Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019 Oct;66:101329. doi: 10.1016/j.cimid.2019.101329. Epub 2019 Jul 4.

Tuberculosis vaccination sequence effect on protection in wild boar.

Author information

1
Departamento de Sanidad Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Avenida Puerta de Hierro s/n, 28040, Madrid, Spain; SaBio, Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos IREC (CSIC-UCLM), Ronda de Toledo 12, 13071, Ciudad Real, Spain. Electronic address: iratxe.diezdelgado@gmail.com.
2
NEIKER-Instituto Vasco de Investigación y Desarrollo Agrario, Animal Health Department. Bizkaia Science and Technology Park 812L, 48160, Derio (Bizkaia), Spain.
3
Centro de Vigilancia Sanitaria Veterinaria (VISAVET), Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Avenida Puerta de Hierro s/n, 28040, Madrid, Spain.
4
Departamento de Sanidad Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Avenida Puerta de Hierro s/n, 28040, Madrid, Spain; Centro de Vigilancia Sanitaria Veterinaria (VISAVET), Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Avenida Puerta de Hierro s/n, 28040, Madrid, Spain.
5
NEIKER-Instituto Vasco de Investigación y Desarrollo Agrario, Animal Health Department. Bizkaia Science and Technology Park 812L, 48160, Derio (Bizkaia), Spain; Servicio Regional de Investigación y Desarrollo Agroalimentario (SERIDA), Carretera de Oviedo s/n 13 P.O. Box, 33300, Villaviciosa, Asturias, Spain.
6
Departamento de Sanidad Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Avenida Puerta de Hierro s/n, 28040, Madrid, Spain.
7
SaBio, Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos IREC (CSIC-UCLM), Ronda de Toledo 12, 13071, Ciudad Real, Spain; Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, Center for Veterinary Health Sciences, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA.
8
SaBio, Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos IREC (CSIC-UCLM), Ronda de Toledo 12, 13071, Ciudad Real, Spain.

Abstract

The Eurasian wild boar (Sus scrofa) is a reservoir for tuberculosis (TB) in which vaccination is a valuable tool for control. We evaluated the protection and immune response achieved by homologous and heterologous regimes administering BCG and heat-inactivated Mycobacterium bovis (IV). Twenty-one wild boar piglets were randomly allocated in five groups: Control, homologous BCG, homologous IV, heterologous IV-BCG, heterologous BCG-IV. Significant 67% and 66% total lesion score reductions were detected in homologous IV (IVx2) and heterologous IV-BCG groups when compared with Control group (F4,16 = 6.393, p = 0.003; Bonferroni Control vs IVx2 p = 0.026, Tukey Control vs IV-BCG p = 0.021). No significant differences were found for homologous BCG (although a 48% reduction in total lesion score was recorded) and BCG-IV (3% reduction). Heterologous regimes did not improve protection over homologous regimes in the wild boar model and showed variable results from no protection to similar protection as homologous regimes. Therefore, homologous regimes remain the best option to vaccinate wild boar against TB. Moreover, vaccine sequence dramatically influenced the outcome underlining the relevance of studying the effects of prior sensitization in the outcome of vaccination.

KEYWORDS:

Animal tuberculosis; BCG; Heat-inactivated Mycobacterium bovis; Heterologous prime-boost; Laboratory vaccination and challenge experiment; Sus scrofa.

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center