Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26448902›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance2015

Anthelmintic resistance to ivermectin and moxidectin in gastrointestinal nematodes of cattle in Europe.

Thomas Geurden, Christophe Chartier, Jane Fanke, Antonio Frangipane di Regalbono, Donato Traversa, Georg von Samson-Himmelstjerna, Janina Demeler, Hima Bindu Vanimisetti, David J Bartram, Matthew J Denwood

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

72 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Anthelmintic resistance against gastrointestinal nematodes: an emerging threat in cattle farms in Bangladesh.Journal of parasitic diseases : official organ of the Indian Society for Parasitology · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Thomas GeurdenZoetis, Mercuriusstraat 20, 1930, Zaventem, Belgium.
Christophe ChartierLUNAM University, ONIRIS, Nantes-Atlantic College of Veterinary Medicine, Food Science and Engineering, UMR 1300 BIOEPAR, Nantes, F-44307, France.
Jane FankeInstitute of Parasitology and Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany.
Antonio Frangipane di RegalbonoDepartment of Animal Medicine, Production and Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Donato TraversaFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Teramo, 64100, Teramo, Italy.
Georg von Samson-HimmelstjernaInstitute of Parasitology and Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany.
Janina DemelerInstitute of Parasitology and Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany.
Hima Bindu VanimisettiZoetis, 333 Portage Street, Kalamazoo, MI, 49007-4931, USA.
David J BartramZoetis, 23/25 avenue du Docteur Lannelongue, 75668, Paris Cedex 14, France.
Matthew J DenwoodDepartment of Large Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegårdsvej 8, 1870, Frederiksberg C, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anthelmintic resistance has been increasingly reported in cattle worldwide over the last decade, although reports from Europe are more limited. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of injectable formulations of ivermectin and moxidectin at 0.2 mg per kg bodyweight against naturally acquired gastro-intestinal nematodes in cattle. A total of 753 animals on 40 farms were enrolled in Germany (12 farms), the UK (10 farms), Italy (10 farms), and France (8 farms). Animals were selected based on pre-treatment faecal egg counts and were allocated to one of the two treatment groups. Each treatment group consisted of between 7 and 10 animals. A post-treatment faecal egg count was performed 14 days (±2 days) after treatment. The observed percentage reduction was calculated for each treatment group based on the arithmetic mean faecal egg count before and after treatment. The resistance status was evaluated based on the reduction in arithmetic mean faecal egg count and both the lower and upper 95% confidence limits. A decreased efficacy was observed in half or more of the farms in Germany, France and the UK. For moxidectin, resistance was confirmed on 3 farms in France, and on 1 farm in Germany and the UK. For ivermectin, resistance was confirmed on 3 farms in the UK, and on 1 farm in Germany and France. The remaining farms with decreased efficacy were classified as having an inconclusive resistance status based on the available data. After treatment Cooperia spp. larvae were most frequently identified, though Ostertagia ostertagi was also found, in particular within the UK and Germany. The present study reports lower than expected efficacy for ivermectin and moxidectin (based on the reduction in egg excretion after treatment) on European cattle farms, with confirmed anthelmintic resistance on 12.5% of the farms.

Indexed as

Drug ResistanceAnimalsAnthelminticsCattleCattle DiseasesEuropeFecesIvermectinMacrolidesNematodaNematode InfectionsParasite Egg CountAnthelminticsIvermectinMacrolidesmoxidectinAnthelmintic resistanceCattleEuropeIvermectinMoxidectin

Identifiers

PMID26448902
PMCPMC4572401

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.