Cargando…
Evaluation of the effectiveness of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination of animals in the buffer zone of the Republic of Armenia in 2016–2020
BACKGROUND: Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) is a high impact viral disease of livestock for which vaccines are extensively used for limiting the spread of infection. Armenia shares a border with both Turkey and Iran where FMD is endemic, making vaccination an important component of Armenia’s control st...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10540388/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37773157 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-023-03728-8 |
_version_ | 1785113705727393792 |
---|---|
author | Kharatyan, Satenik Sargsyan, Khachik Elbakyan, Hasmik Markosyan, Tigran Tumanyan, Pertsh Hakobyan, Varduhi Sargsyan, Vazgen Badalyan, Manvel Chobanyan, Gayane Achenbach, Jenna E. |
author_facet | Kharatyan, Satenik Sargsyan, Khachik Elbakyan, Hasmik Markosyan, Tigran Tumanyan, Pertsh Hakobyan, Varduhi Sargsyan, Vazgen Badalyan, Manvel Chobanyan, Gayane Achenbach, Jenna E. |
author_sort | Kharatyan, Satenik |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) is a high impact viral disease of livestock for which vaccines are extensively used for limiting the spread of infection. Armenia shares a border with both Turkey and Iran where FMD is endemic, making vaccination an important component of Armenia’s control strategy. Additionally, Armenian veterinary services utilize both passive and active monitoring for prevention control. METHODS: We sought to determine the immune status of animals vaccinated against FMD and to evaluate the effectiveness of our vaccination policy in Armenia. This was conducted in three regions including Shirak, Armavir, and Ararat Region which are located in the buffer zones that border Turkey and Iran. Through active monitoring in 2020, we studied blood serum samples from cattle and sheep using an enzyme immunoassay to determine the level of immune animals in these regions following the use of a polyvalent inactivated vaccine containing FMDV serotypes A, O, and Asia-1 that are relevant for this region. ELISA titers were assessed at 28, 90, and 180 days after vaccination in cattle of three age groups at the time of initial vaccination: 4–6 months, 6–18 months and ≥ 24 months of age with sheep of all ages. RESULTS: The 3 age groups of cattle had similarly high levels of immunity with over 90% of the cattle showing a ≥ 50% protective titer 28 days after the first vaccination. By day 90, titers in cattle from the initial 4–18-month age groups dropped below 58% across the 3 serotypes and at or below 80% for the oldest cattle ≥ 24 months. Re-vaccination of cattle at 120 days did improve protective titers but never reached the level of immunity of the first vaccination. Sheep showed a similar rapid drop to less than 50% having a ≥ 50% protective titer at 90 days emphasizing the need for continual revaccination. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study have important implications for the current FMD vaccine policy in Armenia and improves our understanding of the rapid loss of protective titers over short periods. Since small ruminants are only vaccinated once per year and vaccination titers drop rapidly by 90 days suggests that they are vulnerable to FMD and that vaccination protocols need to be updated. Cattle should continue to be vaccinated every 3–6 months depending on their age to maintain a protective level of antibodies to protect them from FMD. More studies are needed to understand the possible role of small ruminants in the epidemiology of FMD and to evaluate revaccination at shorter intervals. These results show the concerns of rapid loss of protection to both cattle and small ruminants following 1 or more doses of commercial vaccines and that additional vaccines need to be evaluated in both groups to know how often they must be vaccinated to provide full protection. The addition of challenge studies should also be considered to better understand the level of protection as measured by serology and how it relates to protection from challenge. These results should be considered by anyone using these vaccines in cattle and sheep at longer than 3 month intervals. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10540388 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105403882023-09-30 Evaluation of the effectiveness of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination of animals in the buffer zone of the Republic of Armenia in 2016–2020 Kharatyan, Satenik Sargsyan, Khachik Elbakyan, Hasmik Markosyan, Tigran Tumanyan, Pertsh Hakobyan, Varduhi Sargsyan, Vazgen Badalyan, Manvel Chobanyan, Gayane Achenbach, Jenna E. BMC Vet Res Research BACKGROUND: Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) is a high impact viral disease of livestock for which vaccines are extensively used for limiting the spread of infection. Armenia shares a border with both Turkey and Iran where FMD is endemic, making vaccination an important component of Armenia’s control strategy. Additionally, Armenian veterinary services utilize both passive and active monitoring for prevention control. METHODS: We sought to determine the immune status of animals vaccinated against FMD and to evaluate the effectiveness of our vaccination policy in Armenia. This was conducted in three regions including Shirak, Armavir, and Ararat Region which are located in the buffer zones that border Turkey and Iran. Through active monitoring in 2020, we studied blood serum samples from cattle and sheep using an enzyme immunoassay to determine the level of immune animals in these regions following the use of a polyvalent inactivated vaccine containing FMDV serotypes A, O, and Asia-1 that are relevant for this region. ELISA titers were assessed at 28, 90, and 180 days after vaccination in cattle of three age groups at the time of initial vaccination: 4–6 months, 6–18 months and ≥ 24 months of age with sheep of all ages. RESULTS: The 3 age groups of cattle had similarly high levels of immunity with over 90% of the cattle showing a ≥ 50% protective titer 28 days after the first vaccination. By day 90, titers in cattle from the initial 4–18-month age groups dropped below 58% across the 3 serotypes and at or below 80% for the oldest cattle ≥ 24 months. Re-vaccination of cattle at 120 days did improve protective titers but never reached the level of immunity of the first vaccination. Sheep showed a similar rapid drop to less than 50% having a ≥ 50% protective titer at 90 days emphasizing the need for continual revaccination. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study have important implications for the current FMD vaccine policy in Armenia and improves our understanding of the rapid loss of protective titers over short periods. Since small ruminants are only vaccinated once per year and vaccination titers drop rapidly by 90 days suggests that they are vulnerable to FMD and that vaccination protocols need to be updated. Cattle should continue to be vaccinated every 3–6 months depending on their age to maintain a protective level of antibodies to protect them from FMD. More studies are needed to understand the possible role of small ruminants in the epidemiology of FMD and to evaluate revaccination at shorter intervals. These results show the concerns of rapid loss of protection to both cattle and small ruminants following 1 or more doses of commercial vaccines and that additional vaccines need to be evaluated in both groups to know how often they must be vaccinated to provide full protection. The addition of challenge studies should also be considered to better understand the level of protection as measured by serology and how it relates to protection from challenge. These results should be considered by anyone using these vaccines in cattle and sheep at longer than 3 month intervals. BioMed Central 2023-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10540388/ /pubmed/37773157 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-023-03728-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Kharatyan, Satenik Sargsyan, Khachik Elbakyan, Hasmik Markosyan, Tigran Tumanyan, Pertsh Hakobyan, Varduhi Sargsyan, Vazgen Badalyan, Manvel Chobanyan, Gayane Achenbach, Jenna E. Evaluation of the effectiveness of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination of animals in the buffer zone of the Republic of Armenia in 2016–2020 |
title | Evaluation of the effectiveness of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination of animals in the buffer zone of the Republic of Armenia in 2016–2020 |
title_full | Evaluation of the effectiveness of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination of animals in the buffer zone of the Republic of Armenia in 2016–2020 |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of the effectiveness of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination of animals in the buffer zone of the Republic of Armenia in 2016–2020 |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of the effectiveness of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination of animals in the buffer zone of the Republic of Armenia in 2016–2020 |
title_short | Evaluation of the effectiveness of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination of animals in the buffer zone of the Republic of Armenia in 2016–2020 |
title_sort | evaluation of the effectiveness of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination of animals in the buffer zone of the republic of armenia in 2016–2020 |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10540388/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37773157 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-023-03728-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kharatyansatenik evaluationoftheeffectivenessoffootandmouthdiseasevaccinationofanimalsinthebufferzoneoftherepublicofarmeniain20162020 AT sargsyankhachik evaluationoftheeffectivenessoffootandmouthdiseasevaccinationofanimalsinthebufferzoneoftherepublicofarmeniain20162020 AT elbakyanhasmik evaluationoftheeffectivenessoffootandmouthdiseasevaccinationofanimalsinthebufferzoneoftherepublicofarmeniain20162020 AT markosyantigran evaluationoftheeffectivenessoffootandmouthdiseasevaccinationofanimalsinthebufferzoneoftherepublicofarmeniain20162020 AT tumanyanpertsh evaluationoftheeffectivenessoffootandmouthdiseasevaccinationofanimalsinthebufferzoneoftherepublicofarmeniain20162020 AT hakobyanvarduhi evaluationoftheeffectivenessoffootandmouthdiseasevaccinationofanimalsinthebufferzoneoftherepublicofarmeniain20162020 AT sargsyanvazgen evaluationoftheeffectivenessoffootandmouthdiseasevaccinationofanimalsinthebufferzoneoftherepublicofarmeniain20162020 AT badalyanmanvel evaluationoftheeffectivenessoffootandmouthdiseasevaccinationofanimalsinthebufferzoneoftherepublicofarmeniain20162020 AT chobanyangayane evaluationoftheeffectivenessoffootandmouthdiseasevaccinationofanimalsinthebufferzoneoftherepublicofarmeniain20162020 AT achenbachjennae evaluationoftheeffectivenessoffootandmouthdiseasevaccinationofanimalsinthebufferzoneoftherepublicofarmeniain20162020 |