Scientific reports · 2025
Intranasal administration of a panreactive influenza antibody reveals Fc-independent mode of protection.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Beukenhorst Anna L, Rice Keira L, Frallicciardi Jacopo, Koldijk Martin H, Boudreau Carolyn M, Crawford Justin, Cornelissen Lisette A H M, da Costa Kelly A S, de Jong Babette A, Fischinger Stephanie, Julg Boris, Klap Jaco M, Koch Clarissa M, Magyarics Zoltán, Mohamed Faez A Nait, Okonkwo Vintus, Adams Lindsey, McCarthy Caitlin M, Ronsard Larance, Temperton Nigel, Vietsch Helene, Wichapong Kanin, Ziere Bertjan, Lingwood Daniel, Goudsmit Jaap
Аннотация
Monoclonal antibodies have two core mechanisms of protection: an antibody's antigen-binding fragment (Fab) can bind and neutralize viral pathogens and its fragment crystallizable domain (Fc) catalyzes effector functions. We investigated the relative contribution of Fab- versus Fc-mediated mechanisms of protection through passive administration of distinct forms of the pan-reactive anti-influenza antibody CR9114. We demonstrated that the contribution of Fc-independent (Fab-dependent) versus Fc-dependent mechanisms of protection is defined by the route of administration. We used CR9114 variants (wild-type, two Fc-silenced variants, or the bivalent antigen-binding fragment F(ab')2), administered either intravenously or intranasally. We found that intravenously-administered CR9114 requires the Fc domain to provide potent, pre-exposure protection against influenza A and B viral challenge. In contrast, when CR9114 was administered locally to the nasal mucosa, the main mode of protection was provided by F(ab')2, and was largely Fc-independent. Importantly, this mode of protection following intranasal administration also applied to non-neutralized influenza B strains. Moreover, intranasal administration resulted in an increase in potency against influenza A/H1N1, A/H5N1, A/H3N2, B/Yam and B/Vic compared to intravenous administration up to 50-fold. These results shed new light on the application of monoclonal antibodies such as CR9114 to combat viral infection locally, and will help inform clinical strategies of pre-exposure prophylaxis. More fundamentally, this study uncovers distinct modes of protection for systemic versus intranasally-administered prophylactic antibodies.