Table 4.
Study | n | Arithmetic means (AM) of live ticks and % efficacy1 on indicated days | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
I. scapularis #1 | Day 2 | Day 9 | Day 16 | Day 23 | Day 32 | ||
Control group2 | 8 | AM | 26.5 | 27.9 | 30.4 | 32.1 | 32.5 |
Treated group3 | 8 | AM | 1.3 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.0 |
% efficacy4 | 95.1 | 99.3 | 100.0 | 98.8 | 100.0 | ||
I. scapularis #2 | Day 2 | Day 9 | Day 16 | Day 22 | Day 32 | ||
Control group2 | 10 | AM | 24.5 | 26.5 | 27.2 | 24.4 | 22.2 |
Treated group3 | 10 | AM | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.4 |
% efficacy4 | 98.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 99.6 | 98.2 |
Note: p-values5 for comparison of the untreated and treated groups = <0.0001 at all time-points.
n = number of cats per group.
The I. scapularis counts were analyzed using SAS Version 9.4. The logarithm of the (count + 1) was analyzed at each study day separately using the MIXED procedure with treatment group used as a fixed effect and blocks used as a random effect.
Control group = Mineral oil administered topically once on Day 0 at 0.12 mL/kg
Treated group = Novel formulation administered topically once on Day 0 at 0.12 mL/kg, providing 1.4 mg/kg esafoxolaner, 10.0 mg/kg praziquantel and 0.5 mg/kg eprinomectin
Percent efficacy = [(C – T)/C] × 100, where C and T are the arithmetic means of the control and treated groups, respectively.
Two-sample probability value comparing the population means of the treated group vs. the control group.