Why the study?
HoBi-like pestiviruses are endemic among Brazilian cattle, yet commercial bovine reproductive and respiratory vaccines contain only BVDV-1 and BVDV-2 strains.
Does the inclusion of HoBi-like pestiviruses in bovine vaccines improve neutralizing antibody responses against these endemic strains in seronegative beef calves?
Does the inclusion of HoBi-like pestiviruses in bovine vaccines improve neutralizing antibody responses against these endemic strains in seronegative beef calves?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Current bivalent bovine pestivirus vaccines do not provide adequate serological cross-protection against endemic HoBi-like pestiviruses, highlighting the need for trivalent formulations.
HoBi-like pestiviruses (HoBiPeV) constitute a novel group of bovine pestiviruses, genetically and antigenically related to bovine viral diarrhea virus 1 (BVDV-1) and BVDV-2. Recent data shows that HoBiPeV are endemic among Brazilian cattle, yet bovine reproductive/respiratory vaccines contain only BVDV-1 and BVDV-2 strains. The present study investigated the neutralizing antibody response against these pestiviruses induced by two commercial vaccines (VA = attenuated, VI = inactivated) and by three experimental, replicative, vaccine formulations (VAC1 = monovalent, BVDV-1; VAC2 = bivalent, BVDV-1 + BVDV-2; VAC3 = trivalent, BVDV-1 + BVDV-2 and HoBiPeV). Seronegative beef calves were immunized once (replicative vaccines) or twice (inactivated vaccine) and serum samples were tested by virus-neutralization (VN) 30 days after vaccination (dpv) (replicative vaccines) or 30 days after the second dose (VI). We considered a threshold VN titer of ≥60 indicative of protection against clinical disease. At 30 dpv, VA induced protective titers against BVDV-2 in 7/7 animals (GMT=289.8) and against BVDV-1 and HoBiPeV in 5/7 animals (GMTs=97.5 and 80, respectively). VI induced protective titers against BVDV-1 in 1/7 animal (GMT=16.4), 2/7 animals against BVDV-2 (GMT=53.8) and in none of the calves against HoBiPeV (GMT=12.2). When a pool of sera of each vaccine group was tested against individual Brazilian isolates, VA induced protective titers against 3/7 BVDV-1 isolates, to 9/10 (BVDV-2) and 1/8 (HoBiPeV); VI induced protective titers against 1/7 (BVDV-1), 1/10 (BVDV-2) and none (0/8) HoBiPeV isolates. The experimental vaccine VAC1 induced protective titers against BVDV-1 in 9/9 animals (GMT=320) but in no animal against BVDV-2 or HoBiPeV (GMT<10). VAC2 induced protective titers to BVDV-1 and BVDV-2 in 9/9 animals (GMTs=160 and 640, respectively), and against HoBiPeV in 7/9 animals (GMT=108.5). Finally, VAC3 induced protective titers in all animals against BVDV-1 (GMT=234.3), BVDV-2 (294.9) and HoBiPeV (201.1). Testing the pool of sera against pestivirus isolates, VAC1 induced titers ≥ 60 against 4/7 BVDV-1 but to none BVDV-2/HoBiPeV isolate; VAC2 induced protective titers against 4/7 BVDV-1; 10/10 BVDV-2 and 2/8 HoBiPeV; VAC3 induced protective titers against all BVDV-1, BVDV-2 and HoBiPeV isolates. These results indicate that vaccines composed by BVDV-1+BVDV-2, especially those containing inactivated virus, may not induce serological response against a variety of HoBiPeV isolates. Thus, the need of inclusion of HoBiPeV in vaccine formulations should be considered.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Silva et al. (2021) studied Bovine pestivirus infection (n=41). Trivalent experimental vaccine (BVDV-1, BVDV-2, and HoBiPeV) vs. Commercial vaccines and monovalent/bivalent experimental vaccines was evaluated on Protective neutralizing antibody titers (VN titer ≥60).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: