The Use of Specific Serological Biomarkers to Detect CaniLeish Vaccination in Dogs

Synthetic Peptides Selected by Immunoinformatics as Potential Tools for the Specific Diagnosis of Canine Visceral Leishmaniasis

Diagnosing canine visceral leishmaniasis (CVL) in Brazil faces challenges due to the limitations regarding the sensitivity and specificity of the current diagnostic protocol. Therefore, it is urgent to map new antigens or enhance the existing ones for future diagnostic techniques. Immunoinformatic tools are promising in the identification of new potential epitopes or antigen candidates. In this study, we evaluated peptides selected by epitope prediction for CVL serodiagnosis in ELISA assays. Ten B-cell epitopes were immunogenic in silico, but two peptides (peptides No. 45 and No. 48) showed the best performance in vitro. The selected peptides, both individually and in combination, were highly diagnostically accurate, with sensitivities ranging from 86.4% to 100% and with a specificity of approximately 90%. We observed that the combination of peptides showed better performance when compared to peptide alone, by detecting all asymptomatic dogs, showing lower cross-reactivity in sera from dogs with other canine infections, and did not detect vaccinated animals. Moreover, our data indicate the potential use of immunoinformatic tools associated with ELISA assays for the selection and evaluation of potential new targets, such as peptides, applied to the diagnosis of CVL.

Antibodies elicited by the CaniLeish® vaccine: long-term clinical follow-up study of dogs in Spain

The prevention of canine leishmaniosis in healthy dogs requires a multimodal approach combining repellents with an effective vaccine. A vaccine that modulates the cell-mediated immune response against the protozoan has been available in Europe since 2012 (CaniLeish®, Virbac, France). The aim of the present study was to monitor dogs vaccinated with CaniLeish® to examine the kinetics of the antibody response and the safety and tolerance of CaniLeish®. Dogs vaccinated with CaniLeish® were monitored for 12 months. In follow-up visits at baseline (primovaccination or annual booster) (Visit 1, V1), and 1 (V2), 4 (V3), 8 (V4) and 12 (V5) months later, we examined antibody response kinetics using two serology techniques (IFAT and Speed Leish K™). Tolerance to CaniLeish® and its safety were also monitored. Anti-L. infantum IgG antibodies were determined in 242 dogs (125 dogs after primovaccination (Group P) and 117 dogs after booster vaccination (Group B). In addition, 46, 22 and 19 dogs were followed for 2, 3 and 4 years, respectively. At baseline, 100% of dogs in Group P returned negative IFAT and Speed Leish K™ test results while 9.4% (11/117) in Group B tested IFAT positive though Speed Leish K™ negative. In subsequent visits, seropositivity was detected by IFAT in 31.2% (Group P) and 41% (Group B) of the dogs in V2; 16.8% (Group P) and 10.2% (Group B) in V3; 6.4% (Group P) and 8.5% (Group B) in V4; and 3.2% (Group P) and 5.9% (Group B) in V5. All dogs tested Speed Leish K™ negative except two, in which it was later confirmed by molecular testing that they were not infected. Adverse events that could be associated with the vaccine were detected in 20 out of 314 dogs (6.4%). The good clinical status of all dogs was confirmed in an exhaustive clinical exam and haemato-biochemical profile. The Canileish® vaccine was well-tolerated with exceptions that did not appear to be related to age, sex, race or size of vaccinated dogs. Anti-L. infantum antibodies were detected by IFAT in 31.9-40.3% of the dogs 1 month after vaccination, and these antibodies could still be detected in 3.2% of the dogs 1 year later. This means that veterinarians need to use other tools (eg. PCR) to correctly diagnose seropositive dogs.

Visceral Dissemination of Mucocutaneous Leishmaniasis in a Kidney Transplant Recipient

Intracellular protozoan of the genus Leishmania, endemic in the Mediterranean basin, are the cause of cutaneous (CL), mucocutaneous (MCL), and visceral leishmaniasis (VL). A 75-year-old woman was admitted nine years after a second kidney transplant (KT), due to persistent pancytopenia and fever. She presented edema and erythema of the nose in the last two years and an exophytic nodular lesion located on the left arm, with areas of peripheral necrosis and central ulceration in the last 18 months. A bone marrow biopsy revealed features compatible with Leishmania amastigotes, and polymerase chain reaction test (PCR) for Leishmania infantum was positive. Moreover, biopsy and PCR for L. infantum of the cutaneous lesion on the patient's left arm and nose and PCR from peripheral blood were positive. Thus, a diagnosis of CL, MCL, and VL was made, and liposomal amphotericin B was initiated, but the patient had an unfavorable outcome and died. This is the first report of a KT recipient presenting with the entire spectrum of leishmaniasis. In Portugal, this infection is rare-so a high degree of clinical suspicion is required for its diagnosis, especially in endemic regions, as visceral leishmaniasis is a potentially life-threatening infection.

Commercially approved vaccines for canine leishmaniosis: a review of available data on their safety and efficacy

Canine leishmaniosis is an important vector-borne zoonosis caused mainly by Leishmania infantum. Diagnosis and treatment of affected individuals can be particularly complex, hindering infection control in endemic areas. Methods to prevent canine leishmaniosis include the use of topical insecticides, prophylactic immunotherapy and vaccination. Four vaccines against canine leishmaniosis have been licensed since 2004, two in Brazil (Leishmune®, the production and marketing licence of which was withdrawn in 2014, and Leish-Tec®) and two in Europe (CaniLeish® and LetiFend®). After several years of marketing, doubts remain regarding vaccine efficacy and effectiveness, potential infectiousness of vaccinated and infected animals or the interference of vaccine-induced antibodies in L. infantum serological diagnosis. This review summarises the scientific evidence for each of the vaccines commercially approved for canine leishmaniosis, while discussing possible weaknesses of these studies. Furthermore, it raises the need to address important questions related to vaccination impact in Leishmania-endemic countries and the importance of post-marketing pharmacological surveillance.