• Vaccine Ontology ID: VO_0004644
• Type: Recombinant vector vaccine
• Status: Research
• Host Species for Licensed Use: Baboon
• Preparation: A panfilovirus vaccine based on a complex adenovirus (CAdVax) technology that expresses multiple antigens from five different filoviruses de novo (Swenson et al., 2008).
• Immunization Route: Intramuscular injection (i.m.)

• Vaccine Ontology ID: VO_0004641
• Type: Recombinant vector vaccine
• Status: Research
• Host Species for Licensed Use: Baboon
• Preparation: A multivalent vaccine candidate (EBO7) that expresses the glycoproteins of Zaire ebolavirus (ZEBOV) and Sudan ebolavirus (SEBOV) in a single complex adenovirus-based vector (CAdVax) (Pratt et al., 2010).
• Immunization Route: Intramuscular injection (i.m.)

• Vaccine Ontology ID: VO_0004385
• Type: DNA vaccine
• Status: Research
• Host Species as Laboratory Animal Model: Macaque
• GP from Sudan ebolavirus gene engineering:
  • Type: DNA vaccine construction
  • Detailed Gene Information: Click Here.
• GP from Zaire ebolavirus gene engineering:
  • Type: DNA vaccine construction
  • Detailed Gene Information: Click Here.
• Vector: Replication-defective rAd5 GP vectors and p1012 (Hensley et al., 2010)
• Immunization Route: Intramuscular injection (i.m.)

• Vaccine Ontology ID: VO_0011465
• Type: DNA vaccine
• Status: Research
• Antigen: Zaire Ebola virus GP and Sudan Ebola virus GP
• GP from Zaire ebolavirus gene engineering:
  • Type: DNA vaccine construction
  • Description: DNA/rAd5 vaccines expressing ZEBOV and SEBOV glycoprotein (GP) (Hensley et al., 2010).
  • Detailed Gene Information: Click Here.
• GP from Sudan ebolavirus gene engineering:
  • Type: DNA vaccine construction
  • Description: DNA/rAd5 vaccines expressing ZEBOV and SEBOV glycoprotein (GP) (Hensley et al., 2010).
  • Detailed Gene Information: Click Here.
• Vector: Replication-defective rAd5 GP vectors and p1012 (Hensley et al., 2010)
• Immunization Route: Intramuscular injection (i.m.)

• Vaccine Ontology ID: VO_0004335
• Type: Recombinant vector vaccine
• Status: Research
• Host Species as Laboratory Animal Model: Macaque
• GP from Zaire ebolavirus gene engineering:
  • Type: Recombinant vector construction
  • Description: Vector rAd expressed the Ebola glycoprotein (GP) (Sullivan et al., 2006).
  • Detailed Gene Information: Click Here.
• Vector: replication-defective adenoviral vectors (rAd) (Sullivan et al., 2006)
• Immunization Route: Intramuscular injection (i.m.)

• Vaccine Ontology ID: VO_0004337
• Type: Recombinant vector vaccine
• Status: Research
• Host Species as Laboratory Animal Model: Macaque
• GP from Sudan ebolavirus gene engineering:
  • Type: Recombinant vector construction
  • Description: Vector CAdVax expressed GP from SEBOV (Pratt et al., 2010).
  • Detailed Gene Information: Click Here.
• GP from Zaire ebolavirus gene engineering:
  • Type: Recombinant vector construction
  • Description: Vector CAdVax expressed GP from ZEBOV (Pratt et al., 2010).
  • Detailed Gene Information: Click Here.
• Vector: a bivalent rAd vector (CAdVax) (Pratt et al., 2010)
• Immunization Route: Intramuscular injection (i.m.)

• Vaccine Ontology ID: VO_0004336
• Type: Recombinant vector vaccine
• Status: Research
• Host Species as Laboratory Animal Model: Macaque
• GP from Zaire ebolavirus gene engineering:
  • Type: Recombinant vector construction
  • Description: Vector VSVΔG expressed GP from ZEBOV (Jones et al., 2005).
  • Detailed Gene Information: Click Here.
• Vector: a replication competent vesicular stomatitis virus vector (VSVΔG) (Jones et al., 2005)
• Immunization Route: Intramuscular injection (i.m.)

• Vaccine Ontology ID: VO_0004660
• Type: Recombinant vector vaccine
• Status: Research
• Host Species for Licensed Use: Baboon
• GP from Zaire ebolavirus gene engineering:
  • Type: Recombinant vector construction
  • Description: The recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (rVSV) vector-based monovalent vaccine platform expressing a glycoprotein of Zaire ebolavirus (ZEBOV) (Falzarano et al., 2011).
  • Detailed Gene Information: Click Here.
• GP from Cote d'Ivoire Ebola virus gene engineering:
  • Type: Recombinant vector construction
  • Description: The recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (rVSV) vector-based monovalent vaccine platform expressing a glycoprotein of Côte d’Ivoire ebolavirus (CIEBOV) (Falzarano et al., 2011).
  • Detailed Gene Information: Click Here.
• Preparation: A recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (rVSV) vector-based monovalent vaccine platform expressing a filovirus glycoprotein (Falzarano et al., 2011).
• Immunization Route: Intramuscular injection (i.m.)

Macaque Response

• Vaccination Protocol: The macaques in the vaccine groups (five per group) were anesthetized by intramuscular injection of ketamine HCl (10 mg/kg of body weight), followed by intramuscular vaccination with an equal mixture of 1 × 10^10 PFU of each vaccine component: EBO2, EBO7, M8, and M11 (resulting in 4 × 10^10 total PFU per animal). Control animals received 4 × 10^10 PFU of the HC4 vaccine vector, also via the intramuscular route (Swenson et al., 2008).
• Vaccine Immune Response Type: VO_0000287
• Challenge Protocol: Group 1 was inoculated subcutaneously with MARV Musoke, while group 2 was inoculated intramuscularly with ZEBOV, using approximately 1,000 PFU of each filovirus. EBOV and MARV each have different established routes of administration (intramuscular and subcutaneous, respectively) (Swenson et al., 2008).
• Efficacy: All vaccinated animals showed no detectable viremia or hematology abnormalities. We can conclude that the multivalent filovirus vaccine was 100% protective against lethal MARV Musoke and ZEBOV challenges (Swenson et al., 2008).

Macaque Response

• Vaccination Protocol: For the parenteral challenge studies, cynomolgus macaques were vaccinated intramuscularly (i.m.) on day zero with a 1:1 mixture of 1 × 10^10 PFU each of EBO7 and M8 (total 2 × 10^10 PFU). Control animals received an i.m. injection of 2 × 10^10 PFU of HC4. For the initial aerosol infection experiments, cynomolgus macaques were vaccinated by i.m. injection of 1 × 10^10 PFU of EBO7 or 1 × 10^10 PFU of HC4 (Pratt et al., 2010).
• Vaccine Immune Response Type: VO_0003057
• Challenge Protocol: For the aerosol infection group, twenty-eight days after vaccination, animals were anesthetized and exposed to a target dose of 1,000 PFU of either aerosolized ZEBOV or aerosolized SEBOV. For the parenteral challenge studies, six weeks after the boosting vaccinations, the macaques were anesthetized by i.m. injection of Telazol (2 to 6 mg/kg of body weight) and then inoculated i.m. with SEBOV or ZEBOV challenge stock (Pratt et al., 2010).
• Efficacy: EBO7 vaccine provided protection against both Ebola viruses by either route of infection. Significantly, protection against SEBOV given as an aerosol challenge, which has not previously been shown, could be achieved with a boosting vaccination (Pratt et al., 2010).

Macaque Response

• Vaccination Protocol: Four cynomolgus macaques were injected at 4–6 week intervals with GP(Z) and GP(S/G) DNA, followed by a rest period, and boosted after one year with rAd5 vectors containing the EBOV matched insert (Hensley et al., 2010).
• Vaccine Immune Response Type: VO_0000286
• Immune Response: DNA/rAd prime-boost EBOV immunization generated antigen-specific CD4+ T cell immunity against proteins expressed by the vaccine insert. The magnitude of antigen-specific CD4+ T cells was uniform across the four immunized macaques (Hensley et al., 2010).
• Efficacy: DNA/rAd5 immunization of cynomolgus macaques protects against infection when animals are challenged with a virus species homologous to the vaccine inserts (Hensley et al., 2010).

Macaque Response

• Vaccination Protocol: DNA immunizations were administered by Biojector IM injection, bilateral deltoid, with a mixture of 2 mg each of two plasmid vectors encoding GP(Z) and GP(S/G). DNA immunizations were administered at 0, 4, 8, and 14 weeks. Each subject received a boost with 10^11 particle units (PU) of rAd5 GP(Z) at 12 months following the final DNA priming immunization (Hensley et al., 2010).
• Challenge Protocol: All animals were challenged by the intramuscular route with 1,000 TCID50 of BEBOV, 7 weeks post rAd5 GP boost. The challenge virus used in this study was isolated from blood specimen #200706291 from a fatal case infected during the 2007 EBOV outbreak in Bundibugyo district, Uganda. The virus was isolated on Vero E6 cells and passaged twice prior to initiating these experiments (Hensley et al., 2010).
• Efficacy: Vaccinated subjects developed robust, antigen-specific humoral and cellular immune responses against the GP from ZEBOV as well as cellular immunity against BEBOV GP, and immunized macaques were uniformly protected against lethal challenge with BEBOV (Hensley et al., 2010).

Macaque Response

• Vaccine Immune Response Type: VO_0000286
• Efficacy: Expression of specific GPs alone vectored by rAd are sufficient to confer protection against lethal challenge in a relevant nonhuman primate model (Sullivan et al., 2006).

Macaque Response

• Vaccine Immune Response Type: VO_0000286
• Efficacy: Significantly, protection against SEBOV given as an aerosol challenge, which has not previously been shown, could be achieved with a boosting vaccination (Pratt et al., 2010).

Macaque Response

• Vaccine Immune Response Type: VO_0000286
• Efficacy: A single intramuscular injection of the EBOV or MARV vaccine elicited completely protective immune responses in nonhuman primates against lethal EBOV or MARV challenges (Jones et al., 2005).

Macaque Response

• Vaccination Protocol: Cynomolgus macaques were vaccinated with an rVSV vaccine expressing either the glycoprotein of Zaire ebolavirus (ZEBOV) or Côte d'Ivoire ebolavirus (CIEBOV) (Falzarano et al., 2011).
• Vaccine Immune Response Type: VO_0003057
• Challenge Protocol: The macaques were challenged with Bundibugyo ebolavirus (BEBOV)(Falzarano et al., 2011).
• Efficacy: A single vaccination with the ZEBOV-specific vaccine provided cross-protection (75% survival) against subsequent BEBOV challenge, whereas vaccination with the CIEBOV-specific vaccine resulted in an outcome similar to mock-immunized animals (33% and 25% survival, respectively) (Falzarano et al., 2011).