Intramuscular and intravaginal vaccination of pregnant cows with thymidine kinase-negative, temperature-resistant infectious bovine rhinotracheitis virus (bovine herpes virus 1)

Kit, Saul; Kit, Malon; McConnell, Stewart

doi:10.1016/0264-410x(86)90098-8

Cited by 35 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although rare after parenteral (IM, SC) administration, virus shedding is a frequently observed finding after IN and IV vaccination (Kit et al 1986, Frerichs et al 1982, Kaashoek et al 1996. In our experiment, the excreted virus apparently did not suffice to assure virus transmission since a susceptible heifer kept in close contact remained seronegative.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

“…As demonstrated in human and mice, intranasal immunization may provide mucosal protection both in the nose and in the genital tract , Johansson et al 1998. Parenteral (IM) administration of BoHV-1 MLV vaccines also resulted in mucosal immunity and partial protection (Gerber et al 1978); whereas intravaginal (IV) administration of a thymidine kinase-negative (tk-) BoHV-1 strain resulted in both local (genital) and nasal immunity (Kit et al 1986). In a recent study, genital administration of an adjuvanted, inactivated caprine herpesvirus 1 (CaHV-1) vaccine conferred clinical protection upon genital challenge ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The safety and attenuation of the vaccine strain SV265gE-for calves and pregnant cows also represent an advantage over other vaccine strains available (Franco et al 2002b;Spilki et al 2005). In addition to an expected solid local immune response, genital immunization may also provide mucosal immunity able to protect against IN challenge (Kit et al 1986). The failure to reactivate the latent infection and thereby be transmitted to other animals upon Dx treatment -a desirable defect demonstrated for other gE-BoHV-1 strains (Mars et al 2000, Kaashoek et al 1998, Liu et al 2008, Franco et al 2002b) -also represents an attractive property of this vaccine candidate strain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These results allow us to expect that such IV immunization would confer adequate protection to heifers upon natural challenge after sexual or AI challenge. We did not investigate a possible nasal immunity in the IVvaccinated group, yet IN protection following IV immunization has already been demonstrated for an experimental MLV, gene-deleted (tk-) BoHV-1 vaccine (Kit et al 1986) and would be worthwhile to investigate for this recombinant strain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Genital immunization of heifers with a glycoprotein Edeleted, recombinant bovine herpesvirus 1 strain confers protection upon challenge with a virulent isolate

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT.-Weiss M., Vogel F.S.F., Martins M., Weiblen R., Roehe P.M., Franco A.C. & Flores E.F. 2010. Genital immunization of heifers with a glycoprotein E-deleted, recombinant bovine herpesvirus 1 strain confers protection upon challenge with a virulent isolate. Pesquisa Veterinária Brasileira 30(1):42-50. Departamento de Medicina Veterinária Preventiva, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, 97105-900 Santa Maria, RS, Brazil. E-mail: eduardofurtadoflores@gmail.com Venereal infection of seronegative heifers and cows with bovine herpesvirus type 1.2 (BoHV-1.2) frequently results in vulvovaginitis and transient infertility. Parenteral immunization with inactivated or modified live BoHV-1 vaccines often fails in conferring protection upon genital challenge. We herein report an evaluation of the immune response and protection conferred by genital vaccination of heifers with a glycoprotein E-deleted recombinant virus (SV265gE-). A group of six seronegative heifers was vaccinated with SV265gE-(0,2mL containing 10 6.9 TCID 50 ) in the vulva submucosa (group IV); four heifers were vaccinated intramuscularly (group IM, 1mL containing 10 7.6 TCID 50 ) and four heifers remained as non-vaccinated controls. Heifers vaccinated IV developed mild, transient local edema and hyperemia and shed low amounts of virus for a few days after vaccination, yet a sentinel heifer maintained in close contact did not seroconvert. Attempts to reactivate the vaccine virus in two IV vaccinated heifers by intravenous administration of dexamethasone (0.5mg/kg) at day 70 pv failed since no virus shedding, recrudescence of genital signs or seroconversion were observed. At day 70 pv, all vaccinated and control heifers were challenged by genital inoculation of a highly virulent BoHV-1.2 isolate (SV-56/90, 10 7.1 TCID 50 /animal). After challenge, virus shedding was detected in genital secretions of control animals for 8.2 days (8-9); in the IM group for 6.2 days (4-8 days) and during 5.2 days (5-6 days) in the IV group. Control non-vaccinated heifers developed moderate (2/4) or severe (2/4) vulvovaginitis lasting 9 to 13 days (x: 10.7 days). The disease was characterized by vulvar edema, vulvo-vestibular congestion, vesicles progressing to coalescence and erosions, fibrino-necrotic plaques and fibrinopurulent exudate. IM vaccinated heifers developed mild (1/3) or moderate (3/4) genital lesions, lasting 10 to 12 days (x: 10.7 days); and IV vaccinated heifers developed mild and transient vulvovaginitis (3/4) or mild to moderate genital lesions (1/4). In the IV group, the clinical signs lasted 4 to 8 days (x: 5.5 days). Clinical examination of the animals after challenge revealed that vaccination by both routes conferred some degree of protection, yet IV vaccination was clearly more effective in reducing the severity and duration of clinical 2) pode resultar em vulvovaginite e infertilidade temporária. As vacinas atenuadas ou inativadas administradas pela via parenteral freqüente-mente conferem proteção incompleta frente a desafio pela via genital. Este...

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Genital immunization of heifers with a glycoprotein Edeleted, recombinant bovine herpesvirus 1 strain confers protection upon challenge with a virulent isolate

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many recent investigations have demonstrated that TK deficient mutants of herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1) [25], PRV [49,112], BHV-1 [50], equine herpesvirus type 1 (EHV-1) [101], and FHV-1 [131] are remarkably attenuated for their natural hosts or mice and appear to be less readily reactivated from neurons [21]. Kit et al reported the loss of ability of BHV-1 TK deficient mutant to infect the fetus and to cause abortions [51] and the reduction of ability of the mutant to develop latent infections [50]. Although the mechanisms of TK gene are unknown fully, such mutants have been proposed as the basis for vaccine development.…”

Section: ) Tk Genementioning

confidence: 99%

Recombinant Viral Vector Vaccines for the Veterinary Use.

Yokoyama

Maeda

Mikami

1997

The Journal of Veterinary Medical Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Recently, genetically engineering using recombinant DNA techniques has been applied to design new viral vaccines in order to reduce some problems which present viral vaccines have. Up to now, many viruses have been investigated for development of recombinant attenuated vaccines or live viral vectors for delivery of foreign immunogenic antigens. In this review, we introduced three kind of viruses; herpesviruses, vaccinia viruses, and adenoviruses, which have best widely been studied as recombinant vaccines or delivery vaccines for the veterinary use. -KEY WORDS: recombinant polyvalent vaccine, recombinant vaccine, viral vector.

show abstract