Route of Vaccine Administration Alters Antigen Trafficking but Not Innate or Adaptive Immunity

Summary: Although intramuscular (i.m.) administration is the most commonly used route for licensed vaccines, subcutaneous (s.c.) delivery is being explored for several new vaccines under development. Here, we use rhesus macaques, physiologically relevant to humans, to identify the anatomical compart...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sebastian Ols, Lifei Yang, Elizabeth A. Thompson, Pradeepa Pushparaj, Karen Tran, Frank Liang, Ang Lin, Bengt Eriksson, Gunilla B. Karlsson Hedestam, Richard T. Wyatt, Karin Loré
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2020-03-01
Series:Cell Reports
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211124720302928
id doaj-1d7a952cbf3f415099b8e5cefd3a2f70
record_format Article
spelling doaj-1d7a952cbf3f415099b8e5cefd3a2f702020-11-25T01:30:04ZengElsevierCell Reports2211-12472020-03-01301239643971.e7Route of Vaccine Administration Alters Antigen Trafficking but Not Innate or Adaptive ImmunitySebastian Ols0Lifei Yang1Elizabeth A. Thompson2Pradeepa Pushparaj3Karen Tran4Frank Liang5Ang Lin6Bengt Eriksson7Gunilla B. Karlsson Hedestam8Richard T. Wyatt9Karin Loré10Department of Medicine Solna, Division of Immunology and Allergy, Karolinska Institutet and University Hospital, 171 64 Stockholm, Sweden; Center for Molecular Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, SwedenIAVI Neutralizing Antibody Center, Department of Immunology and Microbiology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA 92037, USADepartment of Medicine Solna, Division of Immunology and Allergy, Karolinska Institutet and University Hospital, 171 64 Stockholm, Sweden; Center for Molecular Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, SwedenDepartment of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, SwedenIAVI Neutralizing Antibody Center, Department of Immunology and Microbiology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA 92037, USADepartment of Medicine Solna, Division of Immunology and Allergy, Karolinska Institutet and University Hospital, 171 64 Stockholm, Sweden; Center for Molecular Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, SwedenDepartment of Medicine Solna, Division of Immunology and Allergy, Karolinska Institutet and University Hospital, 171 64 Stockholm, Sweden; Center for Molecular Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, SwedenAstrid Fagraeus Laboratory, Comparative Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, SwedenDepartment of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, SwedenIAVI Neutralizing Antibody Center, Department of Immunology and Microbiology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA 92037, USADepartment of Medicine Solna, Division of Immunology and Allergy, Karolinska Institutet and University Hospital, 171 64 Stockholm, Sweden; Center for Molecular Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden; Corresponding authorSummary: Although intramuscular (i.m.) administration is the most commonly used route for licensed vaccines, subcutaneous (s.c.) delivery is being explored for several new vaccines under development. Here, we use rhesus macaques, physiologically relevant to humans, to identify the anatomical compartments and early immune processes engaged in the response to immunization via the two routes. Administration of fluorescently labeled HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein trimers displayed on liposomes enables visualization of targeted cells and tissues. Both s.c. and i.m. routes induce efficient immune cell infiltration, activation, and antigen uptake, functions that are tightly restricted to the skin and muscle, respectively. Antigen is also transported to different lymph nodes depending on route. However, these early differences do not translate into significant differences in the magnitude or quality of antigen-specific cellular and humoral responses over time. Thus, although some distinct immunological differences are noted, the choice of route may instead be motivated by clinical practicality. : Route of immunization, especially intramuscular versus subcutaneous administration, is often debated. Ols et al. use a rhesus macaque model to determine the tissues targeted by a nanoparticle vaccine administered by either route. The authors demonstrate that tissue dissemination is route dependent, but innate and adaptive immune responses develop comparably. Keywords: vaccination, intramuscular, subcutaneous, antigen transport, HIV envelope glycoprotein, dendritic cell, follicular dendritic cell, monocytes, lymph node, B cell folliclehttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211124720302928
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sebastian Ols
Lifei Yang
Elizabeth A. Thompson
Pradeepa Pushparaj
Karen Tran
Frank Liang
Ang Lin
Bengt Eriksson
Gunilla B. Karlsson Hedestam
Richard T. Wyatt
Karin Loré
spellingShingle Sebastian Ols
Lifei Yang
Elizabeth A. Thompson
Pradeepa Pushparaj
Karen Tran
Frank Liang
Ang Lin
Bengt Eriksson
Gunilla B. Karlsson Hedestam
Richard T. Wyatt
Karin Loré
Route of Vaccine Administration Alters Antigen Trafficking but Not Innate or Adaptive Immunity
Cell Reports
author_facet Sebastian Ols
Lifei Yang
Elizabeth A. Thompson
Pradeepa Pushparaj
Karen Tran
Frank Liang
Ang Lin
Bengt Eriksson
Gunilla B. Karlsson Hedestam
Richard T. Wyatt
Karin Loré
author_sort Sebastian Ols
title Route of Vaccine Administration Alters Antigen Trafficking but Not Innate or Adaptive Immunity
title_short Route of Vaccine Administration Alters Antigen Trafficking but Not Innate or Adaptive Immunity
title_full Route of Vaccine Administration Alters Antigen Trafficking but Not Innate or Adaptive Immunity
title_fullStr Route of Vaccine Administration Alters Antigen Trafficking but Not Innate or Adaptive Immunity
title_full_unstemmed Route of Vaccine Administration Alters Antigen Trafficking but Not Innate or Adaptive Immunity
title_sort route of vaccine administration alters antigen trafficking but not innate or adaptive immunity
publisher Elsevier
series Cell Reports
issn 2211-1247
publishDate 2020-03-01
description Summary: Although intramuscular (i.m.) administration is the most commonly used route for licensed vaccines, subcutaneous (s.c.) delivery is being explored for several new vaccines under development. Here, we use rhesus macaques, physiologically relevant to humans, to identify the anatomical compartments and early immune processes engaged in the response to immunization via the two routes. Administration of fluorescently labeled HIV-1 envelope glycoprotein trimers displayed on liposomes enables visualization of targeted cells and tissues. Both s.c. and i.m. routes induce efficient immune cell infiltration, activation, and antigen uptake, functions that are tightly restricted to the skin and muscle, respectively. Antigen is also transported to different lymph nodes depending on route. However, these early differences do not translate into significant differences in the magnitude or quality of antigen-specific cellular and humoral responses over time. Thus, although some distinct immunological differences are noted, the choice of route may instead be motivated by clinical practicality. : Route of immunization, especially intramuscular versus subcutaneous administration, is often debated. Ols et al. use a rhesus macaque model to determine the tissues targeted by a nanoparticle vaccine administered by either route. The authors demonstrate that tissue dissemination is route dependent, but innate and adaptive immune responses develop comparably. Keywords: vaccination, intramuscular, subcutaneous, antigen transport, HIV envelope glycoprotein, dendritic cell, follicular dendritic cell, monocytes, lymph node, B cell follicle
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211124720302928
work_keys_str_mv AT sebastianols routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
AT lifeiyang routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
AT elizabethathompson routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
AT pradeepapushparaj routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
AT karentran routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
AT frankliang routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
AT anglin routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
AT bengteriksson routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
AT gunillabkarlssonhedestam routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
AT richardtwyatt routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
AT karinlore routeofvaccineadministrationaltersantigentraffickingbutnotinnateoradaptiveimmunity
_version_ 1725093800245723136