Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T08:05:41.469Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sequential infection or immunization of ferrets with a series of influenza A (H3N2) strains (Report to the Medical Research Council's Sub-Committee on Influenza Vaccines (CDVIP/IV))

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

C. W. Potter ,
R. Jennings ,
M. J. Ali ,
J. M. Wood ,
U. Dunleavy  and
D. A. J. Tyrrell
C. W. Potter*
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield S10 2RX
R. Jennings
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield S10 2RX
M. J. Ali
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield S10 2RX
J. M. Wood
Affiliation:
Division of Viral Products, National Institute for Biological Standardization and Control, Holly Hill, Hampstead, London NW3 6RB
U. Dunleavy
Affiliation:
Division of Viral Products, National Institute for Biological Standardization and Control, Holly Hill, Hampstead, London NW3 6RB
D. A. J. Tyrrell
Affiliation:
M.R.C. Common Cold Unit, Harvard Hospital, Coombe Road, Salisbury SP2 8BW
*
*Correspondence should be addressed to Professor C. W. Potter at the above address.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Previous studies of boys at Christ's Hospital school have indicated that annual immunization with influenza virus vaccines did not significantly reduce the total incidence of influenza infection compared to unimmunized subjects. In view of the implications of this result, a similar study was conducted in ferrets to clarify these findings. Groups of ferrets were immunized or infected with a series of influenza A (H3N2) viruses over an 18-month period, and the immunity to subsequent live virus challenge was measured after each virus or vaccine exposure. The results indicated that live virus infection gave a more solid immunity than immunization with inactivated vaccine; and the serum haemagglutination-inhibiting antibody response was greater following immunization than following infection. In addition, differences in immunity could not be explained by measurements of cross-reacting and specific antibody, since the incidence of these antibodies was similar in both infected and immunized animals. The results do not suggest an explanation for the different levels of immunity induced following infection or immunization or the results obtained from the Christ's Hospital study. However, the relative contribution of various immune responses to virus or virus antigen is discussed, and it is suggested that the difference in immunity may lie in the ability of live virus infection to stimulate local antibody.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 99 , Issue 2 , October 1987 , pp. 501 - 515
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

References

REFERENCES

Beake, A. S., Hobson, D., Reed, S. E. & Tyrrell, D. A. J. (1968). A comparison of live and killed influenza virus vaccines. Lancet ii, 418–420.Google Scholar
Couch, R. B., Kasel, J. A., Six, H. G., Cate, T. R. & Zanradnik, J. M. (1984). Immnunological reactions and resistance to infection with influenza virus. In Molecular Virology and Epidemiology of Influenza (ed. Stuart-Harris, C. H. & Potter, C. W.), pp. 119–152. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ennis, F. A., Rook, A. A., Yi-Haa, Q., Schild, G. C., Riley, D., Pratt, R. & Potter, C. W. (1981). HLA restricted virus specific cytotoxic T-lymphocyte responses to live and inactivated influenza vaccines. Lancet i, 887–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fazekas de, St Groth S., Witchell, J. & Lafferty, K. J. (1958). An improved assay for neutralizing antibodies against influenza viruses. Journal of Hygiene 56, 415–420.Google Scholar
Freestone, D. S., Hamilton-Smith, S., Schild, G. C., Buckland, R., Chinn, S. & Tyrrell, D. A. J. (1972). Antibody response and resistance to challenge in volunteers vaccinated with live, attentuated, detergent-split and oil-adjuvant A2/Hong Kong/08 (H3N2) influenza vaccines. Journal of Hygiene 44, 227–230.Google Scholar
Greenberg, S. B., Couch, R. B. & Kasel, J. A. (1974). An outbreak of influenza A variant in a closed population: the effect of homologous and heterologous antibody on infection and illness. American Journal of Epidemiology 100, 209–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, P. A., Ennis, F. A., Gaerlan, P. F., Denhon, L. J., Denning, C. R. & Schiffman, D. A. (1977). A controlled double-blind comparison of reaetogenieity, and protective efficacy of whole-virus and split-product influenza vaccines in children. Journal of Infectious Diseases 136, 623–632.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hobson, D. (1972). Assessment of the efficacy of influenza vaccines against natural challenge. In Development in Biological Standardisation (ed. Perkins, F. T., Regamoy, R. H. & Hennessey, W.). Basal: Karger.Google Scholar
Hobson, D., Beare, A. S. & Ward-Gardner, A. (1972). Haemagglutination-inhibiting serum antibody titres as an index of the response of volunteers to intra-nasal infection with live attentuated strains of influenza virus. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Live Influenza Vaccines, Yugoslav Academy of Arts and Science 73.Google Scholar
Hoskins, T. W., Davies, J. R., Smith, A. J., Miller, C. L. & Allchin, A. (1979). Assessment of inactivated influenza A vaccine after three outbreaks of influenza A at Christ's Hospital. Lancet i, 33–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, R., Potter, C. W. & McLaren, C. (1974). Effect of preinfection and preimmunization on the serum antibody response to subsequent immunization with hctcrotypio influenza vaccinca. Journal of Immunology 113, 1834–1843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, R., Potter, C. W. & Massey, P. M. O. (1981). Responses of volunteers to inactivated influenza virus vaccines. Journal of Hygiene 86, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lowry, D. H., Rosebrough, N. J., Farr, A. L. & Randall, R. J. (1951). Protein measurements with the folin phenol rengent. Journal of Biological Chemistry 193, 265–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMichael, A. J., Gotch, F. M., Dongworth, D. W., Clark, A. & Potter, C. W. (1983). Declining T-cell immunity to influenza, 1977–1982. Lancet ii, 702–704.Google Scholar
Miles, R., Potter, C. W., Clark, A. & Jennings, R. (1982). A comparative study of the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of two inactivated influenza vaccines in children. Journal of Biological Standardization 10, 59–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mostow, S. R., Schoenbaum, S. C., Dowdle, W. R., Coleman, M. T. & Kaye, H. S. (1969). Studies with inactivated influenza vaccines purified by zonal centrifugation. I. Adverse reactions and serological responses. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 44, 525–530.Google Scholar
Murphy, B. R., Kasel, J. A. & Chanock, R. M. (1972). Association of serum antineuraminidase antibody with resistance to influenza in man. New England Journal of Medicine 286, 1329–1332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicholson, K. G., Tyrrell, D. A. J., Harrison, P., Potter, C. W., Jennings, R., Clark, A., Schild, G. C., Wood, J. M., Yetts, R., Seagrott, V., Higgins, A. & Anderson, S. G. (1979). Clinical studies of monovalent inactivated whole virus and subunit A/USSR/77 (H1N1) vaccine: Berological response and clinical reactions. Journal of Biological Standardization 7, 123–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oxford, J. S., Haaheim, L. R., Slepushkin, A., Werner, J., Kuwert, E. & Schild, G. C. (1981). Strain specificity of serum antibody to the haemagglutinin of influenza A (H3N2) viruses in children following immunization or natural infection. Journal of Hygiene 86, 17–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oxford, J. S., Yetts, R. & Schild, G. C. (1982). Quantitative analysis of the specificity of postimmunizing antibodies to influenza B virus using single radial haemolysis. Journal of Hygiene 88, 325–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, C. W. (1982). Inactivated influenza virus vaccines. In Basic and Applied Influenza Research (ed. Beare, A. S.). Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Potter, C. W., Jennings, R., McLaren, C. & Clark, A. (1975). Immunity following intranasal administration of an inactivated freeze-dried A/England/12/72 vaccine. Archives of Virology 48, 307–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, C. W., Jennings, R., Mclaren, C. & Marine, W. M. (1973). The potentiation of antibody response to inactivated A2/Hong Kong vaccines by previous heterotypic virus infection. Microbios 8, 101–110.Google ScholarPubMed
Potter, C. W. & Oxford, J. S. (1977). Animals models of influenza virus infection applied to the investigation of antiviral compounds. In Chemoprophylaxis and Virus Infection of the Respiratory Tract (ed. Oxford, J. S.), vol. 2, pp. 1–20. Cleveland, Ohio: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Potter, C. W. & Oxford, J. S. (1979). Determinants of immunity to influenza infection in man. British Medical Bulletin 35, 69–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reed, L. J. & Muench, H. (1938). A simple method of estimating fifty per cent endpoints. American Journal of Hygiene 27, 493–497.Google Scholar
Rott, R., Becht, H. & Orlich, M. (1974). The significance of influenza virus neuraminidaso in immunity. Journal of General Virology 22, 35–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rymer, C. B., Baker, R. S., Newlin, T. E. & Havens, M. L. (1966). Influenza virus purification with tho zonal centrifuge. Science 152, 1379–1382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schild, G. C., Smith, J. W. G., Cuktkscu, L., Newman, R. W. & Wood, J. M. (1977). Strainspecificity of antibody to haemagglutinin following inactivated A/Port Chalmers/1/73 vaccine in man: evidence for a paradoxical strain-specific antibody response. Developments in Biological Standardization 39, 273–281.Google ScholarPubMed
Smith, A. J. & Davies, J. R. (1977). The response to inactivated influenza A (H3N2) vaccines, the development and effect of antibodies to the surface antigens. Journal of Hygiene 78, 363–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar