Early administration of canine parvovirus monoclonal antibody prevented mortality after experimental challenge

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of canine parvovirus monoclonal antibody (CPMA) as a treatment against canine parvovirus (CPV-2)-induced mortality and to support USDA product licensure.

ANIMALS

28 purpose-bred Beagle dogs aged 8 weeks were randomized to the treated (n = 21) or control (7) group.

METHODS

Dogs were challenged intranasally with 104.2 TCID50 virulent CPV-2b on Day 0 and monitored for 14 days for fecal viral shed and clinical disease. All dogs began shedding CPV-2 on Day 4 and were treated intravenously with a single dose of either CPMA (0.2 mL/kg) or saline (equal volume). No additional treatments were given to either group. Feces and sera were collected for quantitative analysis of fecal viral shed (hemagglutination) and antibody responses (hemagglutination inhibition and dot-blot ELISA), respectively. Dogs were monitored twice daily for parameters including lymphopenia, fever, vomiting, abnormal feces, inappetence, and lethargy. Humane endpoints triggered euthanasia by a veterinarian masked to treatment groups. The primary outcome variable was prevention of mortality as compared to controls.

RESULTS

Mortality was prevented in all CPMA-treated dogs compared to 57% mortality in the control group (P = .0017, Fisher exact test). Canine parvovirus monoclonal antibody-treated dogs also experienced less severe and/or shorter durations of diarrhea, fever, vomiting, CPV-2 shedding in feces, and lymphopenia. Both groups showed similar immunoglobulin M responses as measured by semiquantitative analysis.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Intravenous administration of CPMA can effectively improve clinical outcome when administered early in CPV-2 disease. Canine parvovirus monoclonal antibody treatment after proven infection does not interfere with adaptive immunity.

Initial vaccination and revaccination with Type I PRRS 94881 MLV reduces viral load and infection with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus

Background

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) causes respiratory distress in pigs, reproductive failure in breeding-age gilts and sows, and can have devastating economic consequences in domestic herds. Several PRRS vaccines are available commercially. This study compared the effectiveness of single-vaccination and revaccination schedules using the PRRS 94881 Type I modified live virus (MLV) vaccine ReproCyc® PRRS EU with no vaccination (challenge control) in protecting against a PRRS virus (PRRSV) challenge in non-pregnant gilts.

Results

Data were available from 48 gilts across three groups: a challenge control group (n = 16), which received no vaccination; a revaccination group (n = 16), which received ReproCyc® PRRS EU on Days 0 and 56; and a single vaccination group (n = 16), which received ReproCyc® PRRS EU on Day 56. All gilts were PRRSV RNA-negative (based on reverse transcription and quantitative polymerase chain reaction [RT-qPCR]) and PRRSV seronegative (based on enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]) at Day 0. All gilts were challenged with PRRSV strain 190136 on Day 91.

Viral RNA loads in both vaccination groups were significantly reduced compared with the challenge control group on Days 98 (P < 0.0001) and 101 (P < 0.0001), indicating that vaccinated gilts were better able to respond to challenge than unvaccinated gilts. At all timepoints following challenge, mean viral RNA load and the percentage of PRRSV RNA-positive gilts were numerically higher in the single-vaccination group than in the revaccination group; these differences were statistically significant on Day 101 (P = 0.0434). Furthermore, viremia levels after challenge were significantly lower in the revaccination group than in the single-vaccination group based on median area under the curve (AUC) values for viral RNA load from Day 91 to Day 112, suggesting that revaccinated gilts had better protection from viral infection than gilts who received a single vaccination. Protection from viremia did not correlate with the proportion of seropositive gilts on Day 91. In the single-vaccination group, 94% of pigs were seropositive on Day 91 compared with 56% in the revaccination group. Vaccination was well tolerated and no safety concerns were identified.

Conclusions

Both single-vaccination and revaccination with ReproCyc® PRRS EU were effective in reducing PRRSV viremia post-challenge. These findings have important implications for herd management as both the single-vaccination and revaccination schedules protect against PRRSV challenge, with revaccination appearing to provide better protection from viremia than single vaccination.

Safety and early onset of immunity with a novel European porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus vaccine in young piglets

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) can be difficult to manage in commercial settings. A novel type I PRRSV vaccinal strain (94881) was evaluated for safety and efficacy/onset of immunity (OOI) in piglets. In 2 experiments, groups of piglets were vaccinated intramuscularly (IM) at approximately 14 d of age with a maximum-range commercial dose, an overdose, or a placebo in experiment 1 and either a minimum-range commercial dose or a placebo in experiment 2. The piglets in experiment 1 were evaluated for local and systemic reactions from days -2 through 14 after vaccination. The piglets in experiment 2 were challenged with a virulent heterologous type I PRRSV isolate 14 d after vaccination and observed once daily for general health from days -1 through 12 after vaccination and once daily for clinical signs associated with challenge from days 13 through 24 after vaccination. The average daily weight gain (ADWG) and the results of serologic and viremia testing were evaluated in experiments 1 and 2. Lung lesion scores and results of testing for PRRSV in lung tissue were evaluated in experiment 2. In experiment 1 the vaccine was shown to be safe, as there were no relevant differences between the vaccinated piglets and the piglets given a placebo. In experiment 2 the vaccine's efficacy, with an OOI of 14 d after vaccination, was established, as the vaccinated and challenged piglets exhibited significantly lower lung lesion scores, viremia, viral load in lung tissue, and total clinical sign scores, along with a significantly greater ADWG, compared with the placebo-vaccinated and challenged piglets.