Modified-live PRRSV subtype 1 vaccine UNISTRAIN® PRRS provides a partial clinical and virological protection upon challenge with East European subtype 3 PRRSV strain Lena

Current Status of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Vaccines

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS), characterized by reproductive failures in breeding pigs and respiratory diseases in growing pigs, is a widespread and challenging disease. The agent, PRRSV, is a single-strand RNA virus that is undergoing continuous mutation and evolution, resulting in the global spread of multiple strains with different genetic characteristics and variable antigens. There are currently no effective measures to eradicate PRRS, and vaccination is crucial for controlling the disease. At present, various types of vaccine are available or being studied, including inactivated vaccines, modified live virus (MLV) vaccines, vector vaccines, subunit vaccines, DNA vaccines, RNA vaccines, etc. MLV vaccines have been widely used to control PRRSV infection for more than 30 years since they were first introduced in North America in 1994, and have shown a certain efficacy. However, there are safety and efficacy issues such as virulence reversion, recombination with field strains, and a lack of protection against heterologous strains, while other types of vaccine have their own advantages and disadvantages, making the eradication of PRRS a challenge. This article reviews the latest progress of these vaccines in the prevention and control of PRRS and provides scientific inspiration for developing new strategies for the next generation of PRRS vaccines.

Current Status of Vaccines for Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome: Interferon Response, Immunological Overview, and Future Prospects

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) remains a formidable challenge for the global pig industry. Caused by PRRS virus (PRRSV), this disease primarily affects porcine reproductive and respiratory systems, undermining effective host interferon and other immune responses, resulting in vaccine ineffectiveness. In the absence of specific antiviral treatments for PRRSV, vaccines play a crucial role in managing the disease. The current market features a range of vaccine technologies, including live, inactivated, subunit, DNA, and vector vaccines, but only modified live virus (MLV) and killed virus (KV) vaccines are commercially available for PRRS control. Live vaccines are promoted for their enhanced protective effectiveness, although their ability to provide cross-protection is modest. On the other hand, inactivated vaccines are emphasized for their safety profile but are limited in their protective efficacy. This review updates the current knowledge on PRRS vaccines' interactions with the host interferon system, and other immunological aspects, to assess their current status and evaluate advents in PRRSV vaccine development. It presents the strengths and weaknesses of both live attenuated and inactivated vaccines in the prevention and management of PRRS, aiming to inspire the development of innovative strategies and technologies for the next generation of PRRS vaccines.

Research Progress on the Development of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Vaccines

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) is a highly contagious disease in the pig industry, but its pathogenesis is not yet fully understood. The disease is caused by the PRRS virus (PRRSV), which primarily infects porcine alveolar macrophages and disrupts the immune system. Unfortunately, there is no specific drug to cure PRRS, so vaccination is crucial for controlling the disease. There are various types of single and combined vaccines available, including live, inactivated, subunit, DNA, and vector vaccines. Among them, live vaccines provide better protection, but cross-protection is weak. Inactivated vaccines are safe but have poor immune efficacy. Subunit vaccines can be used in the third trimester of pregnancy, and DNA vaccines can enhance the protective effect of live vaccines. However, vector vaccines only confer partial protection and have not been widely used in practice. A PRRS vaccine that meets new-generation international standards is still needed. This manuscript provides a comprehensive review of the advantages, disadvantages, and applicability of live-attenuated, inactivated, subunit, live vector, DNA, gene-deletion, synthetic peptide, virus-like particle, and other types of vaccines for the prevention and control of PRRS. The aim is to provide a theoretical basis for vaccine research and development.

Infectivity and transmissibility of an avian H3N1 influenza virus in pigs

In 2019 a low pathogenic H3N1 avian influenza virus (AIV) caused an outbreak in Belgian poultry farms, characterized by an unusually high mortality in chickens. Influenza A viruses of the H1 and H3 subtype can infect pigs and become established in swine populations. Therefore, the H3N1 epizootic raised concern about AIV transmission to pigs and from pigs to humans. Here, we assessed the replication efficiency of this virus in explants of the porcine respiratory tract and in pigs, using virus titration and/or RT-qPCR. We also examined transmission from directly, intranasally inoculated pigs to contact pigs. The H3N1 AIV replicated to moderate titers in explants of the bronchioles and lungs, but not in the nasal mucosa or trachea. In the pig infection study, infectious virus was only detected in a few lung samples collected between 1 and 3 days post-inoculation. Virus titers were between 1.7 and 4.8 log₁₀ TCID₅₀. In line with the ex vivo experiment, no virus was isolated from the upper respiratory tract of pigs. In the transmission experiment, we could not detect virus transmission from directly inoculated to contact pigs. An increase in serum antibody titers was observed only in the inoculated pigs. We conclude that the porcine respiratory tract tissue explants can be a useful tool to assess the replication efficiency of AIVs in pigs. The H3N1 AIV examined here is unlikely to pose a risk to swine populations. However, continuous risk assessment studies of emerging AIVs in pigs are necessary, since different virus strains will have different genotypic and phenotypic traits.

Heterologous vaccine immunogenicity, efficacy, and immune correlates of protection of a modified-live virus porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus vaccine

Although porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vaccines have been available in North America for almost 30 years, many vaccines face a significant hurdle: they must provide cross-protection against the highly diverse PRRSV strains. This cross-protection, or heterologous vaccine efficacy, relies greatly on the vaccine’s ability to induce a strong immune response against various strains—heterologous immunogenicity. Thus, this study investigated vaccine efficacy and immunogenicity of a modified live virus (MLV) against four heterologous type 2 PRRSV (PRRSV-2) strains. In this study, 60 pigs were divided into 10 groups. Half were MOCK-vaccinated, and the other half vaccinated with the Prevacent® PRRS MLV vaccine. Four weeks after vaccination, groups were challenged with either MOCK, or four PRRSV-2 strains from three different lineages—NC174 or NADC30 (both lineage 1), VR2332 (lineage 5), or NADC20 (lineage 8). Pre-and post-challenge, lung pathology, viral loads in both nasal swabs and sera, anti-PRRSV IgA/G, neutralizing antibodies, and the PRRSV-2 strain-specific T-cell response were evaluated. At necropsy, the lung samples were collected to assess viral loads, macroscopical and histopathological findings, and IgA levels in bronchoalveolar lavage. Lung lesions were only induced by NC174, NADC20, and NADC30; within these, vaccination resulted in lower gross and microscopic lung lesion scores of the NADC20 and NADC30 strains. All pigs became viremic and vaccinated pigs had decreased viremia upon challenge with NADC20, NADC30, and VR2332. Regarding vaccine immunogenicity, vaccination induced a strong systemic IgG response and boosted the post-challenge serum IgG levels for all strains. Furthermore, vaccination increased the number of animals with neutralizing antibodies against three of the four challenge strains—NADC20, NADC30, and VR2332. The heterologous T-cell response was also improved by vaccination: Not only did vaccination increase the induction of heterologous effector/memory CD4 T cells, but it also improved the heterologous CD4 and CD8 proliferative and/or IFN-γ response against all strains. Importantly, correlation analyses revealed that the (non-PRRSV strain-specific) serum IgG levels and the PRRSV strain-specific CD4 T-cell response were the best immune correlates of protection. Overall, the Prevacent elicited various degrees of efficacy and immunogenicity against four heterologous and phylogenetically distant strains of PRRSV-2.

Efficacy of a Modified Live Virus Vaccine against Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus 1 (PRRSV-1) Administered to 1-Day-Old Piglets in Front of Heterologous PRRSV-1 Challenge

PRRSV is one of the most important viruses in the global swine industry and is often controlled by the use of modified live virus (MLV) vaccines. This study assessed the impact of a PRRSV-1 MLV vaccine applied to 1-day-old piglets challenged on day 28 of life with a PRRSV-1 field isolate (AUT15-33). Twenty-one piglets were vaccinated within 24 h of birth (T02), whereas 20 piglets were left unvaccinated (T01). Necropsy was performed two weeks post-challenge. Comparing the two groups, T02 piglets showed significantly higher (p = 0.017) average daily weight gain. In addition, significantly lower (p < 0.0001) PRRSV RNA loads were measured in serum of T02 piglets at all investigated time points. All T01 piglets were viremic and shed virus in nasal swabs, whereas only 71.4% and 38.1% of the T02 group were viremic or shed virus, respectively. Piglets from T02 had significantly higher numbers (p < 0.0001) of IFN-γ producing lymphocytes compared to T01. At necropsy, differences in gross and histologic lung lesions were statistically significant (p = 0.012 and p < 0.0001, respectively) between the two groups. Hence, this MLV vaccine administered to 1-day-old piglets was able to protect piglets against PRRSV infection at weaning.

Commercial PRRS Modified-Live Virus Vaccines

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) virus (PRRSV) presents one of the challenging viral pathogens in the global pork industry. PRRS is characterized by two distinct clinical presentations; reproductive failure in breeding animals (gilts, sows, and boars), and respiratory disease in growing pigs. PRRSV is further divided into two species: PRRSV-1 (formerly known as the European genotype 1) and PRRSV-2 (formerly known as the North American genotype 2). A PRRSV-2 modified-live virus (MLV) vaccine was first introduced in North America in 1994, and, six years later, a PRRSV-1 MLV vaccine was also introduced in Europe. Since then, MLV vaccination is the principal strategy used to control PRRSV infection. Despite the fact that MLV vaccines have shown some efficacy, they were problematic as the efficacy of vaccine was often unpredictable and depended highly on the field virus. This paper focused on the efficacy of commercially available MLV vaccines at a global level based on respiratory disease in growing pigs, and maternal and paternal reproductive failure in breeding animals.

Modeling Economic Effects of Vaccination Against Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome: Impact of Vaccination Effectiveness, Vaccine Price, and Vaccination Coverage

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) causes substantial financial losses in pig farms and economic losses to societies worldwide. Vaccination against PRRS virus (PRRSV) is a common intervention in affected farms. The aim of this study was to assess the economic impact and profitability of potential new PRRS vaccines with improved efficacy at animal, herd, and national level. Two vaccination strategies were modeled; (i) mass vaccination of sows only (MS) and (ii) mass vaccination of sows and vaccination of piglets (MSP), comprising different scenarios of vaccine effectiveness, vaccine price, and vaccination coverage. A farrow-to-finish farm with 1,000 working sows from a pig-dense region in Germany served as an example farm. Financial benefits were obtained from gross margin analyses and were defined as difference in gross margin between a PRRSV-infected farm without vaccination (baseline) and with vaccination (intervention). Financial benefits were highest if both sows and piglets (MSP) were vaccinated. In these scenarios, median annual net benefits per working sow ranged from €170 to 340. If sows only were vaccinated (MS), estimated benefits attributable to vaccination were between €148 and 270. Decisive variables for the estimation of national level benefits were the number of farmers switching from existing to a better protecting vaccine, the number of previously non-vaccinating herds adopting the new vaccine, and the effectiveness of the new vaccine relative to those already available. Benefits were greatest when the new vaccine was adopted by previously non-vaccinating herds. The analyses showed that vaccination against PRRS was beneficial for all modeled scenarios. The magnitude of benefits derived from vaccination was more susceptible to changes in vaccination effectiveness than to vaccine price changes. This study provides evidence to support future vaccine development. The estimates indicate that the introduction of more efficient vaccines might lead to substantial financial benefits, is of socio-economic importance and that new vaccines might significantly contribute to the reduction of disease burden.

Immune response and protective efficacy of intramuscular and intradermal vaccination with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 (PRRSV-1) modified live vaccine against highly pathogenic PRRSV-2 (HP-PRRSV-2) challenge, either alone or in combination with of PRRSV-1

The study was conducted to evaluate the immune response of pigs vaccinated intramuscularly (IM) or intradermally (ID) with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 (PRRSV-1) modified live vaccine (MLV). The protective efficacy was evaluated upon challenge with highly pathogenic (HP)-PRRSV-2, either alone or in combination with PRRSV-1. Forty-two, castrated male, PRRSV-free pigs were randomly allocated into 7 groups of 6 pig each. IM/HPPRRSV2, IM/CoChallenge, ID/HPPRRSV2 and ID/CoChallenge groups were vaccinated IM or ID with PRRSV-1 MLV (UNISTRAIN® PRRS, Laboratorios Hipra S.A., Amer, Spain) in accordance to the manufacturer's directions. NV/HPPRRSV2 and NoVac/CoChallenge groups were nonvaccinated/challenged controls. NoVac/NoChallenge group was left as the control. Antibody response, IFN-γ-secreting cells (IFN-γ-SC) and IL-10 production were evaluated following vaccination. At 35 days post vaccination (DPV), all challenged groups were intranasally inoculated with HP-PRRSV-2, either alone or in combination with PRRSV-1. PRRSV viremia and lung lesion scores were evaluated following challenge. The results demonstrated that ID vaccinated pigs had significantly lower IL-10 levels and higher IFN-γ-SC than that of IM vaccinated pigs. Following challenge with HP-PRRSV-2 either alone or with PRRSV-1, PRRSV viremia and lung lesions, both macroscopically and microscopically, were significantly reduced in vaccinated pigs than that of nonvaccinated pigs, regardless to the route of vaccine administration. ID vaccinated pigs had significantly lower levels of PRRSV viremia and lung lesion scores than that of IM vaccinated pigs. The results of the study suggested that the administration of PRRSV-1 MLV, either IM or ID, provided partial protection against HP-PRRSV-2, either alone or when cochallenged with PRRSV-1, as demonstrated by the reduction in lung lesions and viremia. The ID route might represent an alternative to improve vaccine efficacy, as it resulted in lower IL-10 levels and higher IFN-γ-SC levels.

Dynamics and Differences in Systemic and Local Immune Responses After Vaccination With Inactivated and Live Commercial Vaccines and Subsequent Subclinical Infection With PRRS Virus

The goals of our study were to compare the immune response to different killed and modified live vaccines against PRRS virus and to monitor the antibody production and the cell mediated immunity both at the systemic and local level. In the experiment, we immunized four groups of piglets with two commercial inactivated (A1-Progressis, A2-Suivac) and two modified live vaccines (B3-Amervac, B4-Porcilis). Twenty-one days after the final vaccination, all piglets, including the control non-immunized group (C5), were i.n., infected with the Lelystad strain of PRRS virus. The serum antibody response (IgM and IgG) was the strongest in group A1 followed by two MLV (B3 and B4) groups. Locally, we demonstrated the highest level of IgG antibodies in bronchoalveolar lavages (BALF), and saliva in group A1, whereas low IgA antibody responses in BALF and feces were detected in all groups. We have found virus neutralization antibody at DPV 21 (days post vaccination) and higher levels in all groups including the control at DPI 21 (days post infection). Positive antigen specific cell-mediated response in lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) was observed in groups B3 and B4 at DPV 7 and in group B4 at DPV 21 and in all intervals after infection. The IFN-γ producing lymphocytes after antigen stimulation were found in CD4-CD8+ and CD4+CD8+ subsets of all immunized groups 7 days after infection. After infection, there were obvious differences in virus excretion. The virus was detected in all groups of piglets in serum, saliva, and occasionally in feces at DPI 3. Significantly lower virus load was found in groups A1 and B3 at DPI 21. Negative samples appeared at DPI 21 in B3 group in saliva. It can be concluded that antibodies after immunization and infection, and the virus after infection can be detected in all the compartments monitored. Immunization with inactivated vaccine A1-Progressis induces high levels of antibodies produced both systemically and locally. Immunization with MLV-vaccines (Amervac and Porcilis) produces sufficient antibody levels and also cell-mediated immunity. After infection virus secretion gradually decreases in group B3, indicating tendency to induce sterile immunity.

Establishment of Systems to Enable Isolation of Porcine Monoclonal Antibodies Broadly Neutralizing the Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus

The rapid evolution of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome viruses (PRRSV) poses a major challenge to effective disease control since available vaccines show variable efficacy against divergent strains. Knowledge of the antigenic targets of virus-neutralizing antibodies that confer protection against heterologous PRRSV strains would be a catalyst for the development of next-generation vaccines. Key to discovering these epitopes is the isolation of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) from immune pigs. To address this need, we sought to establish systems to enable the isolation of PRRSV neutralizing porcine mAbs. We experimentally produced a cohort of immune pigs by sequential challenge infection with four heterologous PRRSV strains spanning PRRSV-1 subtypes and PRRSV species. Whilst priming with PRRSV-1 subtype 1 did not confer full protection against a subsequent infection with a PRRSV-1 subtype 3 strain, animals were protected against a subsequent PRRSV-2 infection. The infection protocol resulted in high serum neutralizing antibody titers against PRRSV-1 Olot/91 and significant neutralization of heterologous PRRSV-1/-2 strains. Enriched memory B cells isolated at the termination of the study were genetically programmed by transduction with a retroviral vector expressing the Bcl-6 transcription factor and the anti-apoptotic Bcl-xL protein, a technology we demonstrated efficiently converts porcine memory B cells into proliferating antibody-secreting cells. Pools of transduced memory B cells were cultured and supernatants containing PRRSV-specific antibodies identified by flow cytometric staining of infected MARC-145 cells and in vitro neutralization of PRRSV-1. Collectively, these data suggest that this experimental system may be further exploited to produce a panel of PRRSV-specific mAbs, which will contribute both to our understanding of the antibody response to PRRSV and allow epitopes to be resolved that may ultimately guide the design of immunogens to induce cross-protective immunity.

The prevalent status and genetic diversity of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus in China: a molecular epidemiological perspective

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) has been epidemic more than 30 years in America and 20 years in China. It is still one of the most important causative agents to the worldwide swine industry. Here, we systematically analyzed the prevalence status of PRRSV in China by a molecular epidemiological perspective. Now both PRRSV-1 and PRRSV-2 are circulating and approximately more than 80% of pig farms are seropositive for PRRSV. For PRRSV-2, there are four lineages (lineage 1, lineage 3, lineage 5, lineage 8) circulating in the fields. Lineage 8 (CH-1a-like) and lineage 5 (BJ-4-like) appeared almost at the same time during 1995-1996. Notably, BJ-4 shares 99.6% and 99.8% identity with VR2332 and RespPRRS MLV, respectively. It means that lineage 5 is likely to be imported from America. Now highly pathogenic PRRSV (HP-PRRSV) which was considered to be evolved from local diversity of lineage 8 strains is predominant with different variants. Lineage 3 appeared in 2010 which is mainly sporadic in south of China. Lineage 1, also known as NADC30-like strains in China, has been prevalent since 2013 and leads to PRRS pandemic again. For PRRSV-1, although sporadic at present, more than 9 provinces/regions have been reported. All the circulating strains belong to subtype I. It should be paid more attention since there are no vaccines available. Our analysis would help to deeply understand the prevalent status of PRRSV in China and provide useful information for prevention and control of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS).

Preparation for emergence of an Eastern European porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) strain in Western Europe: Immunization with modified live virus vaccines or a field strain confers partial protection

The porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) causes huge economic losses for the swine industry worldwide. In the past several years, highly pathogenic strains that lead to even greater losses have emerged. For the Western European swine industry, one threat is the possible introduction of Eastern European PRRSV strains (example Lena genotype 1.3) which were shown to be more virulent than common Western resident strains under experimental conditions. To prepare for the possible emergence of this strain in Western Europe, we immunized piglets with a Western European PRRSV field strain (Finistere: Fini, genotype 1.1), a new genotype 1 commercial modified live virus (MLV) vaccine (MLV1) or a genotype 2 commercial MLV vaccine (MLV2) to evaluate and compare the level of protection that these strains conferred upon challenge with the Lena strain 4 weeks later. Results show that immunization with Fini, MLV1 or MLV2 strains shortened the Lena-induced hyperthermia. In the Fini group, a positive effect was also demonstrated in growth performance. The level of Lena viremia was reduced for all immunized groups (significantly so for Fini and MLV2). This reduction in Lena viremia was correlated with the level of Lena-specific IFNγ-secreting cells. In conclusion, we showed that a commercial MLV vaccine of genotype 1 or 2, as well as a field strain of genotype 1.1 may provide partial clinical and virological protection upon challenge with the Lena strain. The cross-protection induced by these immunizing strains was not related with the level of genetic similarity to the Lena strain. The slightly higher level of protection established with the field strain is attributed to a better cell-mediated immune response.