Comparison of the local safety of two multi-component feline vaccines, adjuvanted (1 mL) versus non-adjuvanted at reduced volume (0.5 mL), using computed tomography imaging.

In 2020, a new 0.5 mL presentation of PUREVAX® RCP FeLV was registered and introduced in Europe. The objectives of this study were to investigate the local safety of this non-adjuvanted vaccine at reduced volume by classical methods (clinical examination, histopathology) and to evaluate the suitability of an alternative non-invasive methodology, the computed tomography (CT). For this purpose, the course of local reactions was assessed for 3 months after subcutaneous injection of PUREVAX® RCP FeLV 0.5 mL and compared to an adjuvanted vaccine, LEUCOFELIGEN® FeLV/RCP 1.0 mL. Injection site reactions consisted mainly of swelling reactions, which were more frequent, more pronounced and long-lasting in the adjuvanted vaccine group. Microscopically, in this group, moderate to severe inflammatory reactions were observed on day 7 (D7) and D21 post-injection and still present on D84, while mild inflammatory lesions were observed in the non-adjuvanted vaccine group only on D7 and D21. With the adjuvanted vaccine, inflamed areas were measurable by CT scan in all cats on D7 and D21, whereas they were detected only on D7 and only in 20 % of cats from the non-adjuvanted vaccine group. Besides the higher frequency, the mean inflamed volume was nearly 300 times larger in adjuvanted vaccine group on D7. Using different methodologies, the favorable safety profile of PUREVAX® RCP FeLV 0.5 mL was confirmed. Furthermore, the vaccine is aligned with current vaccination guidelines by inducing less inflammatory reactions, being adjuvant-free and injectable under a reduced volume, thus improving the convenience of administration in recommended sites (eg, legs). CT scan proved to be a suitable non-invasive method for the experimental follow-up of injection site reactions, yielding results consistent with clinical assessment and histopathology on D7 and D21. CT scan substantiated large differences between the investigated vaccines with a more prominent inflammatory reaction after injection of an adjuvanted vaccine.

Development of antibody ELISA specific of Leptospira interrogans serovar Grippotyphosa, Canicola, and Icterohaemorrhagiae to monitor vaccine immunogenicity.

The antibody response after primary vaccination and annual revaccination with a multivalent DAPPi-L vaccine was assessed respectively in SPF dogs and in client owned dogs against the Grippotyphosa (Lg), Canicola (Lc) and Icterohaemorrhagiae (Li) Leptospira serovars. To overcome limitations of the microscopic agglutination test (MAT), we developed serovar-specific and sensitive blocking ELISA assays. Serovar-specific antibodies against Lg, Lc and Li were detected in 100%, 45% and 91% of dogs, respectively, after the first dose of vaccine, and in 100% of dogs for all serovars after the second dose. In addition, mean ELISA antibody titers increased 14 days after annual revaccination with most dogs remaining ELISA antibody positive against Lg (85.3%), Lc (90%) and Li (100%). Parallel testing of sera from the annual revaccination study in the MAT and ELISA assays resulted in an overall agreement of 72%, 67%, 77% of samples for Lg, Lc and Li serovars, respectively. More sera tested positive by ELISA than by MAT, suggesting that the ELISA assay is more sensitive than the MAT. These three new antibody-based assays are the first suitable and reliable ELISA assays for the assessment of the canine antibody response following vaccination and an attractive alternative to the MAT.

Correction to: Oral vaccination of dogs: a well-studied and undervalued tool for achieving human and dog rabies elimination.

The original article [1] contained an error in the Author details paragraph. "5Neglected Zoonotic Diseases, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland" should be replaced by "5Le Grand-Saconnex, Switzerland".

Oral vaccination of dogs: a well-studied and undervalued tool for achieving human and dog rabies elimination.

The mass vaccination of dogs is a proven tool for rabies prevention. Besides parenteral delivery of inactivated vaccines, over the past several decades, several self-replicating biologics, including modified-live, attenuated and recombinant viruses, have been evaluated for the oral vaccination of dogs against rabies. Vaccines are included within an attractive bait for oral consumption by free-ranging dogs. Due to the high affinity between dogs and humans, such biologics intended for oral vaccination of dogs (OVD) need to be efficacious as well as safe. Baits should be preferentially attractive to dogs and not to non-target species. Although many different types have been evaluated successfully, no universal bait has been identified to date. Moreover, high bait acceptance does not necessarily mean that vaccine efficacy and programmatic success is predictable. The use of OVD in the laboratory and field has demonstrated the safety and utility of this technology. Within a One Health context, OVD should be considered as part of a holistic plan for the global elimination of canine rabies.

Oral vaccination of wildlife using a vaccinia-rabies-glycoprotein recombinant virus vaccine (RABORAL V-RG®): a global review.

RABORAL V-RG® is an oral rabies vaccine bait that contains an attenuated ("modified-live") recombinant vaccinia virus vector vaccine expressing the rabies virus glycoprotein gene (V-RG). Approximately 250 million doses have been distributed globally since 1987 without any reports of adverse reactions in wildlife or domestic animals since the first licensed recombinant oral rabies vaccine (ORV) was released into the environment to immunize wildlife populations against rabies. V-RG is genetically stable, is not detected in the oral cavity beyond 48 h after ingestion, is not shed by vaccinates into the environment, and has been tested for thermostability under a range of laboratory and field conditions. Safety of V-RG has been evaluated in over 50 vertebrate species, including non-human primates, with no adverse effects observed regardless of route or dose. Immunogenicity and efficacy have been demonstrated under laboratory and field conditions in multiple target species (including fox, raccoon, coyote, skunk, raccoon dog, and jackal). The liquid vaccine is packaged inside edible baits (i.e., RABORAL V-RG, the vaccine-bait product) which are distributed into wildlife habitats for consumption by target species. Field application of RABORAL V-RG has contributed to the elimination of wildlife rabies from three European countries (Belgium, France and Luxembourg) and of the dog/coyote rabies virus variant from the United States of America (USA). An oral rabies vaccination program in west-central Texas has essentially eliminated the gray fox rabies virus variant from Texas with the last case reported in a cow during 2009. A long-term ORV barrier program in the USA using RABORAL V-RG is preventing substantial geographic expansion of the raccoon rabies virus variant. RABORAL V-RG has also been used to control wildlife rabies in Israel for more than a decade. This paper: (1) reviews the development and historical use of RABORAL V-RG; (2) highlights wildlife rabies control programs using the vaccine in multiple species and countries; and (3) discusses current and future challenges faced by programs seeking to control or eliminate wildlife rabies.

Multivariate analysis of the immune response to a vaccine as an alternative to the repetition of animal challenge studies for vaccines with demonstrated efficacy.

The assessment of vaccine combinations, or the evaluation of the impact of minor modifications of one component in well-established vaccines, requires animal challenges in the absence of previously validated correlates of protection. As an alternative, we propose conducting a multivariate analysis of the specific immune response to the vaccine. This approach is consistent with the principles of the 3Rs (Refinement, Reduction and Replacement) and avoids repeating efficacy studies based on infectious challenges in vivo. To validate this approach, a set of nine immunological parameters was selected in order to characterize B and T lymphocyte responses against canine rabies virus and to evaluate the compatibility between two canine vaccines, an inactivated rabies vaccine (RABISIN®) and a combined vaccine (EURICAN® DAPPi-Lmulti) injected at two different sites in the same animals. The analysis was focused on the magnitude and quality of the immune response. The multi-dimensional picture given by this 'immune fingerprint' was used to assess the impact of the concomitant injection of the combined vaccine on the immunogenicity of the rabies vaccine. A principal component analysis fully discriminated the control group from the groups vaccinated with RABISIN® alone or RABISIN®+EURICAN® DAPPi-Lmulti and confirmed the compatibility between the rabies vaccines. This study suggests that determining the immune fingerprint, combined with a multivariate statistical analysis, is a promising approach to characterizing the immunogenicity of a vaccine with an established record of efficacy. It may also avoid the need to repeat efficacy studies involving challenge infection in case of minor modifications of the vaccine or for compatibility studies.

Twenty year experience of the oral rabies vaccine SAG2 in wildlife: a global review.

The SAG2 vaccine (RABIGEN® SAG2) is a modified live attenuated rabies virus vaccine, selected from the SAD Bern strain in a two-step process of amino acid mutation using neutralizing monoclonal antibodies. The strain is genetically stable and does not spread in vivo or induce a persistent infection. Its absence of residual pathogenicity was extensively demonstrated in multiple target and non target species (such as wild carnivores and rodent species), including non-human primates. The efficacy of SAG2 baits was demonstrated according to the EU requirements for the red fox and raccoon dog. The use of safe and potent rabies vaccines such as SAG2 largely contributed to the elimination of rabies in Estonia, France, Italy and Switzerland. Importantly, these countries were declared free of rabies after few years of oral vaccination campaigns with SAG2 baits distributed with an appropriate strategy. The excellent tolerance of the SAG2 vaccine has been confirmed in the field since its first use in 1993. No safety issues have been reported, and in particular no vaccine-induced rabies cases were diagnosed, after the distribution of more than 20 million SAG2 baits in Europe.

Use of filter paper blood samples for rabies antibody detection in foxes and raccoon dogs.

The effectiveness of oral rabies vaccination in wildlife is usually evaluated by the detection of rabies antibodies. However, the assessment of rabies antibodies has several technical difficulties in the field, such as the collection, storage, transport and titration of blood samples, often of poor quality. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of collecting blood on a filter paper (FP) coupled with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) titration of rabies antibodies in raccoon dogs and red foxes. The FP blood sampling method was found highly specific and repeatable in both species. Overall, results obtained with the FP sampling method were highly concordant with the conventional (venipuncture) sampling methods. Blood eluates from FP samples from foxes and raccoon dogs tested using ELISA showed concordance values of 92% and 95%, respectively, with serum samples tested using the seroneutralisation test and values of 95% and 91%, respectively, when the ELISA was used on both types of sample. The use of FP blood sampling coupled with the titration of rabies antibodies by ELISA provides a reliable alternative to conventional blood sampling and serum testing by seroneutralisation. This simple procedure is particularly attractive and cost-effective for assessing the effectiveness of oral rabies vaccination in field conditions.

Eliminating rabies in Estonia.

The compulsory vaccination of pets, the recommended vaccination of farm animals in grazing areas and the extermination of stray animals did not succeed in eliminating rabies in Estonia because the virus was maintained in two main wildlife reservoirs, foxes and raccoon dogs. These two species became a priority target therefore in order to control rabies. Supported by the European Community, successive oral vaccination (OV) campaigns were conducted twice a year using Rabigen® SAG2 baits, beginning in autumn 2005 in North Estonia. They were then extended to the whole territory from spring 2006. Following the vaccination campaigns, the incidence of rabies cases dramatically decreased, with 266 cases in 2005, 114 in 2006, four in 2007 and three in 2008. Since March 2008, no rabies cases have been detected in Estonia other than three cases reported in summer 2009 and one case in January 2011, all in areas close to the South-Eastern border with Russia. The bait uptake was satisfactory, with tetracycline positivity rates ranging from 85% to 93% in foxes and from 82% to 88% in raccoon dogs. Immunisation rates evaluated by ELISA ranged from 34% to 55% in foxes and from 38% to 55% in raccoon dogs. The rabies situation in Estonia was compared to that of the other two Baltic States, Latvia and Lithuania. Despite regular OV campaigns conducted throughout their territory since 2006, and an improvement in the epidemiological situation, rabies has still not been eradicated in these countries. An analysis of the number of baits distributed and the funding allocated by the European Commission showed that the strategy for rabies control is more cost-effective in Estonia than in Latvia and Lithuania.