 (GST-tag removed) was used as the ELISA antigen (Adjusted P value, P = 0.0258). When SinH-3 (GST-tag removed) was used as the ELISA antigen, SinH-3 vaccinated mice showed higher antigen-specific urinary IgA responses than the control group mice (Adjusted P value, P = 0.0024) (Fig 6E).

Fig 6. Assessment of the protective efficacy and immunogenicity of SinH-based vaccines against acute urinary tract infection (UTI).

Fig 6

(A) The vaccination scheme was used in this experiment. BALB/cJ, 6 weeks old, female mice were subcutaneously immunized with SinH-based antigens (SinH-3, SinH-123, N = 8) or GST alone (N = 7 or 8) and inoculated with a transurethral injection of 108 CFU of UPEC strains (UTI89, CFT073). Bladders were harvested and plated to determine bacteria levels. Urine was taken from each mouse after complete immunization. The schematic diagram was made in BioRender. Box-and-whisker plots of the bacterial levels (CFU/ml) in the bladder of UTI89 (B) or CFT073 (C) ELISA analysis of urinary IgG (D) and IgA (E) from SinH-based antigens vaccinated animals using antigens, SinH-3 or SinH-123, as the capture antigen. Error bars indicate the median with 95% confidence interval (CI). Significant was determined by the Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Dunn’s multiple comparisons correction. Symbols represent data of individual mice. One star (*) P < 0.05, two stars (**) P < 0.01, three stars (***) P < 0.001, four stars (****) P < 0.0001. The Box-and-whisker plots were exported from Graphpad Prism 9 and annotated using BioRender.

SinH-based vaccination led to a minimal reduction in ExPEC colonization in healthy mice that was not statistically significant

The gastrointestinal tract is the major reservoir of ExPEC [83]. In addition, a recent study showed up to 93.5% of traditionally classified InPEC fecal isolates additionally carried ExPEC virulence factors, which might cause the infection outside of the GI tract [84]. Hence, the reduction of the colonization of ExPEC or E. coli strains carrying ExPEC-associated virulence factors in this environment is expected to decrease the risk of extraintestinal infections throughout life. To test the hypothesis that SinH will reduce ExPEC colonization, mice were vaccinated as before and gavaged on day 42 with 109 CFU of ExPEC ST131 strains JJ1886, JJ2547, JJ2050 (Fig 7A). Feces were homogenized, and the ExPEC bacterial load in the feces was quantified (Fig 7B and 7C). Although the reduction of bacterial loads was observed in the SinH-3 vaccinated group, the effect was not statistically significant (Adjusted P value, P = 0.0797) (Fig 7B). For the SinH-123 vaccinated group, there was no difference between the control group and the experimental group. In addition, SinH-3 vaccinated mice showed a better protective efficacy against ExPEC strains JJ2547 and JJ2050 colonization than the SinH-123 in the GI tract; however, the results were not statistically significant (Fig 7C).

Fig 7. Assessment of the protective efficacy of SinH-based vaccines against ExPEC colonization in the GI tract.

Fig 7

(A) The vaccination scheme was used in the murine model of gastrointestinal (GI) tract colonization. BALB/c, 6 weeks old, female mice were subcutaneously immunized with SinH-based antigens (SinH-3, SinH-123, N = 18) or GST alone (N = 18) and inoculated with a gavage of 109 CFU of ExPEC ST131 strains (JJ1886, JJ2547, JJ2050). Feces samples were collected and plated to determine bacteria levels. (B) Box-and-whisker plots of the bacterial levels (CFU/ml) in combining the counts from all ExPEC strains (JJ1886, JJ2547, JJ2050) (C) or the bacterial levels (CFU/ml) of each ExPEC strain in feces. (D) The vaccination scheme was used in the murine model of gastrointestinal (GI) tract colonization in immunosuppressed mice. BALB/c, 6 weeks old, female mice were subcutaneously immunized with SinH-based antigens (SinH-3, SinH-123, N = 18) or GST alone (N = 18) and inoculated with a gavage of 109 CFU of ExPEC ST131 strains (JJ1886, JJ2547, JJ2050). And then, mice were treated with the chemotherapeutic agent Cytoxan (CTX) on alternate days. After three times injections, feces were harvested and plated to determine bacteria levels in immunosuppressed mice. (E) Box-and-whisker plots of the bacterial levels (CFU/ml) in combining the counts from all ExPEC strains (JJ1886, JJ2547, JJ2050) (F) or the bacterial levels (CFU/ml) of each ExPEC strain in immunosuppressed mice feces. Error bars indicate the median with 95% confidence interval (CI). Significant was determined by the Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Dunn’s multiple comparisons correction. Symbols represent data of individual mice. One star (*) P < 0.05, two stars (**) P < 0.01, three stars (***) P < 0.001, four stars (****) P < 0.0001. The schematic diagrams were made in BioRender. The Box-and-whisker plots were exported from Graphpad Prism 9 and annotated using BioRender.

Immunization with SinH-based antigens reduced ExPEC colonization in the gastrointestinal tract in immunosuppressed mice

A significant proportion of E. coli bacteremia originates in immunosuppressed individuals, especially cancer patients receiving chemotherapy who are at high risk of developing neutropenia, which could severely decline the circulating immune cells. These patients usually suffer from long-term hospitalization and have relatively poor prognoses and high mortality rates [85]. To determine if SinH-based antigens are effective in the immunosuppressed clinical context to reduce the ExPEC colonization in the GI tract, we utilized a mouse model of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, whereby immune cells of mice were damaged and declined by the injection of the chemotherapeutic agent cyclophosphamide [56,58]. Mice were vaccinated as before and were gavaged on day 42 with 109 CFU of ExPEC ST131 strains (JJ1886, JJ2547, JJ2050), and the animals were intraperitoneally injected on alternate days with the cancer chemotherapy drug cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan [CTX]) on days 43, 45, 47 (Fig 7D). Feces samples were collected and homogenized on day 48, and the ExPEC bacterial load in the feces samples was quantified (Fig 7E and 7F). Although the results are not statistically significant, both SinH-3 and SinH-123 antigens showed a clear reduction in ExPEC colonization in the GI tract in immunosuppressed mice (Adjusted P value, SinH-3, P = 0.0630; SinH-123, P = 0.0756) (Fig 7E). In addition, both SinH-based vaccinations showed a better protective efficacy against ExPEC strain JJ2050 colonization in the GI tract in the immunosuppressed mice among three challenged ExPEC strains (Adjusted P value, SinH-3, P = 0.0365; SinH-123, P = 0.0267) (Fig 7F).

Discussion

ExPEC is the leading cause of bacteremia and UTIs, persistent in the general community and hospitalized patients. Currently, this situation is exacerbated by overprescribing antibiotics, the spread of antibiotic-resistant plasmids, and the trend of global aging [8688]. As a promising alternative strategy to combat this situation, developing an effective ExPEC vaccine to mitigate the increasing global burden of the AMR crisis and substantial public health burden would be tremendously beneficial to the population worldwide. Despite numerous attempts, no E. coli vaccine has been approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA). Here, we describe; (i) that immunization with either SinH-3 or SinH-123 reduced the bacterial burden of highly virulent ExPEC ST131 and increase the survival rate in the murine model of bacteremia; (ii) that immunization with SinH-based antigens produce a higher level vaccine-specific serum IgG, especially vaccination with SinH-123; (iii) that immunization with SinH-3 reduces UPEC strain UTI89 cystitis in the murine model of acute UTI; (iv) that immunization with SinH-based antigens produce a significantly higher level of vaccine-specific urine IgA and IgG; (v) that whereas immunization with SinH-based antigens did lead to a reduction in colonization compared to the control in both healthy and immunocompromised GI tract mice models, this was not statistically significant; (vi) that immunization with SinH-3 confers extensive protection against multiple ExPEC sequence types with different sinH-sequences in the murine model of bacteremia; (vii) that mice vaccinated with SinH-3 demonstrate a significant increase of survival rate after ExPEC (ST73, ST95) infection. In total, this data supports the contention that immunogens consisting of the extracellular domains of the autotransporter SinH represent promising ExPEC vaccine targets. To our knowledge, this is the first to report to utilize a pathogen-specific autotransporter protein as a ExPEC vaccine, an alternative to whole cell vaccines [20], O-antigen (ExPEC4V/ExPEC9V) conjugate vaccine [2124], FimH vaccine [2527], or iron acquisition receptor vaccine [3136].

From the perspective of epidemiology, a vaccine against ExPEC would be expected to be effective against many of the 50 million incident cases of sepsis and 11 million sepsis-related deaths worldwide [89] and would contribute to the reduction of the UTI and recurrent UTI. For example, among all ages, both sexes, and all underlying causes, an estimated 41.5 million incidents of sepsis cases and 8·2 million sepsis-related deaths in 2017 occurred in countries and districts with a low, low-middle, or middle SDI (Socio-demographic Index (SDI) is a composite indicator of development status and strongly correlated with health outcomes). Countries with low, low-middle, or middle SDI would in particular benefit from an E. coli vaccine to reduce sepsis-related deaths and incidence [89]. Furthermore, bloodstream infections are the most frequent life-threatening infectious complication after abdominal solid organ transplantation, with morbidity and mortality rates up to 69% and 52%, respectively [90]. Recent reports have demonstrated that MDR gram-negative bacteremia has emerged frequently and become the predominant cause of morbidity and mortality after transplantation [91]. For this reason, an E. coli vaccine could be an important preventive strategy to reduce the incidence of post-transplant BSIs and control the spread of MDR organisms in the transplantation. In addition, from the age-related sepsis incidence perspective, overall, sepsis incidence peaked in early childhood, with a second peak in incidence among older adults. For example, in 2017, there were an estimated 20.3 million incident sepsis cases and 2·9 million deaths related to sepsis worldwide among children younger than 5 years. When applied clinically, a SinH-based vaccine could be used to vaccinate children younger than 5 years and older adults (over 50 years) to reduce the sepsis incidence and death rate among this population [89]. Meanwhile, UTIs are the most common outpatient infections, with a lifetime incidence of 50–60% in adult women, especially women over 50 years of age. Thus, the vaccine proposed here could be used to protect this at-risk population.

Although the SinH-based antigens demonstrated high-efficiency protection in the murine model of bacteremia against multiple ExPEC sequence types of colonization, the protective efficacy of SinH-based antigens is not as adequate in the acute UTI model and acute GI tract model as expected. One potential reason for efficacy is that the virulence functions of autotransporter proteins include adhesion, aggregation, and invasion [92]. It is hypothesized here that bacterial clearance is simultaneously mediated by opsonization (opsonophagocytosis), neutralization, and other functions of the antibodies which may either block SinH function (prevent adherence or invasion) or, since its surface-localized, induce its uptake by macrophages. Also, urinary IgG demonstrates a greater level of protection against ExPEC colonization in the urinary tract than urinary IgA, which indicates the high level of urinary IgG is still essential in this mucosal site. In addition, possible differences in the abundance or exposure of SinH on the bacterial surface may explain the observed differences in vaccines efficacy against UTI89 and CFT073 in the murine model of acute UTI. Another potential reason is the deficiency of colonization time post-inoculation. For achieving the acute urinary tract infection and GI tract infection, we only allowed the infections to last 24 hours. However, unlike the intraperitoneal injection, in which bacteria were absorbed from the peritoneal cavity by the portal system with faster speed, transurethral and gavage inoculation would allow the bacteria to colonize on the mucosal site. Hence, SinH-based antigens vaccinated mice might provide a more mucosal immune response and protection against ExPEC colonization in the urinary tract and GI tract if increasing the colonization time after the inoculation until 48 hours or more.

Variations in the immunization route, different adjuvant and mouse model strain all impact the evaluation of vaccine efficacy. Mucosal immunization could efficiently induce local immune responses to pathogens at mucosal sites and efficiently generate immune responses detectable at distant mucosal tissues and in the blood [93]. In addition, previous studies indicated mice intranasally immunized with the iron receptor, FyuA, elicited a long-term vaccine-specific humoral immune response, and reduced the UPEC kidney colonization after transurethral challenged with 108 CFU of UPEC strain 536 [32]. Another study showed intranasal immunization with iron-containing receptors, such as Hma, IreA, or IutA generates an antigen-specific humoral response and antigen-specific IL-17 and IFN-γ; also, mice immunized with the IreA have significantly reduced the CFT073 bacterial counts in the bladder [31]. Hence, without the impaction of the high protective efficacy of SinH-based vaccines in the blood, intranasal or transurethral immunization might be an alternative way to increase the protective efficacy of vaccinated mice against ExPEC colonization in both urinary tract infection and other organs.

Furthermore, without the modification of subcutaneous immunization, immune responses induced by vaccines might be drastically enhanced with the use of other adjuvants. In this study, the adjuvant that we used is alum, which would enhance the immune response by facilitating phagocytosis and accumulating the inflammatory cells. Although alum has been recorded as excellent in safety and the most used adjuvant on a 70-year history of use, it does not elicit as strong an immune response as other adjuvants [94]. In preclinical models, the most largely utilized adjuvants to induce mucosal immune responses have been non-toxic derivatives of cholera toxin [95]. Some studies showed unlike other Toll-like receptors (TLR)-based adjuvants, the adjuvant dmLT induces strong IL-17 cytokine secretion and antigen-specific Th17 responses after parenteral or mucosal immunization, which is critical in protection from pathogens [96]. In addition, the dmLT adjuvant has been shown to enhance mucosal responses to the oral inactivated enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) vaccine ETVAX by increasing the production and secretion of mucosal IgA antibodies and inducing IL-1β as well as other cytokines [97]. Hence, dmLT might be a potential alternative adjuvant to enhance the mucosal immune response and vaccine-specific urinary IgA of the SinH-based vaccines. A recent study demonstrated that UTIs typically evoke prompt and vigorous innate bladder immune responses, including extensive exfoliation of the epithelium; however, following each bladder infection, a highly T-helper type 2 (Th2) immune response would preferentially repair the bladder epithelial cells, which would proportionally inhibit T-helper type 1 (Th1)-mediated responses, especially those related to bacteria-clearing activities, resulted in the reinfections [98]. Therefore, the adjuvant oligodeoxynucleotides containing unmethylated CpG (CpG ODNs), mounting an innate immune response characterized by the generation of Th1 and pro-inflammatory cytokines with a good safety profile in clinical trials [99], could also be an alternative adjuvant in SinH-based vaccines, which could enhance the Th1-mediated bacteria-clearing responses to balance the Th2 re-epithelialization in the mucosal sites of both the urinary tract and GI tract, and also might increase the vaccine-specific serum IgG level in the blood.

Under the global AMR crisis, a SinH-based vaccine may contribute to a promising alternative strategy to combat the increasing global burden of the AMR, effectively mitigating the expansion of resistance elements. In addition, by bridging computational genomics with virulome vaccinology, a similar approach may be utilized for other genetically pleiotropic bacteria such as MDR Klebsiella pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Determination of the putative GST-SinH-3 and GST-SinH-123 proteins by Mass Spectrometry per-band sequencing.

Purified protein bands were resolved and digested in gel. The tryptic peptides were analyzed on nanospray LC-MS (liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry) system. The eluted peptides were directly electro-sprayed into mass spectrometer and analyzed by data-dependent acquisition (DDA). The coverage (the percentage of the protein sequence by identified peptides) of GST-SinH-3 was shown in (A), and the coverage of GST-SinH-123 was shown in (B).

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

We thank James R. Johnson for allowing us to use ExPEC strains JJ2050, JJ1886, and JJ2547 from his collection. BCM Mass Spectrometry Proteomics Core is supported by the Dan L. Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center NIH award and CPRIT Core Facility Award. We thank Professor Robert A. Britton, Professor Pedro A. Piedra, and Professor Pablo C. Okhuysen for their input. We also thank Ellen Vaughan, Hannah Carter, Carmen Gu Liu, Keiko Salazar, and Austen Terwilliger for discussing information on certain virulence factors in this study.

Data Availability

The alignment data between domains 1 and 2 of SinH and the domains of SinH from solved structures of invasin and intimin have been deposited at Dryad dataset repository with the name “Structure Prediction: SinH full length” and the digital object identifiers (DOI) (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.jm63xsjfx). The data package has been cited in the reference and methods section in the manuscript as “Chang J, Xing Y. Structure Prediction: SinH full length [dataset]. 2023 Jan 6 [cited 2023 Jan 22]. Dryad Digital Repository. Available from https://datadryad.org/resource/doi:10.5601/dryad.jm63xsjfx.” All other relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) of the National Institutes of Health under award numbers U19AI157981 (AWM, KAP) and U19AI144297 (AWM). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Poolman JT, Wacker M. Extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli, a common human pathogen: Challenges for vaccine development and progress in the field. The J Infect Dis. 2016;213: 6–13. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiv429 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Russo TA, Johnson JR. Medical and economic impact of extraintestinal infections due to Escherichia coli: focus on an increasingly important endemic problem. Microbes Infect. 2003. Apr;5(5):449–56. doi: 10.1016/s1286-4579(03)00049-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Sarowska J, Futoma-Koloch B, Jama-Kmiecik A, Frej-Madrzak M, Ksiazczyk M, Bugla-Ploskonska G, et al. Virulence factors, prevalence and potential transmission of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli isolated from different sources: Recent reports. Gut Pathog. 2019;11: 10. doi: 10.1186/s13099-019-0290-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Robins-Browne RM, Holt KE, Ingle DJ, Hocking DM, Yang J, Tauschek M. Are Escherichia coli Pathotypes Still Relevant in the Era of Whole-Genome Sequencing? Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2016; 6: 141. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2016.00141 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Pitout JD. Extraintestinal Pathogenic Escherichia coli: A Combination of Virulence with Antibiotic Resistance. Front Microbiol. 2012. Jan 19;3:9. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2012.00009 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Leimbach A, Hacker J, Dobrindt U. E. coli as an all-rounder: the thin line between commensalism and pathogenicity. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 2013;358:3–32. doi: 10.1007/82_2012_303 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Manges AR, Geum HM, Guo A, Edens TJ, Fibke CD, Pitoutc JDD. Global extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli (ExPEC) lineages. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2019;32: e00135–18. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00135-18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Yamamoto S, Tsukamoto T, Terai A, Kurazono H, Takeda Y, Yoshida O. Genetic evidence supporting the fecal-perineal-urethral hypothesis in cystitis caused by Escherichia coli. J Urol. 1997. Mar;157(3):1127–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Epstein L, Dantes R, Magill S, Fiore A. Varying estimates of sepsis mortality using death certificates and administrative codes—United states, 1999–2014. MMWR-Morbid Mortal W. 2016;65: 342–345. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6513a2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ani C, Farshidpanah S, Stewart AB, Nguyen HB. Variations in organism-specific severe sepsis mortality in the united states: 1999–2008. Crit Care Med. 2015;43:65–77. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000555 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Paoli CJ, Reynolds MA, Sinha M, Gitlin M, Crouser E. Epidemiology and costs of sepsis in the united states—An analysis based on timing of diagnosis and severity level. Crit Care Med. 2018;46: 1889–1897. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003342 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Antimicrobial Resistance Collaborators. Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in 2019: a systematic analysis. The Lancet. 2022; Vol 399, Issue 10325, P629–655. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Pormohammad A, Nasiri MJ, Azimi T. Prevalence of antibiotic resistance in escherichia coli strains simultaneously isolated from humans, animals, food, and the environment: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Infection and drug resistance. U.S. National Library of Medicine; 2019; 12: 1181–1197. doi: 10.2147/IDR.S201324 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Dadgostar P. Antimicrobial resistance: Implications and costs. Infection and drug resistance. 2019; 12: 3903–3910. doi: 10.2147/IDR.S234610 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Pitout JDD, DeVinney R. Escherichia coli ST131: A multidrug-resistant clone primed for global domination. F1000Research 2017;6: 195. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.10609.1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Biggel M, Moons P, Nguyen MN, Goossens H, Van Puyvelde S. Convergence of virulence and antimicrobial resistance in increasingly prevalent Escherichia coli ST131 papGII+ sublineages. Commun Biol. 2022. Jul 28;5(1):752. doi: 10.1038/s42003-022-03660-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Shaik S, Ranjan A, Tiwari SK, Hussain A, Nandanwar N, Kumar N. Comparative Genomic Analysis of Globally Dominant ST131 Clone with Other Epidemiologically Successful Extraintestinal Pathogenic Escherichia coli (ExPEC) Lineages. mBio. 2017. Oct 24;8(5):e01596–17. doi: 10.1128/mBio.01596-17 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Colpan A, Johnston B, Porter S, Clabots C, Anway R, Thao L, et al. Escherichia coli sequence type 131 (ST131) subclone H30 as an emergent multidrug-resistant pathogen among US veterans. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57: 1256–1265. doi: 10.1093/cid/cit503 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Nesta B, Pizza M. Vaccines against Escherichia coli. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 2018;416: 213–242. doi: 10.1007/82_2018_111 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Wu J, Bao C, Lee Reinhardt R, Abraham SN. Local induction of bladder th1 responses to combat urinary tract infections. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2021. Mar 9; 118(10): e2026461118. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2026461118 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Van den Dobbelsteen GP.J.M, Fae KC, Serroyen J, Van den Nieuwenhof IM, Braun M, Haeuptle MA. Immunogenicity and safety of a tetravalent E. coli O-antigen bioconjugate vaccine in animal models. Vaccine. 2016. Jul 29;34(35):4152–4160. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.06.067 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Chorro L, Li ZH, Chu L, Singh S, Gu JX, Kim JH. Preclinical Immunogenicity and Efficacy of Optimized O25b O-Antigen Glycoconjugates To Prevent MDR ST131 E. coli Infections. Infect Immun. 2022. Apr 21;90(4):e0002222. doi: 10.1128/iai.00022-22 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Smith WB, Abbanat D, Spiessens B, Go O, Haazen W, de Rosa T, et al. 2712. Safety and immunogenicity of two doses of ExPEC4V vaccine against extraintestinal pathogenic escherichia coli disease in healthy adult participants. OFID 2019;6: S954. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Arshadi N, Mousavi SL, Amani J, Nazarian S. Immunogenic Potency of Formalin and Heat Inactivated E. coli O157:H7 in Mouse Model Administered by Different Routes. Avicenna J Med Biotechnol. 2020. Jul-Sep;12(3):194–200. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Langermann S, Mollby R, Burlein JE, Palaszynski SR, Auguste CG, DeFusco A, et al. Vaccination with FimH Adhesin protects cynomolgus monkeys from colonization and infection by uropathogenic Escherichia coli. J Infect Dis. 2000;181: 774–778. doi: 10.1086/315258 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Starks CM, Miller MM, Broglie PM, Cubbison J, Martin SM, Eldridge GR. Optimization and qualification of an assay that demonstrates that a FimH vaccine induces functional antibody responses in women with histories of urinary tract infections. Hum Vacc Immunother. 2021;17: 283–292. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2020.1770034 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Eldridge GR, Hughey H, Rosenberger L, Martin SM, Shapiro AM, D’Antonio E, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of an adjuvanted Escherichia coli adhesin vaccine in healthy women with and without histories of recurrent urinary tract infections: results from a first-in-human phase 1 study. Human vaccines & Immunotherapeutics. 2021, VOL. 17, NO. 5, 1262–1270. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2020.1834807 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Nesta B, Spraggon G, Alteri C, Moriel DG, Rosini R, Veggi D, et al. FdeC, a novel broadly conserved Escherichia coli adhesin eliciting protection against urinary tract infections. mSphere 2012;3: e00010–12. doi: 10.1128/mBio.00010-12 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Roberts JA, Kaack MB, Baskin G, Chapman MR, Hunstad DA, Pinkner JS, et al. Antibody responses and protection from pyelonephritis following vaccination with purified Escherichia coli papdg protein. J Urol. 2004;171: 1682–1685. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000116123.05160.43 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Goluszko P, Goluszko E, Nowicki B, Nowicki S, Popov V, Wang HQ. Vaccination with purified Dr Fimbriae reduces mortality associated with chronic urinary tract infection due to Escherichia coli bearing Dr Adhesin. Infect Immun. 2005;73: 627–631. doi: 10.1128/IAI.73.1.627-631.2005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Alteri CJ, Hagan EC, Sivick KE, Smith SN, Mobley HLT. Mucosal immunization with iron receptor antigens protects against urinary tract infection. PLOS Pathog. 2009;5: e1000586. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1000586 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Brumbaugh AR, Smith SN, Mobley HLT. Immunization with the yersiniabactin receptor, FyuA, protects against pyelonephritis in a murine model of urinary tract infection. Infect Immun. 2013;81: 3309–3316. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00470-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Mobley HL, Alteri CJ. Development of a Vaccine against Escherichia coli Urinary Tract Infections. Pathogens. 2015. Dec 31;5(1):1. doi: 10.3390/pathogens5010001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Forsyth VS, Himpsl SD, Smith SN, Sarkissian CA, Mike LA, Stocki JA. Optimization of an Experimental Vaccine To Prevent Escherichia coli Urinary Tract Infection. mBio. 2020. Apr 28;11(2):e00555–20. doi: 10.1128/mBio.00555-20 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Wieser A, Romann E, Magistro G, Hoffmann C, Nörenberg D, Weinert K, Schubert S. A multiepitope subunit vaccine conveys protection against extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli in mice. Infect Immun. 2010. Aug;78(8):3432–42. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00174-10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Mike LA, Smith SN, Summer CA, Eaton KA, Mobley HLT. Siderophore vaccine conjugates protect against uropathogenic Escherichia coli urinary tract infection. PNAS. 2016. Nov 22;113(47):13468–13473. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1606324113 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Sivick KE, Mobley HLT. An “omics” approach to uropathogenic Escherichia coli vaccinology. Trends Microbiol. 2009;17: 431–432. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2009.07.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Shea AE, Stocki JA, Himpsl SD, Smith SN, Mobley HLT. Loss of an Intimin-Like Protein Encoded on a Uropathogenic E. coli Pathogenicity Island Reduces Inflammation and Affects Interactions with the Urothelium. Infection and Immunity. 2022. Feb 17;90(2):e0027521. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00275-21 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Clark JR, Maresso AM. Comparative Pathogenomics of Escherichia coli: Polyvalent Vaccine Target Identification through Virulome Analysis. Infect Immun. 2021;89: e00115–21. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00115-21 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Mao BH, Chang YF, Scaria J, Chang CC, Chou LW, Tien N, et al. Identification of Escherichia coli genes associated with urinary tract infections. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50: 449–456. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00640-11 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Johnson JR, Johnston B, Clabots C, Kuskowski MA, Castanheira M. Escherichia coli sequence type ST131 as the major cause of serious multidrug-resistant E. coli infections in the United States. Clin Infect Dis. 2010. Aug 1;51(3):286–94. doi: 10.1086/653932 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Mulvey MA, Schilling JD, Hultgren SJ. Establishment of a persistent Escherichia coli reservoir during the acute phase of a bladder infection. Infect Immun. 2001. Jul;69(7):4572–9. doi: 10.1128/IAI.69.7.4572-4579.2001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Mobley HL, Green DM, Trifillis AL, Johnson DE, Chippendale GR, Lockatell CV, Jones BD, Warren JW. Pyelonephritogenic Escherichia coli and killing of cultured human renal proximal tubular epithelial cells: role of hemolysin in some strains. Infect Immun. 1990. May;58(5):1281–9. doi: 10.1128/iai.58.5.1281-1289.1990 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Jumper J, Evans R, Pritzel A. et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 2021, 596: 583–589. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Pereira J, Simpkin A.J, Hartmann M.D, Ridgen D.J, Keegan R.M, Lupas A.N. High-accuracy protein structure prediction in CASP14. Proteins 2021, 89(12): 1687–1699. doi: 10.1002/prot.26171 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Johnson S.L, Eddy S.R, Portugaly E. Hidden Markov model speed heuristic and iterative HMM search procedure. BMC Bioinformatics 2010, 11: 431. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-11-431 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Mariani V, Biasini M, Barbato A, Schwede T. lDDT: a local superposition-free score for comparing protein structures and moels using distance difference tests. Bioinformatics 2013, 29(21): 2722–2728. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Berman H.M, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliand G, Bhat T.N, Weissig H, Shindyalov I.N, Bourne P.E. The Protein Data Bank Nucleic Acids Research 2000, 28(1): 235–242. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Ye Y, Godzik A. Flexible structure alignment by chaining aligned fragment pairs allowing twists. Bioinformatics 2003, 19(s2): ii246–ii255. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btg1086 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Zhang Y, Skolnick J. TM-align: a protein structure alignment algorithm based on the TM-score. Nucleic Acids Research 2005, 33(7): 2302–2309. doi: 10.1093/nar/gki524 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Pettersen E.F, Goddard T.D, Huang C.C, Meng E.C, Couch G.S, Croll T.I, Morris J.H, Ferrin T.E. UCSF ChimeraX: Structure visualization for researchers, educators, and developers. Protein Science 2021, 30(1): 70–82. doi: 10.1002/pro.3943 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Chang J, Xing Y. Structure Prediction: SinH full length [dataset]. 2023. Jan 6 [cited 2023, Jan 22]. Dryad Digital Repository. Available from https://datadryad.org/resource/doi:10.5601/dryad.jm63xsjfx. [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Johnson M, Zaretskaya I, Raytselis Y, Merezhuk Y, McGinnis S, Madden TL. NCBI BLAST: A better web interface. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008;36: W5–W9. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkn201 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Stamatakis A. RAxML version 8: A tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 2014;30: 1312–1313. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Jelinski J, Terwilliger A, Green S, Maresso A. Progress towards the Development of a NEAT Vaccine for Anthrax II: Immunogen Specificity and Alum Effectiveness in an Inhalational Model. Infect Immun. 2020. Jul 21;88(8):e00082–20. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00082-20 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Green SI, Kaelber JT, Ma L, Trautner BW, Ramig RF, Maresso AW. Bacteriophages from ExPEC reservoirs kill pandemic multidrug-resistant strains of clonal group ST131 in animal models of bacteremia. Sci Rep. 2017;7: 46151. doi: 10.1038/srep46151 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Patras KA, Ha AD, Rooholfada E, Olson J, Ramachandra Rao SP, Lin AE, Nizet V. Augmentation of Urinary Lactoferrin Enhances Host Innate Immune Clearance of Uropathogenic Escherichia coli. J Innate Immun. 2019;11(6):481–495. doi: 10.1159/000499342 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Green SI, Ajami NJ, Ma L, Poole NM, Price RE, Petrosino JF, et al. Murine model of chemotherapy-induced extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli translocation. Infect Immun. 2015;83: 3243–3256. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00684-15 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Denamur E, Clermont O, Bonacorsi S, et al. The population genetics of pathogenic Escherichia coli. Nat Rev Microbiol 19, 37–54 (2021). doi: 10.1038/s41579-020-0416-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Rasko DA, Rosovitz MJ, Myers GSA, Mongodin EF, Fricke WF, Gajer P. The Pangenome Structure of Escherichia coli: Comparative Genomic Analysis of E. coli Commensal and Pathogenic Isolates. Journal of Bacteriology. Volume 190, Issue 20, 15 October 2008, Pages 6881–6893. doi: 10.1128/JB.00619-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Clermont O, Bonacorsi S, Bingen E. Rapid and simple determination of the Escherichia coli phylogenetic group. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000. Oct;66(10):4555–8. doi: 10.1128/AEM.66.10.4555-4558.2000 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Reid SD, Herbelin CJ, Bumbaugh AC, Selander RK, Whittam TS. Parallel evolution of virulence in pathogenic Escherichia coli. Nature. 2000. Jul 6;406(6791):64–7. doi: 10.1038/35017546 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Escobar-Páramo P, Clermont O, Blanc-Potard AB, Bui H, Le Bouguénec C, Denamur E. A specific genetic background is required for acquisition and expression of virulence factors in Escherichia coli. Mol Biol Evol. 2004. Jun;21(6):1085–94. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msh118 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Enright MC, Spratt BG. Multilocus sequence typing. Trends Microbiol. 1999. Dec;7(12):482–7. doi: 10.1016/s0966-842x(99)01609-1 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Maiden MC, Bygraves JA, Feil E, Morelli G, Russell JE, Urwin R, Zhang Q, Zhou J, Zurth K, Caugant DA, Feavers IM, Achtman M, Spratt BG. Multilocus sequence typing: a portable approach to the identification of clones within populations of pathogenic microorganisms. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998. Mar 17;95(6):3140–5. doi: 10.1073/pnas.95.6.3140 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Feil EJ, Li BC, Aanensen DM, Hanage WP, Spratt BG. eBURST: inferring patterns of evolutionary descent among clusters of related bacterial genotypes from multilocus sequence typing data. J Bacteriol. 2004. Mar;186(5):1518–30. doi: 10.1128/JB.186.5.1518-1530.2004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Jaureguy F, Landraud L, Passet V, Diancourt L, Frapy E, Guigon G, et al. Phylogenetic and genomic diversity of human bacteremic Escherichia coli strains. BMC Genomics. 2008. Nov 26;9:560. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-9-560 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Tenaillon O, Skurnik D, Picard B, Denamur E. The population genetics of commensal Escherichia coli. Nat Rev Microbiol 8, 207–217 (2010). doi: 10.1038/nrmicro2298 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Alghoribi MF, Gibreel TM, Farnham G, Al Johani SM, Balkhy HH, Upton M. Antibiotic-resistant ST38, ST131 and ST405 strains are the leading uropathogenic Escherichia coli clones in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. J Antimicrob Chemother 2015; 70: 2757–2762. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkv188 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Goswami C, Fox S, Holden M, Connor M, Leanord A, Evans TJ. Genetic analysis of invasive Escherichia coli in Scotland reveals determinants of healthcare-associated versus community-acquired infections. Microb Genom. 2018. Jun;4(6):e000190. doi: 10.1099/mgen.0.000190 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Riley LW. Pandemic lineages of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014. May;20(5):380–90. doi: 10.1111/1469-0691.12646 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Doumith M, Day M, Ciesielczuk H, Hope R, Underwood A, Reynolds R, Wain J, Livermore DM, Woodford N. Rapid identification of major Escherichia coli sequence types causing urinary tract and bloodstream infections. J Clin Microbiol. 2015. Jan;53(1):160–6. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02562-14 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Gibreel TM, Dodgson AR, Cheesbrough J, Fox AJ, Bolton FJ, Upton M. Population structure, virulence potential and antibiotic susceptibility of uropathogenic Escherichia coli from Northwest England. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012. Feb;67(2):346–56. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkr451 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Heinz E, Stubenrauch CJ, Grinter R, Croft NP, Purcell AW, Strugnell RA, et al. Conserved features in the structure, mechanism, and biogenesis of the inverse autotransporter protein family. Genome Biol. Evol. 8(6):1690–1705 doi: 10.1093/gbe/evw112 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Li M, Wang K, Tang A, Tang A, Chen A, Huang Z. Investigation of the Genes Involved in the Outbreaks of Escherichia coli and Salmonella spp. in the United States. Antibiotics (Basel). 2021. Oct 19;10(10):1274. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics10101274 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Zhang Y, Skolnick J. Scoring function for automated assessment of protein structure template quality. PROTEINS: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics. 2004; 57:702–710. doi: 10.1002/prot.20264 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Fairman JW, Dautin N, Wojtowicz D, Liu W, Noinaj N, Barnard TJ, et al. Crystal structures of the outer membrane domain of intimin and invasin from enterohemorrhagic E. coli and enteropathogenic Y. pseudotuberculosis. Structure. 2012; 20(7): 1233–1243. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2012.04.011 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Hamburger ZA, Brown MS, Isberg RR, Bjorkman PJ. Crystal Structure of Invasin: A Bacterial Integrin-Binding Protein. Science. 8 Oct 1999; Vol 286, Issue 5438; pp. 291–295. doi: 10.1126/science.286.5438.291 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Yi Y.; Ma Y.; Gao F.; Mao X.; Peng H.; Feng Y.; Fan Z.; Wang G.; Guo G.; Yan J.; Zeng H.; Zou H.; Gao G.F. Crystal Structure of EHEC Intimin: Insights into the Complementarity between EPEC and EHEC. PLoS One 2010. 5(12): e15285. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015285 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Goh K, Moriel D, Hancock S, Phan M, Schembri M. Bioinformatic and Molecular Analysis of Inverse Autotransporters from Escherichia coli. mSphere. 2019. Jul-Aug; 4(4): e00572–19. doi: 10.1128/mSphere.00572-19 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Price LB, Johnson JR, Aziz M, Clabots C, Johnston B, Tchesnokova V, Nordstrom L, Billig M, Chattopadhyay S, Stegger M, Andersen PS, Pearson T, Riddell K, Rogers P, Scholes D, Kahl B, Keim P, Sokurenko EV. The epidemic of extended-spectrum-β-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli ST131 is driven by a single highly pathogenic subclone, H30-Rx. mBio. 2013. Dec 17;4(6):e00377–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Flores-Mireles AL, Walker JN, Caparon M, Hultgren SJ. Urinary tract infections: epidemiology, mechanisms of infection and treatment options. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2015. May;13(5):269–84. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro3432 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Manges AR, Johnson JR. Reservoirs of Extraintestinal Pathogenic Escherichia coli. Microbiol Spectr. 2015. Oct;3(5). doi: 10.1128/microbiolspec.UTI-0006-2012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Lindstedt BA, Finton MD, Porcellato D, Brandal LT. High frequency of hybrid Escherichia coli strains with combined Intestinal Pathogenic Escherichia coli (IPEC) and Extraintestinal Pathogenic Escherichia coli (ExPEC) virulence factors isolated from human faecal samples. BMC Infect Dis. 2018. Nov 1;18(1):544. doi: 10.1186/s12879-018-3449-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Tao X, Wang H, Min C, Yu T, Luo Y, Li J, Hu Y, Yan Q, Liu WE, Zou M. A retrospective study on Escherichia coli bacteremia in immunocompromised patients: Microbiological features, clinical characteristics, and risk factors for shock and death. J Clin Lab Anal. 2020. Aug;34(8):e23319. doi: 10.1002/jcla.23319 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Sanchez GV, Adams SJ, Baird AM, Master RN, Clark RB, Bordon JM. Escherichia coli antimicrobial resistance increased faster among geriatric outpatients compared with adult outpatients in the USA, 2000–10. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2013. Aug;68(8):1838–41. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkt110 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Denkinger CM, Grant AD, Denkinger M, Gautam S, D’Agata EM. Increased multi-drug resistance among the elderly on admission to the hospital—a 12-year surveillance study. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2013. Jan-Feb;56(1):227–30. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2012.05.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Pulcini C, Clerc-Urmes I, Attinsounon CA, Fougnot S, Thilly N. Antibiotic resistance of Enterobacteriaceae causing urinary tract infections in elderly patients living in the community and in the nursing home: a retrospective observational study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019. Mar 1;74(3):775–781. doi: 10.1093/jac/dky488 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Rudd KE, Johnson SC, Agesa KM, Shackelford KA, Tsoi D, Kievlan DR, et al. Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990–2017: Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet 2020;395: 200–211. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32989-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Qiao BB, Wu JZ, Wan QQ, Zhang S, Ye QF. Factors influencing mortality in abdominal solid organ transplant recipients with multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteremia. BMC Infect Dis. 2017;17: 171. doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2276-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Al-Hasan MN, Razonable RR, Eckel-Passowd JE, Baddour LM. Incidence rate and outcome of gram-negative bloodstream infection in solid organ transplant recipients. Am J Transplant. 2009;9: 835–843. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02559.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Wells TJ, Tree JJ, Ulett GC, Schembri MA. Autotransporter proteins: Novel targets at the bacterial cell surface. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2007;274: 163–172. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2007.00833.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Nizard M, Diniz MO, Roussel H, Tran T, Ferreira LCS, Badoual C, et al. Mucosal vaccines: Novel strategies and applications for the control of pathogens and tumors at mucosal sites. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2014;10: 2175–2187. doi: 10.4161/hv.29269 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.HogenEsch H. Mechanism of immunopotentiation and safety of aluminum adjuvants. Front Immunol. 2013;10: 406. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2012.00406 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Griffiths KL, Stylianou E, Poyntz HC, Betts GJ, Fletcher HA, McShane H. Cholera toxin enhances vaccine-induced protection against Mycobacterium tuberculosis challenge in mice. PLoS One. 2013. Oct 23;8(10):e78312. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0078312 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Clements JD, Norton EB. The mucosal vaccine adjuvant LT(R192G/L211A) or dmLT. mSphere 2018;3: e00215–18. doi: 10.1128/mSphere.00215-18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Akhtar M, Nizam NN, Basher SR, Hossain L, Akter S, Bhuiyan TR, et al. dmLT adjuvant enhances cytokine responses to T cell stimuli, whole cell vaccine antigens and lipopolysaccharide in both adults and infants. Front Immunol. 2021;12: 654872. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.654872 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Wu JX, Hayes BW, Phoenix C, Macias GS, Miao YX, Choi HW, et al. A highly polarized TH2 bladder response to infection promotes epithelial repair at the expense of preventing new infections. Nat Immunol. 2020;21: 671–683. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Bode C, Zhao G, Steinhagen F, Kinjo T, Klinman DM. CpG DNA as a vaccine adjuvant. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2011;10: 499–511. doi: 10.1586/erv.10.174 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Christoph Tang, Kimberly A Kline

29 Jun 2022

Dear Dr. Maresso,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "Comparative genomics to determine a vaccine antigen - Broad Protective Vaccination against Systemic Escherichia coli with Autotransporter Antigens" for consideration at PLOS Pathogens. As with all papers reviewed by the journal, your manuscript was reviewed by members of the editorial board and by several independent reviewers. In light of the reviews (below this email), we would like to invite the resubmission of a significantly-revised version that takes into account the reviewers' comments.

We cannot make any decision about publication until we have seen the revised manuscript and your response to the reviewers' comments. Your revised manuscript is also likely to be sent to reviewers for further evaluation.

When you are ready to resubmit, please upload the following:

[1] A letter containing a detailed list of your responses to the review comments and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript. Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

[2] Two versions of the revised manuscript: one with either highlights or tracked changes denoting where the text has been changed; the other a clean version (uploaded as the manuscript file).

Important additional instructions are given below your reviewer comments.

Please prepare and submit your revised manuscript within 60 days. If you anticipate any delay, please let us know the expected resubmission date by replying to this email. Please note that revised manuscripts received after the 60-day due date may require evaluation and peer review similar to newly submitted manuscripts.

Thank you again for your submission. We hope that our editorial process has been constructive so far, and we welcome your feedback at any time. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Kimberly Kline

Pearls Editor

PLOS Pathogens

Christoph Tang

Section Editor

PLOS Pathogens

Kasturi Haldar

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Pathogens

orcid.org/0000-0001-5065-158X

Michael Malim

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Pathogens

orcid.org/0000-0002-7699-2064

***********************

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Part I - Summary

Please use this section to discuss strengths/weaknesses of study, novelty/significance, general execution and scholarship.

Reviewer #1: Xing and colleagues describe the use of an E. coli autotranporter with homology to Yersinia invasin, SinH, for subcutaneous vaccination of mice, with Alum as adjuvant to protect against ExPEC ST131 strains (and others). The authors have previously shown that sinH has high prevalence in certain ExPEC phylogroups. Two domains of the protein were expressed as GST fusions and partially purified prior to use in their vaccine prep in intraperitoneal model of bacteremia, transurethral challenge of the mouse bladder for urinary tract infection and oral gavage for gastrointestinal colonization. Statistically significant reduction in colonization was observed for bacteremia and for intestinal colonization but not bladder colonization. Antibodies to proteins in the vaccine prep were elevated following vaccination and dramatically improved survival of vaccinated mice. While there have been many attempts to develop and ExPEC vaccine, none have yet been licensed. However, there has been a lot of work in the area. Nevertheless, it is important to keep working on vaccines until a suitable candidate can be found. Indeed, SinH may be such a viable candidate.

Reviewer #2: This manuscript by Xing and coauthors presents an extensive study seeking a vaccine target for systemic E. coli infections. The investigators used a comparative genomics approach to identify a sinH as selectively present in ExPEC, identify it as encoding a plausibly surface-exposed protein amenable to antibody recognition in a live bacterium, use structure prediction to identify a ligand binding domain, immunize mice to two versions of this domain derived from the multidrug resistant ST131, and evaluate outcomes in three distinctive infection/colonization models using different E. coli strains.

The authors provide compelling evidence of protection against mortality for two strains in a mouse septicemia model with a corresponding difference in multiorgan CFU values. A relatively marginal (though narrowly significant) CFU decrease in GI colonization and bladder CFUs with a UTI model are presented. Results are considered in the context of antibody responses. Similar efforts, using different antigens have been attempted by other groups and these efforts are appropriately noted in this manuscript, where they provide informative context.

A strength of this manuscript is its principled scientific approach to vaccine development, which begins with a thoughtful discovery approach in ExPEC-associated phyla and sequence types, considers protein structure, and evaluates results in more than one E. coli strain using GST tag immunization as a negative control. The manuscript would be improved by equivalent consideration of ST131 and non-ST131 strains in the septicemia model, particularly regarding mortality, given the focus upon, and use of, an ST131 vaccine antigen. While the vaccine as evaluated here did not appear to yield the desired pan-isolate protective effect that was intended, the differences between strains and mouse models (sepsis, UTI, gut colonization) are interesting and may prove to be instructive for future work. The manuscript would be improved if the presentation of these limitations was presented in a more direct manner.

Reviewer #3: This manuscript evaluated the protective efficacy and immunogenicity of a recombinant SinH-based vaccine against infections caused by extraintestinal E. coli.

**********

Part II – Major Issues: Key Experiments Required for Acceptance

Please use this section to detail the key new experiments or modifications of existing experiments that should be absolutely required to validate study conclusions.

Generally, there should be no more than 3 such required experiments or major modifications for a "Major Revision" recommendation. If more than 3 experiments are necessary to validate the study conclusions, then you are encouraged to recommend "Reject".

Reviewer #1: 1. The abstract (line 28) and results (line 121) call sinH an uncharacterized gene. However, when searching PubMed for “sinH and E. coli”, four references are identified. One is the genomic sequence screens described previously by the senior author’s group. The most recent publication, however has characterized the sinH gene and its respective predicted protein domains based on protein prediction software. According to the abstract, he gene was mutated and investigated in the murine urinary tract infection model. The abstract also states that a sinH mutant has a fitness defect and its gene is upregulated during urinary tract infections in women. This is a 2022 paper and was likely missed during manuscript preparation, but appears to provide important background that should now be included.

Shea AE et al. Loss of an Intimin-Like Protein Encoded on a Uropathogenic E. coli Pathogenicity Island Reduces Inflammation and Affects Interactions with the Urothelium. Infect Immun. 2022. 90:e0027521.

2. Citations are somewhat spotty. For example when reviewing antigens that have been tried as vaccine for ExPEC, perhaps the most promising one, FimH of type 1 fimbria is not mentioned. Siderophores were also tried. Other references do not always cite the primary literature. Sometimes reviews are not the most relevant articles to cite. Some are omitted altogether. A more thorough assembly of these references should be added. Also (beginning line 135), primary references should be provided for published strains. Also, unless the authors developed the three murine models in this study, primary references should be given for those models in the Methods sections . As well, the vaccination protocol should be referenced unless developed by the authors

3. Some figures are illegible or uninterpretable as downloaded. For example Fig 1 B and C. and Fig 4A.

4. With respect to the “purified antigens”, one can see the predicted induced bands and when cut out and subjected to mass spec, they are clearly correct, but there are many many other bands in the a-little-hard-to-see Fig 2F (perhaps incompletely destained). Presumably this is what was used for vaccination. It cannot be ruled out that these other bands may be what is affording protection and to what the ELISA is reacting. The authors should show an SDS-PAGE of what was used for vaccination or a Western blot showing reactivity to only the SinH domains. Furthermore, a vaccination trial that has only alum, only sinH and the combo (the latter done) should be done. Challenging with a sinH mutant of the ST131 strain should demonstrate no protection since it lacks the key antigen. This represents a key experiment to clarify the protection data and to demonstrate SinH domains are actually protectinve and not contaminants.

Reviewer #2: The mouse models consider three rather distinctive circumstances: 1) septicemia from experimental peritonitis; 2) urinary tract infection – specifically cystitis/bladder infection; 3) gastrointestinal colonization. Each of these is associated with very different clinical contexts, immunologic responses, microenvironments, and bacterial functions. The most compelling result presented here is the vaccine mortality benefit (presented in Figure 4) observed in the septicemia model of ST73 and ST95 infections, which is corroborated by a substantial difference in organ CFUs. Curiously missing from this paper are survival results for the ST131 strains presented before this in Figure 3. I see no report of mortality data for these strains in the corresponding Results section (lines 403-442). This was surprising as the SinH-3 domain from ST131 (lines 142-147) differs by 30 amino acids from the same proteins in ST73 and ST95. I see a less marked vaccine-associated CFU drop for ST131 strains compared to the non-ST131 strains. Does ST131 express less antigen? Did the ST131 strains somehow evade humoral immunity to a greater degree than ST73/95? Given that the authors focused upon ST131 strains and septicemia, this is a very important result that merits more direct treatment. Please provide the data for ST131 survival so it may be directly compared to the survival data for the non-ST131 strains.

Reviewer #3: L298-335. The authors claim the sequence of SinH from ST131 is significantly divergent compared to the SinH sequence from ST73 and ST95. What is the level of divergence? My quick analysis indicated the SinH protein sequence identity between reference ST131 strains compared to reference ST73 and ST95 strains is ~90% identity. Following on from this, I found Fig 1 very difficult to interpret. In panel A, black boxes indicate ‘no results’ – what does this mean? I could not resolve any information from panel B and panel C as the text was too small.

The SinH-3 and SinH-123 recombinant proteins were not pure - the SDS-PAGE analysis for both protein preparations shows multiple bands, including a significant band at ~25 kDa (see Fig 2F). The authors need to determine if these bands are breakdown products or impurities. They should also determine the purity of the sample using mass spectrometry and demonstrate there is no LPS contamination. These experiments are critical, as the authors need to demonstrate that the reduced cfu counts resulting from vaccination are due to an antibody response against SinH rather than against other ExPEC proteins (or LPS) co-purified in the procedure.

It would be relevant to employ the 5-day IP infection protocol to assess vaccine protection and survival (the critical readout) with the ST131 strains. Please comment.

Is the data showing protection against colonisation of the bladder by UTI89 from a single experiment? If so, this experiment should be repeated to demonstrate reproducibility.

Likewise, is the gut colonisation data from a single experiment?

I have concerns about the statistical methods used to evaluate the significant difference in cfu counts in different experiments. Data in Fig 3 and Fig 5 were evaluated using a two-tailed Mann-Whitney test or Kruskal-Wallis test (which one is not specified in the figure legend), while data in Fig 4 and Fig 6 were evaluated using a two-tailed Mann-Whitney test. Please explain. Given there are multiple comparisons, I would have expected these analyses would be performed using a test such as the Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Dunn’s multiple comparisons correction. Please justify the choice of statistical method.

**********

Part III – Minor Issues: Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications

Please use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity.

Reviewer #1: 5. In Fig 4E, vaccinated with SinH-3 and challenged with ST73, there are six data points (>25% of mice) that are nearly higher than any control value. Please check the statistics on this. The stats would likely take a big hit with these values

6. Some awkward and incorrect language:

Line 151 ‘..proteins were cultured in E. coli BL21(DE3)”. The proteins were not cultured, the E. coli was.

Line 148. plasmid

7. Line 152 “the proteins were induced”. Gene expression was induced…

8. Line 157 should “PSIG” just be “PSI”?

9. Lines 217, 219, 225, 227 (for example) Throughout the manuscript “infection” is used instead of “injected” or “inoculated”. The animals may become infected but only some time after injection or inoculation.

10. Line 391. I don’t think the SinH-based antigens were harvested by centrifugation. Likely the insoluble bacterial material was pelleted. The supernatant likely contained the antigens.

11. Graph in Fig 3E should read” Unvaccinated” on x-axis.

12. In Fig 5B, there is no trend in this experiment. Simply state that the differences were not significant. One cannot put such a spin on these data. Likewise for Figure 6B (SinH-123).

Reviewer #2: 1) Assuming equivalent antigen expression (not examined in this manuscript), among the three models tested (sepsis, UTI, intestinal colonization), I would expect the humoral immune response to subcutaneous vaccination to have the greatest impact upon septicemia because of circulating antibodies, as is found here. Since these invasive infections are what kill patients, I regard this as an important, if not the most important, outcome of the current study. I am concerned that the current manuscript understates this distinction (lines 32-35, for example). The survival data in Fig 4 provides the clearest example of protection, while the meaning of the relatively narrow CFU differences associated with other organisms and contexts is more difficult to discern. While perhaps an imperfect analogy, the concept that a subcutaneous vaccine could confer greater protection against an invasive disease than to a pathogen confined to the mucosa has become highly familiar in the age of COVID vaccines.

2) Unmentioned in this manuscript is the subject of sinH transcription and expression as a modulating influence on the results. What is known about this? Are there any clues from the sinH promoter region?

3) Line 552: I agree with the authors’ suggestion that Fc-mediated effects that are not active at mucosal surfaces or intestinal/bladder lumen is a potential explanation for the diminished effect of vaccination on colonization. Can the authors comment on the likelihood that antibodies that bind SinH would affect SinH-mediated bacterial functions? Has anybody examined virulence of a SinH knockout? On a related note, Line 556: urinary IgG didn’t “demonstrate more effective protection” in this study, rather was associated with greater protection.

Reviewer #3: L410-411. Please define the genetically distinct clonal groups for JJ1886, JJ2050 and JJ2547.

Were the mice sick at 24 hours post infection with the ST131 strains? The data for the ST73 and ST95 strains would indicate that many of the mice may have died within this time (i.e. compare with survival data in Fig 4).

Please refer to strains by their strain name rather than ST. As noted by the authors, there is considerable variation at the ExPEC genome level, and thus while the range of strains examined is to be commended, single strains are not representative of an entire ST.

In the discussion, it is stated that ‘from the perspective of epidemiology, a vaccine against ExPEC would be expected to be effective against many of the 50 million incident cases of sepsis and 11 million sepsis-related deaths worldwide and would contribute to the reduction of the recurrence rate of complicated UTI. The authors should comment on a how a vaccine for E. coli would be used. How will they identify the high-risk target group? Surely it would not be administered to everyone.

Although SinH is immunogenic, the results actually show it is not a protective antigen. For example, at 24h bacteria were still present in the blood of all mice (Fig 3). Even more concerning from a clinical perspective, the challenge strain was present in the spleen and kidney in high numbers in immunized mice (albeit at lower cfu numbers than the control), indicating a lack of protection in these tissues. The authors should comment.

Do the authors envisage SinH would be used as part of a multivalent vaccine? Some discussion is warranted.

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Figure Files:

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

Data Requirements:

Please note that, as a condition of publication, PLOS' data policy requires that you make available all data used to draw the conclusions outlined in your manuscript. Data must be deposited in an appropriate repository, included within the body of the manuscript, or uploaded as supporting information. This includes all numerical values that were used to generate graphs, histograms etc.. For an example see here on PLOS Biology: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001908#s5.

Reproducibility:

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Decision Letter 1

Christoph Tang, Kimberly A Kline

28 Nov 2022

Dear Dr. Maresso,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "Broad Protective Vaccination against Systemic Escherichia coli with Autotransporter Antigens" for consideration at PLOS Pathogens. As with all papers reviewed by the journal, your manuscript was reviewed by members of the editorial board and by several independent reviewers. The reviewers appreciated the attention to an important topic. Based on the reviews, we are likely to accept this manuscript for publication, providing that you modify the manuscript according to the review recommendations.

Please prepare and submit your revised manuscript within 30 days. If you anticipate any delay, please let us know the expected resubmission date by replying to this email.

When you are ready to resubmit, please upload the following:

[1] A letter containing a detailed list of your responses to all review comments, and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out

[2] Two versions of the revised manuscript: one with either highlights or tracked changes denoting where the text has been changed; the other a clean version (uploaded as the manuscript file).

Important additional instructions are given below your reviewer comments.

Thank you again for your submission to our journal. We hope that our editorial process has been constructive so far, and we welcome your feedback at any time. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Kimberly A. Kline

Pearls Editor

PLOS Pathogens

Christoph Tang

Section Editor

PLOS Pathogens

Kasturi Haldar

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Pathogens

orcid.org/0000-0001-5065-158X

Michael Malim

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Pathogens

orcid.org/0000-0002-7699-2064

***********************

Reviewer Comments (if any, and for reference):

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Part I - Summary

Please use this section to discuss strengths/weaknesses of study, novelty/significance, general execution and scholarship.

Reviewer #1: see my original review. The revised manuscript will be an important and much improved contribution to the literature

Reviewer #2: This revised manuscript describes broad spectrum protection from septicemic death following vaccination with an autotransporter protein of unknown function. The results are of interest in the long term effort, extending over many years, to develop an E. coli vaccine protective against extraintestinal infection. In that context, principled investigations of new antigens such as this are of interest regardless of experimental results. Both the successes and limitations of this work are worth careful consideration to guide and evaluate future work. Here, notable protection against septicemia is observed, while the effects of vaccination in the animal models of cystitis and intestinal colonization are relatively marginal. The results at these mucosal surfaces are relatively typical of vaccination strategies to date, despite the categorical change in antigen.

Why results vary depending upon the infecting strain evaluated is curious and remains unaddressed.

Revisions have improved the manuscript.

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

Part II – Major Issues: Key Experiments Required for Acceptance

Please use this section to detail the key new experiments or modifications of existing experiments that should be absolutely required to validate study conclusions.

Generally, there should be no more than 3 such required experiments or major modifications for a "Major Revision" recommendation. If more than 3 experiments are necessary to validate the study conclusions, then you are encouraged to recommend "Reject".

Reviewer #1: The authors have bent over backwards to answer all critiques of all three reviewers. The manuscript is greatly improved

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

Part III – Minor Issues: Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications

Please use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity.

Reviewer #1: none

Reviewer #2: 1) Lines 583-598: The data in this section is explicitly characterized by the subheading as demonstrating that GI tract colonization is reduced by immunization (this is also a conclusion in Discussion lines 632-4), yet none of the results for this are significant and the effect sizes are small. The data as presented does not support the stated conclusion. Immunization has a non-significant, minimal effect on GI colonization by ExPEC strains.

2) Lines 520-526: given the high mortality of the infection, are the bacterial levels measured here only from survivors? This should be stated more clearly in this subsection. Would not be surprised to see lower CFU in survivors and agree it is worth presenting these data as explicitly confirmatory of the survival data. A summary of the data in this subsection in which mortality and CFU analyses are related would be useful for readers.

3) Consider restatements of the following:

- Line 104-106: I don’t think this was the authors’ interest but the suggestion that a beta lactamase has fueled fluoroquinolone resistance sounds like a misunderstanding of beta-lactamase function, which would not be expected to directly affect fluoroquinolone susceptibility.

- Line 106-107: “…unlike the other ExPEC sequence type, ST131 has more extensive genome content and an expanded number of virulence genes…”. This is a misleading statement, as the results in the cited review come from a comparative genomic study to a specific set of antibiotic-resistant ExPEC sequence types. Unlike that comparison, the present study compares ST131 to the more common ExPEC ST73, 95, and 127. It may be that the identity and combination of virulence genes, not the number of them, is determinative for ST131 pathogenicity and transmission. This is not a critical point to the manuscript but is a detail worth clarifying.

- Is the seventh conclusion in lines 636-637 the same as the first conclusion in lines 627-628? This seems like the primary conclusion stated once more.

- Lines 645-646: “a vaccine against ExPEC… would contribute to the reduction of the recurrence rate of complicated UTI”. Singling out “complicated UTI”, which is a clinical subcategory of UTI, seems odd here. Why not just say it would be effective against UTI or recurrent UTI?

Reviewer #3: This revised manuscript is significantly improved. I have the following additional comments.

L106-7. This is incorrect. ST131 does not have more extensive genome content and an expanded number of virulence genes compared to other ExPEC.

L115-116. I am not aware that O antigen vaccines exhibit weak immunogenicity.

L585-587. I don’t understand this statement. Please reword for clarity. ‘In addition, in fecal E. coli strains carrying ExPEC-associated virulence factors, up to 93.5% of fecal isolates classified as InPEC additionally carried ExPEC virulence factors’

P583-598. The gut colonisation experiments are confusing. In the methods this is written as one experiment with 2 parts. However, in the results it is written as 2 independent experiments, and this is also depicted in Fig 7A and 7D. Please clarify.

Why were cfu’s only determined from feces at one timepoint? If more data is available, this should be shown, even if the differences are not significant between the groups.

L632-4. This statement is not consistent with the data. Please correct. ‘(v) that immunization with SinH-based antigens are effective at reducing the colonization of ExPEC ST131 in the GI tract of healthy or immunocompromised mice’

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Figure Files:

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

Data Requirements:

Please note that, as a condition of publication, PLOS' data policy requires that you make available all data used to draw the conclusions outlined in your manuscript. Data must be deposited in an appropriate repository, included within the body of the manuscript, or uploaded as supporting information. This includes all numerical values that were used to generate graphs, histograms etc.. For an example see here: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001908#s5.

Reproducibility:

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

References:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Decision Letter 2

Christoph Tang, Kimberly A Kline

26 Dec 2022

Dear Dr. Maresso,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'Broad Protective Vaccination against Systemic Escherichia coli with Autotransporter Antigens' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Pathogens.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Should you, your institution's press office or the journal office choose to press release your paper, you will automatically be opted out of early publication. We ask that you notify us now if you or your institution is planning to press release the article. All press must be co-ordinated with PLOS.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Pathogens.

Best regards,

Kimberly A. Kline

Pearls Editor

PLOS Pathogens

Christoph Tang

Section Editor

PLOS Pathogens

Kasturi Haldar

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Pathogens

orcid.org/0000-0001-5065-158X

Michael Malim

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Pathogens

orcid.org/0000-0002-7699-2064

***********************************************************

Reviewer Comments (if any, and for reference):

Acceptance letter

Christoph Tang, Kimberly A Kline

3 Feb 2023

Dear Dr. Maresso,

We are delighted to inform you that your manuscript, "Broad Protective Vaccination against Systemic Escherichia coli with Autotransporter Antigens," has been formally accepted for publication in PLOS Pathogens.

We have now passed your article onto the PLOS Production Department who will complete the rest of the pre-publication process. All authors will receive a confirmation email upon publication.

The corresponding author will soon be receiving a typeset proof for review, to ensure errors have not been introduced during production. Please review the PDF proof of your manuscript carefully, as this is the last chance to correct any scientific or type-setting errors. Please note that major changes, or those which affect the scientific understanding of the work, will likely cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript. Note: Proofs for Front Matter articles (Pearls, Reviews, Opinions, etc...) are generated on a different schedule and may not be made available as quickly.

Soon after your final files are uploaded, the early version of your manuscript, if you opted to have an early version of your article, will be published online. The date of the early version will be your article's publication date. The final article will be published to the same URL, and all versions of the paper will be accessible to readers.

Thank you again for supporting open-access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Pathogens.

Best regards,

Kasturi Haldar

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Pathogens

orcid.org/0000-0001-5065-158X

Michael Malim

Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Pathogens

orcid.org/0000-0002-7699-2064

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Determination of the putative GST-SinH-3 and GST-SinH-123 proteins by Mass Spectrometry per-band sequencing.

    Purified protein bands were resolved and digested in gel. The tryptic peptides were analyzed on nanospray LC-MS (liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry) system. The eluted peptides were directly electro-sprayed into mass spectrometer and analyzed by data-dependent acquisition (DDA). The coverage (the percentage of the protein sequence by identified peptides) of GST-SinH-3 was shown in (A), and the coverage of GST-SinH-123 was shown in (B).

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Responses to Reviewers - Final Version.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Responses to Reviewers - Final Version.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The alignment data between domains 1 and 2 of SinH and the domains of SinH from solved structures of invasin and intimin have been deposited at Dryad dataset repository with the name “Structure Prediction: SinH full length” and the digital object identifiers (DOI) (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.jm63xsjfx). The data package has been cited in the reference and methods section in the manuscript as “Chang J, Xing Y. Structure Prediction: SinH full length [dataset]. 2023 Jan 6 [cited 2023 Jan 22]. Dryad Digital Repository. Available from https://datadryad.org/resource/doi:10.5601/dryad.jm63xsjfx.” All other relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLOS Pathogens are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES