FIGURE 5
FROM:
Immunization with adenovirus at the large intestinal mucosa as an effective vaccination strategy against sexually transmitted viral infection
Q Zhu, C W Thomson, K L Rosenthal, M R McDermott, S M Collins and J Gauldie
BACK TO ARTICLEFigure 5.

ICR immunization provides comparably effective mucosal protection against HSV-2 transmitted through either rectal or vaginal mucosa. Mice were immunized by ICR (2
109 PFU), IN (5
108 FPU), SC (5
108 PFU), or unimmunized before HSV-2 challenge. Pathology score (left panels), virus replication (middle panels), and mortality (right panels) were examined after either rectal or vaginal challenge. (a) Mice were challenged rectally with 2
106 PFU of HSV-2 3 weeks after immunization by ICR (N=10), IN (N=8), SC (N=7), or without immunization (N=13). No differences in pathology score or viral shedding were found between IN and SC, but both groups were statistically different from the unimmunized group (left panel, P<0.05 and middle panel). IN differed from unimmunized in mortality (right panel, P<0.01). (b) Mice were challenged vaginally with 2
105 PFU of HSV-2 3 weeks after immunization by ICR (N=9), IN (N=7), SC (N=7), or without immunization (N=10). A significant difference in mortality was also found between IN and SC in vaccinated animals (right panel, P<0.05), but not in viral shedding or pathology score. IN, but not SC, was statistically different from unimmunized in both pathology score (left panel, P<0.01) and mortality (right panel, P<0.05). Asterisks of pathology score and mortality indicate a statistical difference of the group in comparison with the ICR immunization group. *, **, and *** indicate P<0.05, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively. ICR, intracolorectal; HSV-2, herpes simplex virus type 2; PFU, plaque-forming unit; IN, intranasal; SC, subcutaneous.
