Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Zriba, Slim
• Garcia-Gonzalez, Daniel G.
• Khalaf, Omar H.
• Wheeler, Lance
• Chaki, Sankar P.
• Rice-Ficht, Allison
• Ficht, Thomas A.
• Arenas-Gamboa, Angela M.

Titel

Vaccine safety studies of Brucella abortus S19 and S19ΔvjbR in pregnant swine

Ist Teil von

• Vaccine: X, 2019-12, Vol.3, p.100041-100041, Article 100041

Ort / Verlag

England: Elsevier Ltd

Erscheinungsjahr

2019

Quelle

The Electronic Journals Library

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• •Vaccination with Brucella abortus S19 or S19ΔvjbR in pregnant swine did not induce abortion, stillbirths or a reduction in litter size.•Gross and histopathological evaluation did not demonstrate any local or systemic side effect associated with either vaccine.•At the time of the delivery, there was no evidence of the presence of either vaccine strains in the fetuses, placentas or sows.•Both vaccine candidates are safe for use in pregnant swine. Brucellosis in swine is caused by Brucella suis, a bacterial infection of nearly worldwide distribution. Brucella suis is also transmissible to humans, dogs and cattle and is considered a reemerging disease of public health concern. To date, there is no effective vaccine for swine. This prompted us to investigate the potential use of the commercially available vaccine for cattle or the live attenuated vaccine candidate S19ΔvjbR. As the first step, we sought to study the safety of the vaccine candidates when administered in pregnant sows, since one of the major drawbacks associated with vaccination using Live Attenuated Vaccines (LAV) is the induction of abortions when administered in pregnant animals. Fifteen pregnant gilts at mid-gestation were divided into four groups and subsequently vaccinated subcutaneously using different formulations containing 2.0 ± 0.508 × 109 CFU of either S19 or S19ΔvjbR. Vaccination in pregnant animals with the vaccine candidates did not induce abortion, stillbirths or a reduction in litter size. Multiple tissues in the gilts and piglets were examined at the time of delivery to assess bacterial colonization and histopathological changes. There was no evidence of vaccine persistence in the gilts or bacterial colonization in the fetuses. Altogether, these data suggest that both vaccine candidates are safe for use in pregnant swine. Analysis of the humoral responses, specifically anti-Brucella IgG levels measured in serum, demonstrated a robust response induced by either vaccine, but of shorter duration (4–6 weeks post-inoculation) compared to that observed in cattle or experimentally infected mice. Such a transient humoral response may prove to be beneficial in cases where the vaccine is used in eradication campaigns and in the differentiation of vaccinated from infected animals. This study provides evidence to support future efficacy studies of both vaccine candidates in swine.