Skip to main content
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2012 May 2;6:134–140. doi: 10.1016/j.provac.2012.04.018

Load reduction in live PRRS vaccines using oil and polymer adjuvants

Sebastien Deville a, Juliette Ben Arous a,, Ghislaine Ionkoff a, François Bertranda Sergey Kukushkin b, Taufik Baybikov b, Vladimir Borisov b, Laurent Dupuis a
PMCID: PMC7128483  PMID: 32288919

Abstract

PRRSV live vaccines are widely used in pig farming practice and are usually not adjuvanted. For safety issues, it would be useful to reduce the antigenic load of such vaccines while preserving their efficacy. In this study we show that the addition of polymer or oil adjuvants in a PRRS live vaccine enhanced the protection to challenge of vaccinated animals compared to a non-adjuvanted commercial reference. Moreover, for both types of adjuvants, despite lower antibody titers, the protection to challenge given by the adjuvanted vaccine containing only 50% of the antigen load was equivalent to the protection given by the non-adjuvanted vaccine. These results demonstrate that the addition of relevant adjuvants can enhance the efficacy of the protection conferred to animals by live vaccines.

Keywords: live vaccine, PRRS, pig, adjuvant, Montanide

References

  • 1.Cavanagh D. Severe acute respiratory syndrome vaccine development: experiences of vaccination against avian infectious bronchitis coronavirus. Avian Pathol. 2003;32:567–582. doi: 10.1080/03079450310001621198. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Dong X.N., Chen Y.H., Marker vaccine strategies, candidate C.S.F.V., marker vaccines. Vaccine. 2007;25:205–230. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.07.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Rauw F., Gardin Y., Palya V., van Borm S., Gonze M., Lemaire S., Van den Berg T., Lambrecht B. Humoral, cell-mediated and mucosal immunity induced by oculo-nasal vaccination of one-day-old SPF and conventional layer chicks with two different live Newcastle disease vaccines. Vaccine. 2009;27:3631–3642. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.03.068. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Jacobs A.A., Goovaerts D., Nuijten P.J., Theelen R.P., Hartford O.M., Foster T.J. Investigations towards an efficacious and safe strangles vaccine: submucosal vaccination with a live attenuated Streptococcus equi. Vet Rec. 2000;147:563–567. doi: 10.1136/vr.147.20.563. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Schultz R.D., Thiel B., Mukhtar E., Sharp P., Larson L.J. Age and long-term protective immunity in dogs and cats. J Comp Pathol. 2010;142(Suppl 1):S102–S108. doi: 10.1016/j.jcpa.2009.10.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Frey J. Biological safety concepts of genetically modified live bacterial vaccines. Vaccine. 2007;25:5598–5605. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.11.058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Bhanuprakash V., Indrani B.K., Hosamani M., Balamurugan V., Singh R.K. Bluetongue vaccines: the past, present and future. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2009;8:191–204. doi: 10.1586/14760584.8.2.191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Dalloul R.A., Lillehoj H.S. Recent advances in immunomodulation and vaccination strategies against coccidiosis. Avian Dis. 2005;49:1–8. doi: 10.1637/7306-11150R. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Rauw F., Gardin Y., Palya V., Anbari S., Gonze M., Lemaire S., Van den Berg T., Lambrecht B. The positive adjuvant effect of chitosan on antigen-specific cell-mediated immunity after chickens vaccination with live Newcastle disease vaccine. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2010;134:249–258. doi: 10.1016/j.vetimm.2009.10.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Morein B., Hu K.F., Abusugra I. Current status and potential application of ISCOMs in veterinary medicine. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2004;10:1367–1382. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2004.02.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Dwivedi V., Manickam C., Patterson R., Dodson K., Murtaugh M., Torrelles J.B., Schlesinger L.S., Renukaradhyaa G.J. Cross-protective immunity to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus by intranasal delivery of a live virus vaccine with a potent adjuvant. Vaccine. 2011;29:4058–4066. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.03.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Aucouturier J., Ganne V., Laval A. Efficacy and safety of new adjuvants. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000;916:600–604. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb05343.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Neumann E.J., Kliebenstein J.B., Johnson C.D., Mabry J.W., Bush E.J., Seitzinger A.H., Green A.L., Zimmerman J.J. Assessment of the economic impact of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome on swine production in the United States. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2005;227:385–392. doi: 10.2460/javma.2005.227.385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Meulenberg J.J., Hulst M.M., de Meijer E.J., Moonen P.L., den Besten A., de Kluyver E.P., Wensvoort G., Moormann R.J. Lelystad virus, the causative agent of porcine epidemic abortion and respiratory syndrome (PEARS), is related to LDVand EAV. Virology. 1993;192:62–72. doi: 10.1006/viro.1993.1008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Halbur P.G., Paul P.S., Frey M.L., Landgraf J., Eernisse K., Meng X.J., Lum M.A., Andrews J.J., Rathje J.A. Comparison of the pathogenicity of two U.S. porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus isolates with that of the Lelystad virus. Vet. Pathol. 1995;32:648–660. doi: 10.1177/030098589503200606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Procedia in Vaccinology are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES