European Pharmacopoeia foot-and-mouth disease vaccine potency testing in cattle: Between test variability and its consequences

Vaccine

Volumn 25, Issue 17, 2007, Pages 3373-3379

  Goris, N ^a   Merkelbach Peters, P ^b   Diev, V I ^c   Verloo, D ^d   Zakharov, V M ^c   Kraft, H P ^b   De Clercq, K ^a  

^a VETERINARY AND AGROCHEMICAL RESEARCH CENTRE   (Belgium)

^b BAYER PHARMA AG   (Germany)

^c Federal Centre for Animal Health (FGI ARRIAH)   (Russian Federation)

^d EUROPEAN FOOD SAFETY AUTHORITY   (Italy)

Author keywords

Foot and mouth disease; Vaccine potency; Variability

Indexed keywords

FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE VACCINE;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; CATTLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG POTENCY; DRUG SCREENING; FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE; FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE VIRUS; HEALTH CARE POLICY; MALE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ANIMALS; CATTLE; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, IMMUNOLOGIC; EUROPE; FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE VIRUS; MALE; PHARMACOPOEIAS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; VIRAL VACCINES;

EID: 34047262509     PISSN: 0264410X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.12.049     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. OIE (Office International des Epizooties/World Organisation for Animal Health). HandiSTATUS. http://www.oie.int.
2. Valarcher JF, Ferris N, Knowles N, Statham B, Paton D. Annual OIE/FAO FMD reference laboratory network report: January-November 2005. Report of the seventy-second Session of the Executive Committee of the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease. FAO, Rome, The Hague, the Netherlands, November 29-30, 2005 [Appendix 11].
3. European Pharmacopoeia. Foot-and-mouth disease (ruminants) vaccine (inactivated) 04/2005:0063. 5th ed., Version 5.5; 2006.
4. OIE (Office International des Epizooties/World Organisation for Animal Health). Foot and mouth disease. OIE Standards Commission. Manual of diagnostic tests and vaccines for terrestrial animals. 5th ed., Paris, France: Office International des Epizooties; 2004 [chapter 2.1.1].
5. Doel T. Potency testing of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines: an industrial perspective. Proceedings of International Symposium organised by the European Directorate for the quality of medicines. Strasbourg, France, EDQM, March 17-18 (2003) 41-47
6. Kärber G. Beitrag zur kollektiven Behandlung pharmakologischer Reihenversuche. Arch Exp Pathol Pharmakol 162 (1931) 480-483
7. Gelman A., Carlin J.B., Stern H.S., and Rubin D.B. Bayesian data analysis (1995), Chapman and Hall, London
8. Langton S.D., Chevennement R., Nagelkerke N., and Lombard B. Analysing collaborative trials for qualitative microbiological methods: accordance and concordance. Int J Food Microbiol 79 3 (2002) 175-181
9. van der Voet H., and van Raamsdonk L.W.D. Estimation of accordance and concordance in inter-laboratory trials of analytical methods with qualitative results. Int J Food Microbiol 95 2 (2004) 231-234
10. Goris N., and De Clercq K. Quality assurance/quality control of foot and mouth disease solid phase competition enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-Part I. Quality assurance: development of secondary and working standards. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz 24 3 (2005) 995-1004
11. Pay T.W.F., and Hingley P.J. The use of serum neutralising antibody assay for the determination of the potency of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines in cattle. Dev Biol Stand 63 (1986) 875-876
12. Barteling SJ. Proposals for a revision of the monograph for FMD vaccines of the European Pharmacopoeia. Report of the Session of the Research Group of the Standing Technical Committee of the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease. FAO, Rome, Aldershot, United Kingdom, September 14-18; 1998. p. 238-54.
13. Sutmöller P. Computer simulation of foot-and-mouth disease vaccine potency tests. Prev Vet Med 4 (1986) 239-339
14. Mowat GN. Potency testing of FMD vaccines in the UK. Report of the Session of the Research Group of the Standing Technical Committee of the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease. FAO, Rome, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, October 15-18; 1985. p. 15-27.
15. Terré J., Bornarel P., Stellman C., and Souebolt J.P. Contrôle quantitative du vaccine antiaphteux. Détermination de la dose vaccinante 50% chez le bovin. Rev Med Vet 141 (1965) 1109-1130
16. Vianna Filho Y.L., Astudillo V., Gomes I., Fernández G., Rozas C.E.E., Ravison J.A., et al. Potency control of foot-and-mouth disease vaccine in cattle. Comparison of the 50% protective dose and the protection against generalization. Vaccine 11 14 (1993) 1424-1428
17. OIE (Office International des Epizooties/World Organisation for Animal Health). Recommendations of the XIV Conference of the Commission on Foot and Mouth Disease. Bull Off Int Epizoot 1975;83:557-9.
18. Castle P. Applying the three Rs within the regulatory system. Proceedings of the International Symposium on 'Replacement, reduction and refinement of the use of animals in the quality of vaccines'. Strasbourg, France, Council of Europe, November 7-8 (2002) 33-35
19. Haas B. Prediction of protection by FMD vaccines on the basis of LPBE results. Report of the Session of the Research Group of the Standing Technical Committee of the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease. FAO, Rome, Chania, Crete, Greece, October 11-15; 2004. p. 341-3.
20. Hendriksen C.F.M. Refinement, reduction, and replacement of animal use for regulatory testing: current best scientific practices for the evaluation of safety and potency of biologicals. ILAR J 43 Suppl. (2002) S43-S48
21. European Pharmacopoeia. Newcastle disease vaccine (inactivated) 01/2005:0870. 5th ed., Version 5.5; 2006.
22. Barnett P. Potency testing: alternatives to the challenge test: serological assays and small animal models. Proceedings of International Symposium organised by the European Directorate for the quality of medicines. Strasbourg, France, EDQM, March 17-18 (2003) 33-40
23. Barnett P.V., Statham R.J., Vosloo W., and Haydon D.T. Foot-and-mouth disease vaccine potency testing: determination and statistical validation of a model using a serological approach. Vaccine 21 (2003) 3240-3248
24. Pay T.W.F., and Hingley P.J. Foot and mouth disease vaccine potency tests in cattle: the interrelationship of antigen dose, serum neutralizing antibody response and protection from challenge. Vaccine 10 (1992) 669-706
25. Pay T.W.F., and Hingley P.J. A potency test method for foot and mouth disease vaccine based on the serum neutralizing antibody response produced in cattle. Vaccine 10 (1992) 707-713
26. Robiolo B., Grigera P.R., Periolo O.H., Seki C., Bianchi T., Maradei E., et al. Assessment of foot and mouth disease vaccine potency by liquid-phase blocking ELISA: a proposal for an alternative to the challenge procedure in Argentina. Vaccine 13 14 (1995) 1346-1352
27. Van Maanen C., and Terpstra C. Comparison of a liquid-phase blocking sandwich ELISA and a serum neutralization test to evaluate immunity in potency tests of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines. J Immunol Methods 124 1 (1989) 111-119
28. Rweyemamu M.M., Black L., Boge A., Thorne A.C., and Terry G.M. The relationship between 140S antigen dose in aqueous foot-and-mouth disease vaccines and the serum antibody response of cattle. J Biol Stand 12 (1984) 111-120
29. Eble P., de Koeijer A., Bouma A., Stegeman A., and Dekker A. Quantification of within- and between-pen transmission of foot-and-mouth disease virus in pigs. Vet Res 37 5 (2006) 647-654