Immunogenicity of Poxvirus Vector Avian Influenza Vaccines in Muscovy and Pekin Ducks

Current status of virus-vectored vaccines against pathogens that affect poultry

The most effective strategies for the control of disease in poultry are vaccination and biosecurity. Vaccines useful against pathogens affecting poultry must be safe, effective with a single dose, inexpensive, applicable by mass vaccination methods, and able to induce a protective immune response in the presence of maternal antibodies. Viral vector meet some of these characteristics and if the attenuated virus used as vector infects birds, the vaccine will have the advantage of being bivalent. Thus, viral vectors are currently a tool of choice for the development of new poultry vaccines. This review describes the main viruses used as vectors for the delivery and in vivo expression of antigens of poultry pathogens. It also presents the methodologies most frequently used to obtain recombinant viral vectors and summarizes the state-of-the-art related to vectored vaccines in poultry (some of them currently licensed), the pathogens targeted and their antigens, and the ability of these vaccines to induce an effective immune response. Finally, the review discusses the results of a few studies comparing recombinant viral vector vaccines and live-attenuated vaccines in vaccine matching challenges, and mentions strategies and future researches that can help to improve the efficacy of vectored vaccines in poultry birds.

Recombinant viral-vectored vaccines for the control of avian influenza in poultry

Vaccination is a commonly used tool for the control of both low pathogenic and highly pathogenic avian influenza (AI) viruses. Traditionally, inactivated adjuvanted vaccines made from a low pathogenic field strain have been used for vaccination, but advances in molecular biology have allowed a number of different viral vectored vaccines, expressing the AI virus hemagglutinin (HA) gene, to be developed and licensed for use for control of AI. This review summarizes the licensed vector vaccines available for use in poultry. As a group, these vaccines can stimulate both a cellular and humoral immune response and, when antigenically well matched to the target AI strain, are effective at preventing clinical disease and reducing virus shedding if vaccinated birds do become infected. The vaccines can often be given to one-day old chicks in the hatchery, which can provide early protection and is a cost effective route of administration of the vaccine. All the licensed vectored vaccines, because they only express the HA gene, can potentially be used to differentiate vaccinated from vaccinated and infected birds, which is often referred to as a DIVA strategy. Although a potentially valuable tool for the surveillance of the virus in countries that vaccinate, the DIVA principle has currently not been applied. Concern remains that maternal antibody or pre-existing immunity to the vector or to the AI HA insert can suppress the immune response to the vaccine. The viral vectored vaccines appear to work well with a prime boost strategy where the vectored vaccine is given first and a different type of vaccine, often a killed adjuvanted vaccine is given two or three weeks later.

Viral vector-based influenza vaccines

Antigenic drift of seasonal influenza viruses and the occasional introduction of influenza viruses of novel subtypes into the human population complicate the timely production of effective vaccines that antigenically match the virus strains that cause epidemic or pandemic outbreaks. The development of game-changing vaccines that induce broadly protective immunity against a wide variety of influenza viruses is an unmet need, in which recombinant viral vectors may provide. Use of viral vectors allows the delivery of any influenza virus antigen, or derivative thereof, to the immune system, resulting in the optimal induction of virus-specific B- and T-cell responses against this antigen of choice. This systematic review discusses results obtained with vectored influenza virus vaccines and advantages and disadvantages of the currently available viral vectors.

Success factors for avian influenza vaccine use in poultry and potential impact at the wild bird-agricultural interface

Thirty-two epizootics of high pathogenicity avian influenza (HPAI) have been reported in poultry and other birds since 1959. The ongoing H5N1 HPAI epizootic that began in 1996 has also spilled over to infect wild birds. Traditional stamping-out programs in poultry have resulted in eradication of most HPAI epizootics. However, vaccination of poultry was added as a control tool in 1995 and has been used during five epizootics. Over 113 billion doses of AI vaccine have been used in poultry from 2002 to 2010 as oil-emulsified, inactivated whole AIV vaccines (95.5%) and live vectored vaccines (4.5%). Over 99% of the vaccine has been used in the four H5N1 HPAI enzootic countries: China including Hong Kong (91%), Egypt (4.7%), Indonesia (2.3%), and Vietnam (1.4%) where vaccination programs have been nationwide and routine to all poultry. Ten other countries used vaccine in poultry in a focused, risk-based manner but this accounted for less than 1% of the vaccine used. Most vaccine "failures" have resulted from problems in the vaccination process; i.e., failure to adequately administer the vaccine to at-risk poultry resulting in lack of population immunity, while fewer failures have resulted from antigenic drift of field viruses away from the vaccine viruses. It is currently not feasible to vaccinate wild birds against H5N1 HPAI, but naturally occurring infections with H5 low pathogenicity avian influenza viruses may generate cross-protective immunity against H5N1 HPAI. The most feasible method to prevent and control H5N1 HPAI in wild birds is through control of the disease in poultry with use of vaccine to reduce environmental burden of H5N1 HPAIV, and eventual eradication of the virus in domestic poultry, especially in domestic ducks which are raised in enzootic countries on range or in other outdoor systems having contact with wild aquatic and periurban terrestrial birds.

Prime-boost vaccination with recombinant H5-fowlpox and Newcastle disease virus vectors affords lasting protection in SPF Muscovy ducks against highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus

Vaccination protocols were evaluated in one-day old Muscovy ducklings, using an experimental Newcastle disease recombinant vaccine (vNDV-H5) encoding an optimized synthetic haemagglutinin gene from a clade 2.2.1 H5N1 highly pathogenic (HP) avian influenza virus (AIV), either as a single administration or as a boost following a prime inoculation with a fowlpox vectored vaccine (vFP89) encoding a different H5 HP haemagglutinin from an Irish H5N8 strain. These vaccination schemes did not induce detectable levels of serum antibodies in HI test using a clade 2.2.1 H5N1 antigen, and only induced H5 ELISA positive response in less than 10% of vaccinated ducks. However, following challenge against a clade 2.2.1 HPAIV, both protocols afforded full clinical protection at six weeks of age, and full protection against mortality at nine weeks. Only the prime-boost vaccination (vFP89+vNDV-H5) was still fully protecting Muscovy ducks against disease and mortality at 12 weeks of age. Reduction of oropharyngeal shedding levels was also constantly observed from the onset of the follow-up at 2.5 or three days post-infection in vaccinated ducks compared to unvaccinated controls, and was significantly more important for vFP89+vNDV-H5 vaccination than for vNDV-H5 alone. Although the latter vaccine is shown immunogenic in one-day old Muscovy ducks, the present work is original in demonstrating the high efficacy of the successive administration of two different vector vaccines encoding two different H5 in inducing lasting protection (at least similar to the one induced by an inactivated reassortant vaccine, Re-5). In addition, such a prime-boost schedule allows implementation of a DIVA strategy (to differentiate vaccinated from infected ducks) contrary to Re-5, involves easy practice on the field (with injection at the hatchery and mass vaccination later on), and should avoid eventual interference with NDV maternally derived antibodies. Last, the HA insert could be updated according to the epidemiological situation.