Mouse model as an efficacy test for foot‐and‐mouth disease vaccines

Protection against foot‐and‐mouth disease virus (FMDV) has been linked to the development of a humoral response. In Argentina, the official control tests for assessing the potency of FMD vaccines are protection against podal generalization (PPG) and expected percentage of protection (EPP) curves bui...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gnazzo, Victoria, Quattrocchi, Valeria, Soria, Ivana, Pereyra, Erica Vanesa, Langellotti, Cecilia Ana, Pedemonte, Andrea, López, Virginia, Marangunich, Laura An, Zamorano, Patricia Ines
Formato: info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: Wiley 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/7741
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/tbed.13591
https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.13591
_version_ 1855035912749056000
author Gnazzo, Victoria
Quattrocchi, Valeria
Soria, Ivana
Pereyra, Erica Vanesa
Langellotti, Cecilia Ana
Pedemonte, Andrea
López, Virginia
Marangunich, Laura An
Zamorano, Patricia Ines
author_browse Gnazzo, Victoria
Langellotti, Cecilia Ana
López, Virginia
Marangunich, Laura An
Pedemonte, Andrea
Pereyra, Erica Vanesa
Quattrocchi, Valeria
Soria, Ivana
Zamorano, Patricia Ines
author_facet Gnazzo, Victoria
Quattrocchi, Valeria
Soria, Ivana
Pereyra, Erica Vanesa
Langellotti, Cecilia Ana
Pedemonte, Andrea
López, Virginia
Marangunich, Laura An
Zamorano, Patricia Ines
author_sort Gnazzo, Victoria
collection INTA Digital
description Protection against foot‐and‐mouth disease virus (FMDV) has been linked to the development of a humoral response. In Argentina, the official control tests for assessing the potency of FMD vaccines are protection against podal generalization (PPG) and expected percentage of protection (EPP) curves built with quantitative data of antibodies determined by liquid‐phase blocking ELISA (lpELISA). The results of these tests are used to accept or discard vaccines at the batch level. In this report, a mouse model was assessed as an alternative efficacy control for FMDV vaccines. To this aim, groups of cattle (n = 18) and BALB/c mice (n = 16) were inoculated with commercial FMDV vaccines and bleedings were performed 60 days post vaccination (dpv) in cattle and 21 dpv in mice. Specific FMDV antibody titres were measured in both species by a standardized lpELISA. A statistically significant association between antibody levels in cattle and mice has already been demonstrated. However, some vaccines have been misclassified since they were considered protective based on lpELISA results but did not induce good protection in cattle upon challenge. For this reason, other immunological parameters were evaluated to improve the prediction of protection in mice, without the need of using infective virus. In addition, antibody titres by lpELISA, the IgG2b/IgG1 isotype ratio and the Avidity Index were identified as good predictors, resulting in an optimal predictive model of protection. This mouse model could be a simple and economic alternative for testing FMD vaccines since the disadvantages of high costs and facility requirements associated with the use of large animals are overcome.
format info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
id INTA7741
institution Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA -Argentina)
language Inglés
publishDate 2020
publishDateRange 2020
publishDateSort 2020
publisher Wiley
publisherStr Wiley
record_format dspace
spelling INTA77412020-08-19T17:21:29Z Mouse model as an efficacy test for foot‐and‐mouth disease vaccines Gnazzo, Victoria Quattrocchi, Valeria Soria, Ivana Pereyra, Erica Vanesa Langellotti, Cecilia Ana Pedemonte, Andrea López, Virginia Marangunich, Laura An Zamorano, Patricia Ines Virus Fiebre Aftosa Enfermedades de los Animales Vacuna Ratón Modelos Animales Aphthovirus Animal Diseases Vaccines Mice Animal Models Protection against foot‐and‐mouth disease virus (FMDV) has been linked to the development of a humoral response. In Argentina, the official control tests for assessing the potency of FMD vaccines are protection against podal generalization (PPG) and expected percentage of protection (EPP) curves built with quantitative data of antibodies determined by liquid‐phase blocking ELISA (lpELISA). The results of these tests are used to accept or discard vaccines at the batch level. In this report, a mouse model was assessed as an alternative efficacy control for FMDV vaccines. To this aim, groups of cattle (n = 18) and BALB/c mice (n = 16) were inoculated with commercial FMDV vaccines and bleedings were performed 60 days post vaccination (dpv) in cattle and 21 dpv in mice. Specific FMDV antibody titres were measured in both species by a standardized lpELISA. A statistically significant association between antibody levels in cattle and mice has already been demonstrated. However, some vaccines have been misclassified since they were considered protective based on lpELISA results but did not induce good protection in cattle upon challenge. For this reason, other immunological parameters were evaluated to improve the prediction of protection in mice, without the need of using infective virus. In addition, antibody titres by lpELISA, the IgG2b/IgG1 isotype ratio and the Avidity Index were identified as good predictors, resulting in an optimal predictive model of protection. This mouse model could be a simple and economic alternative for testing FMD vaccines since the disadvantages of high costs and facility requirements associated with the use of large animals are overcome. Instituto de Virología Fil: Gnazzo, Victoria. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Virología; Argentina. Fil: Quattrocchi, Valeria. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Virología; Argentina Fil: Soria, Ivana. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Virología; Argentina Fil: Pereyra, Erica Vanesa. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Virología; Argentina Fil: Langellotti, Cecilia Ana. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Virología; Argentina. Fil: Pedemonte, Andrea. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Virología; Argentina. Fil: López, Virginia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Virología; Argentina. Fil: Marangunich, Laura An. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Virología; Argentina. Fil: Zamorano, Patricia Ines. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Virología; Argentina 2020-08-19T17:17:26Z 2020-08-19T17:17:26Z 2020-04 info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/7741 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/tbed.13591 1865-1674 1865-1682 https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.13591 eng info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess application/pdf Wiley Transboundary and Emerging Diseases (First published: 22 April 2020)
spellingShingle Virus Fiebre Aftosa
Enfermedades de los Animales
Vacuna
Ratón
Modelos Animales
Aphthovirus
Animal Diseases
Vaccines
Mice
Animal Models
Gnazzo, Victoria
Quattrocchi, Valeria
Soria, Ivana
Pereyra, Erica Vanesa
Langellotti, Cecilia Ana
Pedemonte, Andrea
López, Virginia
Marangunich, Laura An
Zamorano, Patricia Ines
Mouse model as an efficacy test for foot‐and‐mouth disease vaccines
title Mouse model as an efficacy test for foot‐and‐mouth disease vaccines
title_full Mouse model as an efficacy test for foot‐and‐mouth disease vaccines
title_fullStr Mouse model as an efficacy test for foot‐and‐mouth disease vaccines
title_full_unstemmed Mouse model as an efficacy test for foot‐and‐mouth disease vaccines
title_short Mouse model as an efficacy test for foot‐and‐mouth disease vaccines
title_sort mouse model as an efficacy test for foot and mouth disease vaccines
topic Virus Fiebre Aftosa
Enfermedades de los Animales
Vacuna
Ratón
Modelos Animales
Aphthovirus
Animal Diseases
Vaccines
Mice
Animal Models
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/7741
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/tbed.13591
https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.13591
work_keys_str_mv AT gnazzovictoria mousemodelasanefficacytestforfootandmouthdiseasevaccines
AT quattrocchivaleria mousemodelasanefficacytestforfootandmouthdiseasevaccines
AT soriaivana mousemodelasanefficacytestforfootandmouthdiseasevaccines
AT pereyraericavanesa mousemodelasanefficacytestforfootandmouthdiseasevaccines
AT langellotticeciliaana mousemodelasanefficacytestforfootandmouthdiseasevaccines
AT pedemonteandrea mousemodelasanefficacytestforfootandmouthdiseasevaccines
AT lopezvirginia mousemodelasanefficacytestforfootandmouthdiseasevaccines
AT marangunichlauraan mousemodelasanefficacytestforfootandmouthdiseasevaccines
AT zamoranopatriciaines mousemodelasanefficacytestforfootandmouthdiseasevaccines