A Comparison of the Adaptive Immune Response between Recovered Anthrax Patients and Individuals Receiving Three Different Anthrax Vaccines

Thomas R Laws; Tinatin Kuchuloria; Nazibriola Chitadze; Stephen F Little; Wendy M Webster; Amanda K Debes; Salome Saginadze; Nikoloz Tsertsvadze; Mariam Chubinidze; Robert G Rivard; Shota Tsanava; Edward H Dyson; Andrew J H Simpson; Matthew J Hepburn; Nino Trapaidze

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148713

A Comparison of the Adaptive Immune Response between Recovered Anthrax Patients and Individuals Receiving Three Different Anthrax Vaccines

PLoS One. 2016 Mar 23;11(3):e0148713. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148713. eCollection 2016.

Authors

Thomas R Laws¹, Tinatin Kuchuloria^{2

3}, Nazibriola Chitadze⁴, Stephen F Little⁵, Wendy M Webster⁵, Amanda K Debes⁵, Salome Saginadze⁴, Nikoloz Tsertsvadze⁴, Mariam Chubinidze⁴, Robert G Rivard⁵, Shota Tsanava^{2

4}, Edward H Dyson¹, Andrew J H Simpson¹, Matthew J Hepburn⁵, Nino Trapaidze^{3

4}

Affiliations

¹ Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, DSTL Porton Down, Salisbury, United Kingdom.
² Department of Public Health, Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia.
³ Clinical Research Unit (CRU), Technology Management Company (TMC), Tbilisi, Georgia.
⁴ National Center for Disease Control and Public Health (NCDC), Tbilisi, Georgia.
⁵ U. S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), Fort Detrick, MD, United States of America.

Abstract

Several different human vaccines are available to protect against anthrax. We compared the human adaptive immune responses generated by three different anthrax vaccines or by previous exposure to cutaneous anthrax. Adaptive immunity was measured by ELISPOT to count cells that produce interferon (IFN)-γ in response to restimulation ex vivo with the anthrax toxin components PA, LF and EF and by measuring circulating IgG specific to these antigens. Neutralising activity of antisera against anthrax toxin was also assayed. We found that the different exposures to anthrax antigens promoted varying immune responses. Cutaneous anthrax promoted strong IFN-γ responses to all three antigens and antibody responses to PA and LF. The American AVA and Russian LAAV vaccines induced antibody responses to PA only. The British AVP vaccine produced IFN-γ responses to EF and antibody responses to all three antigens. Anti-PA (in AVA and LAAV vaccinees) or anti-LF (in AVP vaccinees) antibody titres correlated with toxin neutralisation activities. Our study is the first to compare all three vaccines in humans and show the diversity of responses against anthrax antigens.

Publication types

Comparative Study
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

MeSH terms

Adaptive Immunity / immunology*
Adult
Anthrax / immunology*
Anthrax Vaccines / immunology*
Antibodies, Bacterial / immunology
Antigens, Bacterial / immunology
Bacterial Toxins / immunology
Female
Humans
Immune Sera / immunology
Immunoglobulin G / immunology
Interferon-gamma / immunology
Male
Middle Aged
Skin Diseases, Bacterial / immunology*
Vaccination / methods

Substances

Anthrax Vaccines
Antibodies, Bacterial
Antigens, Bacterial
Bacterial Toxins
Immune Sera
Immunoglobulin G
anthrax toxin
Interferon-gamma

Supplementary concepts

Cutaneous anthrax

Grants and funding

Funding for this project was provided by the UK Ministry of Defence and US Department of Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, implemented by the US Defense Threat Reduction Agency. The views of the authors do not purport to reflect the positions of the US Department of Defense. During this study, author T. Kuchuloria worked as a sub-contractor for the commercial entity Technology Management Company (TMC), on behalf of the US Defense Threat Reduction Agency via USAMRIID. TMC administered a salary for T. Kuchuloria but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.