Mice were anaesthetized by an intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection of ZRF (zolazepam [3.3 mg/mL], tiletamine [3.3 mg/mL], xylazine [0.45 mg/mL], fentanyl [2.6 μg/mL]) at 10 μL/g body weight. Immunizations were performed by first shaving the hind legs of anaesthetized mice, followed by an intramuscular (i.m.) injection of 50 μL DNA (0.5 mg/mL) solution into each quadriceps, immediately followed by five-pulse electroporation of the injection site with an AgilePulse system (Harvard Apparatus BTX, Holliston, MA). Protein vaccination was performed under anesthesia by i.m. injection of 50 μL vaccine solution in each quadriceps. For commercial vaccines, 2 × 50 μL of Flublok (Sanofi Pasteur, France) or a 1:1 mixture of Pandemrix:AS03 (GSK, Belgium) was delivered i.m. Viral influenza challenges were done by infecting anaesthetized mice intranasally (i.n.) with a virus dose of 5× the 50% lethal dose (LD50) in 10 μL per nostril. The LD50 dose was established by the Reed and Muench method and titrations of virus in mice. The viral strains used in this study were A/Puerto Rico/8/1934(H1N1), A/California/07/2009(H1N1), and RG14 [reassorted PR8 virus with H5 from A/Viet Nam/04/2005(H5N1)].
Influenza Vaccine Efficacy in Mice
Mice were anaesthetized by an intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection of ZRF (zolazepam [3.3 mg/mL], tiletamine [3.3 mg/mL], xylazine [0.45 mg/mL], fentanyl [2.6 μg/mL]) at 10 μL/g body weight. Immunizations were performed by first shaving the hind legs of anaesthetized mice, followed by an intramuscular (i.m.) injection of 50 μL DNA (0.5 mg/mL) solution into each quadriceps, immediately followed by five-pulse electroporation of the injection site with an AgilePulse system (Harvard Apparatus BTX, Holliston, MA). Protein vaccination was performed under anesthesia by i.m. injection of 50 μL vaccine solution in each quadriceps. For commercial vaccines, 2 × 50 μL of Flublok (Sanofi Pasteur, France) or a 1:1 mixture of Pandemrix:AS03 (GSK, Belgium) was delivered i.m. Viral influenza challenges were done by infecting anaesthetized mice intranasally (i.n.) with a virus dose of 5× the 50% lethal dose (LD50) in 10 μL per nostril. The LD50 dose was established by the Reed and Muench method and titrations of virus in mice. The viral strains used in this study were A/Puerto Rico/8/1934(H1N1), A/California/07/2009(H1N1), and RG14 [reassorted PR8 virus with H5 from A/Viet Nam/04/2005(H5N1)].
Corresponding Organization : Oslo University Hospital
Variable analysis
- DNA vaccine administration method (intramuscular injection with electroporation)
- Protein vaccine administration method (intramuscular injection)
- Commercial vaccine administration method (intramuscular injection)
- Immune response to the vaccines
- Survival rate of mice after viral challenge
- Mouse strain (female BALB/c mice)
- Anesthesia method (intraperitoneal injection of ZRF)
- Viral strains used for challenge (A/Puerto Rico/8/1934(H1N1), A/California/07/2009(H1N1), and RG14 [reassorted PR8 virus with H5 from A/Viet Nam/04/2005(H5N1)])
- Commercial vaccines (Flublok and Pandemrix:AS03)
- Not explicitly mentioned
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!