Author and Year | Type of study (in vitro or in vivo) | Type of vaccine (DNA or protein-antibody) | Type of animal (in vivo studies) and type of cell | Route of administration (in vivo studies) | Results | Conclusion |
[11] Yang et al., 2009. | In vivo | Vaccine DNA pGJA-P/VAX | Gnotobiotic mice and rats | Intranasal | Increased production of IgG and SIgA. Decreased growth of caries lesions in enamel, dentin light lesions and dentin moderate lesions of 21.1%, 33.0% and 40.9%, respectively. | The production process of pGJA-P/ VAX preparation was efficient. The vaccine showed a high degree of purity and desired efficiency, thereby facilitating future clinical trials of this anticaries DNA vaccine. |
[10] Zhang et al., 2007. | In vivo/in vitro | Vaccine DNA pGJA-P/VAX1 pGJA-P pGLUA-P | Gnotobiotic hamster/human dendritic cells | Intramuscular/ intranasal | Vaccines pGJA-P/vax1 and pGJA-P induced higher response of salivary and serum antibodies than pGLUA-P. Fewer caries lesions were observed in hamsters immunized with pGJA-P/vax1 and pGJA-P. | The antigen encoded by CTLA-4 associated to DNA vaccine pGJA-P/vax1 can bind specifically to human dendritic cells. Furthermore, this combination increased the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of the vaccine. |
[9] Xu et al., 2005. | In vivo | Vaccine DNA pGJA-P/VAX | Mice | Intranasal | Antibody responses induced by pGJA-P/ VAX lasting more than 6 months. Furthermore, the pGJA-P/VAX could still be detected either at the site of inoculation, and in the cervical lymph nodes draining, 6 months after immunization. | The persistent immune responses are probably due to the deposit of DNA into the host, which acts as a booster immunization. Thus, there is a greater immunological memory. |
[29] Xu et al., 2007. | In vivo | Vaccine DNA pGJA-P/VAX | Rats | Intranasal | SIgA response were induced, resulting in reduction of enamel and dentin lesions caused by S. mutans and reduced enamel lesions in individuals infected with S. sobrinus | pGJA-P/VAX induces immune response only to infection by S. mutans, but also provided cross-protection against S. sobrinus strain infection in rats. |
[24] Talbman et al., 1995. | In vivo | CAT or GLU (specific region of Gtf de S. mutans) | Rats | Infection with the regions of GTF. | Increased of specific serum IgG for Gtf; Significant reduction of caries. | Immunization with peptides derived from functional domains of S. mutans Gtf are protective for infection with S. sobrinus or S. mutans. |