Key result
rVP6 rotavirus vaccine cuts viral shedding ~65% following live challenge in mice.
Why the study?
Does a vaccine containing RV rVP6 administered via different routes protect against RV shedding in BALB/c mice?
Does a vaccine containing RV rVP6 administered via different routes protect against RV shedding in BALB/c mice?
p-value: p=0.011
A non-live combined RV-NoV vaccine candidate containing RV rVP6 provides at least 65% protection against RV shedding in mice regardless of parenteral or mucosal delivery route.
rVP6 vaccine efficacy in mice via multiple routes; leaves open translation to human RV protection or combined vaccines.
Live oral rotavirus (RV) vaccines are part of routine childhood immunization but are associated with adverse effects, particularly intussusception. We have developed a non-live combined RV – norovirus (NoV) vaccine candidate consisting of human RV inner-capsid rVP6 protein and NoV virus-like particles. To determine the effect of delivery route on induction of VP6-specific protective immunity, BALB/c mice were administered a vaccine containing RV rVP6 intramuscularly, intranasally or a combination of both, and challenged with murine RV. At least 65 % protection against RV shedding was observed regardless of delivery route. The levels of post-challenge serum VP6-specific IgA titers correlated with protection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lappalainen et al. (2015) studied Rotavirus infection (n=22). Trivalent RV-NoV combination vaccine containing RV rVP6 vs. PBS (Naive controls) was evaluated on Reduction in total rotavirus antigen shedding in fecal samples (p=0.011). Intramuscular, intranasal, or combined administration of a vaccine containing human rotavirus rVP6 reduced viral shedding by at least 65% following live rotavirus challenge in mice.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: