In 2003, an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza occurred in the Netherlands, caused by an influenza A virus of subtype H7N7 (
6,
8). The hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) genes of the highly pathogenic avian H7N7 influenza viruses displayed a high sequence identity to the HA and NA genes of low-pathogenicity viruses isolated from Dutch mallards in the framework of our ongoing surveillance studies in wild birds (
5,
6). During the 2003 outbreak, 89 cases of human infection were detected, including 3 probable cases of human-to-human transmission. Most of these individuals suffered from conjunctivitis or mild respiratory disease, but a fatal case of acute respiratory distress syndrome also occurred. The virus that was isolated from the fatal case, A/Netherlands/219/03, was found to differ from a virus isolated from a case of conjunctivitis, A/Netherlands/33/03, and the chicken isolate A/Chicken/Netherlands/1/03, in 14 amino acid positions scattered throughout the genome (
6).
Because of their zoonotic potential and pathogenicity, and because close relatives of the H7N7 viruses that caused the outbreak may still circulate in wild birds, the generation of a vaccine strain based on the H7N7 virus was considered desirable. Because the H7N7 viruses isolated from poultry and humans during the outbreak are highly pathogenic, they cannot be used directly for generating a vaccine strain. Recently, vaccine strains for H5 influenza A virus have been generated by removal of the basic cleavage site from the HA genes of highly pathogenic strains. The resulting genetically modified virus strains, lacking this important determinant of high pathogenicity, were used as seed viruses for vaccine production (
9,
11,
17,
25,
26). Since the HA gene of the virus that caused the H7N7 outbreak in the Netherlands was closely related to the HA gene of influenza virus A/Mallard/Netherlands/12/00, we decided to produce a subunit vaccine containing the HA of this low-pathogenicity H7 virus.
Previously, it was shown that vaccination of naive animals with the traditional, nonadjuvanted subunit vaccine did not induce sufficient antibody titers to protect against challenge with influenza A virus (
19,
20). Therefore, we tested the use of immune stimulatory complexes (ISCOMs) as an adjuvant in parallel with the traditional nonadjuvanted subunit vaccine. ISCOMs are particles of approximately 40 nm in diameter with incorporated antigens (
13). ISCOMs are known to induce both antibody and cell-mediated immunity and have been tested as an adjuvant for influenza vaccines in a number of animal models and in humans (
14,
19-
21).
Here, we describe the development and evaluation of a heterologous vaccine against highly pathogenic avian influenza virus of the H7N7 subtype. First, a mouse model for lethal infection with highly pathogenic H7N7 was developed. Subsequently, the protective efficacy of a classical influenza subunit vaccine preparation was compared to that of an ISCOM-adjuvanted vaccine preparation. The classical preparation did not elicit a sufficient immune response to protect mice from a lethal challenge with influenza virus A/Netherlands/219/03 (H7N7) even after two doses. In contrast, two doses of an ISCOM-adjuvanted vaccine preparation were sufficient to protect mice against the lethal challenge, although at day 4 after challenge infection virus could be detected in their lungs.
DISCUSSION
In 2003 there was an outbreak of highly pathogenic avian influenza (H7N7) in the Netherlands. Because of the zoonotic and pandemic potential of the viruses that caused the outbreak, the availability of an effective vaccine was highly desirable. The HA of a virus isolated from a mallard in 2000 had a high sequence identity to the HA gene of the viruses that caused the outbreak. This offered the opportunity to use this low-pathogenicity virus obtained through routine influenza surveillance in wild birds as the basis of a vaccine directed against highly pathogenic avian influenza H7N7 virus. Using reverse genetics, we generated a reassortant seed strain that was used for vaccine preparation. We compared a classical, nonadjuvanted influenza vaccine preparation containing HA and NA with an ISCOM-adjuvanted preparation.
Our experiments clearly showed that, although an antibody response was mounted, the classical influenza vaccine did not protect against lethal infection with influenza virus A/Netherlands/219/03, not even when two doses were administered. One dose of the ISCOM-adjuvanted vaccine preparation did not protect either. Two doses of the ISCOM-adjuvanted vaccine were required for clinical protection against influenza virus A/Netherlands/219/03. Although two doses of the ISCOM-adjuvanted preparation did not lead to sterile immunity against highly pathogenic avian influenza H7N7, virus titers in the lungs of vaccinated mice were reduced considerably. We speculate that this ∼1,000-fold reduction of pulmonary virus titers was responsible for the survival of the animals receiving two doses of the ISCOM vaccine. In the event of a pandemic outbreak, a vaccine offering clinical protection could be sufficient to reduce the clinical impact of infection with the pandemic virus.
Our experiments also showed that it was possible to use a heterologous low-pathogenicity strain as the donor of the HA protein for vaccines directed against highly pathogenic avian influenza virus strains. It should be noted that the HA amino acid sequence of the low-pathogenicity mallard virus and the highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses differed very little; only the HA cleavage site and single-amino-acid substitutions in the signal peptide, HA1, and HA2 were different. Low-pathogenicity strains with such high amino acid sequence identity and such small antigenic differences from highly pathogenic avian influenza strains may not always be available.
An important question that remains is why infected animals were not protected from infection or death despite high HI antibody titers upon repeated vaccination with adjuvanted or nonadjuvanted vaccines, respectively. We performed virus neutralization assays with the sera from vaccinated mice and influenza viruses A/Mallard/Netherlands/12/00 (H7N3) and A/Netherlands/219/03 (H7N7). These experiments revealed that despite the high titers of HI antibodies in these sera (HI titers ranging up to 7,680), virus-neutralizing antibodies were not detectable (titers <40). In contrast, rabbits hyperimmunized with HA and NA of A/Seal/Massachusetts/1/80 (H7N7), which had HI antibody titers of 1,280 and 2,560 against A/Mallard/Netherlands/12/00 (H7N3) and A/Netherlands/219/03 (H7N7), respectively (Table
1), had virus-neutralizing antibody titers against these viruses of 1,280 and 5,120, respectively.
Since the Dutch H7 viruses are thus not resistant to neutralization, the lack of virus neutralization with the mouse sera must be related to the poor induction of neutralizing antibodies upon vaccination. It is of interest to note that the postinfection ferret sera raised in this study also lacked detectable neutralizing antibody titers despite the presence of HI antibodies (Table
1 and data not shown). Furthermore, the H7N7-infected humans in the Netherlands who developed HI antibodies during the outbreak in 2003 did not develop detectable virus-neutralizing antibodies (unpublished). Thus, it may be that the Dutch H7 viruses are poor inducers of neutralizing antibodies. Hence it is possible that cell-mediated immunity or antibodies with poor virus-neutralizing capacity were responsible for the clinical protection of mice vaccinated with the ISCOM-based vaccine.
Experiments like the one described here have been conducted with highly pathogenic strains of the H5N1 subtype, although it is difficult to compare these studies to our own because of the use of different virus subtypes, animal models, adjuvants, vaccine types, timing, and dosage. Using the low-pathogenicity A/Duck/Singapore/Q/F119-3/97 (H5N3) (
12,
26), the low-pathogenicity A/Duck/Hokkaido/67/96 (H5N4), or an H5N1 reassortant thereof (
24), inactivated virus preparations were tested in mice for their possible use in a pandemic situation. In these studies, vaccinated mice survived challenge with the highly pathogenic avian influenza H5 strains A/Hong Kong/483/97 and A/Hong Kong/156/97, even when no adjuvant was used in the vaccine preparations. When alum was used as an adjuvant, mice were even protected from infection (
12).
However promising these studies may seem compared to ours, our results are more in agreement with vaccination studies in a chicken (
20) and monkey (
19) model and with experimental vaccination in humans (
16). When surface antigen of the same A/Duck/Singapore/Q/F119-3/97 strain used in the mouse studies was used as a vaccine in a phase I randomized trial in human volunteers, two doses of a preparation with the adjuvant MF59 were required to reach antibody levels that are considered protective (
16).
Although ISCOMs are not registered for use in humans, the immune response to an ISCOM-adjuvanted influenza vaccine has been tested in humans. When ISCOMs were tested in humans in a randomized, double-blind study, antibody responses to the ISCOM-adjuvanted preparation were improved compared to antibody responses to the conventional influenza vaccine preparation (
21). Although in this study individuals were vaccinated with an ISCOM preparation containing influenza A virus antigens against which there was preexisting immunity, the results in a range of animal models suggest that the ISCOM adjuvant could also work very well to induce immune responses in naive individuals. In addition, ISCOMs are used as an adjuvant in registered equine influenza vaccines (
1,
14).
In case of a pandemic, a two-dose vaccine will be impractical. Therefore, there is an urgent need for new adjuvants or improved vaccine delivery approaches, yielding better immune responses and improved protection against lethal infection, preferably after administration of a single dose.
Although vaccination experiments using highly pathogenic H5 viruses with a deleted basic cleavage site have been successful in animals (
9-
11), these vaccine strains can only be produced as soon as a pandemic threat arises. Furthermore, removal of the basic cleavage site requires an extra modification step and thus more time in the production of a reassortant seed virus. Since we show here that a heterologous vaccine could work well, prototypic envelope proteins of potentially pandemic viruses could be cloned in advance to speed up seed virus production further. Alternatively, vaccine seed viruses could be generated by classical reassortment, eliminating the need for reverse genetics technology. This would not only bypass the patent-related costs of influenza vaccines, but would also enable vaccine manufacturers to produce vaccines without the need for facilities equipped for working with genetically modified organisms.
An important conclusion that can be drawn from the experiments described above is that prototypic low-pathogenicity strains obtained through routine surveillance of wild birds could be used effectively to generate vaccines directed against highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses long before outbreaks in poultry or pandemic threats emerge. A repository of seed virus containing the HAs of viruses with known zoonotic or pandemic potential (H1, H2, H3, H5, H7, and H9) could be prepared in advance. High-growth strains could be generated in order to respond quickly to outbreaks and pandemic threats. Based on the antigenic properties of the virus strains, the most suitable vaccine candidate could then be selected from the repository using new methods for antigenic characterization (
22).