Both SOL and MP generated significantly higher amounts of IL-12p40 and IFN-γ

and lower amount of IL-10 showing a clear Th1 shift. Interestingly, 7 days after challenge, the IL-10 levels rebounded in the SOL group find more to levels comparable to that of Quadracel®. Thus, the MP formulation seems to maintain the Th1 response for a longer duration than SOL formulation. In summary, we demonstrated that immunization with PTd encapsulated into microparticles and adjuvanted with CpG ODN and IDR induced strong Th1 responses and partial protection against challenge with B. pertussis. From here on, future studies will determine whether inclusion of additional antigens like Pertactin and/or FHA in our formulations may result in enhanced protection comparable to commercial selleck acellular or cellular vaccines in a single shot model. This work was supported by a grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation through the Grand Challenges in Global Health Initiative and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Nelson Eng was supported by a post-doctoral fellowship from the Saskatchewan Health Research Foundation; Jason Kindrachuk received a fellowship from the Canadian Cystic Fibrosis Foundation; REWH holds a Canada Research Chair in Microbiology. We acknowledge Jill van Kessel,

Stacy Strom, Rachelle Buchanan and the Animal Care personnel at the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization for their assistance in this project. This manuscript has been approved by the Director of VIDO as manuscript#582. “
“In the course of replication most viruses make defective-interfering (DI) viruses, which are virus particles composed of a normal set of viral proteins encapsidating a deleted version of the viral genome. Because they lack essential genetic information, DI

viruses are replication deficient. Replication of the defective genome is achieved by the presence in the same cell CYTH4 of a genetically compatible infectious genome, usually from the virus that generated the DI genome, and which provides the missing function(s) in trans. DI virus is thus totally dependent on infectious virus for replication. Interference occurs when the ratio of defective: infectious genomes increases to a level which results in a reduction of the amount of infectious virus produced [1], [2], [3], [4] and [5]. Most of our knowledge comes from studies in cultured cells, but there is also limited evidence that DI virus can protect against virus diseases in vivo [6], [7], [8], [9] and [10]. The conventional view, developed by extrapolation from in vitro studies, is that the protection afforded in vivo is also due to competition between the DI and infectious viruses at the level of genome replication. However, in those cases where in vivo protection has been seen there is little direct evidence for this or any other mechanism.