Virus-neutralizing antibodies of immunoglobulin G (IgG) but not of IgM or IgA isotypes can cure influenza virus pneumonia in SCID mice

The ability of monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) to passively cure an influenza virus pneumonia in the absence of endogenous T- and B-cell responses was investigated by treating C.B-17 mice, homozygous for the severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) mutation, with individual monoclonal antiviral antibodies 1 day after pulmonary infection with influenza virus PR8 [A/PR/8/34 (H1N1)]. Less than 10% of untreated SCID mice survived the infection. By contrast, 100% of infected SCID mice that had been treated with a single intraperitoneal inoculation of at least 175 micrograms of a pool of virus-neutralizing (VN+) antihemagglutinin (anti-HA) MAbs survived, even if antibody treatment was delayed up to 7 days after infection. The use of individual MAbs showed that recovery could be achieved by VN+ anti-HA MAbs of the immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1), IgG2a, IgG2b, and IgG3 isotypes but not by VN+ anti-HA MAbs of the IgA and IgM isotypes, even if the latter were used in a chronic treatment protocol to compensate for their shorter half-lives in vivo. Both IgA and IgM, although ineffective therapeutically, protected against infection when given prophylactically, i.e., before exposure to virus. An Fc gamma-specific effector mechanism was not an absolute requirement for antibody-mediated recovery, as F(ab')2 preparations of IgGs could cure the disease, although with lesser efficacy, than intact IgG. An anti-M2 MAb of the IgG1 isotype, which was VN- but bound well to infected cells and inhibited virus growth in vitro, failed to cure. These observations are consistent with the idea that MAbs of the IgG isotype cure the disease by neutralizing all progeny virus until all productively infected host cells have died. VN+ MAbs of the IgA and IgM isotypes may be ineffective therapeutically because they do not have sufficient access to all tissue sites in which virus is produced during influenza virus pneumonia.