MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vaccination with Plasmid DNA Encoding TSA/LmSTI1 Leishmanial Fusion Proteins Confers Protection against<i>Leishmania major</i>Infection in Susceptible BALB/c Mice

2002· article· en· W2165340588 on OpenAlex
Antonio Campos‐Neto, John R. Webb, Kay Greeson, Rhea N. Coler, Yasir A. W. Skeiky, Steven G. Reed

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInfection and Immunity · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicResearch on Leishmaniasis Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsDNA vaccinationBiologyVirologyVaccinationGene gunAdjuvantAntigenImmune systemLeishmania majorImmunizationCutaneous leishmaniasisTuberculosis vaccinesPlasmidImmunologyLeishmaniaMicrobiologyMycobacterium tuberculosisLeishmaniasisDNATuberculosisGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have recently shown that a cocktail containing two leishmanial recombinant antigens (LmSTI1 and TSA) and interleukin-12 (IL-12) as an adjuvant induces solid protection in both a murine and a nonhuman primate model of cutaneous leishmaniasis. However, because IL-12 is difficult to prepare, is expensive, and does not have the stability required for a vaccine product, we have investigated the possibility of using DNA as an alternative means of inducing protective immunity. Here, we present evidence that the antigens TSA and LmSTI1 delivered in a plasmid DNA format either as single genes or in a tandem digene construct induce equally solid protection against Leishmania major infection in susceptible BALB/c mice. Immunization of mice with either TSA DNA or LmSTI1 DNA induced specific CD4(+)-T-cell responses of the Th1 phenotype without a requirement for specific adjuvant. CD8 responses, as measured by cytotoxic-T-lymphocyte activity, were generated after immunization with TSA DNA but not LmSTI1 DNA. Interestingly, vaccination of mice with TSA DNA consistently induced protection to a much greater extent than LmSTI1 DNA, thus supporting the notion that CD8 responses might be an important accessory arm of the immune response for acquired resistance against leishmaniasis. Moreover, the protection induced by DNA immunization was specific for infection with Leishmania, i.e., the immunization had no effect on the course of infection of the mice challenged with an unrelated intracellular pathogen such as Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Conversely, immunization of BALB/c mice with a plasmid DNA that is protective against challenge with M. tuberculosis had no effect on the course of infection of these mice with L. major. Together, these results indicate that the protection observed with the leishmanial DNA is mediated by acquired specific immune response rather than by the activation of nonspecific innate immune mechanisms. In addition, a plasmid DNA containing a fusion construct of the two genes was also tested. Similarly to the plasmids encoding individual proteins, the fusion construct induced both specific immune responses to the individual antigens and protection against challenge with L. major. These results confirm previous observations about the possibility of DNA immunization against leishmaniasis and lend support to the idea of using a single polygenic plasmid DNA construct to achieve polyspecific immune responses to several distinct parasite antigens.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it