The time course of the immune response to experimental coronavirus infection of man.
Journal: 1990/November - Epidemiology and Infection
ISSN: 0950-2688
PUBMED: 2170159
Abstract:
After preliminary trials, the detailed changes in the concentration of specific circulating and local antibodies were followed in 15 volunteers inoculated with coronavirus 229E. Ten of them, who had significantly lower concentrations of pre-existing antibody than the rest, became infected and eight of these developed colds. A limited investigation of circulating lymphocyte populations showed some lymphocytopenia in infected volunteers. In this group, antibody concentrations started to increase 1 week after inoculation and reached a maximum about 1 week later. Thereafter antibody titres slowly declined. Although concentrations were still slightly raised 1 year later, this did not always prevent reinfection when volunteers were then challenged with the homologous virus. However, the period of virus shedding was shorter than before and none developed a cold. All of the uninfected group were infected on re-challenge although they also appeared to show some resistance to disease and in the extent of infection. These results are discussed with reference to natural infections with coronavirus and with other infections, such as rhinovirus infections.
Relations:
Content
Citations
(107)
References
(29)
Diseases
(1)
Chemicals
(4)
Organisms
(2)
Processes
(1)
Anatomy
(2)
Similar articles
Articles by the same authors
Discussion board
Epidemiol Infect 105(2): 435-446

The time course of the immune response to experimental coronavirus infection of man.

Abstract

After preliminary trials, the detailed changes in the concentration of specific circulating and local antibodies were followed in 15 volunteers inoculated with coronavirus 229E. Ten of them, who had significantly lower concentrations of pre-existing antibody than the rest, became infected and eight of these developed colds. A limited investigation of circulating lymphocyte populations showed some lymphocytopenia in infected volunteers. In this group, antibody concentrations started to increase 1 week after inoculation and reached a maximum about 1 week later. Thereafter antibody titres slowly declined. Although concentrations were still slightly raised 1 year later, this did not always prevent reinfection when volunteers were then challenged with the homologous virus. However, the period of virus shedding was shorter than before and none developed a cold. All of the uninfected group were infected on re-challenge although they also appeared to show some resistance to disease and in the extent of infection. These results are discussed with reference to natural infections with coronavirus and with other infections, such as rhinovirus infections.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (1.3M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Cate TR, Rossen RD, Douglas RG, Jr, Butler WT, Couch RB. The role of nasal secretion and serum antibody in the rhinovirus common cold. Am J Epidemiol. 1966 Sep;84(2):352–363. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Butler WT, Waldmann TA, Rossen RD, Douglas RG, Jr, Couch RB. Changes in IgA and IgG concentrations in nasal secretions prior to the appearance of antibody during viral respiratory infection in man. J Immunol. 1970 Sep;105(3):584–591. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Rossen RD, Butler WT, Waldman RH, Alford RH, Hornick RB, Togo Y, Kasel JA. The proteins in nasal secretion. II. A longitudinal study of IgA and neutralizing antibody levels in nasal washings from men infected with influenza virus. JAMA. 1970 Feb 16;211(7):1157–1161. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Yanagihara R, McIntosh K. Secretory immunological response in infants and children to parainfluenza virus types 1 and 2. Infect Immun. 1980 Oct;30(1):23–28.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Rossen RD, Butler WT, Cate TR, Szwed CF, Couch RB. Protein composition of nasal secretion during respiratory virus infection. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1965 Aug-Sep;119(4):1169–1176. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Crifö S, Vella S, Filiaci F, Resta S, Rocchi G. Secretory immune response after nasal vaccination with live attenuated influenza viruses. Rhinology. 1980 Jun;18(2):87–92. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Holmes MJ, Reed SE, Stott EJ, Tyrrell DA. Studies of experimental rhinovirus type 2 infections in polar isolation and in England. J Hyg (Lond) 1976 Jun;76(3):379–393.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Buscho RF, Perkins JC, Knopf HL, Kapikian AZ, Chanock RM. Further characterization of the local respiratory tract antibody response induced by intranasal instillation of inactivated rhinovirus 13 vaccine. J Immunol. 1972 Jan;108(1):169–177. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Barclay WS, al-Nakib W, Higgins PG, Tyrrell DA. The time course of the humoral immune response to rhinovirus infection. Epidemiol Infect. 1989 Dec;103(3):659–669.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Callow KA. Effect of specific humoral immunity and some non-specific factors on resistance of volunteers to respiratory coronavirus infection. J Hyg (Lond) 1985 Aug;95(1):173–189.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Macnaughton MR. Occurrence and frequency of coronavirus infections in humans as determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Infect Immun. 1982 Nov;38(2):419–423.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Reed SE. The behaviour of recent isolates of human respiratory coronavirus in vitro and in volunteers: evidence of heterogeneity among 229E-related strains. J Med Virol. 1984;13(2):179–192. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Levandowski RA, Ou DW, Jackson GG. Acute-phase decrease of T lymphocyte subsets in rhinovirus infection. J Infect Dis. 1986 Apr;153(4):743–748. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Scheinberg M, Blacklow NR, Goldstein AL, Parrino TA, Rose FB, Cathcart ES. Influenza: response of T-cell lymphopenia to thymosin. N Engl J Med. 1976 May 27;294(22):1208–1211. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dolin R, Richman DD, Murphy BR, Fauci AS. Cell-mediated immune responses in humans after induced infection with influenza A virus. J Infect Dis. 1977 May;135(5):714–719. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Faguet GB. The effect of killed influenza virus vaccine on the kinetics of normal human lymphocytes. J Infect Dis. 1981 Feb;143(2):252–258. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Aoki FY, Stiver HG, Sitar DS, Hammond GW, Milley EV, Vermeersch C, Hughes HE, Cooper T, Sekla L, Lamontage M, et al. Potential of influenza vaccine and amantadine to prevent influenza A illness in Canadian forces personnel 1980-1983. Mil Med. 1986 Sep;151(9):459–465. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Higgins PG, Phillpotts RJ, Scott GM, Wallace J, Bernhardt LL, Tyrrell DA. Intranasal interferon as protection against experimental respiratory coronavirus infection in volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1983 Nov;24(5):713–715.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Barclay WS, Callow KA, Sergeant M, al-Nakib W. Evaluation of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay that measures rhinovirus-specific antibodies in human sera and nasal secretions. J Med Virol. 1988 Aug;25(4):475–482. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Phillpotts RJ. Clones of MRC-C cells may be superior to the parent line for the culture of 229E-like strains of human respiratory coronavirus. J Virol Methods. 1983 May;6(5):267–269. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Holmes MJ, Callow KA, Parry HF. An improved method for recovery of secretory immunoglobulins and lymphocytes from the nasal mucosa. J Immunol Methods. 1987 Apr 16;98(2):183–187. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • LOWRY OH, ROSEBROUGH NJ, FARR AL, RANDALL RJ. Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem. 1951 Nov;193(1):265–275. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Totman R, Kiff J, Reed SE, Craig JW. Predicting experimental colds in volunteers from different measures of recent life stress. J Psychosom Res. 1980;24(3-4):155–163. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Broadbent DE, Broadbent MH, Phillpotts RJ, Wallace J. Some further studies on the prediction of experimental colds in volunteers by psychological factors. J Psychosom Res. 1984;28(6):511–523. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Larson HE, Reed SE, Tyrrell DA. Isolation of rhinoviruses and coronaviruses from 38 colds in adults. J Med Virol. 1980;5(3):221–229. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • LIDWELL OM, WILLIAMS RE. The epidemiology of the common cold. I. J Hyg (Lond) 1961 Sep;59:309–319.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Cavallaro JJ, Monto AS. Community-wide outbreak of infection with a 229E-like coronavirus in Tecumseh, Michigan. J Infect Dis. 1970 Oct;122(4):272–279. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kaye HS, Marsh HB, Dowdle WR. Seroepidemiologic survey of coronavirus (strain OC 43) related infections in a children's population. Am J Epidemiol. 1971 Jul;94(1):43–49. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Monto AS. Medical reviews. Coronaviruses. Yale J Biol Med. 1974 Dec;47(4):234–251.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
MRC Common Cold Unit, Harvard Hospital, Salisbury, Wiltshire, UK.
MRC Common Cold Unit, Harvard Hospital, Salisbury, Wiltshire, UK.
Abstract
After preliminary trials, the detailed changes in the concentration of specific circulating and local antibodies were followed in 15 volunteers inoculated with coronavirus 229E. Ten of them, who had significantly lower concentrations of pre-existing antibody than the rest, became infected and eight of these developed colds. A limited investigation of circulating lymphocyte populations showed some lymphocytopenia in infected volunteers. In this group, antibody concentrations started to increase 1 week after inoculation and reached a maximum about 1 week later. Thereafter antibody titres slowly declined. Although concentrations were still slightly raised 1 year later, this did not always prevent reinfection when volunteers were then challenged with the homologous virus. However, the period of virus shedding was shorter than before and none developed a cold. All of the uninfected group were infected on re-challenge although they also appeared to show some resistance to disease and in the extent of infection. These results are discussed with reference to natural infections with coronavirus and with other infections, such as rhinovirus infections.
Collaboration tool especially designed for Life Science professionals.Drag-and-drop any entity to your messages.