Feline panleukopenia virus, feline herpesvirus-1 and feline calicivirus antibody responses in seronegative specific pathogen-free kittens after parenteral administration of an inactivated FVRCP vaccine or a modified live FVRCP vaccine

Prevalence of Serum Antibody Titers against Core Vaccine Antigens in Italian Cats

Feline core vaccines strongly recommended for all cats are against Feline panleukopenia virus (FPV), Felid herpesvirus type 1 (FeHV-1), and Feline calicivirus (FCV), but cats can be classified as low- and high-risk based on their lifestyle. The aim of this study was to determine the actual seroprotection against FPV, FeHV-1, and FCV in a large cohort of Italian cats by using the VacciCheck test. A total of 740 cats (567 owned and 173 stray cats; 435 vaccinated and 305 unvaccinated) were analyzed for Protective Antibody Titers (PATs). Differences related to origin, sex, age, breed, FIV/FeLV status, health status, and time elapsed since last vaccination were evaluated. Less than half of the entire cohort (36.4%) had PATs for all three diseases simultaneously, increasing to 48.6% if weak positive values were also considered and 50.3% when considering only the 435 vaccinated cats. Particularly, antibodies were detected against FCV, FPV, and FeHV-1 at protective titers (PATs) in 78.6%, 68.1, and 49.1% of the cats, respectively. In general, owned, neutered, and adult FIV- and/or FeLV-negative cats were the most protected categories, even if not always for the three viruses. Most cats maintained high PATs for 3 years or longer after vaccination against FPV and FCV but not FeHV-1. Long-lasting protective immunity persisted for many years after the last vaccination (more than 18 years in the oldest cats). Nevertheless, since not all cats were protected after so many years and for all pathogens, checking protection via antibody titration could be the best choice to prevent immunity breakdowns. The discussion also focuses on the reliability of antibody titration for the two URTD (upper respiratory tract disease) viruses which, unlike for FPV, is not widely accepted as a valid index of protection.

Antibody Responses in Cats Following Primary and Annual Vaccination against Feline Immunodeficiency Virus (FIV) with an Inactivated Whole-Virus Vaccine (Fel-O-Vax® FIV)

Although the antibody response induced by primary vaccination with Fel-O-Vax^® FIV (three doses, 2–4 weeks apart) is well described, the antibody response induced by annual vaccination with Fel-O-Vax^® FIV (single dose every 12 months after primary vaccination) and how it compares to the primary antibody response has not been studied. Residual blood samples from a primary FIV vaccination study (n = 11), and blood samples from cats given an annual FIV vaccination (n = 10), were utilized. Samples from all 21 cats were tested with a commercially available PCR assay (FIV RealPCR^TM), an anti-p24 microsphere immunoassay (MIA), an anti-FIV transmembrane (TM; gp40) peptide ELISA, and a range of commercially available point-of-care (PoC) FIV antibody kits. PCR testing confirmed all 21 cats to be FIV-uninfected for the duration of this study. Results from MIA and ELISA testing showed that both vaccination regimes induced significant antibody responses against p24 and gp40, and both anti-p24 and anti-gp40 antibodies were variably present 12 months after FIV vaccination. The magnitude of the antibody response against both p24 and gp40 was significantly higher in the primary FIV vaccination group than in the annual FIV vaccination group. The differences in prime versus recall post-vaccinal antibody levels correlated with FIV PoC kit performance. Two FIV PoC kits that detect antibodies against gp40, namely Witness^® and Anigen Rapid^®, showed 100% specificity in cats recently administered an annual FIV vaccination, demonstrating that they can be used to accurately distinguish vaccination and infection in annually vaccinated cats. A third FIV PoC kit, SNAP^® Combo, had 0% specificity in annually FIV-vaccinated cats, and should not be used in any cat with a possible history of FIV vaccination. This study outlines the antibody response to inactivated Fel-O-Vax^® FIV whole-virus vaccine, and demonstrates how best to diagnose FIV infection in jurisdictions where FIV vaccination is practiced.

2020 AAHA/AAFP Feline Vaccination Guidelines

The guidelines are a consensus report on current recommendations for vaccination of cats of any origin, authored by a Task Force of experts. The guidelines are published simultaneously in the Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery (volume 22, issue 9, pages 813-830, DOI: 10.1177/1098612X20941784) and the Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association (volume 56, issue 4, pages 249-265, DOI: 10.5326/JAAHA-MS-7123). The guidelines assign approved feline vaccines to core (recommended for all cats) and non-core (recommended based on an individualized risk-benefit assessment) categories. Practitioners can develop individualized vaccination protocols consisting of core vaccines and non-core vaccines based on exposure and susceptibility risk as defined by the patient's life stage, lifestyle, and place of origin and by environmental and epidemiologic factors. An update on feline injection-site sarcomas indicates that occurrence of this sequela remains infrequent and idiosyncratic. Staff education initiatives should enable the veterinary practice team to be proficient in advising clients on proper vaccination practices and compliance. Vaccination is a component of a preventive healthcare plan. The vaccination visit should always include a thorough physical exam and client education dialog that gives the pet owner an understanding of how clinical staff assess disease risk and propose recommendations that help ensure an enduring owner-pet relationship.

2020 AAHA/AAFP Feline Vaccination Guidelines*

The guidelines are a consensus report on current recommendations for vaccination of cats of any origin, authored by a Task Force of experts. The guidelines are published simultaneously in the Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery (volume 22, issue 9, pages 813–830, DOI: 10.1177/1098612X20941784) and the Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association (volume 56, issue 4, pages 249–265, DOI: 10.5326/JAAHA-MS-7123). The guidelines assign approved feline vaccines to core (recommended for all cats) and non-core (recommended based on an individualized risk-benefit assessment) categories. Practitioners can develop individualized vaccination protocols consisting of core vaccines and non-core vaccines based on exposure and susceptibility risk as defined by the patient’s life stage, lifestyle, and place of origin and by environmental and epidemiologic factors. An update on feline injection-site sarcomas indicates that occurrence of this sequela remains infrequent and idiosyncratic. Staff education initiatives should enable the veterinary practice team to be proficient in advising clients on proper vaccination practices and compliance. Vaccination is a component of a preventive healthcare plan. The vaccination visit should always include a thorough physical exam and client education dialog that gives the pet owner an understanding of how clinical staff assess disease risk and propose recommendations that help ensure an enduring owner-pet relationship.

Recommendations on vaccination for Latin American small animal practitioners: a report of the WSAVA Vaccination Guidelines Group

The World Small Animal Veterinary Association Vaccination Guidelines Group has produced global guidelines for small companion animal practitioners on best practice in canine and feline vaccination. Recognising that there are unique aspects of veterinary practice in certain geographical regions of the world, the Vaccination Guidelines Group undertook a regional project in Latin America between 2016 and 2019, culminating in the present document. The Vaccination Guidelines Group gathered scientific and demographic data during visits to Argentina, Brazil and Mexico, by discussion with national key opinion leaders, visiting veterinary practices and review of the scientific literature. A questionnaire survey was completed by 1390 veterinarians in five Latin American countries and the Vaccination Guidelines Group delivered continuing education at seven events attended by over 3500 veterinarians.

The Vaccination Guidelines Group recognised numerous challenges in Latin America, for example: (1) lack of national oversight of the veterinary profession, (2) extraordinary growth in private veterinary schools of undetermined quality, (3) socioeconomic constraints on client engagement with preventive health care, (4) high regional prevalence of some key infectious diseases (e.g. feline leukaemia virus infection, canine visceral leishmaniosis), (5) almost complete lack of minimal antigen vaccine products as available in other markets, (6) relative lack of vaccine products with extended duration of immunity as available in other markets, (7) availability of vaccine products withdrawn from other markets (e.g. Giardia vaccine) or unique to Latin America (e.g. some Leishmania vaccines), (8) accessibility of vaccines directly by pet owners or breeders such that vaccination is not delivered under veterinary supervision, (9) limited availability of continuing education in veterinary vaccinology and lack of compulsion for continuing professional development and (10) limited peer‐reviewed published scientific data on small companion animal infectious diseases (with the exception of leishmaniosis) and lack of support for such academic research.

In this document, the Vaccination Guidelines Group summarises the findings of this project and assesses in evidence‐based fashion the scientific literature pertaining to companion animal vaccine‐preventable diseases in Latin America. The Vaccination Guidelines Group makes some recommendations on undergraduate and postgraduate education and academic research. Recognising that current product availability in Latin America does not permit veterinarians in these countries to vaccinate according to the global World Small Animal Veterinary Association guidelines, the Vaccination Guidelines Group makes a series of “pragmatic” recommendations as to what might be currently achievable, and a series of “aspirational” recommendations as to what might be desirable for the future. The concept of “vaccine husbandry” is addressed via some simple guidelines for the management of vaccine products in the practice. Finally, the Vaccination Guidelines Group emphasises the global trend towards delivery of vaccination as one part of an “annual health check” or “health care plan” that reviews holistically the preventive health care needs of the individual pet animal. Latin American practitioners should transition towards these important new practices that are now well embedded in more developed veterinary markets.

The document also includes 70 frequently asked questions and their answers; these were posed to the Vaccination Guidelines Group during our continuing education events and small group discussions and should address many of the issues surrounding delivery of vaccination in the Latin American countries. Spanish and Portuguese translations of this document will be made freely available from the on‐line resource pages of the Vaccination Guidelines Group.

Feline upper respiratory tract infection and disease in Australia

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to conduct a comprehensive assessment of feline infectious upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) and disease (URTD) in Australian cats.

METHODS

Laboratory data demonstrating URTI from feline URTD multiplex PCR panel (feline herpesvirus 1 [FHV-1], feline calicivirus [FCV], Bordetella bronchiseptica, Chlamydophila felis, Mycoplasma felis and H1N1 influenza) submissions in Australia (2013-2015) were obtained. For comparison, reports of feline URTD during the same time period were sourced from a voluntary companion animal disease surveillance system.

RESULTS

A total of 3126 samples were submitted for testing; 1533 (49%) were positive. Of these, the most commonly detected agents were M felis (21.5%) and FCV (16.0%) alone, followed by FCV and M felis (13.4%) together as a respiratory infection complex, then FHV-1 (7.0%) alone. During the study period, there were 262 reports of 320 clinical feline URTD cases. Most cases (69%) were reported from New South Wales, <1 year of age (41%) and equally distributed between the sexes. Infection was more common in entire cats (69%) and most cases (55%) involved domestic shorthair cats. Of the 90 reports that had a known vaccination status, 63 had a vaccination history, 40 of which were recently vaccinated. Most (72%) feline URTD cases recovered from clinical disease. Both feline URTI and URTD were more common during winter months.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Feline URTI and URTD cause substantial impact in Australia, being most commonly associated with M felis and FCV infection. This information can be used by veterinarians to educate clients about prevention and management of this important infectious disease of cats.

Feline Panleukopenia: A Re-emergent Disease

Feline panleukopenia (FPL) is caused by a Carnivore protoparvovirus infection. Feline parvovirus (FPV) causes most cases. When Canine parvovirus 2 (CPV-2) first emerged, it could not replicate in cats. All current CPV variants (CPV-2a-c) can infect cats to cause subclinical disease or FPL. Feline panleukopenia has re-emerged in Australia in shelter cats associated with failure to vaccinate. Parvoviruses can remain latent in mononuclear cells post-infection. Molecular methods such as polymerase chain reaction are used to determine the infecting strain. Current perspectives on causes, epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment, prognostic indicators, and management of outbreaks in shelters are reviewed.

Anti-feline panleukopenia virus serum neutralizing antibody titer in domestic cats with the negative or low hemagglutination inhibition antibody titer

To evaluate the accuracy of hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test as the index of feline panleukopenia virus (FPV)-protective ability, sera from 153 FPV-vaccinated cats aged ≥7 months with HI titer of <1:10–1:40, were examined for serum neutralizing (SN) antibody. SN antibody was detected (≥1:10) in 33 (62.3%) of 53 HI antibody-negative cats, and ranged <1:10–1:160. This suggests that FPV-antibody detection sensitivity of HI test is lower than SN test, and SN test is more suitable for the assessment of FPV-vaccine effect than HI test especially in cats with negative or low HI titer. SN titer was 1:32, FPV-protective threshold, or higher in all cats with HI titers of ≥1:20, suggesting it may be appropriate to set protective HI threshold at 1:20.

Effect of modified live or inactivated feline herpesvirus-1 parenteral vaccines on clinical and laboratory findings following viral challenge

Objectives The objective was to investigate the effect of one dose of an inactivated feline herpesvirus-1 (FHV-1), feline calicivirus (FCV) and panleukopenia virus (FPV) vaccine (FVRCP) or one dose of a modified live (ML) FVRCP vaccine on clinical signs and shedding of FHV-1 in specific pathogen-free kittens after challenge with FHV-1 7 days after vaccination. Methods Twenty-four FHV-1 seronegative 5-month-old kittens were randomized into three groups of eight kittens. Group 1 kittens were maintained as unvaccinated controls, group 2 kittens were administered one dose of the inactivated FVRCP vaccine subcutaneously (SC) and group 3 kittens were administered one dose of the ML FVRCP vaccine SC. All 24 cats were administered FHV-1 by nasal and oropharyngeal inoculation 7 days later and were observed daily for clinical signs of illness for 21 days. Results In the 21 days after FHV-1 challenge, both groups of vaccinated cats were less likely to be clinically ill (indicated by lower cumulative clinical scores) than control cats ( P <0.001). There was no statistical difference in total clinical score between the two vaccinated groups ( P = 0.97). Although the total clinical score was similar between both vaccines, signs of respiratory disease were significantly fewer in the kittens vaccinated with the inactivated FVRCP vaccine compared with the ML FVRCP vaccine ( P = 0.005) during the period after inoculation when the majority of clinical disease was observed. Conclusions and relevance Parenteral administration of either the inactivated FVRCP vaccine or the ML FVRCP vaccine can decrease clinical signs of illness due to FHV-1 on a day 7 challenge when compared with controls. Use of either vaccine product is indicated in cats at risk of acute exposure to FHV-1.

Evaluation of an in-house dot enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to detect antibodies against feline panleukopenia virus

Measuring antibody titres to determine a cat's immunity to core diseases instead of just administering annual vaccinations has not been established in Germany so far. An in-house test kit for the detection of antibodies against feline panleukopenia virus (FPV), feline herpesvirus-1 and feline calicivirus-- the ImmunoComb Feline VacciCheck--is now available in several European countries. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of the ImmunoComb Feline VacciCheck to determine antibodies by comparing it to a gold standard. The test is aimed for use in practice to assist decision-making when performing an individual health assessment to see whether a cat is potentially unprotected against FPV and requires FPV vaccination. Sera from 347 cats were included in the study. For antibody detection, haemagglutination inhibition (HI) was performed as gold standard. Sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of the ImmunoComb Feline VacciCheck were determined for three different HI titre cut-off points (1:20, 1:40, 1:80). In comparison to the HI, the ImmunoComb Feline VacciCheck showed a sensitivity of 79%, 83% and 87%, and a specificity of 89%, 86% and 81%, respectively. Specificity of the ImmunoComb Feline VacciCheck, which was considered the most important parameter, was acceptable in comparison to HI. Especially when considering an antibody titre of 1:20 sufficient for protection (eg, in an adult animal), the ImmunoComb Feline VacciCheck can be recommended for use in veterinary practice.

ABCD: Update of the 2009 guidelines on prevention and management of feline infectious diseases

OVERVIEW

In this article, the ABCD guidelines published in the JFMS Special Issue of July 2009 (Volume 11, Issue 7, pages 527-620) are updated by including previously unavailable and novel information. For a better picture, the reader is advised to consult that issue before focusing on the novel features.