DNA immunization: present and future

The biology and development of vaccines for bovine alphaherpesvirus 1

Bovine alphaherpesvirus type 1 (BoAHV-1) infections lead to compromised herd health and significantly reduced productivity of affected cattle. While BoAHV-1 may cause rhinotracheitis, conjunctivitis, genital infections, and abortions, respiratory tract infections constitute the predominant clinical disease. Immune suppression induced by BoAHV-1 may contribute to co-infections initiating the bovine respiratory disease complex. In this review, the emphasis is to recapitulate the biology and the vaccine technologies currently in use and in development for BoAHV-1, and to discuss the major limitations. Studies on the life cycle and host interactions of BoAHV-1 have resulted in the identification of virulence factors. While several vaccine types, such as vectored vaccines and subunit vaccines, are under investigation, modified live and inactivated BoAHV-1 vaccines are still most frequently used in most areas of the world, whereas attenuated and inactivated marker vaccines are in use in Europe. The knowledge gained from studies on the biology of BoAHV-1 can form a basis for the rational design of future vaccines.

Heterologous DNA prime-protein boost immunization with RecA and FliD offers cross-clade protection against leptospiral infection

The emergence of >300 serovars of Leptospira confounded the use of generalized bacterin, the whole cell lysate, as vaccines to control leptospirosis. Because of substantial genetic and geographic heterogeneity among circulating serovars, one vaccine strain per serovar cannot be efficacious against all the serovars. We have performed heterologous DNA prime-protein boost vaccination challenge studies in hamsters using in vivo expressed, leptospiral recombinase A (RecA) and flagellar hook associated protein (FliD). We prepared the monovalent recombinant protein, plasmid DNA, and DNA prime protein boost adjuvant vaccines. The whole cell bacterin served as a control. Our data show that (i) RecA and FliD have multiple immunogenic B and T-cell epitopes with highly conserved domains among most prevalent pathogenic Leptospira spp., (ii) humoral and cell mediated immune responses were induced remarkably, (iii) provides significant protection against homologous (Autumnalis strain N2) and cross-clade heterologous (Canicola strain PAI-1) challenge infection for the heterologous prime-protein boost (∼91–100%) and, the DNA vaccine (∼75–83%). Recombinant protein vaccine shows only partial protection (∼58–66%), (iv) RecA prime-protein boost vaccine shows sterilizing immunity, with heterologous protection. This RecA/FliD prime-protein boost strategy holds potential for vaccination against animal leptospirosis and for a better control of zoonotic transmission.

Immunization against bovine herpesvirus-1 infection. Preliminary tests in calves with a DNA vaccine

A bovine herpesvirus-1 (BHV-1) vaccine expressing glycoprotein D, the form with the transmembrane anchor removed, was evaluated for inducing immunity in calves. The plasmid encoding gD of BHV-1 was injected three times to nine calves, using three animals for each of the following routes: intramuscularly (i.m.), intradermally (i.d.), or intranasally (i.n.). Three additional calves were given the plasmid vector only and served as unvaccinated controls. When calves were subjected to challenge infection with BHV-1, all vaccinated calves as well as the controls developed a typical severe form of infectious bovine rhinotracheitis. However, compared to the controls, the vaccinated calves showed earlier clearance of challenge virus. Moreover, the calves given the vaccine i.m. developed neutralizing antibody to BHV-1 between 21 and 42 days following the first injection of vaccine, whereas in calves vaccinated either i.d. or i.n., as well as the controls, antibody first appeared in their sera 14 days post-challenge infection.

DNA vaccination in the avian

Inoculation of naked DNA represents a novel approach to vaccine and immune therapeutic development. DNA vaccines or genetic immunization offers several advantages over the conventional vaccines for specific immune activation. Although a large number of vaccines have been made and are being used in the poultry industry, there have been no major advances in vaccine technology for this animal industry sector for decades. The potential advantages of DNA vaccines, such as over coming maternal immunity, in ovo delivery and absence of requirement for a cold-chain, combined with immunological efficacy make this new vaccine technology very attractive for the poultry industry. This review lists all of the published reports of experimental DNA vaccines developed for use in poultry and focuses on the trends, potentials and remaining barriers in the development of this new revolution in poultry vaccinology.

Genetic immunization: what's in a name?

The concept and demonstration of genetic immunization (GI) was first introduced in 1992. At the time it appeared to be a revolutionary new approach in vaccinology. Since then, genetic immunization has been applied with much success in a wide variety of model and natural systems. It has also been used in several human clinical trials. Currently there is a general impression that genetic immunization has limitations inhibiting its broad use. The technique is thought to be poor at antibody production and more importantly not to work well in primates and humans (simian barrier). However, recent reports addressing these issues (poor antibody production and the simian barrier) showed improvements of GI to produce protective immune responses in humans. We propose that the apparent limitations of gene vaccines may arise from not using the technologies' potential to manipulate the immune system. This dearth of imaginative use is manifested in the tendency by some to term the technique DNA immunization. The apparent limitations of DNA vaccines may not be limitations for gene vaccines.

Vaccines and vaccinations. The strategic issues

The rapid proliferation of companion animal vaccines, advances in diagnostic and vaccine technology, and concerns over vaccine safety are clearly among the most important issues practicing veterinarians face as we enter the 21st century. Although many would argue that these are already issues, the future promises to be especially challenging as the vaccines we currently use and the protocols we recommend undergo unprecedented review.