Cargando…

Comparative efficacy of the Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV vaccines against infection with circulating feline Calicivirus

BACKGROUND: Feline calicivirus (FCV) is a common virus, found worldwide, mainly responsible for chronic ulceroproliferative faucitis and periodontitis. This virus has a high mutation rate, leading to the presence of numerous FCV strains in the field. The objectives of this study was to evaluate and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Almeras, T., Schreiber, P., Fournel, S., Martin, V., Nicolas, C. S., Fontaine, C., Lesbros, C., Gueguen, S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5635571/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29017551
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-017-1217-y
_version_ 1783270315101519872
author Almeras, T.
Schreiber, P.
Fournel, S.
Martin, V.
Nicolas, C. S.
Fontaine, C.
Lesbros, C.
Gueguen, S.
author_facet Almeras, T.
Schreiber, P.
Fournel, S.
Martin, V.
Nicolas, C. S.
Fontaine, C.
Lesbros, C.
Gueguen, S.
author_sort Almeras, T.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Feline calicivirus (FCV) is a common virus, found worldwide, mainly responsible for chronic ulceroproliferative faucitis and periodontitis. This virus has a high mutation rate, leading to the presence of numerous FCV strains in the field. The objectives of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of two vaccines (Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV), which differ by their nature (live vs. inactivated) and the vaccinal strains, against circulating FCV strains. Thirty 9-week-old specific pathogen free (SPF) kittens were thus randomised into 3 groups and were either not vaccinated (control) or vaccinated (2 injections, 3 weeks apart) with one of the vaccines. Four weeks after the second injection of primary vaccination, the cats were inoculated with a pathogenic strain representative of the ones circulating in Europe (FCV-FR4_01) and followed for 2 weeks. RESULTS: After challenge, significant differences (p < 0.05) between control cats and cats vaccinated with Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP or Purevax™ RCP FeLV were observed for body weight variation, rectal temperature rise and maximum clinical scores, reflecting the intensity of the signs (83% and 67% lower in the respective vaccinated groups than in the control group). Significant differences were observed between the vaccinated groups, as cats vaccinated with Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP had a lower temperature rise (p < 0.05 at days post-challenge 3 to 5) and lower virus shedding titres (p < 0.05 at days post-challenge 8, 9 and 11) than cats vaccinated with Purevax™ RCP FeLV. Finally, only cats vaccinated with Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP had a significantly lower cumulative score, reflecting the intensity and duration of calicivirosis clinical signs, than the control cats (77% lower vs. 62% lower for cats vaccinated with Purevax™ RCP FeLV). CONCLUSIONS: Both vaccines, Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV, were found to be efficacious in reducing clinical signs induced by FCV-FR4_01, a FCV strain representative of the circulating ones. However, cats vaccinated with Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP were able to control the infection more efficiently than those vaccinated with Purevax™ RCP FeLV, as evidenced by the shorter duration of clinical signs and lower viral titre in excretions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5635571
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56355712017-10-18 Comparative efficacy of the Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV vaccines against infection with circulating feline Calicivirus Almeras, T. Schreiber, P. Fournel, S. Martin, V. Nicolas, C. S. Fontaine, C. Lesbros, C. Gueguen, S. BMC Vet Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Feline calicivirus (FCV) is a common virus, found worldwide, mainly responsible for chronic ulceroproliferative faucitis and periodontitis. This virus has a high mutation rate, leading to the presence of numerous FCV strains in the field. The objectives of this study was to evaluate and compare the efficacy of two vaccines (Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV), which differ by their nature (live vs. inactivated) and the vaccinal strains, against circulating FCV strains. Thirty 9-week-old specific pathogen free (SPF) kittens were thus randomised into 3 groups and were either not vaccinated (control) or vaccinated (2 injections, 3 weeks apart) with one of the vaccines. Four weeks after the second injection of primary vaccination, the cats were inoculated with a pathogenic strain representative of the ones circulating in Europe (FCV-FR4_01) and followed for 2 weeks. RESULTS: After challenge, significant differences (p < 0.05) between control cats and cats vaccinated with Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP or Purevax™ RCP FeLV were observed for body weight variation, rectal temperature rise and maximum clinical scores, reflecting the intensity of the signs (83% and 67% lower in the respective vaccinated groups than in the control group). Significant differences were observed between the vaccinated groups, as cats vaccinated with Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP had a lower temperature rise (p < 0.05 at days post-challenge 3 to 5) and lower virus shedding titres (p < 0.05 at days post-challenge 8, 9 and 11) than cats vaccinated with Purevax™ RCP FeLV. Finally, only cats vaccinated with Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP had a significantly lower cumulative score, reflecting the intensity and duration of calicivirosis clinical signs, than the control cats (77% lower vs. 62% lower for cats vaccinated with Purevax™ RCP FeLV). CONCLUSIONS: Both vaccines, Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV, were found to be efficacious in reducing clinical signs induced by FCV-FR4_01, a FCV strain representative of the circulating ones. However, cats vaccinated with Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP were able to control the infection more efficiently than those vaccinated with Purevax™ RCP FeLV, as evidenced by the shorter duration of clinical signs and lower viral titre in excretions. BioMed Central 2017-10-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5635571/ /pubmed/29017551 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-017-1217-y Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Almeras, T.
Schreiber, P.
Fournel, S.
Martin, V.
Nicolas, C. S.
Fontaine, C.
Lesbros, C.
Gueguen, S.
Comparative efficacy of the Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV vaccines against infection with circulating feline Calicivirus
title Comparative efficacy of the Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV vaccines against infection with circulating feline Calicivirus
title_full Comparative efficacy of the Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV vaccines against infection with circulating feline Calicivirus
title_fullStr Comparative efficacy of the Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV vaccines against infection with circulating feline Calicivirus
title_full_unstemmed Comparative efficacy of the Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV vaccines against infection with circulating feline Calicivirus
title_short Comparative efficacy of the Leucofeligen™ FeLV/RCP and Purevax™ RCP FeLV vaccines against infection with circulating feline Calicivirus
title_sort comparative efficacy of the leucofeligen™ felv/rcp and purevax™ rcp felv vaccines against infection with circulating feline calicivirus
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5635571/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29017551
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-017-1217-y
work_keys_str_mv AT almerast comparativeefficacyoftheleucofeligenfelvrcpandpurevaxrcpfelvvaccinesagainstinfectionwithcirculatingfelinecalicivirus
AT schreiberp comparativeefficacyoftheleucofeligenfelvrcpandpurevaxrcpfelvvaccinesagainstinfectionwithcirculatingfelinecalicivirus
AT fournels comparativeefficacyoftheleucofeligenfelvrcpandpurevaxrcpfelvvaccinesagainstinfectionwithcirculatingfelinecalicivirus
AT martinv comparativeefficacyoftheleucofeligenfelvrcpandpurevaxrcpfelvvaccinesagainstinfectionwithcirculatingfelinecalicivirus
AT nicolascs comparativeefficacyoftheleucofeligenfelvrcpandpurevaxrcpfelvvaccinesagainstinfectionwithcirculatingfelinecalicivirus
AT fontainec comparativeefficacyoftheleucofeligenfelvrcpandpurevaxrcpfelvvaccinesagainstinfectionwithcirculatingfelinecalicivirus
AT lesbrosc comparativeefficacyoftheleucofeligenfelvrcpandpurevaxrcpfelvvaccinesagainstinfectionwithcirculatingfelinecalicivirus
AT gueguens comparativeefficacyoftheleucofeligenfelvrcpandpurevaxrcpfelvvaccinesagainstinfectionwithcirculatingfelinecalicivirus