↓ Skip to main content

Vaccination with Lipid Core Peptides Fails to Induce Epitope-Specific T Cell Responses but Confers Non-Specific Protective Immunity in a Malaria Model

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Vaccination with Lipid Core Peptides Fails to Induce Epitope-Specific T Cell Responses but Confers Non-Specific Protective Immunity in a Malaria Model
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0040928
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon H. Apte, Penny L. Groves, Mariusz Skwarczynski, Yoshio Fujita, Chenghung Chang, Istvan Toth, Denise L. Doolan

Abstract

Vaccines against many pathogens for which conventional approaches have failed remain an unmet public health priority. Synthetic peptide-based vaccines offer an attractive alternative to whole protein and whole organism vaccines, particularly for complex pathogens that cause chronic infection. Previously, we have reported a promising lipid core peptide (LCP) vaccine delivery system that incorporates the antigen, carrier, and adjuvant in a single molecular entity. LCP vaccines have been used to deliver several peptide subunit-based vaccine candidates and induced high titre functional antibodies and protected against Group A streptococcus in mice. Herein, we have evaluated whether LCP constructs incorporating defined CD4(+) and/or CD8(+) T cell epitopes could induce epitope-specific T cell responses and protect against pathogen challenge in a rodent malaria model. We show that LCP vaccines failed to induce an expansion of antigen-specific CD8(+) T cells following primary immunization or by boosting. We further demonstrated that the LCP vaccines induced a non-specific type 2 polarized cytokine response, rather than an epitope-specific canonical CD8(+) T cell type 1 response. Cytotoxic responses of unknown specificity were also induced. These non-specific responses were able to protect against parasite challenge. These data demonstrate that vaccination with lipid core peptides fails to induce canonical epitope-specific T cell responses, at least in our rodent model, but can nonetheless confer non-specific protective immunity against Plasmodium parasite challenge.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 7%
Unknown 26 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 36%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 18%
Student > Master 5 18%
Other 1 4%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 3 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 7%
Chemistry 2 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 3 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 September 2012.
All research outputs
#18,313,878
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#153,825
of 193,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,751
of 169,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,428
of 4,365 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,562 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 169,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,365 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.