https://orcid.org/0009-0002-5881-2709
KEYWORDS:
Dear editor
We would like to discuss on the publication “Development of a novel multi-epitope mRNA vaccine candidate to combat HMPV virus.Citation1” The research largely relies on in-silico predictions and simulations. While these methods are beneficial for preliminary screening of possible epitopes, they do not guarantee their efficacy as vaccine candidates. To confirm the vaccine’s immunogenicity and protective potential, in-vitro or in-vivo investigations, such as animal models or clinical trials, are required. The research only looks at a subset of potential proteins (Fusion protein, G, SH, M, and M2) and picks epitopes from them. It is likely that other critical epitopes from different viral proteins were overlooked. A more thorough investigation of the viral proteome, as well as the identification of novel immunodominant epitopes, could give larger coverage and potentially improve vaccination efficacy. The article stresses the need for high conservancy in epitope selection, however it doesn’t say anything about the diversity of HMPV strains studied. HMPV has genetic variability, with many subtypes circulating globally. The inclusion of a varied panel of HMPV strains during epitope selection can improve vaccination efficacy and coverage by ensuring that the identified epitopes are conserved across strains. This study’s immune response evaluation is mostly based on docking and simulation analyses. While these methods provide information on potential protein-protein interactions and binding affinities, they do not fully capture the intricacies of real immunological responses. Future research should include experimental tests to assess the amplitude and quality of the vaccine candidate’s humoral and cellular immune responses.
The following initiatives can be taken to strengthen this work in future investigations. To confirm their immunogenicity and interaction with immune cells or antibodies, the anticipated epitopes should be tested in-vitro using in-vitro assays such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) or flow cytometry. Furthermore, animal models or clinical studies should be carried out to evaluate the vaccine candidate’s protective efficacy. A more extensive examination of the viral proteome should be considered in order to uncover potential immunodominant epitopes from a broader variety of viral proteins. Bioinformatic methods, such as protein structure analysis and epitope prediction algorithms, can be used to do this. The coverage and possible efficacy of the vaccine will be improved by utilizing a varied panel of HMPV strains throughout the epitope selection process. It is important to do experimental assays to gauge the strength and caliber of immune responses the vaccination candidate elicits. Analyzing cytokine synthesis, antibody titers, and cytotoxic T-cell responses are a few examples of this. The length of immune responses and the possibility of long-term protection should also be evaluated in the research. The addition of adjuvants to the vaccination is mentioned in the study. Future research should assess various adjuvants and vaccine formulations in order to maximize the vaccine candidate’s immunogenicity and stability. To find the most efficient delivery system, formulation studies should also take into account several administration routes, such as intramuscular, subcutaneous, or intranasal. Animal challenge studies utilizing appropriate animal models, such as mice or non-human primates, should be carried out to offer a greater demonstration of vaccine efficacy. In a controlled environment, these trials can evaluate the vaccine’s capacity to provide protection against HMPV infection.
Authors’ contribution
HD 50% ideas, writing, analyzing, approval.
vW 50% ideas, supervision, approval.