An Effective CTL Peptide Vaccine for Ebola Zaire Based on Survivors’ CD8+ Targeting of a Particular Nucleocapsid Protein Epitope with Potential Implications for COVID-19 Vaccine Design
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
The 2013-2016 West Africa EBOV epidemic was the biggest EBOV outbreak to date. An analysis of virus-specific CD8+ T-cell immunity in 30 survivors showed that 26 of those individuals had a CD8+ response to at least one EBOV protein. The dominant response (25/26 subjects) was specific to the EBOV nucleocapsid protein (NP). It has been suggested that epitopes on the EBOV NP could form an important part of an effective T-cell vaccine for Ebola Zaire. We show that a 9-amino-acid peptide NP44-52 (YQVNNLEEI) located in a conserved region of EBOV NP provides protection against morbidity and mortality after mouse adapted EBOV challenge. A single vaccination in a C57BL/6 mouse using an adjuvanted microsphere peptide vaccine formulation containing NP44-52 is enough to confer immunity in mice. Our work suggests that a peptide vaccine based on CD8+ T-cell immunity in EBOV survivors is conceptually sound and feasible. Nucleocapsid proteins within SARS-CoV-2 contain multiple class I epitopes with predicted HLA restrictions consistent with broad population coverage. A similar approach to a CTL vaccine design may be possible for that virus.
Article activity feed
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.02.25.963546: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar …
SciScore for 10.1101/2020.02.25.963546: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Institutional Review Board Statement not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding not detected. Power Analysis not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Table 2: Resources
No key resources detected.
Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).
Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.
Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.
Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.
Results from rtransparent:- No conflict of interest statement was detected. If there are no conflicts, we encourage authors to explicit state so.
- Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
- No protocol registration statement was detected.
-
