Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013
description
Transcript of Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013
![Page 1: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
KAT I E BO L A N D DV M , P H DJ U N E 1 5 , 2 0 1 3
VACCINATION OF CATTLE WITH ESCHERICHIA COLI O157:H7-DERIVED PROTEINS RESULTS
IN HUMORAL AND CELLULAR IMMUNE RESPONSES BUT DOES NOT CONFER PROTECTION AGAINST SUBSEQUENT
CHALLENGE
1
![Page 2: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
E. COLI O157:H7
• Causes disease in humans• Diarrhea (MMRW, 1985)• Hemolytic-uremic syndrome (HUS) (Riley LW, Remis RS,
Helgerson SD, et al, 1983)• Renal failure, hemolytic anemia and
thrombocytopenia• Pathogenesis
• Attaching and effacing (A/E) lesions• Pedestal formation• Dissolution of brush border
• Shiga toxins• Prevention is key
2
![Page 3: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
RESERVOIR
• Cattle are major source of contamination (Armstrong et al., 1996)• Transient colonization• Variable shedding
• Meat• Produce• Water
• Recto-anal junction• Lymphoid rich tissue
3
![Page 4: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
PRE-PROCESSING CONTROL
• Decontamination• Probiotics• Diet• Antimicrobials
http://www.chadcompany.com/MVC-006F.JPG
4
![Page 5: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
A/E LESIONS5
(Gauthier, Finlay 2002)
![Page 6: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
1: Mucosal immunization of naïve cattle with recombinant intimin induces a more robust adaptive
immune response at the recto-anal junction than subcutaneous immunization
2: An induced adaptive immune response to recombinant E. coli O157:H7 proteins is associated with
decreased colonization
HYPOTHESES
![Page 7: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
TRIAL SETUP
• Trials 1, 2 and 3• 3 animals per group
• Trial 1: Cholera toxin B subunits (rectal) and Freund’s (SQ)• Trial 2: TLR 7/8 agonist (rectal and SQ)• Trial 3: TLR 4 agonist (rectal and SQ)
• Immunized weeks 0, 3, 6
7
![Page 8: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
CELLULAR RESPONSES
INT OVATrial Treatment Adjvant Week 0 Week 9 Week 0 Week 9
1 rectal CTB 0 2 0 2 SQ CFA 0 3 0 22 rectal TLR7/8 0 3 0 1 SQ TLR7/8 0 3 0 13 rectal TLR4 2 2 0 2 SQ TLR4 3 3 0 1
INT OVATrial Treatment Adjvant Week 9 Week 9
1 rectal CTB 2 2 SQ CFA 2 02 rectal TLR7/8 3 2 SQ TLR7/8 2 33 rectal TLR4 0 0 SQ TLR4 0 0
Systemic PBMC Responses
Local MRLN Responses
8
![Page 9: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
TRIAL 4
• Is the MRNL response targeted?• TLR 7/8 agonist• All get SQ immunization week 0• Immunized again weeks 8 and 11• All SQ immunizations on same side
• Evaluate MRLNs as well and prescapular LNs
9
![Page 10: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
34545 34549 34551 34553 34590 32888 32896 34548 34570 34577
1
10
100
1000
Con A INT OVA
Stim
ulat
ion
Inde
x
Animal NumbersRectal Subcutaneous
*
*
*
*
* *
*
* **
*
**
*
*
Trial 4 PBMC Responses Week 11
![Page 11: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
34545 34549 34551 34553 34590 32888 32896 34548 34570 34577
1
10
100
1000
Con A INT OVA
Stim
ulat
ion
Inde
x
Rectal Subcutaneous
*
*
*
*
**
*
* *
*
** *
*
*
***
*
* *
**
*
***
Trial 4 MRLN Responses
Animal Numbers
![Page 12: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Draining Non-draining Mesorectal0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130S
timul
atio
n In
dex
Lymph Nodes
Trial 4 LN Stimulation Summary INT 10g
![Page 13: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
SERUM ANTIBODY RESPONSES
• All 4 trials:• Significant increases in titers to INT• Significant increases in titers to OVA in SQ groups
• Variable responses to OVA in rectal groups• In trial 1 and 4:
• Titers in SQ groups significantly increased compared to rectal groups
13
![Page 14: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
1: Mucosal immunization of naïve cattle with recombinant intimin induces a more robust adaptive
immune response at the recto-anal junction than subcutaneous immunization
(reject)
2: An induced adaptive immune response to recombinant E. coli O157:H7 proteins is associated with
decreased colonization
HYPOTHESES
![Page 15: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
CHALLENGE TRIALS
Trials 1 and 2• 6 animals per group
• Immunized or sham• 4(trial 1) or 3 (trial 2)
doses• Challenged
• Rectal (trial 1)• Oral (trial 2)
Trials 3 and 4• Trial 3
• 10 animals per group• Previous oral or rectal
exposure• Oral or rectal challenge
• Trial 4• Oral group from trial 3• Rectal challenge
Colonization levels followed for 4-7 weeksEvaluated PBMC and serum antibody responses
15
![Page 16: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
0 1 3 8 14 21 28 35 42 490
1
2
3
4
5
6
7Lo
g 10(C
FU E
. col
i O15
7:H
7/S
wab
)
Days Post-Challenge
Immunized Animals Sham-Immunized Animals
Challenge 1 Colonization Levels
![Page 17: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
0 1 3 8 14 21 28 35 42 490
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
High Responders Low Responders
Log 10
(CFU
E. c
oli O
157:
H7/
Sw
ab)
Days Post-Challenge
Challenge 1 Colonization Levels by PBMC Responses
![Page 18: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
SERUM ANTIBODY RESPONSES
• In trials 1 and 2:• All animals had significant increases in titers to all
proteins• No change 2 weeks post-challenge
• In trials 3 and 4• Variable, low responses to all proteins• Tended to be higher in trial 4
• In all trials:• Did not correlate with colonization duration
18
![Page 19: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Trial Trial Groups Animals Immunization Challenge Post
Challenge
Treatment Adjuvant Route Total doses Bacteria Total CFUs Route Culture
Time
Trial 1 Immunized 5 INT, OVA, EspB, TIR R837 Rectal 4 A 1010 Rectal 49
Sham 5 1x PBS none Rectal 4 A 1010 Rectal 49
Trial 2 Immunized 6INT, OVA,
Esp A, EspB, TIR
R848 SQ 3 A 1010 Oral 28
Sham 6 1x PBS none SQ 3 A 1010 Oral 28
Trial 3 Oral 10 109 CFU total B none Oral 1 B 109 Oral 56
Rectal 10 109 CFU total B none Rectal 1 B 109 Rectal 56
Trial 4 Oral 10 109 CFU total B none Oral 2 B 107 Rectal 35
CHALLENGE SUMMARY19
![Page 20: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
CHALLENGE CONCLUSIONS
• Immunization and experimental exposure induced lymphoproliferative responses
• Immunization induced significant antibody responses
• No significant increase in responses after challenge
• Neither lymphoproliferative nor serum antibody responses conferred protection against colonization
20
![Page 21: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
OVERALL SUMMARY
• Mucosal immunization does not induce a more robust regional immune response compared to SQ immunization • Regional responses overall more robust than systemic
and are targeted in SQ immunization• Induced immune responses are not protective
against challenge
21
![Page 22: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Tovah KerrSusan SmartEmma KarelFred LoaizaLonnie AustinAlex BeckAndrea HaylesEric SuttenKathleen SuttenAllison VilanderClaire Miller
Carolyn BohachHaiqing ShengClaudia Deobald
THANK YOU!
Kevin LahmersTim BaszlerTom BesserWendy BrownDoug CallEsther Trueblood
WADDL Pathologists and residentsVMP Faculty and staffGraduate StudentsOfficematesFriendsFamily
![Page 23: Katie Boland DVM, PhD June 15, 2013](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062323/5681649c550346895dd67d97/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
ELISA
1:101:20
1:1280
Negative controlSamples
Positive if > average + 2 SD
Titer is last positive dilution