Antibodies and antigens Antibodies = immunoglobulins Antibodies bind antigens.
=1= Neutralising antibodies prevent PRRSv viremia rebound: evidence from a data-supported model ·...
Transcript of =1= Neutralising antibodies prevent PRRSv viremia rebound: evidence from a data-supported model ·...
– Natacha GO –[email protected]
NEUTRALISING ANTIBODIES PREVENT PRRSV
VIREMIA REBOUND:EVIDENCE FROM A DATA-SUPPORTED MODEL
PhD seminar, 10th April 2017
In collaboration withSuzanne TOUZEAU, ISA, INRA & BIOCORE, Inria, Sophia Antipolis, FranceCatherine BELLOC, BioEpAR, Oniris & INRA, Nantes, FranceAndrea WILSON, Div. Genetics and Genomics, Roslin Institute , Edinburgh, Scotland
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
ContextPorcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome virus (PRRSv):
– Targets the porcine antigen presenting cells (APC)
– Wide variability in virulence & susceptibility
– Numerous vaccines, but only partially protective
⇒ Need to better understand the immune response
Viral titer rebounds:
From PHGC data
Vir
al ti
ter
– Mechanisms unclear (immune response,viral mutation, re-exposure over infection)
– Issue for the infection control (vaccination,genetic selection, population dynamics)
⇒What immune mechanisms can cause rebounds ?
2
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
Linking immune response & infection dynamics
– Contrasted immune reponses can result in similar infection dynamics:
01
23
45
02
46
8
050
150
−20 0 20 40
01
23
45
−20 0 20 400
24
68
−20 0 20 40
050
150
Cytotoxic T-cellsViremia Pro-inf cytokines
strain:
strain:
●
experi
menta
l st
udie
s: -
Dia
z et
al. 2
01
2;
- W
eese
ndro
p e
t al.,
20
13
– Fragmented & partial view from the experimental studies– High variability & complex system
→ ORIGINAL MODEL: Integrative view of the within-host dynamics
3
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
(1) initiation of infection & immune response
naive target cells APCn(innate immunity)
APCm
V viral particles
APCi
viral particles decay
Innate responseearly & non-specific
Infection Excretion
Phagocytosis
viral particles multiplication
Exp
osur
e
4
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
(2) virus-immune response interactions
naive target cells APCn
natural killerscytotoxic lymphocytes
neutralising antibodies
NK
IgAPCm
V
CD8+
APCi
viral particles decay
Innate responseearly & non-specific
Adaptive responsedelayed & specific
Neutralisation
Infection Excretion
Cytolysis
Phagocytosis
viral particles multiplication
viral particles decay
infected cells decay
4
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
(3) immune response activation & regulations
CD4+APCm
APCi
B
APCn
NK
IgAPCm
V
CD8+
APCi
Neutralisation
Infection Excretion
Antigen presentation
Cytolysis
Phagocytosis
Cyt
ok
ines
Cyt
ok
ines
4
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
Model - overview
Integrative and detailed view of the within-host dynamics
ModelODE system describing the evolution over time of each
component of interest by the formalisation of the immune
mechanisms
Parametersfixed values ~ rate of immune mechanisms
Dynamics of:- PRRSv- Immune effectors- Antibodies- Cytokines
– evolution over time of PRRSv, innate and adaptive components
– deterministic system of 19 ODE involving 50 parameters
– mechanisms at between-cell scale, variability ∼ parameter values
5
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
Model - equations
example of viral dynamics:
APCm
V
APCi
Cyt
okin
es
APCn
Ig
V̇ =+ E(t)︸︷︷︸exposure
− ηT V (APCn + APCm) κ−() [1 + κ+()]︸ ︷︷ ︸
phagocytosis
− βT V (APCm + APCn) κ−() [1 + κ+()]︸ ︷︷ ︸
infection
+ eT APCi κ−()︸ ︷︷ ︸
excretion
− µadV V Ig︸ ︷︷ ︸
neutralisation
− µnatV V︸ ︷︷ ︸
natural decay
6
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
What prevents rebounds?
Data. 300 pigs (genomic variability), NVSL strain (high virulence)
0 10 20 30 40
110
102
103
104
105
106
107
0 10 20 30 40
110
102
103
104
105
106
107
uniphasic biphasic
Method.
(1) Model fitting
(2) Identify the underlying mechanisms (ex. of antibodies)
7
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
What prevents rebounds?
Data.
Method.
(1) Model fitting1. Selection of parameters: linked to between-host variability (14/50)2. Check if the model can generate the data3. Fitting method. 600 times the fitting process / profile:
Parameter set 1Parameter set 2 ...Parameter set s
Model
DataRejectedSelected
Viral titer 1Viral titer 2 ...Viral titer s
1
2
s
Start
End
(2) Identify the underlying mechanisms (ex. of antibodies)
7
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
What prevents rebounds?Data.
Method.
(1) Model fitting
Fitted viral titer:
0 10 20 30 40
01e
21e
41e
61e
8 peak
resolution
0 10 20 30 40
01e
21e
41e
61e
8 peakrebound (max)
rebound (min)
uniphasic biphasic
(2) Identify the underlying mechanisms (ex. of antibodies)7
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
What prevents rebounds?Data.
Method.
(1) Model fitting
(2) Identify the underlying mechanisms (ex. of antibodies)
Modelestimated parameters
(2 x 600 sets)synthesis of Ig
resulting dynamics(2 x 600 sets)
titer of Ig
cummulated flow(2 x 600 sets)
total # of neutralised viral particles:
0
20
21
42
0-20 >20
7
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
What prevents rebounds?
peak
Gro
ss fl
ow
rati
o/t
ot.
deacyIg
synth
esi
s
0-20 >20 0-20 >20
Modelestimated parametersuniphasic vs biphasic
resulting dynamicsuniphasic vs biphasic
cummulated flowsuniphasic vs biphasic
titer
(1) Rebounds due to a lack of antibodies synthesis
→ strength of neutralisation determines infection profiles?
8
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
What prevents rebounds?
peak
Gro
ss fl
ow
rati
o/t
ot.
deacyIg
synth
esi
s
0-20 >20 0-20 >20
Modelestimated parametersuniphasic vs biphasic
resulting dynamicsuniphasic vs biphasic
cummulated flowsuniphasic vs biphasic
titer
(2) Lower Ig titer despite similar synthesis !?!?!
→ strength of neutralisation determines infection profiles?
8
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
What prevents rebounds?
peak
Gro
ss fl
ow
rati
o/t
ot.
deacyIg
synth
esi
s
0-20 >20 0-20 >20
Modelestimated parametersuniphasic vs biphasic
resulting dynamicsuniphasic vs biphasic
cummulated flowsuniphasic vs biphasic
titer
(3) Rebounders need more neutralising antibodies !!!
→ strength of neutralisation determines infection profiles?
8
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
What prevents rebounds?
Influence of pomoting / inhibiting neutralisation efficiency on profile
Method: vary µadV Results: % of profile inversion
levels uniphasic biphasicL1 ×0.1 ×10↓ ↓ ↓L6 ×0.001 ×1000
levels uni→ bi bi→ uniL1↓ 0 85L6
⇓strength of neutralisation do not determines infection profile
... BUT ...high neutralisation can prevent rebounds !
8
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
ConclusionStrengths:
•Model: can reproduce the variability within and between PRRSv profiles
• Approach: powerfull to identify underlying mechanismsExpe.: only dynamics→ expensive & partial view• Results: new insights to explain PRRSv within-host dynamics→ prospects for infection control (vaccination & host genetic selection)
Limits:
• Only fitted on viral titer (1 model variable / 19)• No validation of fixed parameters & ranges
Prospects:
• Model simplification (Stefano’s method)• Exploration of other hypotheses (viral mutation, re-exposure)
9
INTRODUCTION MODEL RESULTS CONCLUSION
Thank you!
CD4+APCm
APCi
B
APCn
NK
IgAPCm
V
CD8+
APCi
Neutralisation
Infection Excretion
Antigen presentation
Cytolysis
Phagocytosis
Cyt
ok
ines
Cyt
ok
ines
10