背景:在撒哈拉以南非洲地区,蛇咬伤毒液造成了较高的死亡率和发病率负担。抗蛇毒血清是毒害治疗的主要手段,迫切需要为该地区开发具有广泛中和功效的抗蛇毒血清。通常考虑到它们的医学重要性和可用性,选择用作免疫原来制造蛇抗血清的毒液。此外,应考虑它们诱导具有高中和能力的抗体应答的能力,一个涉及免疫计划和正在免疫的动物物种的问题。
结果:使用小鼠的致死性中和测定法,我们比较了免疫马产生的抗血清的粒内中和范围与单特异性,双特异性/单属,和用Bitisspp毒液配制的多特异性/单属免疫原。,回声。,Dendroaspisspp.,吐痰眼镜蛇。或者不随地吐痰的眼镜蛇。发现所有免疫原产生的抗血清都能中和同源毒液,除了一个例外,异源同种毒液(分别考虑吐痰和非吐痰眼镜蛇)。总的来说,Bitisspp的多特异性抗血清,回声,和Dendroaspisspp对这些属的毒液给出了最好的中和曲线。吐痰眼镜蛇毒液,单特异性之间的中和能力没有显着差异,双特异性和多特异性抗血清。在非随地吐痰眼镜蛇的情况下也获得了类似的结果,除了多特异性抗血清与单特异性抗血清相比,多特异性抗血清对黑藻和黑藻的毒液更有效。
结论:使用多特异性免疫原是生产具有广泛中和作用的单属抗蛇毒血清的最佳替代方法,回声,眼镜蛇属(非随地吐痰)和Dendroaspis属。另一方面,由眼镜蛇毒液组成的单特异性免疫原适用于生产具有广泛中和作用的单属抗蛇毒血清。这些发现可用于撒哈拉以南非洲广泛中和范围的抗蛇毒血清的设计。
BACKGROUND: Snakebite envenomation inflicts a high burden of mortality and morbidity in sub-Saharan Africa. Antivenoms are the mainstay in the therapy of envenomation, and there is an urgent need to develop antivenoms of broad neutralizing efficacy for this region. The venoms used as immunogens to manufacture snake antivenoms are normally selected considering their medical importance and availability. Additionally, their ability to induce antibody responses with high neutralizing capability should be considered, an issue that involves the immunization scheme and the animal species being immunized.
RESULTS: Using the lethality neutralization assay in mice, we compared the intrageneric neutralization scope of antisera generated by immunization of horses with monospecific, bispecific/monogeneric, and polyspecific/monogeneric immunogens formulated with venoms of Bitis spp., Echis spp., Dendroaspis spp., spitting Naja spp. or non-spitting Naja spp. It was found that the antisera raised by all the immunogens were able to neutralize the homologous venoms and, with a single exception, the heterologous congeneric venoms (considering spitting and non-spitting Naja separately). In general, the polyspecific antisera of Bitis spp, Echis spp, and Dendroaspis spp gave the best neutralization profile against venoms of these genera. For spitting Naja venoms, there were no significant differences in the neutralizing ability between monospecific, bispecific and polyspecific antisera. A similar result was obtained in the case of non-spitting Naja venoms, except that polyspecific antiserum was more effective against the venoms of N. melanoleuca and N. nivea as compared to the monospecific antiserum.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of polyspecific immunogens is the best alternative to produce monogeneric antivenoms with wide neutralizing coverage against venoms of sub-Saharan African snakes of the Bitis, Echis, Naja (non-spitting) and Dendroaspis genera. On the other hand, a monospecific immunogen composed of venom of Naja nigricollis is suitable to produce a monogeneric antivenom with wide neutralizing coverage against venoms of spitting Naja spp. These findings can be used in the design of antivenoms of wide neutralizing scope for sub-Saharan Africa.