Antibody Titres to Strangvac® Antigens Correlate with Protection and Duration of Immunity Against Experimental Infection with Streptococcus equi Subspecies equi
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Clinical Data
2.3. Quantification of the Antibody Response to Vaccination and Clinical Data
2.4. Statistical Methods
3. Results
3.1. Onset of Abnormal Temperature (OOT)
3.2. IdeE, Eq85 and CCE Antibody Titres at the Time of Experimental Infection with S. equi
3.3. Threshold of Protection
3.4. Duration of Immunity (DOI), Thresholds and Predicted Protection in Vaccinated Animals
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| Ag | Antigen |
| Ab | Antibody |
| AUC | Area under the curve |
| CI | Confidence Interval |
| CoP | Correlate of Protection |
| DOI | Duration of Immunity |
| EAV | Equine artritis virus |
| EI | Equine influenza |
| EIV | Equine influenza virus |
| IQR | Interquartile range |
| LN | Lymph node |
| OOT | Onset of abnormal temperature |
| ROC | Receiver Operating Characteristic |
| S. equi | Streptococcus equi subspecies equi |
| SRH | Single Radial Haemolysis |
| VN | Virus-neutralising |
References
- Surveillance of Equine Strangles (SES). Available online: https://equinesurveillance.org/ses/ (accessed on 24 September 2025).
- International Collating Centre (ICC). Available online: https://equinesurveillance.org/iccview/ (accessed on 4 June 2026).
- Jaramillo-Morales, C.; James, K.; Barnum, S.; Vaala, W.; Chappell, D.E.; Schneider, C.; Craig, B.; Bain, F.; Barnett, D.C.; Gaughan, E.; et al. Voluntary Biosurveillance of Streptococcus Equi Subsp. Equi in Nasal Secretions of 9409 Equids with Upper Airway Infection in the USA. Vet. Sci. 2023, 10, 78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Boyle, A. Streptococcus Equi Subspecies Equi Infection (Strangles) in Horses. Compend Contin. Educ. Vet. 2011, 33, E1–E7; quiz E8. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Boyle, A.G.; Timoney, J.F.; Newton, J.R.; Hines, M.T.; Waller, A.S.; Buchanan, B.R. Streptococcus Equi Infections in Horses: Guidelines for Treatment, Control, and Prevention of Strangles-Revised Consensus Statement. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 2018, 32, 633–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Christmann, U.; Pink, C. Lessons Learned from a Strangles Outbreak on a Large Standardbred Farm. Equine Vet. Educ. 2017, 29, 138–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Sweeney, C.R.; Whitlock, R.H.; Meirs, D.A.; Whitehead, S.C.; Barningham, S.O. Complications Associated with Streptococcus Equi Infection on a Horse Farm. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1987, 191, 1446–1448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Osman, S.; Tharwat, M.; Saeed, E. An Outbreak of Strangles in Arabian Horses in Saudi Arabia: Epidemiology, Clinical Signs and Treatment Outcomes. Int. J. Vet. Sci. 2021, 10, 323–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Newton, J.R.; Wood, J.L.; Dunn, K.A.; DeBrauwere, M.N.; Chanter, N. Naturally Occurring Persistent and Asymptomatic Infection of the Guttural Pouches of Horses with Streptococcus Equi. Vet. Rec. 1997, 140, 84–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Newton, J.R.; Verheyen, K.; Talbot, N.C.; Timoney, J.F.; Wood, J.L.; Lakhani, K.H.; Chanter, N. Control of Strangles Outbreaks by Isolation of Guttural Pouch Carriers Identified Using PCR and Culture of Streptococcus Equi. Equine Vet. J. 2000, 32, 515–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Pringle, J.; Venner, M.; Tscheschlok, L.; Bächi, L.; Riihimäki, M. Long Term Silent Carriers of Streptococcus Equi Ssp. Equi Following Strangles; Carrier Detection Related to Sampling Site of Collection and Culture versus qPCR. Vet. J. 2019, 246, 66–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lakic, B.; Ekmann, A.; Lindahl, J.; Grondahl, G. Streptococcus Equi Infections in Sweden Are Preceded by Introducing New Horses to the Premises. Equine Vet. J. 2024, 56, 15–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Paillot, R.; Kevorkian, L.; Scicluna, C.; Hermange, T.; Couroucé, A. Vaccination contre la gourme: Dernières avancées scientifiques. Le Nouv. Prat. Vétérinaire-Équine 2026, 19, 42–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Morize, I.; Giraudet, A. La Gourme du Cheval: Étude Bibliographique et Approche Descriptive D’une Écurie Infectée. Doctoral Dissertation, Faculté de Médecine de Créteil, Ecole vétérinaire d’Alfort, France, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Robinson, C.; Waller, A.S.; Frykberg, L.; Flock, M.; Zachrisson, O.; Guss, B.; Flock, J.-I. Intramuscular Vaccination with Strangvac Is Safe and Induces Protection against Equine Strangles Caused by Streptococcus Equi. Vaccine 2020, 38, 4861–4868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Gröndahl, G.; Righetti, F.; Aspán, A.; Bjerketorp, J.; Frosth, S.; Frykberg, L.; Jacobsson, K.; Guss, B.; Paillot, R.; Flock, J.-I.; et al. Reining in Strangles: Absence of Disease in Horses Vaccinated with a DIVA-Compatible Recombinant Fusion Protein Vaccine, Strangvac, Following Natural Exposure to Streptococcus Equi Subspecies Equi. Equine Vet. J. 2026, 58, 476–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Rendle, D.; Bowen, M.; Cavalleri, J.; De Brauwere, N.; Grondahl, G.; van Maanen, K.; Newton, J.R. Strangles Vaccination: A Current European Perspective. Equine Vet. Educ. 2025, 37, 90–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Rask, E.; Righetti, F.; Ruiz, A.; Bjerketorp, J.; Frosth, S.; Frykberg, L.; Jacobsson, K.; Guss, B.; Flock, J.-I.; Henriques-Normark, B.; et al. Closing the Stable Door on Strangles: Serological Responses of Vaccinated Horses on a Farm Following the Arrival of a New Horse. Animals 2025, 15, 3584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lannergård, J.; Frykberg, L.; Guss, B. CNE, a Collagen-Binding Protein of Streptococcus Equi. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2003, 222, 69–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Jonsson, H.; Lindmark, H.; Guss, B. A Protein G-Related Cell Surface Protein in Streptococcus Zooepidemicus. Infect. Immun. 1995, 63, 2968–2975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Jiang, X.; Ma, X.; Su, L.; Zhang, B.; He, Z.; Su, Y. Analysis of Distinct Variants of Immunoglobulin G Binding Protein EAG on Humoral Immunity and Bacterial Clearance of Streptococcus Equi Subspecies Equi. Microb. Pathog. 2025, 205, 107726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lannergård, J.; Guss, B. IdeE, an IgG-Endopeptidase of Streptococcus Equi Ssp. Equi. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2006, 262, 230–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Righetti, F.; Hentrich, K.; Flock, M.; Frosth, S.; Jacobsson, K.; Bjerketorp, J.; Pathak, A.; Ido, N.; Henriques-Normark, B.; Frykberg, L.; et al. Neutralisation of the Immunoglobulin-Cleaving Activity of Streptococcus Equi Subspecies Equi IdeE by Blood Sera from Ponies Vaccinated with a Multicomponent Protein Vaccine. Vaccines 2025, 13, 1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Holden, M.T.G.; Heather, Z.; Paillot, R.; Steward, K.F.; Webb, K.; Ainslie, F.; Jourdan, T.; Bason, N.C.; Holroyd, N.E.; Mungall, K.; et al. Genomic Evidence for the Evolution of Streptococcus Equi: Host Restriction, Increased Virulence, and Genetic Exchange with Human Pathogens. PLoS Pathog. 2009, 5, e1000346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Karlström, Å.; Jacobsson, K.; Guss, B. SclC Is a Member of a Novel Family of Collagen-like Proteins in Streptococcus Equi Subspecies Equi That Are Recognised by Antibodies against SclC. Vet. Microbiol. 2006, 114, 72–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Plotkin, S.A.; Gilbert, P.B. Nomenclature for Immune Correlates of Protection After Vaccination. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2012, 54, 1615–1617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Mumford, J.A.; Wood, J. Establishing an Acceptability Threshold for Equine Influenza Vaccines. Dev. Biol. Stand. 1992, 79, 137–146. [Google Scholar]
- Mumford, J.A.; Jessett, D.; Dunleavy, U.; Wood, J.; Hannant, D.; Sundquist, B.; Cook, R.F. Antigenicity and Immunogenicity of Experimental Equine Influenza ISCOM Vaccines. Vaccine 1994, 12, 857–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Fougerolle, S.; Fortier, C.; Legrand, L.; Jourdan, M.; Marcillaud-Pitel, C.; Pronost, S.; Paillot, R. Success and Limitation of Equine Influenza Vaccination: The First Incursion in a Decade of a Florida Clade 1 Equine Influenza Virus That Shakes Protection Despite High Vaccine Coverage. Vaccines 2019, 7, 174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Elliott, S.; Olufemi, O.T.; Daly, J.M. Systematic Review of Equine Influenza A Virus Vaccine Studies and Meta-Analysis of Vaccine Efficacy. Viruses 2023, 15, 2337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Compliance of Authorised Equine Influenza Vaccines with OIE Requirements—Scientific Guideline|European Medicines Agency (EMA). Available online: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/compliance-authorised-equine-influenza-vaccines-oie-requirements-scientific-guideline (accessed on 21 January 2026).
- AAEP Guidelines for Serology in Horses with Adverse Events from Vaccination—AAEP. Available online: https://aaep.org/ (accessed on 2 December 2025).
- Kinoshita, Y.; Yamanaka, T.; Kodaira, K.; Niwa, H.; Uchida-Fujii, E.; Ueno, T. Assessment of Tetanus Revaccination Regimens in Horses Not Vaccinated in the Previous Year. J. Vet. Med. Sci. 2023, 85, 751–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Castillo-Olivares, J.; de Vries, A.A.F.; Raamsman, M.J.B.; Rottier, P.J.M.; Lakhani, K.; Westcott, D.; Tearle, J.P.; Wood, J.L.N.; Mumford, J.A.; Hannant, D.; et al. Evaluation of a Prototype Sub-Unit Vaccine against Equine Arteritis Virus Comprising the Entire Ectodomain of the Virus Large Envelope Glycoprotein (G(L)): Induction of Virus-Neutralizing Antibody and Assessment of Protection in Ponies. J. Gen. Virol. 2001, 82, 2425–2435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Castillo-Olivares, J.; Wieringa, R.; Bakonyi, T.; de Vries, A.A.F.; Davis-Poynter, N.J.; Rottier, P.J.M. Generation of a Candidate Live Marker Vaccine for Equine Arteritis Virus by Deletion of the Major Virus Neutralization Domain. J. Virol. 2003, 77, 8470–8480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Middleton, D.; Pallister, J.; Klein, R.; Feng, Y.-R.; Haining, J.; Arkinstall, R.; Frazer, L.; Huang, J.-A.; Edwards, N.; Wareing, M.; et al. Hendra Virus Vaccine, a One Health Approach to Protecting Horse, Human, and Environmental Health. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2014, 20, 372–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Halpin, K.; Graham, K.; Durr, P.A. Sero-Monitoring of Horses Demonstrates the Equivac® HeV Hendra Virus Vaccine to Be Highly Effective in Inducing Neutralising Antibody Titres. Vaccines 2021, 9, 731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Robinson, C.; Frykberg, L.; Flock, M.; Guss, B.; Waller, A.S.; Flock, J.-I. Strangvac: A Recombinant Fusion Protein Vaccine That Protects against Strangles, Caused by Streptococcus Equi. Vaccine 2018, 36, 1484–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lee, D.K. Alternatives to P Value: Confidence Interval and Effect Size. Korean J. Anesthesiol. 2016, 69, 555–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Andersen, P.K. Fifty Years with the Cox Proportional Hazards Regression Model. J. Indian Inst. Sci. 2022, 102, 1135–1144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Cox, D.R. Regression Models and Life-Tables. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Methodol.) 1972, 34, 187–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Guss, B.; Flock, M.; Frykberg, L.; Waller, A.S.; Robinson, C.; Smith, K.C.; Flock, J.-I. Getting to Grips with Strangles: An Effective Multi-Component Recombinant Vaccine for the Protection of Horses from Streptococcus Equi Infection. PLoS Pathog. 2009, 5, e1000584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Plotkin, S.A. Correlates of Protection Induced by Vaccination. Clin. Vaccine Immunol. 2010, 17, 1055–1065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Rendle, D.; de Brauwere, N.; Hallowell, G.; Ivens, P.; McGlennon, A.; Newton, R.; White, J.; Waller, A. Streptococcus Equi Infections: Current Best Practice in the Diagnosis and Management of ‘Strangles. UK-Vet. Equine 2021, 5, S3–S15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Zinkernagel, A.S.; Timmer, A.M.; Pence, M.A.; Locke, J.B.; Buchanan, J.T.; Turner, C.E.; Mishalian, I.; Sriskandan, S.; Hanski, E.; Nizet, V. The IL-8 Protease SpyCEP/ScpC of Group A Streptococcus Promotes Resistance to Neutrophil Killing. Cell Host Microbe 2008, 4, 170–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Wan, J.; Weldon, E.; Ganser, G.; Morris, E.R.A.; Hughes, E.V.; Bordin, A.I.; Heine, P.A.; Hust, M.; Cohen, N.D.; Gill, J.J.; et al. Immunogenic Streptococcus Equi Cell Surface Proteins Identified by ORFeome Phage Display. mSphere 2025, 10, e0062625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Sheoran, A.S.; Sponseller, B.T.; Holmes, M.A.; Timoney, J.F. Serum and Mucosal Antibody Isotype Responses to M-like Protein (SeM) of Streptococcus Equi in Convalescent and Vaccinated Horses. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 1997, 59, 239–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- The 3Rs|NC3Rs. Available online: https://nc3rs.org.uk/who-we-are/3rs (accessed on 9 March 2026).
- EMEA/CVMP. Guideline on Clinical Evaluation of Vaccines. Vol. EMEA/CHMP/VWP/164653/05 Rev. 1, p. 22. Available online: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-clinical-evaluation-vaccines-revision-1_en.pdf (accessed on 9 March 2026).






| Vaccine Ags | S. equi Protein | S. equi Localisation | Locus Tag in Se4047 | Function | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IdeE | IdeE | secreted | SEQ0999 | Endopeptidase, IgG cleavage, immune evasion | [22] |
| Eq85 | Eq5 | SSp | SEQ0256 | Virulence factor, host interaction | [24] |
| Eq8 | SSp | SEQ0402 | |||
| CCE | CNE | SSp | SEQ0935 | Collagen-binding protein | [19] |
| SclC | SSp | SEQ2101 | Collagen-like protein | [25] | |
| SclF | SSp | SEQ0855 | Collagen-like protein | [25] | |
| SclI | SSp | SEQ1817 | Collagen-like protein | [25] | |
| EAG | SSp | SEQ0721 | α2-macroglobulin, IgG and albumin binding protein, immune evasion | [20] |
| Study ID ([Ref.]) | Control Animals | Vaccinated Animals Day of Vaccination | E. Infection |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study #1 (Exp. II in [15]) | n = 16 (placebo + 326 µg MatrixC adjuvant) | n = 16 (V1 + V2) D0 and D28 50 µg each Ag +326 µg MatrixC adj. i.m route | D42 (V2 + 2 weeks) Dose: 2 × 108 cfu/pony |
| Study #2 (Exp. III in [15]) | n = 4 (placebo + 326 µg MatrixC adjuvant) i.m route | n = 12 (V1 + V2) D0 & D28 50 µg each Ag +326 µg MatrixC adj. i.m route | D91 (V2 + 9 weeks) Dose: 1.7 × 108 cfu/pony |
| Study #3 (Exp. IV in [15]) | n = 15 (placebo + 326 µg MatrixC adjuvant) i.m route | n = 16 (V1–V3) D0, D28 and D119 50 µg each Ag + 326 µg MatrixC adj. i.m route | D133 V3 + 2 weeks Dose: 2.1 × 108 cfu/pony |
| Study #4 | n = 5 (placebo) i.m route (Exp. III/[38]) | n = 18 3 groups (V1–V2) D1 and D43 30 µg to 300 µg each Ag + 326 µg MatrixC adj. i.m route | D57 (V2 + 2 weeks) Dose: 1.05 × 108 cfu/pony |
| Study #5 | n = 5 (placebo + 326 µg MatrixC adjuvant) i.m route | n = 8 (V1–V5) D1, D43, D127, D309, D400 50 µg each Ag + 326 µg MatrixC adj. i.m route | D414 (V5 + 2 weeks) Dose: 1.63 × 108 cfu/pony |
| Study #6 | n = 4 (placebo + MatrixC adjuvant) i.m route | n = 10 (V1–V3) D1, D43, D134 30 µg each Ag + 326 µg MatrixC adj. i.m route | D225 (V3 + 3 months) Dose: 2.3 × 108 cfu/pony |
| Total number of ponies | n = 49 | n = 80 | |
| Study #7 (Exp. I in [15]) | n/a | n = 12 (4/group; V1–V3) D1, D28, D119 (Group #1) or 210 (Group #2) or 392 (Group #3) 50 µg each Ag + 320–326 µg MatrixC adj. i.m route | n/a |
| IdeE (Threshold-Low = 3.5) | |||
| P. Protected | P. Unprotected | ||
| A. Protected | TP: 63 | FN: 3 | Sensitivity: 95.45% [0.87–0.98] |
| A. Unprotected | FP: 21 | TN: 33 | Specificity: 61.1% [0.48–0.73] |
| Precision: 75.0% [0.65–0.83] | NPV: 91.7% [0.78–0.97] | Accuracy *: 80% [0.72–0.86] | |
| IdeE (Threshold-High = 4.3) | |||
| P. Protected | P. Unprotected | ||
| A. Protected | TP: 50 | FN: 16 | Sensitivity: 75.8% [0.64–0.84] |
| A. Unprotected | FP : 8 | TN : 46 | Specificity: 85.2% [0.73–0.92] |
| Precision: 86.2% [0.75–0.93] | NPV: 74.2% [0.62–0.83] | Accuracy *: 80% [0.72–0.96] | |
| Eq85 (Threshold-Low = 2.65) | |||
| P. Protected | P. Unprotected | ||
| A. Protected | TP: 64 | FN: 2 | Sensitivity: 97.0% [0.9–0.99] |
| A. Unprotected | FP: 22 | TN: 32 | Specificity: 59.3% [0.46–0.71] |
| Precision: 74.4% [0.64–0.82] | NPV: 94.1% [0.81–0.98] | Accuracy *: 80% [0.72–0.86] | |
| Eq85 (Threshold-High = 3.7) | |||
| P. Protected | P. Unprotected | ||
| A. Protected | TP: 51 | FN: 15 | Sensitivity: 77.3% [0.66–0.86] |
| A. Unprotected | FP: 9 | TN: 45 | Specificity: 83.3% [0.71–0.91] |
| Precision: 85.0% [0.74–0.92] | NPV: 75.0% [0.63–0.84] | Accuracy *: 80% [0.72–0.86] | |
| CCE (Threshold-Low = 2.66) | |||
| P. Protected | P. Unprotected | ||
| A. Protected | TP: 64 | 2 | Sensitivity: 97.0% [0.9–0.99] |
| A. Unprotected | FP: 21 | 33 | Specificity: 61.1% [0.48–0.73] |
| Precision: 75.3% [0.65–0.83] | NPV: 94.3% [0.81–0.98] | Accuracy *: 80.8% [0.73–0.87] | |
| CCE (Threshold-High = 3.2) | |||
| P. Protected | P. Unprotected | ||
| A. Protected | TP: 59 | 7 | Sensitivity: 89.4% [0.8–0.95] |
| A. Unprotected | FP: 17 | 37 | Specificity: 68.5% [0.55–0.79] |
| Precision: 77.7% [0.67–0.86] | NPV: 84.1% [0.71–0.92] | Accuracy *: 80% [0.72–0.86] | |
| IdeE (T-High = 4.3) Then Eq85 (T-High = 3.7; Only If IdeE <T) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| P. Protected | P. Unprotected | ||
| A. Protected | TP: 57 | FN: 9 | Sensitivity: 86.4% [0.78–0.95] |
| A. Unprotected | FP: 12 | TN: 42 | Specificity: 77.8% [0.67–0.89] |
| Precision: 82.6% [0.74–0.92] | NPV: 82.4% [0.72–0.93] | Accuracy: 82.5% [0.76–0.89] | |
| Ag./n | T (V2 + 16d) | DOI (V2+) | T DOI 1 | T. Applied | Accuracy | V. Prot. | V. Unprot. | % Prot. | nV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IdeE | Ref. High | 4.3 | 80 | 50 | 8 | 86.2 [0.77–0.95] | 22 | ||
| 4 | 4.94 ± 0.25 | +91d | 4.08 ± 0.13 | 4.05 | 81.7 | 58 | 13 | 81.7 [0.73–0.91] | 9 |
| 8 | 4.82 ± 0.57 | +168d | 4.00 ± 0.22 | 4.00 | 80.8 | 59 | 15 | 79.7 [0.71–0.89] | 6 |
| 4 | 4.97 ± 0.51 | +182d | 3.99 ± 0.11 | 3.95 | 81.7 | 60 | 15 | 80.0 [0.71–0.89] | 5 |
| 4 | 4.66 ± 0.66 | +364d | 3.83 ± 0.22 | 3.77 | 81.2 | 60 | 16 | 78.9 [0.70–0.88] | 4 |
| Ref. Low | 3.5 | 80.0 | 62 | 17 | 78.5 [0.69, 0.88] | 1 | |||
| Eq85 | Ref. High | 3.7 | 80.0 | 51 | 9 | 85.0 [0.76–0.94] | 20 | ||
| 4 | 4.45 ± 0.3 | +91d | 3.61 ± 0.18 | 3.6 | 79.2 | 51 | 10 | 83.6 [0.74–0.93] | 19 |
| 8 | 4.78 ± 0.22 | +168d | 3.59 ± 0.22 | 3.55 | 80.0 | 52 | 10 | 83.9 [0.69–0.88] | 18 |
| 4 | 4.84 ± 0.2 | +182d | 3.59 ± 0.21 | 3.55 | 80.0 | 52 | 10 | 83.9 [0.75–0.93] | 18 |
| 4 | 4.71 ± 0.25 | +364d | 3.39 ± 0.25 | 3.35 | 80.8 | 56 | 13 | 81.2 [0.72–0.90] | 11 |
| Ref. Low | 2.65 | 80.0 | 63 | 17 | 78.8 [0.70–0.88] | 0 | |||
| CCE | Ref. High | 3.2 | 80.0 | 59 | 17 | 78.5 [0.69–0.88] | 4 | ||
| 4 | 4.35 ± 0.39 | +91d | 3.49 ± 0.13 | 3.4 | 79.2 | 57 | 16 | 78.1 [0.69–0.88] | 7 |
| 8 | 4.22 ± 0.42 | +168d | 3.31 ± 0.31 | 3.3 | 79.2 | 58 | 17 | 77.3 [0.68–0.87] | 5 |
| 4 | 4.15 ± 0.17 | +182d | 3.17 ± 0.1 | 3.1 | 79.2 | 60 | 17 | 77.9 [0.69–0.87] | 3 |
| 4 | 4.29 ± 0.6 | +364d | 3.35 ± 0.28 | 3.35 | 78.3 | 57 | 17 | 77.0 [0.67–0.87] | 6 |
| Ref. Low | 2.66 | 80.8 | 63 | 17 | 78.8 [0.70–0.88] | 0 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Paillot, R.; Righetti, F.; Robinson, C.; Frykberg, L.; Flock, M.; Zachrisson, O.; Guss, B.; Flock, J.-I.; Waller, A.S. Antibody Titres to Strangvac® Antigens Correlate with Protection and Duration of Immunity Against Experimental Infection with Streptococcus equi Subspecies equi. Vaccines 2026, 14, 533. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines14060533
Paillot R, Righetti F, Robinson C, Frykberg L, Flock M, Zachrisson O, Guss B, Flock J-I, Waller AS. Antibody Titres to Strangvac® Antigens Correlate with Protection and Duration of Immunity Against Experimental Infection with Streptococcus equi Subspecies equi. Vaccines. 2026; 14(6):533. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines14060533
Chicago/Turabian StylePaillot, Romain, Francesco Righetti, Carl Robinson, Lars Frykberg, Margareta Flock, Olof Zachrisson, Bengt Guss, Jan-Ingmar Flock, and Andrew S. Waller. 2026. "Antibody Titres to Strangvac® Antigens Correlate with Protection and Duration of Immunity Against Experimental Infection with Streptococcus equi Subspecies equi" Vaccines 14, no. 6: 533. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines14060533
APA StylePaillot, R., Righetti, F., Robinson, C., Frykberg, L., Flock, M., Zachrisson, O., Guss, B., Flock, J.-I., & Waller, A. S. (2026). Antibody Titres to Strangvac® Antigens Correlate with Protection and Duration of Immunity Against Experimental Infection with Streptococcus equi Subspecies equi. Vaccines, 14(6), 533. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines14060533

