Research Opens Doors To Vaccines That Can Circumvent Maternal Antibodies
Main Category: Immune System / VaccinesArticle Date: 01 Mar 2011 - 1:00 PDT
'Research Opens Doors To Vaccines That Can Circumvent Maternal Antibodies'
| Patient / Public: | ![]() |
2.17 (6 votes) |
| Healthcare Prof: | ![]() |
2.5 (6 votes) |
| Article opinions: | 7 posts |
New research that reveals how maternal antibodies block an immune response to the measles virus is a first step toward improving current childhood vaccination practices, scientists say.
Maternal antibodies are passed to fetuses during pregnancy and to newborns in their mothers' milk. The antibodies protect infants against disease in the first months of life, but that protection comes at a cost: Their presence also interferes with the generation of a natural immune response to vaccination. As a result, most babies receive measles immunizations at the age of 12 to 15 months, when maternal antibodies are gone.
Years of studies have advanced the theory that maternal antibodies shield the measles virus so that cells that generate an immune response can't see the pathogen. If that were the case, little could be done to intervene.
But Ohio State University researchers have demonstrated an entirely different mechanism in an animal model, showing that maternal antibodies bind to a specific receptor that sends a message to stop activation of an immune response to vaccination. The scientists also determined that signals to the immune response can be manipulated, and they are already devising ways that vaccines could be designed to circumvent this natural process.
"In effect, we have found how maternal antibodies affect the off-switch in the immune response, and we have found a potential on-switch," said Stefan Niewiesk, associate professor of veterinary biosciences at Ohio State University and senior author of the study.
The research is published in the online First Edition of the journal Blood.
Under current pediatric practices, children receive measles vaccinations at age 12 to 15 months, and again when they are 5 years old. Maternal antibodies can be active in babies for up to nine months; this schedule is designed to offer protection after the decline of maternal antibodies.
"The maternal antibodies are high at birth, and go down over time. By age 1 year, the maternal antibodies are gone. So this vaccine schedule works quite well if protection is not so urgent. But there is a window of opportunity for measles to come in and infect. So we would like to be able to immunize earlier," said Niewiesk, also an investigator in Ohio State's Center for Microbial Interface Biology.
Niewiesk has been a leader in developing the cotton rat as an animal model for infectious diseases. The animal is susceptible to common human pathogens that affect the respiratory system, and Niewiesk's lab has developed antibodies and other substances that help to evaluate the immune response, which is similar to that found in humans. As a result, researchers around the world have consulted with Niewiesk for years, using the animals to test vaccine candidates. Often, the experimental vaccines do not work in the presence of maternal antibodies. And even for the one vaccine that did work, the researchers couldn't explain why at the time.
In a normal immune response, white blood cells known as B cells grow and release antibodies that are prepared to fight a specific invader, known as an antigen. The B cells are called to action by B cell receptors on their surface; when the antigen binds to these B cell receptors, the cells get the message to proliferate and then secrete antibodies that are made strictly for the task of fending off the attacking virus.
But the Ohio State researchers determined that when maternal antibodies are active, and then an antigen comes along, their presence triggers a different receptor on the B cell surface a receptor known as Fc-gamma RIIB. And because this particular receptor's job is to regulate the immune response, preventing it from going out of control, the receptor tells the B cell to stop don't grow, and don't secrete antigen-specific antibodies.
"The problem is that maternal antibodies come in, and will go away, but this Fc receptor doesn't know it. The receptor reacts 'Hey, there is antibody already, let's not make too much of an immune response.' This binding leads to a negative signal, and it blocks the receptor's positive signal to the B cell," Niewiesk said.
Further investigation of the multiple signals received by B cells suggests that there are ways to work around this effect that the maternal antibodies have on the immune response, said Dhohyung Kim, first author of the paper and a doctoral candidate in Ohio State's graduate program in Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology.
Maternal antibodies are immunoglobulin G (IgG) molecules, a designation based on their structure, and IgG antibodies are among the most potent players in the immune response. In this current work, Kim showed that another type of antibody, an immunoglobulin M molecule, can be used with a measles vaccine and that these IgM antibodies can activate B cells, even when maternal antibodies are present.
The IgM antibodies bind to yet another type of receptor on the B cell surface, Niewiesk explained. "So we are looking at the various ways B cells are being activated, and we already see that we can improve the positive signal to B cells by stimulating them with IgM antibodies," he said.
As part of the study, the researchers disproved the previous theory about how maternal antibodies work a process called epitope masking. This theory suggested that maternal antibodies would bind to specific areas on the measles virus needed for immune response recognition called epitopes and effectively shield the virus so that B cells could neither see the virus nor activate an immune response.
Niewiesk said the scientists knew that the measles virus surface has numerous epitopes, making it highly unlikely that maternal antibodies could block so many different areas of recognition on a single virus. In addition, they showed that suppression of the immune response did not occur if maternal antibody structures were manipulated to prevent them from binding to the Fc-gamma RIIB receptor. That meant that this Fc receptor was key to the mechanism that allowed maternal antibodies to suppress the immune response.
The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases supported this research.
Additional co-authors of the study are Devra Huey and Michael Oglesbee of the Department of Veterinary Biosciences.
This research is part of Ohio State's Targeted Investment in Excellence program in public health preparedness for infectious diseases (PHPID). The TIE program targets some of society's most pressing challenges with a major investment of university resources in programs with a potential for significant impact in their fields.
Source: Ohio State University
Visit our immune system / vaccines section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
26 May. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/217739.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/217739.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
Visitor Opinions (latest shown first)
Why Circumvent Natural Evolutionary Protections
posted by Don on 4 Mar 2011 at 8:55 amIt seems they have avoided the overall question of WHY the maternal antibodies circumvent the child's own immune system. Instead they have sought to override it synthetically in order to vaccinate earlier. Why such a motivation ? Why not study the superior, stabilized, and mature maternal antibodies and how they work to protect and support the child, and develop something that builds on that instead.
ABSURD
posted by Steve on 4 Mar 2011 at 7:07 amThis is one of the most ABSURD pieces I've ever read. Now you want to vaccinate even earlier, give aluminium, 2-phenoxyethanol, formaldehyde, glutamates, etc., etc., even earlier to an infant's developing brain?
These idiots must be stopped. Vaccines need to be given LATER in life when the blood-brain barrier is stronger and more developed if they're going to be given at all.
And the Pharmaceutical companies are not liable in any shape, form or manner for adverse reactions, so there is no reason to make vaccine ingredients safer.
No wonder the anti-vaccine movement is gaining strength.
If it's not broke...
posted by Jennifer on 4 Mar 2011 at 7:00 amWe should be researching how to strengthen the natural way our immune systems work (and they do work wonderfully!), not trying to side step them, arrogantly thinking that we can devise a better way.
Don't experiment with my kid
posted by Mama Bear on 3 Mar 2011 at 4:17 pmHey, how do you guys know this won't come back and hurt my kid negatively ... like other vaccines that have caused injury or death to some children who received them? Oh ya, you don't have anything to worry about since vaccine experimentation is protected from any civil lawsuits due to defective design (meaning your drug damaged my kid because there was something wrong with it!). You can come up with any old reason to experiment on my kid's natural immune system because you can, thanks to the recent Supreme Court Ruling. Gotta love how we are slowly losing our precious rights and liberties to the United Pharmaceuticals of America. "Sorry about that seizure, honey, go cry to your mommy and leave us alone .... Next ..."
Pandora's Box
posted by Dr. B. Deakin on 3 Mar 2011 at 3:50 pmGee...do you think there is a reason that mother nature designed the human immune system like this? Scientists don't use logic or a rational mind and their hubris is going to cause trouble for us all. It's already happening. Leave mother nature alone...it's smarter than humans will ever be. Thank God I have never vaccinated my kids.
Out-of-control pseudo-science
posted by Erwin on 3 Mar 2011 at 10:12 amI totally agree with Michelle: this is science gone mad. It's not even science. Vaccinology is pseudo-science which has been used to give this 200-year-old medical superstition a veneer of legitimacy.
Vaccines have never prevented anything apart frm health, sanity and common sense. As far as I am concerned, vaccination is an organised criminal enterprise dressed up as disease prevention.
Breastfeeding mother
posted by Michelle Robinson on 2 Mar 2011 at 2:44 pmThis is an example of mad science. You think you're helping children from getting the measles but tampering the immune system like this? Want are the long term effects on an otherwise healthy immune system? How do we know kids will not be predisposed other allergic reactions now?
Add Your Opinion On This Article
'Research Opens Doors To Vaccines That Can Circumvent Maternal Antibodies'Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.



