THE EFFECT OF CHALLENGE WITH VIRULENTBRUCELLA ABORTUSON BEEF CATTLE VACCINATED AS CALVES OR ADULTS WITH EITHERBRUCELLA ABORTUSSTRAIN 19 OR 45/20

Sutherland, S. S.; Robertson, A.; Cras, D. V.; Robertson, G. M.; Johnston, J. M.; Evansxs, R. J.

doi:10.1111/j.1751-0813.1981.tb05769.x

Cited by 17 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Under these conditions, it is extremely difficult to distinguish the effect of the vaccine from the one that would be caused by the sanitary measures by themselves, and experiences in other situations were much less favorable [84]. The results of controlled experiments are satisfactory in some cases but not in others [8,84,124], and direct comparisons with S19 unfavorable [8,124]. Moreover, the quality of the vaccine was a constant source of problems [28].…”

Section: B Abortus 45/20mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the basis of previous evidence, it has been suggested [84] that the protection given by S19 and 45/20 to adult cattle is greater than that of cattle vaccinated as calves and this could perhaps apply to the results obtained with RB51. However, when the evidence [8,124] is examined it becomes apparent that the comparisons may be biased in favor of a more protective effect in adults by the shorter time elapsed between vaccination and challenge. Thus, a second explanation for the discrepancies observed between Experiments 2 and 3 (reduced dose) may lay in the different vaccination-challenge periods, which was at least two times longer in the animals vaccinated at calfhood that were not protected (Tab.…”

Section: Protection Against B Abortus In Controlled Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rough vaccines in animal brucellosis: Structural and genetic basis and present status

Grilló²,

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Brucellosis control and eradication requires serological tests and vaccines. Effective classical vaccines (S19 in cattle and Rev 1 in small ruminants), however, induce antibodies to the O-polysaccharide of the lipopolysaccharide which may be difficult to distinguish from those resulting from infection and may thus complicate diagnosis. Rough attenuated mutants lack the O-polysaccharide and would solve this problem if eliciting protective immunity; the empirically obtained rough mutants 45/20 and RB51 have been used as vaccines. Strain 45/20 is reportedly unstable and it is not presently used. RB51 is increasingly used instead of S19 in some countries but it is rifampicin resistant and its effectiveness is controversial. Some controlled experiments have found good or absolute protection in adult cattle vaccinated orally (full dose) or subcutaneously (reduced dose) and in one field experiment, RB51 was reported to afford absolute protection to calves and to perform better than S19. Controlled experiments in calves, however, have shown reduced doses of RB51 to be ineffective, full doses only partially effective, and RB51 less effective than S19 against severe challenges. Moreover, other observations suggest that RB51 is ineffective when prevalence is high. RB51 is not useful in sheep and evidence in goats is preliminary and contradictory. Rough mutants obtained by molecular biology methods on the knowledge of the genetics and structure of Brucella lipopolysaccharide may offer alternatives. The B. abortus manB core (rfbK) mutant seems promising in cattle, and analyses in mice suggest that mutations affecting only the O-polysaccharide result in better vaccines than those affecting both core and O-polysaccharide. Possible uses of rough vaccines also include boosting immunity by revaccination but solid evidence on its effectiveness, safety and practicality is not available.

show abstract

Section: B Abortus 45/20mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Protection Against B Abortus In Controlled Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rough vaccines in animal brucellosis: Structural and genetic basis and present status

Grilló²,

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The B. abortus challenge strain was isolated in 91.89% (34/37) of the trials that performed vaccination with S19 from at least one animal among those vaccinated. In three trials [8.10% (3/37)], the authors stated that it was not possible to isolate B. abortus from animal's tissues after vaccination with S19 (Sutherland et al, 1981;Cheville et al, 1993;Montaña et al, 1998) For the trials that used RB51, data on bacteriology analysis from animal's tissues after challenge was obtained from all 12 trials assessed. From these, in 4 trials [33.33% (4/12)] B. abortus(both challenge and vaccine strains) was not isolated from any tissues among vaccinated animals only from control group (Cheville et al, 1993;Olsen, 2000b).…”

Section: Assessment Of Protection Against Infectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Brucella abortus S19 and RB51 vaccine strains: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Dorneles¹,

Oliveira²,

Pereira³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to recalculate the efficacy of these two vaccine strains, and to discuss the main variables associated with controlled trials to evaluate bovine brucellosis vaccines efficacy. The most used vaccine strain was S19, at the dose of 10 colony forming units (CFU), followed by the vaccine strain RB51 at 10 CFU. The most used challenge strain was B. abortus 2308, at the dose of 10 CFU by intraconjunctival route. For the meta-analysis, trials were grouped according to the vaccine strain and dose to recalculate protection against abortion (four groups) or infection (five groups), using pooled risk ratio (RR) and vaccine efficacy (VE). For protection against abortion (n = 15 trials), S19 vaccine at 10 CFU exhibited the highest protection rate (RR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.52; VE = 75.09%, 95% CI: 48.08 – 88.05), followed by RB51 10 (RR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.61; VE = 69.25%, 95% CI: 39.48 – 84.38). For protection against infection (n = 23 trials), only two subgroups exhibited significant protection: S19 at 10 CFU (RR = 0.28, 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.55; VE = 72.03%, 95% CI: 57.70 – 81.50) and RB51 at 10 CFU dose (RR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.84; VE = 57.05%, 95% CI: 30.90 – 73.30). In conclusion, our results suggest that the dose of 10 CFU for S19 and 10 CFU for RB51 are the most suitable for the prevention of abortion and infection caused by B. abortus.

show abstract

“…The cattle in this study were part of a large field experiment in which vaccinated cattle were challenged with virulent B. abortus 544 and then cultured for B. abortus at slaughter. The clinical results of challenge (see Table 1) have been described elsewhere (17).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and complement fixation test for the detection of specific antibody in cattle vaccinated and challenged with Brucella abortus

Sutherland¹

1985

J Clin Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and a complement fixation test (CFT) were applied to sera collected regularly from 60 cattle challenged with Brucella abortus strain 544. Of the 60 cattle, 48 were vaccinated with either B. abortus strain 19 or B. abortus strain 45/20 as calves or adults. The remaining 12 cattle were not vaccinated. Of the 27 sera from cattle found to be infected at slaughter, 9 showed aberrant reactions to the CFT in that a positive titer after challenge was delayed or transient. The performance of the ELISA in these nine cattle with aberrant reactions and the other cattle in the trial was as follows. After vaccination with strain 19 or strain 45/20, the number of weeks at which the ELISA was positive was significantly greater (P < 0.001) than that for the CFT. The strain 19 vaccine also induced positive responses to the CFT and the ELISA for a significantly longer period (P < 0.001) than did the strain 45/20 vaccine. For cattle with aberrant reactions, the number of weeks after challenge when the ELISA was positive was significantly greater (P < 0.001) than that for the CFT. For noninfected cattle, the average number of weeks after challenge when the CFT was negative (35 of 40) was higher than that for the ELISA (18 of 40).

show abstract

THE EFFECT OF CHALLENGE WITH VIRULENTBRUCELLA ABORTUSON BEEF CATTLE VACCINATED AS CALVES OR ADULTS WITH EITHERBRUCELLA ABORTUSSTRAIN 19 OR 45/20

Cited by 17 publications

References 4 publications

Rough vaccines in animal brucellosis: Structural and genetic basis and present status

Rough vaccines in animal brucellosis: Structural and genetic basis and present status

Efficacy of Brucella abortus S19 and RB51 vaccine strains: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and complement fixation test for the detection of specific antibody in cattle vaccinated and challenged with Brucella abortus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About