Reducing animal experimentation in foot-and-mouth disease vaccine potency tests

Vaccine

Volumn 29, Issue 33, 2011, Pages 5467-5473

  Reeve, Richard ^a   Cox, Sarah ^b   Smitsaart, Eliana ^c,d   Beascoechea, Claudia Perez ^d,e   Haas, Bernd ^f   Maradei, Eduardo ^d,e   Haydon, Daniel T ^a   Barnett, Paul ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^b INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL HEALTH   (United Kingdom)

^c Biogenesis Bago   (Argentina)

^d Argentine FMD Interinstitutional Network for Research and Development in Foot and mouth Disease (RII   (Argentina)

^e Servicio Nacional de Sanidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria Argentina   (Argentina)

^f FEDERAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL HEALTH   (Germany)

Author keywords

3Rs; Batch potency testing; Foot and mouth disease; MCMC; Vaccine efficacy

Indexed keywords

FOOT AND MOUTH DISEASE VACCINE;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG POTENCY; EXPERIMENTAL ANIMAL WELFARE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROVOCATION TEST; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION; ANIMALS; DRUG DISCOVERY; FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE; FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE VIRUS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOUTH AMERICA; TECHNOLOGY, PHARMACEUTICAL; VIRAL VACCINES;

EID: 79960367650     PISSN: 0264410X     EISSN: 18732518     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.05.056     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. OIE List a diseases. Manual of diagnostic tests and vaccines for terrestrial animals 2004 2004, Office International des Epizooties, Paris. 5th ed.
2. Council of Europe Foot-and-mouth disease (ruminants) vaccine (inactivated). European Pharmacopoeia 2008, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, p. 918-20. 6th ed.
3. Spearman C. The method of 'right and wrong cases' ('constant stimuli') without Gauss's formulae. Br J Psychiatry 1908, 2(January (3)):227-242.
4. Doel T.R. Potency assessment of inactivated viral vaccines. Vaccine manual: the production and quality control of veterinary vaccines for use in developing countries 1997, 395-409. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. N. Mowat, M.M. Rweyemamu (Eds.).
5. Council of Europe Statistical analysis of results of biological assays and tests. European Pharmacopoeia 2008, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, p. 571-600. 6th ed.
6. Bliss C.I. The method of probits - a correction. Science 1934, 79(May (2053)):409-410.
7. Finney D.J. Probit analysis 1971, Cambridge University Press, London. 3rd ed.
8. Berkson J. Application of the logistic function to bio-assay. J Am Stat Assoc 1944, 39(September (227)):357-365.
9. Hosmer D.W., Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression 2000, John Wiley & Sons, New York, Chichester. 2nd ed.
10. Vianna Filho Y.L., Astudillo V., Gomes I., Fernandez G., Rozas C.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 1993, 11(November (14)):1424-1428.
11. Maradei E., Latorre J., Robiolo B., Esteves J., Seki C., Pedemonte A., et al. Updating of the correlation between lpELISA titers and protection from virus challenge for the assessment of the potency of polyvalent aphtovirus vaccines in Argentina. Vaccine 2008, 26(December (51)):6577-6586.
12. Stellmann C., Terre J., Favre H., Brun A., Fontaine J. Comparison of foot and mouth disease vaccine potency testing on cattle in terms of the nature of the diluent. Arch Virol 1977, 54(1-2):61-74.
13. Pay T.W. Factors influencing the performance of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines under field conditions. Applied virology 1984, 73-86. Academic Press, Orlando; London. E. Kurstak (Ed.).
14. Cox S., Barnett P. Experimental evaluation of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines for emergency use in ruminants and pigs: a review. Vet Res 2009, 40(January (3)):13.
15. Brehm K.E., Kumar N., Thulke H.-H., Haas B. High potency vaccines induce protection against heterologous challenge with foot-and-mouth disease virus. Vaccine 2008, 26(March (13)):1681-1687.
16. Hingley P.J., Pay T.W. Sources of variability in foot and mouth disease vaccine potency estimates based on serum neutralizing antibody assay. J Biol Stand 1987, 15(April (2)):127-142.
17. Pay T.W., Hingley P.J. A potency test method for foot and mouth disease vaccine based on the serum neutralizing antibody response produced in cattle. Vaccine 1992, 10(10):707-713.
18. Pay T.W., 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 1992, 10(10):699-706.
19. Tanner J.E., Morgan A.P. Design and analysis of veterinary vaccine efficacy trials. Vet Microbiol 1993, 37(November (3-4)):221-230.
20. Sutmöller P. Computer simulation of foot-and-mouth disease vaccine potency tests. Prev Vet Med 1986, 4(December (4)):329-339.
21. 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 2007, 25(January (17)):3373-3379.
22. 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 2008, 26(June (27-28)):3432-3437.
23. Gelman A.C., Stern J.B., Rubin H.S., Bayesianm D.B. Data analysis 1995, Chapman and Hall, London.
24. Green P. Reversible Jump Markov Chain Monte Carlo computation and Bayesian model determination. Biometrika 1995, 82(December (4)):711-732.
25. Kass R.E., Raftery A.E. Bayes factors. J Am Stat Assoc 1995, 90(June (430)):773-795.
26. Reed L.J., Muench H. A simple method of estimating fifty per cent endpoints. Am J Hyg 1938, 27(May (3)):493-497.
27. Kärber G. Beitrag zur kollektiven Behandlung pharmakologischer Reihenversuche. N-S Arch Ex Path Ph 1931, 162:480-483.
28. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria; 2010.
29. Jeffreys H. Theory of probability 1961, Clarendon Press, Oxford. 3rd ed.
30. Zweig M.H., Campbell G. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin Chem 1993, 39(April (4)):561-577.
31. Committee for Veterinary Medicinal Products Position paper on compliance of veterinary products with veterinary vaccine monographs of the European Pharmacopoeia 1999, European Medicines Agency.