Literature DB >> 24623625

Comparison of test methodologies for foot-and-mouth disease virus serotype A vaccine matching.

Tesfaalem Tekleghiorghis1, Klaas Weerdmeester, Froukje van Hemert-Kluitenberg, Rob J M Moormann, Aldo Dekker.   

Abstract

Vaccination has been one of the most important interventions in disease prevention and control. The impact of vaccination largely depends on the quality and suitability of the chosen vaccine. To determine the suitability of a vaccine strain, antigenic matching is usually studied by in vitro analysis. In this study, we performed three in vitro test methods to determine which one gives the lowest variability and the highest discriminatory capacity. Binary ethylenimine inactivated vaccines, prepared from 10 different foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) virus serotype A strains, were used to vaccinate cattle (5 animals for each strain). The antibody titers in blood serum samples 3 weeks postvaccination (w.p.v.) were determined by a virus neutralization test, neutralization index test, and liquid-phase blocking enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The titers were then used to calculate relationship coefficient (r1) values. These r1 values were compared to the genetic lineage using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. In the two neutralization test methods, the median titers observed against the test strains differed considerably, and the sera of the vaccinated animals did not always show the highest titers against their respective homologous virus strains. When the titers were corrected for test strain effect (scaling), the variability (standard error of the mean per vaccinated group) increased because the results were on a different scale, but the discriminatory capacity improved. An ROC analysis of the r1 value calculated on both observed and scaled titers showed that only r1 values of the liquid-phase blocking ELISA gave a consistent statistically significant result. Under the conditions of the present study, the liquid-phase blocking ELISA showed less variation and still had a higher discriminatory capacity than the other tests.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24623625      PMCID: PMC4018896          DOI: 10.1128/CVI.00034-14

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol        ISSN: 1556-679X


  36 in total

Review 1.  RNA virus populations as quasispecies.

Authors:  J J Holland; J C De La Torre; D A Steinhauer
Journal:  Curr Top Microbiol Immunol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 4.291

2.  Correlation of 140S antigen dose with the serum neutralizing antibody response and the level of protection induced in cattle by foot-and-mouth disease vaccines.

Authors:  T W Pay; P J Hingley
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 3.641

3.  Sources of variability in foot and mouth disease vaccine potency estimates based on serum neutralizing antibody assay.

Authors:  P J Hingley; T W Pay
Journal:  J Biol Stand       Date:  1987-04

4.  A new enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the detection of antibodies against foot-and-mouth disease virus. I. Development and method of ELISA.

Authors:  C Hamblin; I T Barnett; R S Hedger
Journal:  J Immunol Methods       Date:  1986-10-23       Impact factor: 2.303

Review 5.  Rapid evolution of RNA genomes.

Authors:  J Holland; K Spindler; F Horodyski; E Grabau; S Nichol; S VandePol
Journal:  Science       Date:  1982-03-26       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Comparison of a liquid-phase blocking sandwich ELISA and a serum neutralization test to evaluate immunity in potency tests of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines.

Authors:  C Van Maanen; C Terpstra
Journal:  J Immunol Methods       Date:  1989-11-13       Impact factor: 2.303

7.  Thermal stability of foot-and-mouth disease virus.

Authors:  T R Doel; P J Baccarini
Journal:  Arch Virol       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 2.574

Review 8.  Protective immune response against foot-and-mouth disease.

Authors:  K C McCullough; F De Simone; E Brocchi; L Capucci; J R Crowther; U Kihm
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 5.103

Review 9.  Antigenic variation in foot-and-mouth disease: studies based on the virus neutralization reaction.

Authors:  M M Rweyemamu
Journal:  J Biol Stand       Date:  1984-07

Review 10.  Inactivation of viral antigens for vaccine preparation with particular reference to the application of binary ethylenimine.

Authors:  H G Bahnemann
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 3.641

View more
  6 in total

1.  Dendrimeric peptides can confer protection against foot-and-mouth disease virus in cattle.

Authors:  Ivana Soria; Valeria Quattrocchi; Cecilia Langellotti; Mariela Gammella; Sebastian Digiacomo; Beatriz Garcia de la Torre; David Andreu; Maria Montoya; Francisco Sobrino; Esther Blanco; Patricia Zamorano
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Experimental infections using the foot-and-mouth disease virus O/JPN/2010 in animals administered a vaccine preserved for emergency use in Japan.

Authors:  Katsuhiko Fukai; Tatsuya Nishi; Nobuaki Shimada; Kazuki Morioka; Manabu Yamada; Kazuo Yoshida; Kenichi Sakamoto; Rie Kitano; Reiko Yamazoe; Makoto Yamakawa
Journal:  J Vet Med Sci       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 1.267

3.  Seroprevalence and associated risk factors for foot and mouth disease virus seropositivity in cattle in selected districts of Gamo zone, Southern Ethiopia.

Authors:  Mesfin Shurbe; Bekahegn Simeon; Wasihun Seyoum; Ayelech Muluneh; Ephrem Tora; Edget Abayneh
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2022-08-15

4.  Novel Capsid-Specific Single-Domain Antibodies with Broad Foot-and-Mouth Disease Strain Recognition Reveal Differences in Antigenicity of Virions, Empty Capsids, and Virus-Like Particles.

Authors:  Haozhou Li; Aldo Dekker; Shiqi Sun; Alison Burman; Jeroen Kortekaas; Michiel M Harmsen
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2021-06-08

5.  Genetic and antigenic characterisation of serotype A FMD viruses from East Africa to select new vaccine strains.

Authors:  Fufa D Bari; Satya Parida; Tesfaalem Tekleghiorghis; Aldo Dekker; Abraham Sangula; Richard Reeve; Daniel T Haydon; David J Paton; Mana Mahapatra
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2014-08-26       Impact factor: 3.641

6.  Cross-Protection Induced by a A/MAY/97 Emergency Vaccine Against Intra-Serotype Heterologous Challenge with a Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus from the A/ASIA/G-VII Lineage.

Authors:  Aldo Dekker; Beatriz Sanz-Bernardo; Nagendrakumar Balasubramanian Singanallur; Anna B Ludi; Jacquelyn Horsington; Phaedra L Eblé; Donald P King; Wilna Vosloo
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2020-01-14
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.