Submit a comment
Abstract
Protein-based, self-assembling nanoparticles elicit superior immunity compared with soluble protein vaccines, but the immune mechanisms underpinning this effect remain poorly defined. Here, we investigated the immunogenicity of a prototypic ferritin-based nanoparticle displaying influenza hemagglutinin (HA) in mice and macaques. Vaccination of mice with HA-ferritin nanoparticles elicited higher serum antibody titers and greater protection against experimental influenza challenge compared with soluble HA protein. Germinal centers in the draining lymph nodes were expanded and persistent following HA-ferritin vaccination, with greater deposition of antigen that colocalized with follicular dendritic cells. Our findings suggest that a highly ordered and repetitive antigen array may directly drive germinal centers through a B cell–intrinsic mechanism that does not rely on ferritin-specific T follicular helper cells. In contrast to mice, enhanced immunogenicity of HA-ferritin was not observed in pigtail macaques, where antibody titers and lymph node immunity were comparable to soluble vaccination. An improved understanding of factors that drive nanoparticle vaccine immunogenicity in small and large animal models will facilitate the clinical development of nanoparticle vaccines for broad and durable protection against diverse pathogens.
Authors
Hannah G. Kelly, Hyon-Xhi Tan, Jennifer A. Juno, Robyn Esterbauer, Yi Ju, Wenbo Jiang, Verena C. Wimmer, Brigette C. Duckworth, Joanna R. Groom, Frank Caruso, Masaru Kanekiyo, Stephen J. Kent, Adam K. Wheatley
Guidelines
The Editorial Board will only consider comments that are deemed relevant and of interest to readers. The Journal will not post data that have not been subjected to peer review; or a comment that is essentially a reiteration of another comment.
- Comments appear on the Journal’s website and are linked from the original article’s web page.
- Authors are notified by email if their comments are posted.
- The Journal reserves the right to edit comments for length and clarity.
- No appeals will be considered.
- Comments are not indexed in PubMed.
Specific requirements
- Maximum length, 400 words
- Entered as plain text or HTML
- Author’s name and email address, to be posted with the comment
- Declaration of all potential conflicts of interest (even if these are not ultimately posted); see the Journal’s conflict-of-interest policy
- Comments may not include figures
