Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T14:42:18.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Antibody responses and resistance to challenge in volunteers vaccinated with live attenuated, detergent split and oil adjuvant A2/Hong Kong/68 (H3N2) influenza vaccines* A report to the Medical Research Council Committee on Influenza and other Respiratory Virus Vaccines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

D. S. Freestone
Affiliation:
Wellcome Research Laboratories, BeckenhamKent
Stephanie Hamilton-Smith
Affiliation:
Wellcome Research Laboratories, BeckenhamKent
G. C. Schild
Affiliation:
National Institute for Medical Research, London, N.W. 7
Rosemary Buckland
Affiliation:
Clinical Research Centre, Harrow, Middlesex
Susan Chinn
Affiliation:
Clinical Research Centre, Harrow, Middlesex
D. A. J. Tyrrell
Affiliation:
Clinical Research Centre, Harrow, Middlesex
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Forty-nine subjects were vaccinated with either live attenuated, detergent split, or oil adjuvant A2/Hong Kong influenza vaccines, or a saline influenza B vaccine as control. Respiratory symptoms occurred more frequently in subjects who received the live vaccine but in total there was little difference between the symptoms in the four groups. Antibody titres hi nasal washings and serum were measured by haemagglutination inhibition, neuraminidase inhibition and virus neutralization tests. The oil adjuvant vaccine stimulated larger antibody responses than the other procedures. Six weeks after vaccination the volunteers were challenged with partially attenuated live A2/Hong Kong influenza virus administered intranasally. The live attenuated and oil adjuvant vaccines provided the best protection against challenge.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1972

References

REFERENCES

Beare, A. S. & Bynoe, M. L. (1969). Attenuation of human influenza A viruses. British Medical Journal iv, 198201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beare, A. S., Hobson, D., Reed, S. E. & Tyrrell, D. A. J. (1968). A comparison of live and killed influenza virus vaccines. Lancet ii, 418–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beare, A. S., Hobson, D., Reed, S. E. & Tyrrell, D. A. J. (1960). Antibody responses to and efficacy of an inactivated spray vaccino. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 41, 549–51.Google Scholar
Downie, J. (1970). Nouraminidaso and haomagglutinin-inhibiting antibodies in serum and nasal secretions of volunteors immunized with attenuated and inactivated influenza B/Eng./13/C5 virus vaccinos. Journal of Immunology 105, 620–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobson, D., Beare, A. S. & Gardner, A. W. (1972). Haemagglutination-inhibiting serum antibody titros as an indox of the response of volunteers to intranasal infection with live attenuated strains of influenza virus. (In preparation.)Google Scholar
Kasel, J. A., Rossen, R. D., Fedson, D. S., Couch, R. B. & Brown, P. (1909). Human influenza; aspects of tho immune response to vaccination. (Conference report.) Annals of Internal Medicine 71, 369–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schild, G. C. & Newman, R. (1969). Antibody against influenza A 2 virus nouraminidase in human sera. Journal of Hygiene 67, 353–05.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slepushkin, A. N., Schild, G. C., Beare, A. S., Chinn, S. & Tyrrell, D. A. J. (1971). Nouraminidaso and resistance to vaccination with live influenza A 2 Hong Kong vaccines. Journal of Hygiene 69, 571–8.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (1953). Expert Committee on Influenza. World Health Organization, Technical Report Series, no. 64.Google Scholar
W.H.O. Group on Influenza Nomenclature (1971). A revised system of nomenclature for influenza viruses. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 45, 119–24.Google Scholar