Respuesta inmune y terapia gó©nica con vectores virales adenoasociados / Immune response and gene therapy with adenoassociated viral vectors

En los ó;ºltimos aó;±os la terapia gó;©nica se ha posicionado como una opció;n real y segura en el desarrollo de alternativas terapó;©uticas para la cura y la prevenció;n de diferentes enfermedades. Consiste en la inserció;n de material genó;©tico en un tejido o có;©lula defectuosa, mediante el uso de un vector. Existen varias consideraciones para seleccionar el vector más apropiado, incluyendo el potencial de unió;n y entrada a la có;©lula diana, la capacidad de transferencia del material genó;©tico al nó;ºcleo, la habilidad de expresió;n del inserto y la ausencia de toxicidad. En el panorama actual, los vectores virales más utilizados son los derivados de los virus adenoasociados (AAV). Características como su bioseguridad, baja toxicidad y tropismo selectivo, han posibilitado su evaluació;n como opció;n terapó;©utica en un amplio nó;ºmero de enfermedades monogó;©nicas o complejas. A pesar de sus ventajas, los vectores AAV presentan inconvenientes, siendo el más importante la respuesta inmune del paciente al vector, especialmente la respuesta mediada por anticuerpos neutralizantes (NAb). Los NAb disminuyen la transducció;n del vector e impiden la expresió;n del gen que transporta, limitando su aplicació;n clínica. Por lo tanto, identificar y cuantificar la presencia y actividad de los NAbs, es el primer paso en cualquier protocolo de terapia gó;©nica con vectores AAV. La presencia de NAb depende principalmente de la exposició;n al virus en la naturaleza y varía drásticamente segó;ºn edad, localizació;n geográfica y estado de salud de la persona evaluada.

In recent years, gene therapy has been positioned as a real and safe option in the development of therapeutic alternatives for the cure and prevention of different diseases. It consists in the insertion of genetic material in a defective tissue or cell, through the use of a vector. There are several considerations for selecting the most appropriate vector, including the potential for binding and entry to the target cell, the ability of the genetic material to transfer to the nucleus, the ability to express the insert, and the absence of toxicity. In the current scenario, the most commonly used viral vectors are those derived from adeno-associated viruses (AAV). Characteristics such as biosafety, low toxicity and selective tropism have enabled its evaluation as a therapeutic option in many monogenic or complex diseases. Despite their advantages, AAV vectors have drawbacks, the most important being the patient’s immune response to the vector, especially the response mediated by neutralizing antibodies (NAb). NAbs decrease the transduction of the vector and prevent the expression of the gene it transports, limiting its clinical application. Therefore, identifying and quantifying the presence and activity of NAbs is the first step in any gene therapy protocol with AAV vectors. The presence of NAbs depends mainly on exposure to the virus in nature and varies drastically according to age, geographic location and health status of the person evaluated.

Safety & immunogenicity of tgAAC09, a recombinant adeno-associated virus type 2 HIV-1 subtype C vaccine in India.

Background & objective: A phase 1 trial of adeno-associated virus based HIV-1 subtype C vaccine (tgAAC09) was conducted at two sites in Germany and Belgium and one site in India. This paper reports the safety and immunogenicity of tgAAC09 in healthy adult Indian volunteers. Methods: Between January 2005 and December 2006, 30 consenting volunteers were enrolled in the placebo controlled double-blind dose-escalation trial [3x109, 3x1010 and 3x1011 DNase resistant particles (DRPs)/ml]. Single injection of the candidate vaccine was administered to ten volunteers randomized in 8:2 ratio in vaccine and placebo arms at each dosage level. Results: The mean age of study volunteers (16 men and 14 women) was 34 yr. Six local reactogenicity events and 14 systemic reactogenicity events like malaise, fever, headache and myalgia were reported, both were dose-dependent. The difference between the adverse events reported by vaccine and placebo recipients (79 and 67%) was not significant. A modest IFN-γ ELISPOT response [248 spot forming units (SFU)/million cells] was detected in one volunteer from high dose group and low response (56 and 75 SFU/million cells) in two volunteers in low and mid-dose groups. A post-vaccination dose-dependent increase was observed in anti AAV2 neutralizing titres. None of the volunteers showed a positive antibody response to HIV-1. Interpretation & conclusions: The trial was a benchmark in phase I clinical evaluation of HIV candidate vaccines in India. The vaccine was generally well tolerated and raised no safety concerns. The vaccine was found to be weakly immunogenic. It is essential to understand the role of pre-existing immunity against vectors and significance of evaluation in a prime-boost strategy.