J Vet Sci.  2017 Aug;18(S1):323-331. 10.4142/jvs.2017.18.S1.323.

Immune responses in pigs and cattle vaccinated with half-volume foot-and-mouth disease vaccine

• Park ME
• You SH
• Lee SY
• Lee KN
• Ko MK
• Choi JH
• Kim B
• Lee JS
• Park JH

• KMID: 2412557
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4142/jvs.2017.18.S1.323

Abstract

With the current commercial foot-and-mouth disease vaccine, inoculating twice increases the formation of denatured meat due to granuloma or residual adjuvant at the injection site in pigs, resulting in economic loss. Therefore, we investigated protective antibody levels after reducing the amount of adjuvant in the vaccine. Field applicability of the experimental vaccine, made with a new adjuvant ISA 201, was tested by vaccinating farm animals with half-volume doses (1 mL/animal) of commercial vaccine and monitoring their immunogenicity. Among pigs, the group that received a half-volume dose showed similar or higher titers of structural protein antibody and neutralizing antibody than those receiving the standard dose (2 mL). In pigs, the durable effects of antibody titer of the reduced vaccine volume did not diminish up to the time of slaughter. Among cattle, boosting with a second 1 mL vaccine increased virus neutralizing antibody for the protective effects. The boosting effects were more marked in cattle than in pigs. The immune responses differed between species with the effect of the half-volume vaccination being lower in cattle than in pigs. In conclusion, the immune response to the half-volume vaccine was similar to that from the standard volume vaccine in pigs, but not in cattle.

Keyword

foot-and-mouth disease; immunity; vaccination methods; vaccine

MeSH Terms

Animals
Antibody Formation/immunology
Cattle
Cattle Diseases/immunology/*prevention & control/virology
Dose-Response Relationship, Immunologic
Foot-and-Mouth Disease/immunology/*prevention & control
Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus/*immunology
Swine
Swine Diseases/immunology/*prevention & control/virology
Viral Vaccines/administration & dosage/immunology/*therapeutic use
Viral Vaccines

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Antibody responses in pigs vaccinated with the experimental foot-and-mouth disease vaccine with an ISA 201 oil adjuvant. (A) PI values of type O SP-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) from sera of pigs vaccinated with 2 mL of vaccine. (B) PI values of type O SP-ELISA from sera of pigs vaccinated with 1 mL of vaccine. (C) PI values of type O SP-ELISA from sera of pigs vaccinated twice with 1 mL of vaccine. (D) VN titers to O/Andong/SKR/2010 in sera of pigs vaccinated with 2 mL of vaccine. (E) VN titers to O/Andong/SKR/2010 in sera of pigs vaccinated with 1 mL of vaccine. (F) VN titers to O/Andong/SKR/2010 in sera of pigs vaccinated twice with 1 mL of vaccine. (G) Antibody-positive rate (%) for type O in pigs vaccinated with 2 mL of vaccine. (H) Antibody-positive rate (%) for type O in pigs vaccinated with 1 mL of vaccine. (I) Antibody-positive rate (%) for type O in pigs vaccinated twice with 1 mL of vaccine. The antibody-positive rate was applied based on positive cutoff with O-SP ELISA (PI > 50) and VNT (> 1:16 for positive baseline and 1:45 for protectable level). Twenty pigs were included in this study. Black arrows indicate second vaccination (boosting). PI, percent inhibition value in SP-ELISA; VN, virus neutralizing; SP antibody, antibody against structural protein in SP-ELISA; AD, O/Andong/SKR/2010; JC, O/Jincheon/SKR/2014; VN-AD, virus neutralizing titer against O/Andong/SKR/2010; VN-JC, virus neutralizing titer against O/Jincheon/SKR/2014. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

• 

  Fig. 2 Antibody responses in cattle vaccinated with the experimental foot-and-mouth disease vaccine with an ISA 201 oil adjuvant. (A) PI values of type O SP-enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) from sera of cattle vaccinated with 2 mL of vaccine. (B) PI values of type O SP-ELISA from sera of cattle vaccinated with 1 mL of vaccine. (C) PI values of type O SP-ELISA from sera of cattle vaccinated twice with 1 mL of vaccine. (D) VN titers to O/Andong/SKR/2010 in sera of cattle vaccinated with 2 mL of vaccine. (E) VN titers to O Andong/SKR/2010 in sera of cattle vaccinated with 1 mL of vaccine. (F) VN titers to O/Andong/SKR/2010 in sera of cattle vaccinated twice with 1 mL of vaccine. (G) Antibody-positive rate (%) of type O in cattle vaccinated with 2 mL of vaccine. (H) Antibody-positive rate (%) of type O in cattle vaccinated twice with 1 mL of vaccine. (I) Antibody-positive rate (%) of type O in cattle vaccinated twice with 1 mL of vaccine. The antibody-positive rate was applied by positive cutoff with O-SP ELISA (PI > 50) and VNT (> 1:16 for positive baseline and 1:45 for predicted protective level). Black arrows indicate second vaccination (boosting). PI, percent inhibition value in SP-ELISA; VN, virus neutralizing; SP antibody, antibody against structural protein in SP-ELISA; AD, O/Andong/SKR/2010; JC, O/Jincheon/SKR/2014; VN-AD, virus neutralizing titer against O/Andong/SKR/2010; VN-JC, virus neutralizing titer against O/Jincheon/SKR/2014. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

• 

  Fig. 3 Comparison of antibody responses in pig and cattle vaccinated with the experimental foot-and-mouth disease vaccine with an ISA 201 oil adjuvant. (A) Antibody responses (ELISA and VNT) of pigs at the 3rd week post vaccination (wpv). (B) Antibody responses (ELISA and VNT) of pigs at the 4th wpv. (C) Antibody responses (ELISA and VNT) of pigs at the 8th wpv. (D) Antibody responses (ELISA and VNT) of pigs at the 12th wpv. (E) Antibody responses (ELISA and VNT) of cattle at 4th wpv. (F) Antibody responses (ELISA and VNT) of cattle at the 8th wpv. (G) Antibody responses (ELISA and VNT) of cattle at the 12th wpv. PI, percent inhibition value in SP-ELISA; VN, virus neutralizing; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; VNT, virus neutralization test. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

• 

  Fig. 4 Comparison of neutralizing titers in response to a heterologous virus in pig and cattle vaccinated with experimental foot-and-mouth disease vaccine. (A) Virus neutralizing (VN) titers to O/Jincheon/SKR/2014 in sera of pigs vaccinated with 2 mL of vaccine. (B) VN titers to O/Jincheon/SKR/2014 in sera of pigs vaccinated with 1 mL of vaccine. (C) VN titers to O/Jincheon/SKR/2014 in sera of pigs vaccinated twice with 1 mL of vaccine. (D) VN titers to O/Jincheon/SKR/2014 in sera of cattle vaccinated with 2 mL of vaccine. (E) VN titers in sera of cattle to O/Jincheon/SKR/2014 vaccinated with 1 mL of vaccine. (F) VN titers to O/Jincheon/SKR/2014 in sera of cattle vaccinated twice with 1 mL of vaccine. Black arrows indicate second vaccination (boosting).

Reference

1. Barnett PV, Pullen L, Williams L, Doel TR. International bank for foot-and-mouth disease vaccine: assessment of Montanide ISA 25 and ISA 206, two commercially available oil adjuvants. Vaccine. 1996; 14:1187–1198.

2. Choi SH, Park SI. Economic burden of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination-induced injection site lesions in slaughtered pigs and its causal relationship. J Prev Vet Med. 2015; 39:153–156.

3. Couch RB, Winokur P, Edwards KM, Black S, Atmar RL, Stapleton JT, Kissner JM, Shinefield H, Denny TN, Bybel MJ, Newman FK, Yan L. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Smallpox Vaccine Study Group. Reducing the dose of smallpox vaccine reduces vaccine-associated morbidity without reducing vaccination success rates or immune responses. J Infect Dis. 2007; 195:826–832.

4. Dekker A, Chénard G, Stockhofe N, Eblé PL. Proper timing of foot-and-mouth disease vaccination of piglets with maternally derived antibodies will maximize expected protection levels. Front Vet Sci. 2016; 3:52.

5. Fowler VL, Knowles NJ, Paton DJ, Barnett PV. Marker vaccine potential of a foot-and-mouth disease virus with a partial VP1 G-H loop deletion. Vaccine. 2010; 28:3428–3434.

6. Fukai K, Morioka K, Yamada M, Nishi T, Yoshida K, Kitano R, Yamazoe R, Kanno T. Comparative performance of fetal goat tongue cell line ZZ-R 127 and fetal porcine kidney cell line LFBK-α_vβ₆ for Foot-and-mouth disease virus isolation. J Vet Diagn Invest. 2015; 27:516–521.

7. Ibrahim Eel-S, Gamal WM, Hassan AI, Mahdy Sel-D, Hegazy AZ, Abdel-Atty MM. Comparative study on the immunopotentiator effect of ISA 201, ISA 61, ISA 50, ISA 206 used in trivalent foot and mouth disease vaccine. Vet World. 2015; 8:1189–1198.

8. Khorasani A, Madadgar O, Soleimanjahi H, Keyvanfar H, Mahravani H. Evaluation of the efficacy of a new oil-based adjuvant ISA 61 VG FMD vaccine as a potential vaccine for cattle. Iran J Vet Res. 2016; 17:8–12.

9. Koh WM, Bogich T, Siegel K, Jin J, Chong EY, Tan CY, Chen MI, Horby P, Cook AR. The epidemiology of hand, foot and mouth disease in Asia: a systematic review and analysis. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2016; 35:e285–e300.

10. McKercher PD, Graves JH. A review of the current status of oil adjuvants in foot-and-mouth disease vaccines. Dev Biol Stand. 1976; 35:107–112.

11. Park JH, Lee KN, Kim SM, Lee HS, Ko YJ, Tark DS, Shin YK, Seo MG, Kim B. Reemergence of foot-and-mouth disease, South Korea, 2000-2011. Emerg Infect Dis. 2014; 20:2158–2161.

12. Park JH, Tark D, Lee KN, Lee SY, Ko MK, Lee HS, Kim SM, Ko YJ, Seo MG, Chun JE, Lee MH, Kim B. Novel foot-and-mouth disease virus in Korea, July-August 2014. Clin Exp Vaccine Res. 2016; 5:83–87.

13. Park JN, Lee SY, Chu JQ, Lee YJ, Kim RH, Lee KN, Kim SM, Tark DS, Kim B, Park JH. Protection to homologous and heterologous challenge in pigs immunized with vaccine against foot-and-mouth disease type O caused an epidemic in East Asia during 2010/2011. Vaccine. 2014; 32:1882–1889.

14. Park ME, Lee SY, Kim RH, Ko MK, Lee KN, Kim SM, Kim BK, Lee JS, Kim B, Park JH. Enhanced immune responses of foot-and-mouth disease vaccine using new oil/gel adjuvant mixtures in pigs and goats. Vaccine. 2014; 32:5221–5227.

15. Park ME, Lee SY, Kim RH, Ko MK, Park JN, Lee KN, Kim SM, Choi JH, You SH, Kim B, Lee JS, Park JH. Altered adjuvant of foot-and-mouth disease vaccine improves immune response and protection from virus challenge. Trial Vaccinol. 2016; 5:97–104.

16. Patil PK, Sajjanar CM, Natarajan C, Bayry J. Neutralizing antibody responses to foot-and-mouth disease quadrivalent (type O, A, C and Asia 1) vaccines in growing calves with pre-existing maternal antibodies. Vet Microbiol. 2014; 169:233–235.

17. Xu M, Zuest R, Velumani S, Tukijan F, Toh YX, Appanna R, Tan EY, Cerny D, MacAry P, W CI, Fink K. A potent neutralizing antibody with therapeutic potential against all four serotypes of dengue virus. NPJ Vaccines. 2017; 2:2.

18. Yamanaka M, Hiramatsu K, Hirahara T, Okabe T, Nakai M, Sasaki N, Goto N. Pathological studies on local tissue reactions in guinea pigs and rats caused by four different adjuvants. J Vet Med Sci. 1992; 54:685–692.