Given the chronic nature of H. pylori infection, its localization in the gastric mucosa, and its sophisticated immune evasion strategies, I’m curious to hear thoughts from the community on vaccine platform selection.
In your opinion, which approach holds more promise in terms of:
- Inducing strong and durable mucosal immunity (particularly secretory IgA)?
- Stability and efficient delivery to the gastric environment?
- Flexibility in incorporating conserved epitopes to overcome strain variability?
- Overall feasibility in preclinical and clinical settings?
I’m particularly interested in comparing multi-epitope subunit (protein-based) vaccines versus mRNA-based vaccines encoding multiple epitopes.
Any recent insights, experimental data, or references would be greatly appreciated.
In my opinion, for Helicobacter pylori vaccine development, a multi-epitope protein-based vaccine might be more practical and effective in the short term, especially considering the need for mucosal immunity in the gastric environment. Protein vaccines can be paired with mucosal adjuvants like dmLT or chitosan, which are known to enhance local immune responses, particularly IgA. These vaccines are also more feasible for oral or intranasal delivery, which is crucial for targeting the mucosal surface of H. pylori.
On the other hand, mRNA vaccines offer an exciting potential for inducing strong cellular immunity, including CD4+ and CD8+ responses. They are faster to design and adapt, and could be used to address strain variability. However, the major challenge lies in effectively delivering the mRNA to the gastric mucosa, as the acidic environment poses a significant obstacle for the stability and efficacy of the vaccine.
In conclusion, while protein-based vaccines might be more practical for now, overcoming the challenges of mRNA delivery could unlock promising new strategies for H. pylori vaccination in the future.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts