Oral immunization with recombinant Lactococcus lactis confers protection against respiratory pneumococcal infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present work, we evaluated if oral immunization with the pneumococcal protective protein A (PppA), expressed in the cell wall of Lactococcus lactis (L. lactis PppA+), was able to confer protective immunity against Streptococcus pneumoniae. Mice were immunized orally with L. lactis PppA+ for 5 consecutive days. Vaccination was performed one (nonboosted group) or 2 times with a 2 week interval between each immunization (boosted group). Oral priming with L. lactis PppA+ induced the production of anti-PppA IgM, IgG, and IgA antibodies in serum and in bronchoalveolar (BAL) and intestinal (IF) lavage fluids. Boosting with L. lactis PppA+ increased the levels of mucosal and systemic immunoglobulins. Moreover, the avidity and the opsonophagocytic activity of anti-PppA antibodies were significantly improved in the boosted group. The presence of both IgG1 and IgG2a anti-PppA antibodies in serum and BAL and the production of both interferon gamma and interleukin-4 by spleen cells from immunized mice indicated that L. lactis PppA+ stimulated a mixture of Th1 and Th2 responses. The ability of L. lactis PppA+ to confer cross-protective immunity was evaluated using challenge assays with serotypes 3, 6B, 14, and 23F. Lung bacterial cell counts and hemocultures showed that immunization with L. lactis PppA+ improved resistance against all the serotypes assessed, including serotype 3, which was highly virulent in our experimental animal model. To our knowledge, this is the first demonstration of protection against respiratory pneumococcal infection induced by oral administration of a recombinant lactococcal vaccine.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".