MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2209050427 · doi:10.1182/blood.v124.21.1501.1501

Immunization Against Influenza but Not MMR Modulates the Anti-Factor VIII Immune Response in Hemophilia Α Mice

2014· article· en· W2209050427 sur OpenAlexaff
Jesse D. Lai, Paul Moorehead, Kate Sponagle, Katharina Nora Steinitz, Birgit M. Reipert, Christine Hough, David Lillicrap

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHemophilia Treatment and Research
Établissements canadiensJaneway Children's Health and Rehabilitation CentreMemorial University of NewfoundlandQueen's University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineImmunogenicityImmunologyRubellaImmunizationAntibodyImmune systemMeaslesVaccinationInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: The etiology of inhibitory factor VIII (FVIII) antibodies in 25-30% of hemophilia A (HA) patients remains poorly understood. It is possible that concurrent exposure to inflammatory stimuli, or ‘danger signals’, with FVIII increases the risk of inhibitor formation. HA patients generally begin FVIII replacement therapy around 12 months of age, and the median age of inhibitors onset is between 15-21 months. During this time frame, patients may be exposed to vaccines, such as the mumps-measles-rubella (MMR) and seasonal influenza vaccines. Our investigation is the first to address the concern that these vaccines may serve as danger signals that augment FVIII immunogenicity. Methods: Our studies used 8-12 week-old FVIII E17KO C57Bl6/S129 HA mice, which carry a complete knockout of all murine MHC class II molecules, and instead express a chimeric human-mouse HLA-DRB1*1501 allele associated with increased inhibitor risk. Our preliminary studies show that 40-80% of these animals develop FVIII inhibitors following treatment. HA mice were immunized with 10x the standard human dose of live-attenuated MMR vaccine (Priorix) subcutaneously or intravenously 24 hrs prior to 4 weekly intravenous infusions of 2 IU recombinant human FVIII (rhFVIII, Advate). Mice were subsequently re-challenged with MMR 24 hrs prior to 4 biweekly infusions of 6 IU rhFVIII. Blood samples were collected retro-orbitally or via cardiac puncture. Plasma from weeks 5 and 9 was assessed for anti-FVIII IgG by ELISA; inhibitor concentrations were assessed by a Bethesda assay on week 9. The inactivated influenza vaccine (Agriflu) was administered at standard human doses either intramuscularly or intravenously 24 hrs before, after, or concurrently with the first of 7 biweekly infusions of 6 IU rhFVIII. Week 5 plasma samples were subjected to anti-FVIII and anti-influenza IgG ELISA and Bethesda assays. Statistical comparisons were made using the Fisher’s exact Mann-Whitney U tests, as appropriate. Results: Subcutaneous MMR vaccination exhibited no significant differences in the incidence or titres of anti-FVIII IgG compared to HBSS-injected controls at weeks 5 and 9 (n=13). Similarly, no differences in the incidence or concentration of inhibitors were detected at week 9. We next evaluated the effects of intravenous MMR immunization on FVIII immunogenicity. Surprisingly, we again observed no differences in the incidence or magnitude of the anti-FVIII immune response at weeks 5 and 9 (n=28-30). Importantly, we found a significant decrease in the incidence of FVIII-specific IgG in mice that were immunized intramuscularly with the influenza vaccine 24 hrs after and at the same time as the first infusion of rhFVIII (t=-24 hrs: 30%, t=0 hrs: 20%, t=+24 hrs: 26% vs control: 67%; p=0.11, 0.06, 0.04; n=10-15). Similarly, there was a significant decrease in the incidence of inhibitors at all immunization time points (t=-24 hrs: 30%, t=0 hrs: 43%, t=+24 hrs: 11% vs control: 80%; p=0.03, 0.02, 0.0022). No differences in IgG titres or inhibitor concentrations were detected. When immunized intravenously with the influenza vaccine, we observed an increase in the presence of FVIII-specific IgG, but no differences in titres. However, these differences were not statistically significant and need confirmation (t=-24 hrs: 80%, t=0 hrs: 90%, t=+24 hrs 40% vs control: 50%; p=0.58, 0.14, 1.00; n=5-10). Conclusion: These are the first experimental studies to address vaccination as a potential danger signal in the development of an anti-FVIII immune response. Our results suggest that both subcutaneous and intravenous immunization of HA mice with the MMR vaccine do not influence the incidence or magnitude of the anti-FVIII immune response. In contrast, our data suggest that intramuscular immunization with the inactivated influenza vaccine modulates the anti-FVIII immune response and may enhance tolerance induction to FVIII, possibly through antigen competition. However, this proposal awaits further confirmation. Finally, a trend in increased antibody and inhibitor incidence in intravenously immunized mice suggests that the influenza vaccine can serve as a danger signal, but is dependent on the route of administration. Our findings contradict current vaccination concerns in the treatment of young HA patients, and instead suggest an inhibitor-protective effect from influenza immunization. Disclosures Moorehead: Baxter: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria. Steinitz:Baxter: Employment. Reipert:Baxter: Employment. Hough:Bayer: Research Funding. Lillicrap:Baxter: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; CSL Behring: Research Funding; Biogen Idec: Research Funding.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,007

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,022
Tête enseignante GPT0,287
Écart entre enseignants0,264 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetHemophilia Treatment and Research→Travaux en français237 207→