Abstract
SummaryStudies in animal models suggest that protection against malaria induced by intradermal (ID) administration of sporozoites is less effective compared to intravenous injection (IV). We investigated in a murine model the protective efficacy and immune responses after ID or IV immunization of sporozoites. Mice were immunized via either IV or ID route with P. berghei sporozoites in combination with chloroquine treatment (CPS) (allowing full liver stage development) or by γ‐radiation attenuated sporozoites (RAS) (early liver stage arrest). While IV immunization with both RAS and CPS generated 90‐100% protection, ID immunization resulted in reduced levels of protection with either immunization strategy in both Balb/cByJ (50%) and C57BL/6j mice (7‐13%). Lower protection by ID routing associated with a 30‐fold lower parasite liver load (p<0.001 (χ2= 49.08, (df 1)) assessed by real time in vivo imaging of bioluminescent P. berghei parasites. Unlike IV, ID immunization did not result in expansion of CD8+ T‐cells with effector memory phenotype and showed lower IFNγ responses irrespective of the immunization regime. In conclusion, protection against sporozoite infection is likely dependent on parasite liver infection and subsequently generated cellular immune responses.© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
