An Overview of Vaccine Adjuvants: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

Vaccinations are one of the most important preventive tools against infectious diseases. Over time, many different types of vaccines have been developed concerning the antigen component. Adjuvants are essential elements that increase the efficacy of vaccination practises through many different actions, especially acting as carriers, depots, and stimulators of immune responses. For many years, few adjuvants have been included in vaccines, with aluminium salts being the most commonly used adjuvant. However, recent research has focused its attention on many different new compounds with effective adjuvant properties and improved safety. Modern technologies such as nanotechnologies and molecular biology have forcefully entered the production processes of both antigen and adjuvant components, thereby improving vaccine efficacy. Microparticles, emulsions, and immune stimulators are currently in the spotlight for their huge potential in vaccine production. Although studies have reported some potential side effects of vaccine adjuvants such as the recently recognised ASIA syndrome, the huge worth of vaccines remains unquestionable. Indeed, the recent COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of vaccines, especially in regard to managing future potential pandemics. In this field, research into adjuvants could play a leading role in the production of increasingly effective vaccines.

Dose-response relationships in aluminium toxicity in humans

INTRODUCTION

Aluminium exposure is associated with bone disease (an elevated bone content of aluminium and reduced bone formation on bone biopsy) and neurotoxicity (features of altered brain functions and/or typical spike and slow wave waveforms on electroencephalogram) in patients with elevated blood aluminium concentrations.

OBJECTIVES

To critically analyse the literature to determine the dose-toxicity relationships between aluminium exposure and related bone disease and aluminium neurotoxicity.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature with collation and analysis of individual data of human cases of aluminium exposure was conducted between 1 January 1966 and 30 December 2020. Embase, MEDLINE (OVID MEDLINE), PubMed and TOXNET were searched with the following strategies: "Aluminium AND toxicity OR aluminium AND poisoning OR aluminium AND dialysis OR aluminium AND chronic renal failure OR aluminium AND intravenous" limited to "(human)". Inclusion criteria required individual data relating to aluminium exposure in humans. Papers in which features of aluminium toxicity and analytical confirmation of aluminium exposure could not be determined in individual patients were excluded.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven papers were identified, which included data on 179 individuals exposed to aluminium. The sources of aluminium exposure (median duration of exposure) were: dialysis fluid (48 months) in 110 cases; oral aluminium hydroxide (20 months) in 20 cases; plasma exchange (2 months) in 16 cases; infant formula feed (minimal duration of 2 weeks) in 14 cases; intravesical exposures (2 days) in 13 oncology patients and potable water exposure in six cases.

EXPOSURE TO DIALYSIS FLUID

Of the 110 patients exposed to dialysis fluid, 99 were adults and 11 children, who were analysed separated. Of the adults, 50 with aluminium neurotoxicity had a median aluminium concentration of 467 µg/L (IQR 230 - 752), 28 with aluminium bone disease had a median aluminium concentration of 142 µg/L (IQR 46-309) and 21 with asymptomatic aluminium overload had a median aluminium concentration of 35 µg/L (IQR 26-51). Median aluminium concentrations were significantly greater in patients with aluminium neurotoxicity compared to those with aluminium bone disease (p < 0.0001) or asymptomatic aluminium overload (p < 0.0001).

ORAL ALUMINIUM HYDROXIDE

Of the 20 cases, 11 were adults and nine were children. Of the 11 adults, eight with aluminium neurotoxicity had a median aluminium concentration of 682 µg/L (IQR 438-770) and three with aluminium bone disease had a median aluminium concentration of 100 µg/L (IQR 62-138) (p = 0.007). Of the nine children, five had aluminium neurotoxicity with a median aluminium concentration of 335 µg/L (IQR 229-601), one had aluminium bone disease and an aluminium concentration of 1030 µg/L and three had asymptomatic aluminium overload with a median aluminium concentration 98 µg/L (IQR 65-365).

PLASMA EXCHANGE

Three patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease developed aluminium bone disease during plasma exchange; their median blood or serum aluminium concentration was 73 µg/L (IQR 59-81). Asymptomatic aluminium overload was reported in six patients receiving outpatient plasma exchange who had a median creatinine clearance of 71 mL/min (IQR 40-106) and a median aluminium concentration of 49 µg/L (IQR 34-116), and in seven intensive care patients with acute kidney injury whose median aluminium concentration was 30 µg/L (IQR 17-35); (p = 0.02).

INTRAVESICAL EXPOSURES

All 13 intravesical exposures developed aluminium neurotoxicity and had a median aluminium concentration of 157 µg/L (IQR 45-276).

POTABLE WATER

All six patients developed aluminium bone disease and their median blood aluminium concentration was 17 µg/L (IQR 13-100).

CONCLUSIONS

Toxic aluminium exposure can result in neurotoxicity and bone disease, especially in patients with chronic kidney disease. Adults with stage 5 chronic kidney disease chronically exposed to aluminium developed aluminium neurotoxicity at higher concentrations than those with aluminium bone disease or with asymptomatic aluminium overload. Aluminium neurotoxicity was reported at lower concentrations following acute exposure to intravesical aluminium. Extrapolating the relevance of these concentrations to the general population is problematic in that the data were derived from oncology patients, however, the possibility that aluminium neurotoxicity may occur at concentrations lower that those reported historically in patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease cannot be excluded.

Physiology-based toxicokinetic modelling of aluminium in rat and man

A sufficient quantitative understanding of aluminium (Al) toxicokinetics (TK) in man is still lacking, although highly desirable for risk assessment of Al exposure. Baseline exposure and the risk of contamination severely limit the feasibility of TK studies administering the naturally occurring isotope 27Al, both in animals and man. These limitations are absent in studies with 26Al as a tracer, but tissue data are limited to animal studies. A TK model capable of inter-species translation to make valid predictions of Al levels in humans-especially in toxicological relevant tissues like bone and brain-is urgently needed. Here, we present: (i) a curated dataset which comprises all eligible studies with single doses of 26Al tracer administered as citrate or chloride salts orally and/or intravenously to rats and humans, including ultra-long-term kinetic profiles for plasma, blood, liver, spleen, muscle, bone, brain, kidney, and urine up to 150 weeks; and (ii) the development of a physiology-based (PB) model for Al TK after intravenous and oral administration of aqueous Al citrate and Al chloride solutions in rats and humans. Based on the comprehensive curated 26Al dataset, we estimated substance-dependent parameters within a non-linear mixed-effect modelling context. The model fitted the heterogeneous 26Al data very well and was successfully validated against datasets in rats and humans. The presented PBTK model for Al, based on the most extensive and diverse dataset of Al exposure to date, constitutes a major advancement in the field, thereby paving the way towards a more quantitative risk assessment in humans.

Derivation of Biomonitoring Equivalents for aluminium for the interpretation of population-level biomonitoring data

Aluminium is widely used in many consumer products, however the primary source of aluminium exposure to the Canadian general population is through food. Aluminium can cause neurotoxicity and reproductive toxicity at elevated exposure levels. Health-based exposure guidance values have been established for oral exposure to aluminium, including a Minimal Risk Level (MRL) by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), a Provincial Tolerable Weekly Intake (PTWI) by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and a Tolerable Weekly Intake (TWI) by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Aluminium concentration in blood and urine can be used as a tool for exposure characterization in a population. A pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed based on human dosing data to derive blood Biomonitoring Equivalents (BEs), whereas a mass balance approach was used to derive urine BEs for the above guidance values. The BEs for blood for daily intake consistent with the MRL, PTWI and TWI were 18, 16 and 8 μg/L, respectively. BEs for urine for the same guidance values were 137, 123 and 57 μg/L, respectively. The derived BEs may be useful in interpreting population-level biomonitoring data in a health risk context and thereby screening and prioritizing substances for human health risk assessment and risk management.

Aluminium in human sweat

It is of burgeoning importance that the human body burden of aluminium is understood and is measured. There are surprisingly few data to describe human excretion of systemic aluminium and almost no reliable data which relate to aluminium in sweat. We have measured the aluminium content of sweat in 20 healthy volunteers following mild exercise. The concentration of aluminium ranged from 329 to 5329μg/L. These data equate to a daily excretion of between 234 and 7192μg aluminium and they strongly suggest that perspiration is the major route of excretion of systemic aluminium in humans.

Human exposure to aluminium

Human activities have circumvented the efficient geochemical cycling of aluminium within the lithosphere and therewith opened a door, which was previously only ajar, onto the biotic cycle to instigate and promote the accumulation of aluminium in biota and especially humans. Neither these relatively recent activities nor the entry of aluminium into the living cycle are showing any signs of abating and it is thus now imperative that we understand as fully as possible how humans are exposed to aluminium and the future consequences of a burgeoning exposure and body burden. The aluminium age is upon us and there is now an urgent need to understand how to live safely and effectively with aluminium.