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.archives.ouvertes.fr
from tel.archives.ouvertes.fr More from this publisher
27.06.2013 Views

tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013 (a) Efficiency of adjuvant physically linked with antigen Despite differences in antigen formulation, it is clear that antigen physically linked with its adjuvant generally gives very good results, as the two molecules are most likely sensed at the same time by APCs (Wille-Reece et al., 2005; Huleatt et al., 2007). This effect was highlighted in the work of Nierkens and colleagues in which they studied the adjuvant effect of CpG in a tumor model. B16-OVA tumor-bearing mice were treated with cryoablation, which provided an instant antigen source for DCs and this was combined with injections of CpG at various time points surrounding the antigen injection. They observed that the strongest adjuvant effect was obtained when CpG was administered concurrently with cryoablation (Nierkens et al., 2008). As cryoablation leads to the generation of soluble, as well as cell-associated antigen, they chose to study soluble Ovalbumin to mimic antigen quickly released after cryoablation. In these conditions, they demonstrated that the most efficient response correlated with a colocalization between soluble antigen and CpG in the same cellular compartment. This is also in accordance with studies demonstrating that antigen and danger signals have to be detected by the same cell to induce an optimal response (Kratky et al., 2011; Sporri and Reis e Sousa, 2005). Moreover, Blander and Medzhitov even suggest that antigen and danger signals have to be delivered into the same compartment (Blander and Medzhitov, 2006) in order to observe efficient priming, although these results remain controversial (Yates and Russell, 2005). Lastly, an additional advantage of adjuvant that is physically linked to its antigen is that the amount of adjuvant necessary is lower, as it is directly targeted to the effector APC. In conditions using lower adjuvant doses, less side effects of adjuvant were observed (Nicodemus and Berek, 2010). (b) Importance of non-hematopoietic cells In several studies, it has been observed that the most robust response was obtained when co- detection of adjuvant and antigen was made by the same APCs. However, in some cases, the non-hematopoietic cells were also demonstrated to be crucial for the adjuvant effect of a molecule. Longhi et al. studied the adjuvant effect of poly I:C on the CD4 + T cell response and they demonstrated in bone-marrow chimeras that type I IFN production by hematopoietic cells, as well as stromal cells, was required for the most effective T cell response (Longhi et al., 2009). 166

tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013 (c) Similar pleiotropic roles of type I IFN on macrophages depending on the timing of application In our studies, we have focused on adjuvant and type I IFN action on DCs. The same IFN- mediated differential effects were also observed for other cell types. In a model of macrophage infection by Leishmania major, it was demonstrated that type I IFN could also have conflicting effects on macrophage activity and parasite clearance (Mattner et al., 2000). In this model, when macrophages detect parasite and IFN at the same time, macrophages are activated and the expression of the inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) is increased, leading to Leishmania killing. If IFN are detected later than Leishmania, it also favors parasite clearance. However, if macrophages detect IFN prior to Leishmania exposure, this activation inhibits the expression of iNOS and, in turn, restricts Leishmania killing (Figure 55). Since IFN are produced directly by macrophages, the authors proposed a model in which this mechanism acts as a type of negative feedback loop, providing for the desensitization of neighbouring macrophages if they had not yet been infected. Figure 55. Opposite effects of type I IFN on macrophage activity depending on the sequence of the stimuli. Leishmania major (in red) and type I IFN are administered in 3 different sequences. iNOS, inducible nitric oxide synthase. Figure from Bogdan et al., 2004. C. Comparison with other TLR ligands Previous studies have already pointed out that the timing of adjuvant delivery should be carefully determined. A deeper understanding of the mechanisms of adjuvant action is required to both improve vaccination and further understand seemingly conflicting results. Stimulation with TLR ligands has been shown to enhance T cell priming (Schulz et al., 2005). However in certain contexts, the opposite effects can be observed (Wilson et al., 2006). For Page 167 of 256

tel-00827710, version 1 - 29 May 2013<br />

(a) Efficiency of adjuvant physically linked with antigen<br />

Despite differences in antigen formulation, it is clear that antigen physically linked with its<br />

adjuvant generally gives very good results, as the two molecules are most likely sensed at the<br />

same time by APCs (Wille-Reece <strong>et</strong> al., 2005; Huleatt <strong>et</strong> al., 2007). This effect was<br />

highlighted in the work of Nierkens and colleagues in which they studied the adjuvant effect<br />

of CpG in a tumor mo<strong>de</strong>l. B16-OVA tumor-bearing mice were treated with cryoablation,<br />

which provi<strong>de</strong>d an instant antigen source for DCs and this was combined with injections of<br />

CpG at various time points surrounding the antigen injection. They observed that the<br />

strongest adjuvant effect was obtained when CpG was administered concurrently with<br />

cryoablation (Nierkens <strong>et</strong> al., 2008). As cryoablation leads to the generation of soluble, as<br />

well as cell-associated antigen, they chose to study soluble Ovalbumin to mimic antigen<br />

quickly released after cryoablation. In these conditions, they <strong>de</strong>monstrated that the most<br />

efficient response correlated with a colocalization b<strong>et</strong>ween soluble antigen and CpG in the<br />

same cellular compartment. This is also in accordance with studies <strong>de</strong>monstrating that antigen<br />

and danger signals have to be d<strong>et</strong>ected by the same cell to induce an optimal response (Kratky<br />

<strong>et</strong> al., 2011; Sporri and Reis e Sousa, 2005). Moreover, Blan<strong>de</strong>r and Medzhitov even suggest<br />

that antigen and danger signals have to be <strong>de</strong>livered into the same compartment (Blan<strong>de</strong>r and<br />

Medzhitov, 2006) in or<strong>de</strong>r to observe efficient priming, although these results remain<br />

controversial (Yates and Russell, 2005).<br />

Lastly, an additional advantage of adjuvant that is physically linked to its antigen is that the<br />

amount of adjuvant necessary is lower, as it is directly targ<strong>et</strong>ed to the effector APC. In<br />

conditions using lower adjuvant doses, less si<strong>de</strong> effects of adjuvant were observed<br />

(Nico<strong>de</strong>mus and Berek, 2010).<br />

(b) Importance of non-hematopoi<strong>et</strong>ic cells<br />

In several studies, it has been observed that the most robust response was obtained when co-<br />

d<strong>et</strong>ection of adjuvant and antigen was ma<strong>de</strong> by the same APCs. However, in some cases, the<br />

non-hematopoi<strong>et</strong>ic cells were also <strong>de</strong>monstrated to be crucial for the adjuvant effect of a<br />

molecule. Longhi <strong>et</strong> al. studied the adjuvant effect of poly I:C on the CD4 + T cell response<br />

and they <strong>de</strong>monstrated in bone-marrow chimeras that type I IFN production by hematopoi<strong>et</strong>ic<br />

cells, as well as stromal cells, was required for the most effective T cell response (Longhi <strong>et</strong><br />

al., 2009).<br />

166

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!