Voie d'immunisation et séquence d'administration de l ... - TEL
Voie d'immunisation et séquence d'administration de l ... - TEL Voie d'immunisation et séquence d'administration de l ... - TEL
tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013 114
tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013 In instances where microbial associated molecular patterns are absent (e.g., cell-associated antigen), it is common practice to formulate the vaccine with an adjuvant. While adjuvants have been shown to be useful for enhancing the response to antigen, it has also been observed that DC maturation prior to immunization can have the opposite effect – the inhibition of subsequent T cell priming (Wilson et al., 2006). Following from our results indicating delayed cross-presentation after i.d. immunization (Figure 32), we predicted that the optimal timing of adjuvant delivery will depend on the route of immunization. I. THE OPTIMAL TIMING FOR ADJUVANT DELIVERY IS DEPENDENT ON THE ROUTE OF IMMUNIZATION Our prediction was that the optimal timing for adjuvant delivery may be earlier for i.v. immunization as compared to i.d. immunization, due to the different kinetic of cross- presentation observed in Figure 32. To test this, mice were again immunized with K bm1 mOva splenocytes i.d. or i.v. Poly I:C was used as an adjuvant and administered at different time points relative to immunization with antigen. The absolute number of antigen-specific T cells was determined at the respective time of peak response (day 7 for i.v. and day 9 for i.d. immunization). When poly I:C was injected one day prior, or the day of i.v. immunization with the K bm1 mOva cells, T cell priming was greatly reduced (Figure 37A). Strikingly, injection of poly I:C one day after i.v. immunization enhanced T cell priming. For the i.d. route, poly I:C injection one day prior to, the day of, or even one day after immunization, resulted in the inhibition of T cell priming (Figure 37B). It was necessary to wait until three days post-immunization to inject poly I:C in order to observe an enhancement of T cell priming (Figure 37B). Following from the results presented in Figure 32, we suggest that antigen capture has to occur prior to adjuvant detection by DCs and that one day of antigen capture is sufficient to permit T cell priming after i.v. immunization, but that additional time is required for antigen capture after i.d. immunization. This hypothesis could explain why delayed adjuvant delivery is optimal for i.d. immunization. Page 115 of 256
- Page 63 and 64: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 65 and 66: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 67 and 68: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 69 and 70: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 71 and 72: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 73 and 74: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 75 and 76: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 77 and 78: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 79 and 80: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 81 and 82: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 83 and 84: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 85 and 86: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 87 and 88: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 89 and 90: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 91 and 92: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 93 and 94: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 95 and 96: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 97 and 98: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 99 and 100: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 101 and 102: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 103 and 104: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 105 and 106: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 107 and 108: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 109 and 110: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 111 and 112: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 113: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 117 and 118: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 119 and 120: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 121 and 122: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 123 and 124: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 125 and 126: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 127 and 128: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 129 and 130: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 131 and 132: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 133 and 134: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 135 and 136: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 137 and 138: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 139 and 140: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 141 and 142: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 143 and 144: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 145 and 146: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 147 and 148: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 149 and 150: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 151 and 152: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 153 and 154: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 155 and 156: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 157 and 158: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 159 and 160: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 161 and 162: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 163 and 164: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013<br />
In instances where microbial associated molecular patterns are absent (e.g., cell-associated<br />
antigen), it is common practice to formulate the vaccine with an adjuvant. While adjuvants<br />
have been shown to be useful for enhancing the response to antigen, it has also been observed<br />
that DC maturation prior to immunization can have the opposite effect – the inhibition of<br />
subsequent T cell priming (Wilson <strong>et</strong> al., 2006). Following from our results indicating<br />
<strong>de</strong>layed cross-presentation after i.d. immunization (Figure 32), we predicted that the optimal<br />
timing of adjuvant <strong>de</strong>livery will <strong>de</strong>pend on the route of immunization.<br />
I. THE OPTIMAL TIMING FOR ADJUVANT DELIVERY IS<br />
DEPENDENT ON THE ROUTE OF IMMUNIZATION<br />
Our prediction was that the optimal timing for adjuvant <strong>de</strong>livery may be earlier for i.v.<br />
immunization as compared to i.d. immunization, due to the different kin<strong>et</strong>ic of cross-<br />
presentation observed in Figure 32. To test this, mice were again immunized with K bm1 mOva<br />
splenocytes i.d. or i.v. Poly I:C was used as an adjuvant and administered at different time<br />
points relative to immunization with antigen. The absolute number of antigen-specific T cells<br />
was d<strong>et</strong>ermined at the respective time of peak response (day 7 for i.v. and day 9 for i.d.<br />
immunization). When poly I:C was injected one day prior, or the day of i.v. immunization<br />
with the K bm1 mOva cells, T cell priming was greatly reduced (Figure 37A). Strikingly,<br />
injection of poly I:C one day after i.v. immunization enhanced T cell priming. For the i.d.<br />
route, poly I:C injection one day prior to, the day of, or even one day after immunization,<br />
resulted in the inhibition of T cell priming (Figure 37B). It was necessary to wait until three<br />
days post-immunization to inject poly I:C in or<strong>de</strong>r to observe an enhancement of T cell<br />
priming (Figure 37B). Following from the results presented in Figure 32, we suggest that<br />
antigen capture has to occur prior to adjuvant d<strong>et</strong>ection by DCs and that one day of antigen<br />
capture is sufficient to permit T cell priming after i.v. immunization, but that additional time<br />
is required for antigen capture after i.d. immunization. This hypothesis could explain why<br />
<strong>de</strong>layed adjuvant <strong>de</strong>livery is optimal for i.d. immunization.<br />
Page 115 of 256