高级检索
翁景清, 李敏红, 方春福, 傅桂明, 俞樟有, 汪建江, 俞水明, 刘文雪. 肾综合征出血热疫苗交叉加强免疫抗体应答水平[J]. 中国公共卫生, 2003, 19(3): 275-276.
引用本文: 翁景清, 李敏红, 方春福, 傅桂明, 俞樟有, 汪建江, 俞水明, 刘文雪. 肾综合征出血热疫苗交叉加强免疫抗体应答水平[J]. 中国公共卫生, 2003, 19(3): 275-276.
WENG Jing-qing, LI Min-hong, FANG Chun-fu, . Study on antibody response level after cross strengthening immunity with vaccine against hemorrhagic fever of renal syndrome[J]. Chinese Journal of Public Health, 2003, 19(3): 275-276.
Citation: WENG Jing-qing, LI Min-hong, FANG Chun-fu, . Study on antibody response level after cross strengthening immunity with vaccine against hemorrhagic fever of renal syndrome[J]. Chinese Journal of Public Health, 2003, 19(3): 275-276.

肾综合征出血热疫苗交叉加强免疫抗体应答水平

Study on antibody response level after cross strengthening immunity with vaccine against hemorrhagic fever of renal syndrome

  • 摘要:
      目的   研究在肾综合征出血热(HFRS)双价灭活疫苗基础免疫的基础上, 1年后分别用双价苗和Ⅰ型、Ⅱ型单价苗分别进行加强免疫, 以观察不同型别疫苗加强后机体的抗体应答水平及区别, 以确定加强疫苗剂型。
      方法   对206名疫苗接种者中的部分接种者, 在基础免疫后2周及1年后(加强前)和加强后2周、1年分别采集血清, 以间接免疫荧光试验(IFA)和微量细胞病变中和试验(MCPENT)检测IFA-IgG抗体和中和抗体。
      结果   (1) 基础免疫后2周IFA-IgG抗体阳转率为96.76%, GMT为38.05;中和抗体阳转率: Ⅰ型为100%, Ⅱ型为92.50%;中和抗体GMT: Ⅰ型为20.82, Ⅱ型为15.66.(2)基础免疫后1年(加强前)IFA-IgG抗体阳转率降为51.91%, GMT也降到25.45;中和抗体阳转率: Ⅰ型为55.81%, Ⅱ型为46.51%.中和抗体GMT也分别降到5.45和5.18.(3)加强免疫后2周IFA-IgG抗体阳转率回升到98.46%, GMT也上升到38.02;同时中和抗体性率: 3组两型抗体均为100%阳转; Ⅰ型抗体GMT分别为20.01, 46.66和12.42;Ⅱ型抗体和GMT分别为20.00、19.99和16.82。
      结论   在双价疫苗基础免疫的基础上, 通过3种疫苗加强免疫, 产生的IFA抗体和中和抗体在阳性率和GMT水平3组间很接近, 但Ⅰ型苗组应答的Ⅰ型中和抗体GMT是3组中最高的。提示: 在双价苗基础免疫的基础上, 可以考虑使用与该疫区相同型别的单价疫苗进行加强免疫, 以降低疫苗接种成本和减轻接种者的经济负担。

     

    Abstract:
      Objective   To detemine the type of vaccine for streng thening immunity on the basis of fundamental immunity 1 year ago with biovalent inactivated vaccine against HFRS, by comparing the antibody response level after strenghening immunity with bivalent, typeⅠand typeⅡunivalent vaccine, respectively.
      Methods   Serum samples were taken from 206 vaccinated objects after 2 weeks later(after fundamental immunity), 1 year later(before strenghening immunity), 2 weeks and 1 year later(after strengthening immunity), respectively.Indirect immu noflu orescence test and MCPEBT were used to assay IFA-IgG antibody and neutralizing antibody.
      Results   (1) Two weeks later(after fundamental immunity), positive rate of IFA-IgG antibody was 96.76% and geometrical mean titration(GMT)was 38.05.Positive rate of neutralizing antibody was 100% for typeⅠ, and 92.50% for typeⅡ.GMT of neutralizing antibody was 20.82 for typeⅠ, and 15.66 for type Ⅱ.(2)One year later(before strengthening immunity), positive rate and GMT of IFA-IgG antibody decreased to 51.91% and 25.45, respectively.Positive rate of neutr alizing antibody was 55.81% for typeⅠ, and 46.51% for typeⅡ.GMT of neutralizing antibody was 5.45 for typeⅠ, and 5.18 for typeⅡ.(3)Two weeks later(after strenghening immunity), positive rate of IFA-IgG antibody increased to 98.46%, and GMT also increased to 38.02.Meanwhile, positive rate of two types of neutr alizing body were all 100% in three groups.GMT of typeⅠ antibody was 20.01, 46.66 and 12.42 in the corresponding group, respectively.GMT of typeⅡ antibody was 20.00, 19.99 and 16.82 in the corresponding group, respectiv ely.
      Conclusion   By strenthening immunity with either type of vaccine on the basis of fundamental immunity with bivalent vaccine, positive rate and GMT of both IFA-IgG antibody and neutralizing antibody in three groups were very approximate.But GMT of typeⅠneutralizing antibody in typeⅠ univalent vaccine group was the highestin three groups.It was indicated that on the basis of fundamental immunity with bivalent vaccine, strengthening immunity with univalent vaccine, the type being the same with the focus type, would be recommendable for the benefit of less economic burden on objects of vaccination.

     

/

返回文章
返回