Next Article in Journal
Japanese Mothers’ Intention to HPV Vaccinate Their Daughters: How Has It Changed over Time Because of the Prolonged Suspension of the Governmental Recommendation?
Next Article in Special Issue
Potent Protective Immune Responses to Senecavirus Induced by Virus-Like Particle Vaccine in Pigs
Previous Article in Journal
A Consent Support Resource with Benefits and Harms of Vaccination Does Not Increase Hesitancy in Parents—An Acceptability Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Characterization of the Maternally Derived Antibody Immunity against Rhdv-2 after Administration in Breeding Does of an Inactivated Vaccine
Open AccessArticle

Determining Equine Influenza Virus Vaccine Efficacy—The Specific Contribution of Strain Versus Other Vaccine Attributes

MSD Animal Health, Wim de Körverstraat 35, 5831 AN Boxmeer, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vaccines 2020, 8(3), 501; https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines8030501
Received: 9 July 2020 / Revised: 21 August 2020 / Accepted: 26 August 2020 / Published: 3 September 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Controlled Clinical Evaluation of Veterinary Vaccines)
Vaccination is an effective tool to limit equine influenza virus (EIV H3N8) infection, a contagious respiratory disease with potentially huge economic impact. The study assessed the effects of antigenic change on vaccine efficacy and the need for strain update. Horses were vaccinated (V1 and V2) with an ISCOMatrix-adjuvanted, whole inactivated virus vaccine (Equilis Prequenza, group 2, FC1 and European strains) or a carbomer-adjuvanted, modified vector vaccine (ProteqFlu, group 3, FC1 and FC2 HA genes). Serology (SRH, HI, VN), clinical signs and viral shedding were assessed in comparison to unvaccinated control horses. The hypothesis was that group 2 (no FC2 vaccine strain) would be less well protected than group 3 following experimental infection with a recent FC2 field strain (A/equi-2/Wexford/14) 4.5 months after vaccination. All vaccinated horses had antibody titres to FC1 and FC2. After challenge, serology increased more markedly in group 3 than in group 2. Vaccinated horses had significantly lower total clinical scores and viral shedding. Unexpectedly, viral RNA shedding was significantly lower in group 2 than in group 3. Vaccination induced protective antibody titres to FC1 and FC2 and reduced clinical signs and viral shedding. The two tested vaccines provided equivalent protection against a recent FC2 EIV field strain. View Full-Text
Keywords: equine influenza virus; vaccine; strain; sublineage; infection; viral shedding; protection equine influenza virus; vaccine; strain; sublineage; infection; viral shedding; protection
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Reemers, S.; Sonnemans, D.; Horspool, L.; van Bommel, S.; Cao, Q.; van de Zande, S. Determining Equine Influenza Virus Vaccine Efficacy—The Specific Contribution of Strain Versus Other Vaccine Attributes. Vaccines 2020, 8, 501. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines8030501

AMA Style

Reemers S, Sonnemans D, Horspool L, van Bommel S, Cao Q, van de Zande S. Determining Equine Influenza Virus Vaccine Efficacy—The Specific Contribution of Strain Versus Other Vaccine Attributes. Vaccines. 2020; 8(3):501. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines8030501

Chicago/Turabian Style

Reemers, Sylvia; Sonnemans, Denny; Horspool, Linda; van Bommel, Sander; Cao, Qi; van de Zande, Saskia. 2020. "Determining Equine Influenza Virus Vaccine Efficacy—The Specific Contribution of Strain Versus Other Vaccine Attributes" Vaccines 8, no. 3: 501. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines8030501

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop