key: cord-0036134-seaa46hz
authors: Kiros, Tadele G.; Levast, Benoît; Auray, Gaël; Strom, Stacy; van Kessel, Jill; Gerdts, Volker
title: The Importance of Animal Models in the Development of Vaccines
date: 2012-03-29
journal: Innovation in Vaccinology
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-4543-8_11
sha: e729626c72be503f3591391c8e6f743a3130bd40
doc_id: 36134
cord_uid: seaa46hz

Efficient translation of basic vaccine research into clinical therapies greatly depends upon the availability of appropriate animal models. Testing novel vaccine candidates in animal models is a critical step in the development of modern vaccines. Animal models are being used to assess the quality and quantity of the immune response, to identify the optimal route of delivery and formulation, to determine protection from infection and disease transmission, and to evaluate the safety and toxicity of the vaccine formulation. Animal models help to make the translation from basic research to clinical application, and they often allow prediction of the vaccine potential, which helps in predicting the financial risks for vaccine manufacturers. Choosing an appropriate animal model has become increasingly important for the field, as each model has its own advantages and disadvantages. In this review, the criteria for selecting the right animal model, the advantages and disadvantages of various animal models, as well as the future needs for animal models are being discussed.

reduction of disease transmission. A plethora of animal models exists, ranging from very small insects to very large livestock species, such as horses or cattle. Animal models are being used to investigate very speci fi c immune mechanisms, such as the traf fi cking and interaction of effector cells, or they can be used to assess larger aspects of vaccine development, such as the induction of herd immunity or to model the spread of a certain disease within a naïve or vaccinated population. Animal models can range greatly, from transgenic and cloned animals to outbred species; from surgical models that facilitate access to certain immune compartments to "humanized" animals; from neonatal to aging animals; and from gnotobiotic to wild type animals. They can be used to model single infections versus co-infections, chronic diseases and autoimmune disorders, and they can be used to analyze herd immunity following vaccination, transmission amongst infected and non-infected animals, as well as studying transfer of passive immunity via the placenta, colostrum, and milk. Thus, choosing the appropriate animal model is critical for the development of modern, more effective vaccines. However, the use of animals for research also comes with an ethical responsibility to treat the animal in the best possible way, and to avoid suffering or unnecessary pain. Thus, the use of animals in research should be limited to circumstances for which no other model exists and should be monitored through ethics committees involving the public.

Testing vaccines in animal models is a critical step in vaccine development, and often the most critical decision point in the long process of developing and registering a vaccine. Hundreds of different models are available to assess various aspects of the immune response. A plethora of species, strains, and mutants are available for these studies and some of them are reviewed in this review.

Many countries promote replacement and reduction of animal experiments for research as much as possible (Wiles et al. 2006 ) , however, as there is no other method currently available to test the induction of immune responses to vaccination the use of animals remains critical in the development of vaccines. However, choosing the most appropriate animal model is crucial for success of the projects and in the long run to save animals and research money. Most vaccines have been evaluated at one point in small rodents, most likely mice. Mice have the advantage of being readily available at a low cost, they are easy to handle, they have de fi ned genetic backgrounds, and their immune functions are well characterized. Furthermore, an abundance of immunological reagents exists for mice allowing a very detailed analysis of the immune response to vaccines. Fewer reagents are available for other species, which limits the level of detail in the analysis. However, large animal species such as pigs, cows and sheep have the advantage of being physiologically and immunologically closer related to man and often are host to the same or closely related pathogens. (Elahi et al. 2007 ; Gerdts et al. 2001 ) . Moreover, large animal species are predominantly outbred, which is important for the development of vaccines as a normal distribution for vaccine responders and non-responders can be seen. The genome for most species has been sequenced and annotated (Bishop et al. 2011 ) , or is in the fi nal process of being annotated. A detailed overview of the potential advantages and disadvantages of various species for vaccine research is provided in Table 11 .1 .

Animal models can be grouped into models used to assess an immune response only, natural disease models, surrogate disease models and surgical or experimental models. These models vary greatly in their scope, their cost and their requirement for special infrastructure.

Models to assess an immune response typically include mice and small rodents, and in most cases are based on the use of speci fi c strains, or knockouts. For example, the linkages between innate and acquired immune response to vaccination can be assessed by using mice that are defective in innate signalling pathways, such as MyD88 −/− or TRIF −/− mice. To assess the type of an immune response induced by a speci fi c vaccine Balb/c mice versus C57 black are commonly used, since reagents are available to assess both cytokine secretion and speci fi c antibody isotypes. However, numerous other strains are available to assess the immune response in mice. Other species commonly used include rabbits, rats and guinea pigs. The advantages of these models is the ability to rapidly assess the immune response to a certain antigen and are commonly used for large screen testing of adjuvants, vaccine formulations or for the assessment of the best route of immunization. Speci fi c strains, knockouts, or even humanized animals are being used to assess certain qualities of the immune response including a shift towards T helper (Th) 1, Th2 or Th17 responses, induction of mucosal versus systemic immunity, onset and duration of immunity etc. The one key characteristic though is that these models can't be used to assess protection against infection, and thus are somewhat limited for the development of vaccines.

These models are commonly used in preclinical vaccine development and refer to the use of species that only under experimental conditions can be infected with the pathogen of interest. These models are somewhat arti fi cial as often higher infection doses, arti fi cial routes of infection, or lack of clinical symptoms are being used. However, they offer the advantages of working with animals that can be easily housed and handled, are cost-effective or are well de fi ned in terms of the immune system. Most often mice are being used, not only for developmental purposes but also from a regulatory point of view for registering a vaccine product, as it allows Non-human primate Very costly ($1,000-20,000); physiologically very similar to humans (depending on species); easy access to mucosal sites and many immune compartments; immune functions well de fi ned; outbred species; hemo-chorial placenta type Very costly ($1,000-20,000); need for special facilities and training; immune system develops post partum

MHC major histocompatibility complex, PRR pattern recognition receptor screening of large numbers of candidate vaccines in a rapid and ef fi cient way and in most cases is more cost effective. In particular the ability to speci fi cally knock out individual genes has helped in the understanding of very speci fi c immune functions and the ability to adoptively transfer immune cells from one animal to another is another major advantage of using mice as surrogate model. More recently, the creation of "humanized" mice, which are generated by the transfer of human stem cells into fetal animals, has further enhanced the potential of surrogate models for vaccine development (Macchiarini et al. 2005 ; Shultz et al. 2007 ) . However, the use of other species as surrogate models is becoming more and more popular. For example, cotton rats are widely accepted as an excellent model for respiratory viruses, and ferrets are being used to model In fl uenza virus infections. Guinea pigs and domestic pigs can be used for tuberculosis research, and pigs are being used for a number of pathogens including Enteromoeba histolytica (Girard-Misguich et al. 2011 ) , Chlamydia trichomatis and Hendra virus (Meurens et al. 2012 ) . We recently developed a novel model for pertussis in newborn piglets (Elahi et al. 2005 ) . This model resembles the disease in human much closer and allows the assessment of both vaccine induced immune responses as well as study of the interaction between the bacterium Bordetella pertussis and the host . Interestingly, pigs are natural host to B. bronchiseptica , and thus many of the results can be directly translated into the development of veterinary vaccines (Elahi et al. 2007 ) . Thus, the use of surrogate models has many advantages over models that are being used to assess the immune response to vaccination only. Surrogate models can be used to understand the role of various aspects of the immune responses including innate and acquired immunity, mucosal versus systemic immunity as well as traf fi cking of effector cells from one immune compartment to another, but offer the major advantage that these fi ndings can be correlated with protection against experimental challenge infection.

These models are based on a speci fi c pathogen and its natural host and have the advantage of resembling the interaction between host and pathogen within the appropriate biological context. Thus, natural models can be used to analyze various aspects of the immune response to immunization and infection including the role of virulence factors during invasion, penetration and toxicity, as well as the host's immune response to the pathogen. Natural disease models include many large animal species, which has proven to be a very successful strategy for developing vaccines against both human and animal diseases ( Rouse and Kaistha 2006 ) . An important advantage of large animal models is the ability to use the natural route of challenge and therefore obtain more relevant correlates of immune-mediated protection. In addition, using large animal models one can fi nd high-and low-responders, which then can be further characterized using genome, proteome and kinome analysis (Jalal et al. 2009 ; Wilkie and Mallard 1999 ) . Vaccine ef fi cacy also varies dramatically when immunizing the very young or the elderly (Lambert et al. 2005 ; Lang et al. 2011 ; Moxon and Siegrist 2011 ) . Natural disease models including Parvovirus , E. coli and Rotavirus infections in pigs and calves have been used to establish the concept of maternal vaccination as an effective strategy to reduce the risk of infection in the neonate. These studies identi fi ed vaccine strategies to optimize the passive transfer of maternal immunity to the newborn and determined the duration of protection following passive transfer of maternal antibodies (Dobrescu and Huygelen 1976 ; Kohara et al. 1997 ; McNulty and Logan 1987 ; Mostl and Burki 1988 ) . As a result, this concept has been introduced into human medicine and several vaccines are now available for immunization of pregnant mothers, and additional candidates are being considered by several countries in the world (Blanchard-Rohner and Siegrist 2011 ; Edwards 2003 ; Poehling et al. 2011 ) .

Another major advantage of natural disease models is the ability to study co-infections between two or more pathogens. There is increasing evidence in the literature that co-infections substantially contribute to the establishment of disease, and in many case are responsible for severe complication and even lethal disease outcomes. This is the case for many viral infections as these are typically followed by a secondary bacterial infection. However, it is also believed to be the case for two viral infections, such as Hepatitis B and C virus (Rodriguez-Inigo et al. 2005 ) , or others. Several co-infection models are well established in large animals including models for respiratory infections in cattle such as combinations of Respiratory bovine coronaviruses (RBCV)/ Pasteurella haemolytica (Storz et al. 2000 ) , Bovine herpes virus 1 (BHV-1)/ Mannheimia hemolytica model (Yates 1982 ) , Bovine virus diarrhea virus (BVDV)/ Mycoplasma bovis (Prysliak et al. 2011 ) to name a few. Other examples include a Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV)/ Streptococcus suis model in pigs (Xu et al. 2010 ) . Thus, using natural disease models has the advantage of being able to study the effect of multifactorial or co-infections in the same host.

They have been used to explore various aspects of vaccine formulation and delivery, including the route of administration, targeting to speci fi c receptors and the induction of mucosal versus systemic immunity. Surgical models allow access to speci fi c immune compartments such as the intestine, lymph nodes or skin tissues. For example, we developed an intestinal gut-loop model in large animals (Gerdts et al. 2001 ) , that can be used to assess the potential of oral vaccines in vivo . Following the original concept of Thiery-Vella loops (Yardley et al. 1978 ) , this model is based on the surgical creation of independent intestinal segments that can remain within the animal for more than 6 months without altered blood or lymph support (Gerdts et al. 2001 ) . After a certain period of time, the segments can be collected and the immune responses in each segment in Peyer's patch, lamina propria and intestinal epithelium assessed (Meurens et al. 2009 ) . The major advantage of this model is the fact that the loops are independent from each other and thus allow the assessment of multiple immune responses to different vaccine formulations within the same animal. This model is now available in a number of species including calves, sheep, pigs and even chicken (Aich et al. 2007 ) . Other surgical models include cannulation of blood vessels or even lymphatics, which allows for the collection of large numbers of speci fi c immune cells (Yen et al. 2006 ) . For example, pseudoafferent lymph which is especially rich in dendritic cells can be collected after removal of the lymph nodes and subsequent stenosis of afferent and efferent lymphatics (Rothel et al. 1998 ) . Other examples of surgical models include the insertion of catheters or pumps for vaccine release at very speci fi c sites, slow release over time or even placement of a bolus to analyze a depot effect.

Animal models are also being used to assess speci fi c issue such as vaccine delivery, topical application or safety and toxicity of vaccine formulations, or individual components thereof. In most cases, this is required by regulatory authorities, which often require the use of at least two species to show safety, in most cases small rodents. However, large animal models have been recognized as useful models. For example, the physiology of the skin is very similar between humans and pigs, which make the pig a good model for studying intracutaneous or topical delivery of vaccines, as well as assessing the safety of novel vaccine formulations.

The ethical use of animals in vaccine research requires that we only choose animals that resemble the disease as closely as possible or that will help to address very speci fi c issues. This should be considered every time an animal experiment is planned. Three examples of considerations for choosing an appropriate animal model are provided below.

The vast majority of pathogens enter via the mucosal surfaces. The induction of both systemic and mucosal immunity, therefore, is an important goal of future vaccines, and models are required to assess whether future vaccines effectively induce mucosal immunity (Gerdts et al. 2006 ) . Not every animal model is well suited for the assessment of mucosal immune responses, as the size of the animal itself and that of the oral and respiratory tract predetermines the accessibility of the mucosal tract, the volume of injection, and the actual route of immunization. For example, intranasal vaccination in mice is often associated with inhalation and ingestion of vaccine antigens, which makes it dif fi cult to discriminate between intranasal, oral and intrapulmonary vaccination. In contrast, larger animal models can be used for the controlled delivery of vaccines to the nasal passages and provide easier access to the mucosal surfaces themselves and mucosal compartments in (Gerdts et al. 2006 . For example, suf fi cient quantities of intraepithelial lymphocytes and lamina propria lymphocytes can be isolated from the mucosal surfaces of pigs, sheep and cattle, without having to compromise on the number of immune cells or having to pool cells from different compartments (Gerdts et al. 2001 ) . Indeed, the nasal passages of sheep and cattle more closely resemble that of humans, and display similar patterns of development (Hein and Griebel 2003 ; Mutwiri et al. 2002 ) . In these species the mucosal immune system develops well before birth, which stands in clear contrast to mice, in which the mucosal immune system only develops after birth. As mentioned above, intestinal models have been developed that allow controlled vaccine delivery to speci fi c mucosal sites including the intestine and which can be used to evaluate mucosal vaccine delivery technologies and adjuvants (Gerdts et al. 2001 ; Mutwiri et al. 2005 ) .

Neonates are amongst the most susceptible to infectious diseases and millions of infants and young children die every year due to infection with infectious pathogens. This is due to a number of factors including the challenges associated with a developing immune system, an inability to respond to glycoconjugate vaccines, limited access to vaccines, as well as the absence of vaccines for devastating diseases such as RSV and others (PrabhuDas et al. 2011 ) . Vaccine research speci fically for neonates, however, is currently hampered by the absence of good animal models to study the induction of immune responses and immune memory in the context of a neonatal immune system. For example, the neonatal period in mice is much shorter than in man, which makes the use of mice for developing neonatal vaccines highly problematic. A number of large animal models may be more representative of immune system ontogeny in humans (Elahi et al. 2007 ) . For example, using a fetal lamb model we were able to show that oral immunization with a DNA vaccine was highly effective in fetuses and induced strong mucosal and systemic immune responses, as well as long-term memory in the developing immune system (Gerdts et al. 2000 . Large animal models may be much more appropriate for evaluating vaccine immune responses in the neonate and addressing questions regarding possible interactions between vaccines and maternal antibodies . For example, novel vaccine formulations including adjuvants have to 

An area of rapid development in vaccine research is the area of vaccine delivery. Both human and animal vaccines are moving away from needles, either because of the risk of broken needles in meat products or because of the low compliance rate in young children and infants. Interestingly, the recent pandemic has revealed that even in adults, the injection via needle is becoming less accepted by the public. Thus, novel strategies for vaccine delivery are required, using needle-free injectors, intradermal patches or topical applications. Appropriate animal models are required that fi rstly resemble the skin physiology in humans, secondly allow testing of injectors and that at the same time allow delivery of the vaccine under real conditions (Table 11 .2 ). Both pigs and cows have been frequently used to assess such novel vaccine technologies, and allow intradermal application of even larger volumes of vaccine (van Drunen Littel-van den Hurk et al. 2006 ) . Needle-free devices such as electroporation (van Drunen Littel-van den Hurk and Hannaman 2010 ) have been shown to be highly effective in cattle and pigs (van Drunen Littel-van den Hurk et al. 2008 and are currently developed for practical application. Other devices, such as needle-free injectors have been successfully tested in pigs.

Animal models are critical for the development of vaccines. They are required to determine the quality and quantity of an immune response to vaccination, they are required for assessing the safety and toxicity of vaccine formulations, they are used to determine the ef fi cacy of the vaccine in providing protection against challenge infection, and they are often used to assess the potential of preventing disease transmission within a speci fi c population. Thus, selecting the most appropriate animal model for the speci fi c needs of the research project is critical, and rather than being driven by low cost and ease of handling, researchers should look for models that closely resemble the target species and thus produce results that could be quickly translated into real products. In the long term, large amounts of money, time and resources can be saved that way.

Comparative analysis of innate immune responses following infection of newborn calves with bovine rotavirus and bovine coronavirus

Targeting bacterial secretion systems: bene fi ts of disarmament in the microcosm

Report from the second international symposium on animal genomics for animal health: critical needs, challenges and potential solutions

Vaccination during pregnancy to protect infants against in fl uenza: why and why not?

Protection of piglets against neonatal E. coli enteritis by immunization of the sow with a vaccine containing heat-labile enterotoxin (LT) I. Protection against experimentally induced diarrhoea

Pertussis: an important target for maternal immunization

Infection of newborn piglets with Bordetella pertussis: a new model for pertussis

The bene fi ts of using diverse animal models for studying pertussis

Fetal immunization by a DNA vaccine delivered into the oral cavity

Multiple intestinal 'loops' provide an in vivo model to analyse multiple mucosal immune responses

Oral DNA vaccination in utero induces mucosal immunity and immune memory in the neonate

Mucosal delivery of vaccines in domestic animals

Use of animal models in the development of human vaccines

Towards the establishment of a porcine model to study human amebiasis

Antibody responses in adult and neonatal Balb/c mice to immunization with novel Bordetella pertussis vaccine formulations

West Nile virus vaccines

A road less travelled: large animal models in immunological research

Genome to kinome: species-speci fi c peptide arrays for kinome analysis

Enhancement of passive immunity with maternal vaccine against newborn calf diarrhea

The novel adjuvant combination of CpG ODN, indolicidin and polyphosphazene induces potent antibody-and cell-mediated immune responses in mice

Can successful vaccines teach us how to induce ef fi cient protective immune responses

Vaccine effectiveness in older individuals: what has been learned from the in fl uenza-vaccine experience

Humanized mice: are we there yet?

Effect of vaccination of the dam on rotavirus infection in young calves

Early immune response following Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica serovar Typhimurium infection in porcine jejunal gut loops

The pig: a model for human infectious diseases

Incidence of diarrhoea and of rotavirus-and coronavirus-shedding in calves, whose dams had been vaccinated with an experimental oil-adjuvanted vaccine containing bovine rotavirus and bovine coronavirus

The next decade of vaccines: societal and scienti fi c challenges

Induction of mucosal immune responses following enteric immunization with antigen delivered in alginate microspheres

Microparticles for oral delivery of vaccines

Combination adjuvants: the next generation of adjuvants?

Marek's disease virus: from miasma to model

Impact of maternal immunization on in fl uenza hospitalizations in infants

In fl uence of maternal antibodies on active pertussis toxoid immunization of neonatal mice and piglets

Decreased shedding of Escherichia coli O157:H7 by cattle following vaccination with type III secreted proteins

Challenges in infant immunity: implications for responses to infection and vaccines

Respiratory disease caused by Mycoplasma bovis is enhanced by exposure to bovine herpes virus 1 (BHV-1) and not to bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) type 2

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) can coinfect the same hepatocyte in the liver of patients with chronic HCV and occult HBV infection

Antibody and cytokine responses in efferent lymph following vaccination with different adjuvants

A tale of 2 alpha-herpesviruses: lessons for vaccinologists

Humanized mice in translational biomedical research

Coronavirus and Pasteurella infections in bovine shipping fever pneumonia and Evans' criteria for causation

Electroporation for DNA immunization: clinical application

Needle-free delivery of veterinary DNA vaccines

Electroporation-based DNA transfer enhances gene expression and immune responses to DNA vaccines in cattle

Electroporation enhances immune responses and protection induced by a bovine viral diarrhea virus DNA vaccine in newborn calves with maternal antibodies

Modelling infectious disease -time to think outside the box?

Selection for high immune response: an alternative approach to animal health maintenance?

Secondary infection with Streptococcus suis serotype 7 increases the virulence of highly pathogenic porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus in pigs

Local (immunoglobulin A) immune response by the intestine to cholera toxin and its partial suppression with combined systemic and intra-intestinal immunization

A review of infectious bovine rhinotracheitis, shipping fever pneumonia and viral-bacterial synergism in respiratory disease of cattle

A sheep cannulation model for evaluation of nasal vaccine delivery