Naked plasmid DNA formulation: effect of different disaccharides on stability after lyophilisation.

Since plasmid DNA (pDNA) is unstable in solution, lyophilisation can be used to increase product shelf life. To prevent stress on pDNA molecules during lyophilisation, cryo- and lyoprotectants have to be added to the formulation. This study assessed the effect of disaccharides on naked pDNA stability after lyophilisation using accelerated stability studies. Naked pDNA was lyophilised with sucrose, trehalose, maltose or lactose in an excipient/DNA w/w ratio of 20. To one part of the vials extra residual moisture was introduced by placing the vials half opened in a 25 degrees C/60% RH climate chamber, before placing all vials in climate chambers (25 degrees C/60% RH and 40 degrees C/75% RH) for stability studies. An ex vivo human skin model was used to assess the effect of disaccharides on transfection efficiency. Lyophilisation resulted in amorphous cakes for all disaccharides with a residual water content of 0.8% w/w. Storage at 40 degrees C/75% RH resulted in decreasing supercoiled (SC) purity levels (sucrose and trehalose maintained approximately 80% SC purity), but not in physical collapse. The addition of residual moisture (values between 7.5% and 10% w/w) resulted in rapid collapse except for trehalose and decreasing SC purity for all formulations. In a separate experiment disaccharide formulation solutions show a slight but significant reduction (<3% with sucrose and maltose) in transfection efficiency when compared to pDNA dissolved in water. We demonstrate that disaccharides, like sucrose and trehalose, are effective lyoprotectants for naked pDNA.

Lipopolysaccharide contamination in intradermal DNA vaccination: toxic impurity or adjuvant?

PURPOSE: Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) are known both as potential adjuvants for vaccines and as toxic impurity in pharmaceutical preparations. The aim of this study was to assess the role of LPS in intradermal DNA vaccination administered by DNA tattooing. METHOD: Mice were vaccinated with a model DNA vaccine (Luc-NP) with an increasing content of residual LPS. The effect of LPS on systemic toxicity, antigen expression and cellular immunity was studied. RESULTS: The presence of LPS in the DNA vaccine neither induced systemic toxicity (as reflected by IL-6 concentration in serum), nor influenced antigen expression (measured by intravital imaging). Higher LPS contents however, appeared to be associated with an elevated cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL) response but without reaching statistical significance. Interestingly, the DNA tattoo procedure by itself was shown to induce a serum cytokine response that was at least as potent as that induced by parenteral LPS administration. CONCLUSION: LPS does not show toxicity in mice vaccinated by DNA tattooing at dose levels well above those encountered in GMP-grade DNA preparations. Thus, residual LPS levels in the pharmaceutical range are not expected to adversely affect clinical outcome of vaccination trials and may in fact have some beneficial adjuvant effect. The observed pro-inflammatory effects of DNA tattoo may help explain the high immunogenicity of this procedure.