Experimental human pneumococcal colonisation in older adults is feasible and safe, not immunogenic

Rationale Pneumococcal colonisation is key to the pathogenesis of invasive disease, but is also immunogenic in young adults, protecting against re-colonisation. Colonisation is rarely detected in older adults, despite high rates of pneumococcal disease. Objectives To establish experimental human pneumococcal colonisation in healthy adults aged 50—84 years, to measure the immune response to pneumococcal challenge, and to assess the protective effect of prior colonisation against autologous strain rechallenge. Methods Sixty-four participants were inoculated with Streptococcus pneumoniae (serotype 6B, 80,000CFU in each nostril). Colonisation was determined by bacterial culture of nasal wash, serum anti-6B capsular IgG responses by ELISA, and anti-protein immune responses by multiplex electrochemiluminescence. Measurements and Main Results Experimental colonisation was established in 39% of participants (25/64) with no adverse events. Colonisation occurred in 47% (9/19) of participants aged 50—59 compared with 21% (3/14) in those aged ≥70 years. Previous pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination did not protect against colonisation. Colonisation did not confer serotype-specific immune boosting: GMT (95% CI) 2.7μg/mL (1.9—3.8) pre-challenge versus 3.0 (1.9—4.7) four weeks post-colonisation (p = 0.53). Furthermore, pneumococcal challenge without colonisation led to a drop in specific antibody levels from 2.8μg/mL (2.0—3.9) to 2.2μg/mL (1.6—3.0) post-challenge (p = 0.006). Anti-protein antibody levels increased following successful colonisation. Rechallenge with the same strain after a median of 8.5 months (IQR 6.7—10.1) led to recolonisation in 5/16 (31%). Conclusions In older adults, experimental pneumococcal colonisation is feasible and safe, but demonstrates different immunological outcomes compared with younger adults in previous studies. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Clinical Trial ISRCTN10948363 ### Clinical Protocols ### Funding Statement This study was approved by the National Health Service Research Ethics Committee (Ref 16/NW/0031), registered with ISRCTN (10948363) and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Grant number OPP1117728) and UK Medical Research Council (Grant number MR/M011569/1). The funders had no role in study design, data analysis or the decision to submit for publication. ### Author Declarations All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript. Yes All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable. Yes N/A