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 2) In which circumstances does splenocyte engulfment occur? Figure 51. Intradermal versus intravenous injections: conditions of immunization. Differences between are highlighted in yellow: formation (i.d.) or absence (i.v.) of an antigen depot (1), damage associated with injection (i.d.) or not (i.v.) (2), different DC subsets involved (3), different levels of danger depending on where antigen is delivered (4). 146
tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013 (a) Depot formation after i.d. immunization When we injected bioluminescent splenocytes in vivo, we observed that they formed an antigen depot afer i.d. immunization at the site of injection, that persisted for several days (Figure 33). After i.v. immunization, such a depot was not observed. Previous studies have already demonstrated that the presence of a depot facilitates the development of a better immune response. Moreover, the antigen depot is a well-known characteristic of empirically developed adjuvants such as oil-in-water emulsions or aluminum salts, which may partially explain their effectiveness (Coffman et al., 2010). Finally proteins formulated with this kind of adjuvant or a protein anchored to a cell membrane are not dramatically different – a protein antigen in combination with lipids in both cases – with either cellular membrane or adjuvant, allowing for the formation of a depot. This depot formation and resulting antigen persistence could explain why a more robust cross-priming is observed upon i.d. immunization (Figure 51, (1)). (b) Tissue damage induced after i.d. immunization Inflammation can be induced at the site of injection (Figure 51, (2)): however, i.v. and i.d. immunizations would probably not trigger the same tissue damage and inflammation. As it is being delivered directly to the bloodstream, an intravenous injection should not induce as much inflammation. This is completely different for an intradermal immunization, in which the full volume of injection is pushed into an organized tissue, which is characterized by its structural integrity. Injection will lead to damage of the local tissues and capillaries, including the necrotic cell death of neighbouring cells. This type of damage would induce the release of danger signals, activation of immune cells within the skin and the initiation of a local inflammatory response. In fact, we can observe the skin visibly distending during i.d. injection. Interestingly adjuvants previously described as favoring the formation of a depot were recently “re-discovered”, as they were thought to maybe play a role also in inflammasome activation or induction of necrosis (Coffman et al., 2010). Because of these points, the i.d. route can be considered as a more inflammatory than i.v. injection. This observation can also be confirmed by the results obtained in DNA vaccination trials. Although exciting data were obtained in mouse models of DNA vaccination, the results in humans were disappointing. One justification of this inconsistency was the volume of injection used (Rice et al., 2008). The volume used in mice was relatively high probably allowing for increased transfection of host cells and, potentially, more damage at the site of infection leading to increased inflammatory responses, as discussed here. Unfortunately, the proportional volume was far too large to be used in humans and was reduced for clinical Page 147 of 256
- 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 and 114: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 115 and 116: 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: 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
- Page 165 and 166: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 167 and 168: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 169 and 170: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 171 and 172: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 173 and 174: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 175 and 176: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 177 and 178: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 179 and 180: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 181 and 182: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 183 and 184: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 185 and 186: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 187 and 188: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 189 and 190: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 191 and 192: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 193 and 194: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
- Page 195 and 196: tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 20
tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013<br />
2) In which circumstances does splenocyte engulfment occur?<br />
Figure 51. Intra<strong>de</strong>rmal versus intravenous injections: conditions of immunization. Differences<br />
b<strong>et</strong>ween are highlighted in yellow: formation (i.d.) or absence (i.v.) of an antigen <strong>de</strong>pot (1), damage<br />
associated with injection (i.d.) or not (i.v.) (2), different DC subs<strong>et</strong>s involved (3), different levels of<br />
danger <strong>de</strong>pending on where antigen is <strong>de</strong>livered (4).<br />
146