RESUMO
In 2017, highly fatal canine leptospirosis emerged in Sydney, Australia. Based on results of microscopic agglutination testing (MAT), serovar Copenhageni appeared to be the most common causative serovar. Prior to this, no clinical cases had been reported since 1976. In a serosurvey of healthy dogs in Australian shelters in 2004, 2.4% of 431 New South Wales dogs had serological evidence of exposure to Copenhageni, the most prevalent serovar. The aim of this study was to estimate the current prevalence of Leptospira exposure and associated serovars in healthy Sydney dogs, previously unvaccinated against Leptospira. Serum samples from 411 healthy dogs in leptospirosis hotspots and neighbouring suburbs were collected before vaccination. MAT for 23 serovars was performed at the WHO Leptospirosis Reference Laboratory in Queensland, Australia. The overall seroprevalence was 4.1% (17/411) with low titres (1/50-1/200) detected. Eleven dogs were from known leptospirosis hotspots. Eight dogs were known to hunt rodents. One dog had been in contact with a leptospirosis positive dog 1 year prior. Serovar Topaz was the most prevalent serovar (n = 5) followed by serovars Australis (n = 4), Copenhageni (n = 4), Djasiman (n = 2), Cynopteri (n = 1), Javanica (n = 1), Medanensis (n = 1), and Pomona (n = 1). In conclusion, serological evidence of exposure of dogs in Sydney to Leptospira is low, but apparently has increased since 2004. Positive titres to serovars not previously reported to cause disease in dogs could be due to low virulence of those serovars or cross-reactivity with other serovars.
Assuntos
Doenças do Cão , Leptospira , Leptospirose , Animais , Cães , New South Wales/epidemiologia , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos , Austrália , Leptospirose/epidemiologia , Leptospirose/veterinária , Leptospirose/prevenção & controle , Anticorpos AntibacterianosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: It is doubtful that any of the treatments proposed for feline leukaemia virus (FeLV) infection are effective, despite the entity being described 60 years ago. METHODS: Eighteen pet cats with progressive FeLV infections were recruited in Australia. One or more antiviral drugs were trialled in 16 cats, while two FeLV-infected cats were not handleable and served as untreated controls. Six cats were administered RetroMAD1™ only (0.5 mg/kg orally twice daily), a commercially available recombinant chimeric protein with proposed antiretroviral activity. Three cats were administered the integrase inhibitor raltegravir only (10-15 mg/kg orally twice daily), a drug used as a component of highly effective antiretroviral therapy for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1) infection. Three cats were administered RetroMAD1™ and raltegravir concurrently, and four cats were administered raltegravir and the reverse transcriptase inhibitor zidovudine (AZT, 5 mg/kg orally twice daily) concurrently. FeLV RNA and p27 antigen loads were measured at two timepoints (T1-2 months and T3-5 months) during therapy and compared to baseline (pretreatment) levels, to assess the response to therapy using linear modelling. The median survival time (MST) of the cats from commencement of FeLV treatment to death was also determined and compared between treatments. RESULTS: The MST for the 16 FeLV-positive cats which received antiviral therapy was 634 days, while the MST from FeLV diagnosis to death for the two untreated control cats was 780 days. In cats treated with RetroMAD1™, FeLV viral load decreased from T0 to T1-2 months (median viral load reduced from 1339 × 106 to 705 × 106 copies/mL plasma; P = 0.012), but MST was reduced compared to cats not given RetroMAD1™ (426 days vs 1006 days; P = 0.049). Cats treated with raltegravir and AZT had no significant changes in FeLV viral load over time, but p27 antigen load was decreased from T0 to T3-5 months in cats treated with raltegravir (median p27 antigen level reduced from 50.2% to 42.7%; P = 0.005). All other results were not significantly affected by the treatment provided. Importantly, statistically significant and substantial associations were found between age at FeLV diagnosis and survival time (P = 0.046, R2 = 18.6) and between FeLV viral load at T0 and survival time (P = 0.004, R2 = 44.4). Younger cats, and cats with higher levels of pretreatment FeLV RNA, had reduced survival times. Cats treated with RetroMAD1™ were typically younger (median age 2.0 vs 8.0 years), likely explaining the observed reduction in MST. A significant association was found between FeLV viral load and p27 antigen load at T0 (P = 0.015, R2 = 32.9). CONCLUSIONS: Results from this small case series do not provide convincing support for the use of RetroMAD1™, raltegravir or AZT, alone or in combination, for the treatment of cats progressively infected with FeLV. The changes observed were biologically insignificant. Age and FeLV viral load at diagnosis are useful prognostic markers, and p27 antigen concentration can be used to predict viral load. Larger field trials should be performed examining antiretroviral therapy in FeLV-positive cats with progressive infections, preferably using three or more drugs from at least two classes, as is standard with human antiretroviral therapy. Future studies would be easier in countries with a higher prevalence of FeLV infections than Australia.