Comparison of Traditional Vaccine and Nanoparticle Vaccine - Essay Example

Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) infection: Comparison of traditional vaccine and nanoparticle vaccine Section Number Date Traditional and Nanoparticle vaccines Introduction Globally, 64 million cases and 160,000 deaths per year have resulted from respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) (Gregory et al., 2013; Ko et al., 2014). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, online) consider this infectious disease to be a major concern which relates to human health. RSV symptoms vary between adults and infants. Severe symptoms are more often to occur in childhood (Medical Cyclopedia, 2014). The spread of infectious infections can be controlled by vaccination. Edward Jenner, a British medical doctor from the 18th century, first introduced the term ‘vaccine’. Jenner derived the term ‘vaccine’ from the Latin words vacca and vaccinia, that means cow and cowpox, respectively (Riedel, 2005). The World Health Organization (WHO, 2014) defines vaccine as “a biological preparation that improves immunity to a particular disease. A vaccine typically contains an agent that resembles a disease-causing microorganism, and is often made from weakened or killed forms of the microbe, its toxins or one of its surface proteins." However, traditional vaccines are not available for an extensive range of infectious diseases including RSV (Gregory et al., 2013). This essay will compare traditional vaccines and nanoparticle vaccines in terms of RSV prevention. Antigenic preparation will also be discussed with particular attention to induced toxicity. The essay will also examine the effect of both vaccines on the human immune system. Finally, the application of nanoparticle vaccines in humans will be addressed in terms of challenges and limitations. The current rapid development in nanoparticle technology, specifically RSV infection, shows the future of new vaccines that can replace traditional vaccines. Comparing traditional vaccines and nanoparticle vaccines in RSV prevention Nanoparticles vaccine possesses immunogenic specificity. This implies they induce an immune system that will produce specific antibodies to fight the RSV. This makes nanoparticles safe to the human being unlike the traditional vaccines that were hardly specific. Another feature of nanoparticle vaccines it is easier to produce than preparing live or inactivated pathogens for traditional vaccine (Gregory et al., 2013). Isolation of the components to manufacture nanoparticles is easier unlike the preparation of the traditional vaccine. The nanoparticle vaccines tend to be more potent than the traditional vaccines that use either killed or attenuated viruses (Yih & Al-Fandi, 2006). The effectiveness is based on the specificity of the vaccine and it is easy in preparation. The potency of the new vaccines that has peptides, DNA and proteins are impressive. However, the challenge is the requirement of a delivery system that will be used to maintain the vaccine potency in vivo (Ko et al., 2014). Proper nanoparticle delivery system the vaccine can remain potent in vivo for many generations. Through nanotechnology, many adjuvants have been developed that form basis of making new subunit vaccines in the coming generation. This shows progressive development of nanoparticles to produce the best vaccine for RSV infection. This is a contrast to traditional vaccines. The following are some of the subunits that are to be developed through nanotechnology: inorganic nanoparticles, polymeric nanoparticles, self-assembling peptides and liposomes. The subunits of the nanoparticle vaccines will be unique in their characteristic and more research is ongoing about them (Mamo & Poland, 2012). Pison et al. (2006) argues that, preparation of nanoparticles has led to the development of target vaccine delivery and its release in a more controlled fashion. This shows how superior the nanoparticles are to the traditional vaccines whose delivery would end up causing RSV infection. Nanoparticles vaccine enhances immunogenicity and bio-recognition of the body systems. This means it is very rare with the nanoparticles to experience immune attack of the body itself. Gregory et al. (2013) reported that nanoparticles do not exhibit nonspecific toxicities. The traditional vaccines induce RSV infection because they induce the CD4+ cells that are linked with exacerbating the infection besides protecting the lung from infection (Gregory et al., 2013). Similar case has been reported with nanoparticles, however, for the nanoparticles, they have additional CD8+ cells that clear the virus. This means the balance between the two cells in the body is required to prevent infection development. CD4+ initially eliminates the RSV after this they induce an inflammatory response that puts the lung cells at risk of reinfection. The basis in the infectivity would lie on destruction of the mucosal lining of the respiratory system resulting from the inflammatory response of CD4+. CD8+ cells eliminate the virus and help to balance the CD4+ cells. Preparation of the vaccines Generation of Virus-like nanoparticles (VLP) can be prepared through assembling of structural proteins and lipid bilayer membranes that are similar in morphology to the virus. From recent research, DNA transfections of avian cells were used to generate a chimeric Newcastle disease virus (NDV) core-protein that had the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) ecto-domains (Ko et al., 2014). Experiments also show that VLP vaccines induced specific antibodies response and cytokine CD8 T cell response (Gregory et al., 2013). This demonstrated that the nanoparticle which is developed from DNA of protein and lipids developed from avian cells induce a specific immune response. This preparation is easy to develop without utilizing the virus itself. This demonstrates the ability to develop nanoparticles vaccine using the modern nanotechnology. Recent research has further shown that infectious virus can be recovered from DNA clones of RSV. This has led to genetically engineered vaccines. Through this, two-subunit vaccine respiratory syncytial virus F (RSV F) and respiratory syncytial virus G (RSV G) have been isolated. RSV F and RSV G are viral glycoproteins that induce neutralizing and protective antibodies in the body (Gregory et al., 2013). The neutralizing power of the vaccine is the one that determines viral elimination from the lung. When RSV FG is administered intramuscularly, it provides protection of lower respiratory tract from infection and not the upper respiratory tract. The response of human immune to the vaccines Since the 1960s, traditional inactivated RSV vaccines were prepared through inactivating infected cells with formalin; subsequently concentrating them through a process similar to precipitation. The prepared vaccines were then tested to determine whether they were potent. On the other hand, live attenuated RSV vaccines developed after the failure of parenteral administration of inactivated-RSV (Ko et al., 2014). This vaccine was administered intranasal; to trigger the immune system. Later it was discovered that the intranasal live attenuated vaccine could easily replicate and lead to an infection in the patient. As such, and not surprisingly, the traditional vaccine has been in widespread use ever since; with little chance of a direct substitute taking its place. As nano-particle vaccines are capable of neutralizing the RSV levels and impacted upon the lung’s viral role, the impact of this particular approach, at least with respect to RSV, is demonstrably clear. The higher the neutralizing effect of the vaccine, the faster the clearing up of the RSV infection can be noted (Ko et al., 2014). Further studies have compared the immunological trigger of antibodies between nano-particle and traditional vaccines; using ELISA coating antigens. The research revealed that after the first infection, the levels of IgG antibodies specific for RSV were higher in the traditional vaccines as compared to those created by nano-particles. However, three weeks after priming (affected within a second dose) the level of antibodies was higher within those individuals that had been treated with the nano-particle vaccine. As such, nano-particle vaccines have come to represent a better vaccine as it raises the antibodies after the second exposure to the infection. This reveals a situation in which nano-particle vaccines provide the patient with a longer overall protection against infection (Ko et al., 2014). One study showed that upon RSV infection, traditional vaccines had higher cellular infiltration of larger sized cells (Cheon et al., 2013). As demonstrated by Gregory et al. (2013), this includes the granulocytes and macrophages in the cell of the alveoli and bronchioles. This has the effect of creating a high level of inflammation and swelling in the affected site; however, nano-particle vaccines demonstrate a lower level of cellular infiltration in the cells of alveoli and bronchioles (Cheon et al., 2014). Therefore, there is little or no congestion or edema on the site of the infection. Graham (2011) indicates that inactivated RSV shows a higher level of myeloid marker CD11b+; compared to nanoparticles on the fifth day after RSV infection. Graham’s study was performed through analysis of broncho-alveolar lavage (BAL) fluids. However, CD11c+ in inactivated RSV is higher than in nanoparticle vaccines. Moreover, CD11C+ is associated with the macrophages that aid in clearing the viral load in the lung. The presence of macrophage is a sure sign of innate and acquired immune response to a viral infection. Therefore, the nanoparticle further triggers the immune system more appropriately than the traditional vaccine. Studies have further demonstrated that nanoparticle vaccines confer protection against RSV through modulating cellular phenotypes, cellular infiltration, inhibiting pulmonary eosinophilia, modulating interferon gamma releases, as well as inducing cytokines and Th1 type antibodies (Mamo & Poland, 2012). Likewise, nano-particle vaccination produces antibodies that recognize RSV and bind to RSV protein antigens. Graham (2011) indicated that after priming, the level of IgG2 increases within those cells vaccinated using nano-particles. The administration of boost immunization increases the level of IgG2.The two vaccines induce the immune system similarly; but with different overall levels of specificity and strength. It has further been studied that the nano-particle vaccines are more specific and have a higher neutralizing effect. The ability of nano-particle vaccines to induce macrophages makes it unique and an oftentimes chosen vaccine of choice against RSV. More research in the coming years will unmask more of the ways these vaccines trigger the immune system and can likely assist other illnesses as well. Challenges and limitations faced in the application of the nanoparticles Sadly, it is currently clear that the RSV vaccines that are available are inadequate; therefore they limit treatment options that might otherwise be available (Mamo & Poland, 2012). The future direction of vaccinology is likely to do away with both live and inactivated whole vaccines; at least as they currently exist. The following section denotes some of the challenges in the development and application that Graham found in the effectiveness of nanoparticle vaccines. Nanoparticle vaccines have been known to trigger key ethical issues. The vaccines and other adjuvants used are oftentimes non-biodegradable (Riedel, 2005). This can lead to accumulation of components in the body resulting in undesired side effects. In vivo studies on the toxicity of this practice should be done to ensure that they are safe; before being used in humans (Yih & Al-Famdi, 2006). To achieve successful clinical applications, scaling up and setting up reliable manufacturing facilities is required. To design the various components into a unit, nanoparticle vaccine require a sophisticated process and well-equipped facilities that are capable of these metrics (Glenn, 2013). This in turn is reflected by versatility in clinical applications. Production and distribution of large-scale vaccines requires a robust and reproducible nano-particle platform. Despite the efforts laid down to address this issue, still more needs to be done in order to effect a change on these shortcomings. Adaptation of lithography that aids in the production of precisely engineered nanoparticles and the use of microfluidic chip-technologies is also essential. According to Mambo & Poland (2012), one of the limitations that is especially hard to deal with relates to cost. This implies that the advancement of nano-technology is perfectly tied to budgetary constraints. Graham (2011) focused on developmental issues that posed a challenge in nanoparticle vaccine production. Another issue is the ability of the RSV to evade the innate immunity. Just like most viruses, RSV has several mechanisms that assist it in evading the immunity that pre-exists. This makes the infection to reappear even after vaccination; or after acquiring the infection. The challenge remains on how to develop a nano-particle vaccine that can provide a longer immunity against RSV. Conclusion With the invention of nanotechnology vaccines, field work and application of this technology has evolved to an entirely new level. Despite these changes the continual limitation of necessary financial resources continues to constrain the degree and extent to which new breakthroughs are being developed and/or tested. Nano-particle vaccines have gained more favor in the eyes of many individuals within the medical community due to the fact that they are specific and safer to administer; at least as compared to other traditional forms of vaccination. Despite the advances made in the health ladder, diseases such as Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) still pose a challenge; leading to the deaths of many people. Despite the promises made by individuals involved in nano-particles research, several concerns have been raised which limit its use on human beings. For instance, the technical production, level of quality control, and toxicity of adjuvants have dominated the discussion up until this point in time. As RSV infection is still a threat to the lives of many, this requires all stakeholders to invest more in research and time as a means of creating and understanding the mechanisms that nanoparticle vaccines can provide to the general public. There is still hope that with advances in nanotechnology better vaccines will be developed against RSV infection. If current trends continue into the future, it is clear that there will be a shift toward nano-particle vaccines as a means of protecting the population from the RSV infection; as well as many other known illnesses. References A.D.A.M. Medical Encyclopedia (2014). Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). Pubmed Health Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002531/, accessed date: 13/08/2014. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/rsv/research/history.html, Accessed date: 13/08/2014 Cheon, I., Shim, B., Park, S., Choi, Y., Jang, J., Jung, D., & ... Song, M. (2014). Development of Safe and Effective RSV Vaccine by Modified CD4 Epitope in G Protein Core Fragment (Gcf). Plos ONE, 9(4), 1-10. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0094269 Glenn, G. M., Smith, G., Fries, L., Raghunandan, R., Lu, H., Zhou, B., Thomas, D. N., Hickman, S. P., Kapamegan, E., Boddapati, S., & Piedra, P. A. (2013). Safety and immunogenicity of a Sf9 insect cell-derived respiratory syncytial virus fusion protein nanoparticle vaccine. Vaccine. 31(3), 524-532. Graham, B. S. (2011). Biological challenges and technological opportunities for respiratory syncytial virus vaccine development. Immunological reviews. 239(1), 149-166. Gregory, A. E., Titball, R., & Williamson, D. (2013). Vaccine delivery using nanoparticles. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology. 3. Ko, E. J., Kwon, Y. M., Lee, J. S., Hwang, H. S., Yoo, S. E., Lee, Y. N., Lee, Y. T., Kim, M. C., Cho, M. K., Lee, Y. R., Quan, F. S., Song, J.M., Lee, S., Moore, M. L., & Kang, S. M. (2014). Virus-like nanoparticle and DNA vaccination confers protection against respiratory syncytial virus by modulating innate and adaptive immune cells. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine Mamo, T., & Poland, G. A. (2012). Nanovaccinology: the next generation of vaccines meets 21st century materials science and engineering. Vaccine.30(47), 6609-6611. Pison, U., Welte, T., Giersig, M., & Groneberg, D. A. (2006). Nanomedicine for respiratory diseases. European Journal of Pharmacology. 533(1), 341-350. Riedel, S. (2005). Edward Jenner and the history of smallpox and vaccination. Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center). 18(1), 21. Ulery, B. D., Kumar, D., Ramer-Tait, A. E., Metzger, D. W., Wannemuehler, M. J., & Narasimhan, B. (2011). Design of a protective single-dose intranasal nanoparticle-based vaccine platform for respiratory infectious diseases. Plos One. 6(3), e17642. World Health Organization; Available at: http://www.who.int/topics/vaccines/en/, accessed date: 19/08/2014. Yih, T. C., & Al‐Fandi, M. (2006). Engineered nanoparticles as precise drug delivery systems. Journal of Cellular Biochemistry. 97(6), 1184-1190. Yildiz, I., Shukla, S., & Steinmetz, N. F. (2011). Applications of viral nanoparticles in medicine. Current opinion in biotechnology. 22(6), 901-908. Read More