Institute of Biomedical Sciences

Title

Antibody Responses to HIV Protein and Commensal Bacteria After Treatment with Probiotics in a Rhesus Macaque Vaccination Model

Poster Number

14

Document Type

Poster

Status

Graduate Student - Doctoral

Abstract Category

HIV/AIDS

Keywords

HIV, Probiotics, Vaccine, Microbiome

Publication Date

Spring 2018

Abstract

To date there is no highly effective HIV vaccine, and therefore improving vaccine efficacy is of high importance. HIV preferentially replicates within mucosal tissue, and therefore, boosting mucosal immunity may be one strategy to increase vaccine efficacy. Here we studied the effects of microbiome manipulation on antibody responses to vaccination and infection in a rhesus macaque model, and analyzed responses to commensal strains of bacteria.

Male rhesus macaques were divided into treatment groups receiving either daily oral probiotic treatment alone, in conjunction with a DNA (SIV p55 and HIV gp160) plus protein (HIV gp140 trimer) subtype C vaccine, or vaccine alone. Following 26 weeks of treatment, macaques were challenged intra-rectally six weeks later with multiple low doses of subtype C SHIV (SHIV.C.CH505.375H.dCT). Plasma was collected longitudinally throughout treatment course and SHIV infection. Plasma antibody responses were analyzed by indirect ELISA to determine levels of IgG against HIV proteins and 5 bacteria strains.

In the first cohort of macaques (n=3 per group), background cross-reactive antibodies to HIV gp41 but not gp120 protein were detectable before vaccination. Microbiome manipulation through probiotic treatment moderately dampened the anti-gp41 and gp120 antibody response to HIV vaccine and early SHIV infection compared to the vaccine alone group. Antibody responses to gram positive bacteria L. plantarum, L. rhamnosus, and B. cereus as well as gram negative A. junii remain stable post-vaccination and infection in the presence or absence of probiotic treatment; however, antibody responses to gram negative E. coli increased in all macaques post-SHIV infection.

Our preliminary findings suggest that probiotic treatment may moderately affect the antibody response to HIV vaccination or infection, but does not affect the anti-bacterial response in rhesus macaques. This study is currently ongoing and more animals will be studied to increase the sample size. Whether these changes significantly impact immune responses to HIV must be further explored in future studies.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Open Access

1

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 

Antibody Responses to HIV Protein and Commensal Bacteria After Treatment with Probiotics in a Rhesus Macaque Vaccination Model

To date there is no highly effective HIV vaccine, and therefore improving vaccine efficacy is of high importance. HIV preferentially replicates within mucosal tissue, and therefore, boosting mucosal immunity may be one strategy to increase vaccine efficacy. Here we studied the effects of microbiome manipulation on antibody responses to vaccination and infection in a rhesus macaque model, and analyzed responses to commensal strains of bacteria.

Male rhesus macaques were divided into treatment groups receiving either daily oral probiotic treatment alone, in conjunction with a DNA (SIV p55 and HIV gp160) plus protein (HIV gp140 trimer) subtype C vaccine, or vaccine alone. Following 26 weeks of treatment, macaques were challenged intra-rectally six weeks later with multiple low doses of subtype C SHIV (SHIV.C.CH505.375H.dCT). Plasma was collected longitudinally throughout treatment course and SHIV infection. Plasma antibody responses were analyzed by indirect ELISA to determine levels of IgG against HIV proteins and 5 bacteria strains.

In the first cohort of macaques (n=3 per group), background cross-reactive antibodies to HIV gp41 but not gp120 protein were detectable before vaccination. Microbiome manipulation through probiotic treatment moderately dampened the anti-gp41 and gp120 antibody response to HIV vaccine and early SHIV infection compared to the vaccine alone group. Antibody responses to gram positive bacteria L. plantarum, L. rhamnosus, and B. cereus as well as gram negative A. junii remain stable post-vaccination and infection in the presence or absence of probiotic treatment; however, antibody responses to gram negative E. coli increased in all macaques post-SHIV infection.

Our preliminary findings suggest that probiotic treatment may moderately affect the antibody response to HIV vaccination or infection, but does not affect the anti-bacterial response in rhesus macaques. This study is currently ongoing and more animals will be studied to increase the sample size. Whether these changes significantly impact immune responses to HIV must be further explored in future studies.