Indirect foot-and-mouth disease vaccine potency testing based on a serological alternative

Vaccine

Volumn 26, Issue 31, 2008, Pages 3870-3879

  Goris, Nesya ^a   Willems, Tom ^a   Diev, Vyacheslav I ^b   Merkelbach Peters, Petra ^c   Vanbinst, Tine ^a   Van der Stede, Yves ^a   Kraft, Horst Peter ^c   Zakharov, Valery M ^b   Borisov, Vladimir V ^b   Nauwynck, Hans J ^d   Haas, Bernd ^e   De Clercq, Kris ^a  

^a VETERINARY AND AGROCHEMICAL RESEARCH CENTRE   (Belgium)

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

^c BAYER PHARMA AG   (Germany)

^d GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^e FEDERAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL HEALTH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Alternative potency test; Foot and mouth disease; Serology; Vaccine potency

Indexed keywords

FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE VACCINE;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG POTENCY; ENZYME LINKED IMMUNOSORBENT ASSAY; FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEROLOGY; VIRUS NEUTRALIZATION;

ANIMALS; ANTIBODIES, VIRAL; CATTLE; ENZYME-LINKED IMMUNOSORBENT ASSAY; FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE; LOGISTIC MODELS; NEUTRALIZATION TESTS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROC CURVE; STATISTICS AS TOPIC; VIRAL VACCINES;

EID: 46349095557     PISSN: 0264410X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.05.013     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Leforban Y. Prevention measures against foot-and-mouth disease in Europe in recent years. Vaccine 17 13-14 (1999) 1755-1759
2. European Pharmacopoeia. Foot-and-mouth disease (ruminants) vaccine (inactivated) 04/2005:0063. 2006, 5th ed., version 5.5.
3. Centro Panamericano de Fiebre Aftosa. Requisitos para acreditación de sistemas nacionales oficiales para el control de calidad de vacuna antiaftosa. 2002, version 1.0.
4. Goris N., Merkelbach-Peters P., Diev V.I., Verloo D., Zakharov V.M., Kraft H.P., et al. European Pharmacopoeia foot-and-mouth disease vaccine potency testing in cattle: between test variability and its consequences. Vaccine 25 17 (2007) 3373-3379
5. Goris N., Maradei E., D'Aloia R., Fondevila N., Mattion N., Perez A., et al. Foot-and-mouth disease vaccine potency testing in cattle using homologous and heterologous challenge strains: precision of the "Protection against Podal Generalisation" test. Vaccine 26 (2008) 3432-3437
6. Pay T.W.F., and Hingley P.J. The use of serum neutralizing antibody assay for the determination of the potency of foot and mouth disease (FMD) vaccines in cattle. Dev Biol Stand 64 (1986) 153-161
7. Hendriksen C.F. 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
8. Stellmann C., Bornarel P., Lang R., and Terre J. Contrôle quantitatif du vaccin antiaphteux Analyse statistique de la relation liant les titres d'anticorps neutralisant au pourcentage de protection bovine. Rec Med Vet (Alfort) 144 (1968) 325-351
9. Sutmöller P., and Vieira A. The relationship of neutralizing antibody titers for foot-and-mouth disease virus and the protection of cattle. Bltn Centro Panamericano Fiebre Aftosa 39-40 (1980) 57-62
10. Ahl R., Lorenz R.J., and Wittman G. A trial to estimate the potency of FMD vaccines by means of serum antibody assays with sera from groups of vaccinated cattle. Report of the Session of Research Group of the Standing Technical Committee of the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease. FAO, Rome, Lelystad, Netherlands, 20-22 September (1983) 56-61
11. Amadori M., Barei S., Bugnetti M., and Panina G.F. Correlation between antibody level and response to challenge in FMD vaccinated cattle: results for "A" and "C" types. Report of the Session of Research Group of the Standing Technical Committee of the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease. FAO, Rome, Rio de Janiero, Brazil, October 15-18 (1985) 32-39
12. van Bekkum JG. Potency testing of FMD vaccines. Report of the Session of Research Group of the Standing Technical Committee of the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease. FAO, Rome, Rio de Janiero, Brazil, October 15-18 (1985) 10-14
13. Hamblin C., Kitching R.P., Donaldson A.I., Crowther J.R., and Barnett I.T. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the detection of antibodies against foot-and-mouth disease virus. III. Evaluation of antibodies after infection and vaccination. Epidemiol Infect 99 3 (1987) 733-744
14. Hingley P.J., and Pay T.W. Sources of variability in foot and mouth disease vaccine potency estimates based on serum neutralizing antibody assay. J Biol Stand 15 2 (1987) 127-142
15. Pay T.W., and Hingley P.J. Correlation of 140S antigen dose with the serum neutralizing antibody response and the level of protection induced in cattle by foot-and-mouth disease vaccines. Vaccine 5 1 (1987) 60-64
16. 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
17. Bolwell C., Parry N.R., and Rowlands D.J. Comparison between in vitro neutralizing titres and in vivo protection against homologous and heterologous challenge induced by vaccines prepared from two serologically distinct variant of foot-and-mouth disease virus, serotype A22. J Gen Virol 73 (1992) 727-731
18. Pay T.W., 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 10 (1992) 699-706
19. Pay T.W., 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 10 (1992) 707-713
20. 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
21. Dus Santos M.J., Wigdorovitz A., Maradei E., Periolo O., Smitsaart E., Borca M.V., et al. A comparison of methods for measuring the antibody response in mice and cattle following vaccination against foot and mouth disease. Vet Res Commun 24 4 (2000) 261-273
22. 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 23 (2003) 3240-3248
23. Ahl R., Haas B., Lorenz R.J., and Wittman G. Alternative potency test of FMD vaccines and results of comparative antibody assays in different cell systems and ELISA. Report of the Session of Research Group of the Standing Technical Committee of the European Commission for the Control of Foot-and-Mouth Disease. FAO, Rome, Rio Lindholm, Denmark, June 25-29 (1990) 51-54
24. McCullough K.C., Bruckner L., Schaffner R., Fraefel W., Muller H.K., and Kihm U. Relationship between the anti-FMD virus antibody reaction as measured by different assays, and protection in vivo against challenge infection. Vet Microbiol 30 2-3 (1992) 99-112
25. McCullough K.C., De Simone F., Brocchi E., Capucci L., Crowther J.R., and Kihm U. Protective immune response against foot-and-mouth disease. J Virol 66 4 (1992) 1835-1840
26. Doel T.R. Natural and vaccine induced immunity to FMD. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 288 (2005) 103-131
27. Castle P. Current regulatory background. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Foot and Mouth Disease organised by the European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines, Council of Europe, Strasbourg. France, 17-18 March (2003) 5-8
28. Kärber G. Beitrag zur kollektiven Behandlung pharmakologischer Reihenversuche. Arch Exp Pathol Pharmakol 162 (1931) 480-483
29. OIE (World Organisation for Animal Health). Foot and mouth disease. OIE Standards Commission. Manual of diagnostic tests and vaccines for terrestrial animals. 5th ed. (2004), Office International des Epizooties, Paris, France [chapter 2.1.1]
30. 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
31. Reed L.J., and Münch H. A simple method of estimating fifty percent endpoints. Am J Hyg 27 (1938) 493-497
32. Goris N., and De Clercq K. Quality assurance/quality control of foot and mouth disease solid phase competition enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Part II. Quality control: comparison of two charting methods to monitor assay performance. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz 24 3 (2005) 1005-1016
33. The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, R Version 2.5.1. ISBN 3-900051-00-3, 2007.
34. Agresti A. Categorical data analysis (2002), Wiley-Interscience, New Jersey
35. Berkvens D., Speybroeck N., Praet N., Adel A., and Lesaffre E. Estimating disease prevalence in a Bayesian framework using probabilistic constraints. Epidemiology 17 2 (2006) 145-153
36. Somers R.H. A new asymmetric measure of association for ordinal variables. Am Sociol Rev 27 (1962) 799-811
37. Cox S.J., Parida S., Voyce C., Reid S.M., Hamblin P.A., Hutchings G., et al. Further evaluation of higher potency vaccines for early protection of cattle against FMDV direct contact challenge. Vaccine 25 44 (2007) 7687-7695
38. Cox S.J., Voyce C., Parida S., Reid S.M., Hamblin P.A., Hutchings G., et al. Effect of emergency FMD vaccine antigen payload on protection, sub-clinical infection and persistence following direct contact challenge of cattle. Vaccine 24 16 (2006) 3184-3190
39. Cox S.J., Voyce C., Parida S., Reid S.M., Hamblin P.A., Paton D.J., et al. Protection against direct-contact challenge following emergency FMD vaccination of cattle and the effect on virus excretion from the oropharynx. Vaccine 23 9 (2005) 1106-1113
40. Orsel K., de Jong M.C., Bouma A., Stegeman J.A., and Dekker A. The effect of vaccination on foot and mouth disease virus transmission among dairy cows. Vaccine 25 2 (2007) 327-335
41. Brehm K.E., Kumar N., Thulke H.-H., and Haas B. High potency vaccines induce protection against heterologous challenge with foot and mouth disease virus. Vaccine 26 13 (2008) 1681-1687
42. OIE (World Organisation for Animal Health). Recommendations of XIV Conference of the Commission on Foot and mouth disease. Bull Off Int Epizoot 1975;83:557-9.
43. European Pharmacopoeia. Statistical analysis of results of biological assays and tests 01/2008:50300, version 6.0.
44. Parida S., Oh Y., Reid S.M., Cox S.J., Statham R.J., Mahapatra M., et al. Interferon-gamma production in vitro from whole blood of foot-and-mouth disease virus (FMDV) vaccinated and infected cattle after incubation with inactivated FMDV. Vaccine 24 7 (2006) 964-969
45. Rweyemamu M.M., Black L., Boge A., Thorne A.C., and Terry G.M. The relationship between the 140S antigen dose in aqueous foot-and-mouth disease vaccines and the serum antibody response of cattle. J Biol Stand 12 1 (1984) 111-120
46. OIE (World Organisation for Animal Health). Foot and mouth disease. OIE Standards Commission. Terrestrial animal health code. 16th ed. (2007), Office International des Epizooties, Paris, France [chapter 2.2.10, Article 2.2.10.1]
47. Brocchi E., Bergmann I.E., Dekker A., Paton D.J., Sammin D.J., Greiner M., et al. Comparative evaluation of six ELISAs for the detection of antibodies to the non-structural proteins of foot-and-mouth disease virus. Vaccine 24 47-48 (2006) 6966-6979