Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28953944›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Field trial of efficacy of the Leish-tec® vaccine against canine leishmaniasis caused by Leishmania infantum in an endemic area with high transmission rates.

Gabriel Grimaldi, Antonio Teva, Claudiney B Dos-Santos, Fernanda Nunes Santos, Israel de-Souza Pinto, Blima Fux, Gustavo Rocha Leite, Aloísio Falqueto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Knowledge mapping of risk mitigation measures against vector-borne diseases.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. LmCenNPJ vaccines · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Advances inPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Dogs HarborPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors.

Gabriel GrimaldiInstituto Gonçalo Moniz, Fiocruz, Salvador, Brazil, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5189-9763
Antonio TevaEscola Nacional de Saúde Pública, Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Claudiney B Dos-SantosCentro de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santos, Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Fernanda Nunes SantosEscola Nacional de Saúde Pública, Fiocruz, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Israel de-Souza PintoCentro de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santos, Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Blima FuxCentro de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santos, Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Gustavo Rocha LeiteCentro de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santos, Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
Aloísio FalquetoCentro de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santos, Vitória, Espírito Santo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBecause domestic dogs are reservoir hosts for visceral leishmaniasis (VL) in Brazil, one of the approaches used to reduce human disease incidence is to cull infected dogs. However, the results of controlled intervention trials based on serological screening of dogs and killing of seropositive animals are equivocal. A prophylactic vaccine to protect dogs from being infectious to the sand fly vector could be an effective strategy to provide sustained control. Here, we investigated whether a currently licensed commercial subunit rA2 protein-saponin vaccine (Leish-tec®) had an additional effect to dog culling on reducing the canine infectious populations. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsThis prospective study was conducted in an L. infantum highly endemic area of southeast Brazil. At the onset of the intervention, all of the eligible dogs received through subcutaneous route a three-dose vaccine course at 21-day intervals and a booster on month 12. For the purpose of comparison, newly recruited healthy dogs were included as the exposed control group. To ascertain vaccine-induced protection, dogs were screened on clinical and serological criteria every 6 months for a 2-year follow-up period. Antibody-based tests and histopathological examination of post-mortem tissue specimens from euthanized animals were used as a marker of infection. The standardized vaccine regime, apart from being safe, was immunogenic as immunized animals responded with a pronounced production of anti-A2-specific IgG antibodies. It should be noted the mean seroconversion time for infection obtained among immunized exposed dogs (~ 18 months), which was twice as high as that for unvaccinated ones (~ 9 months). After two transmission cycles completed, the cumulative incidence of infection did differ significantly (P = 0.016) between the vaccinated (27%) and unvaccinated (42%) dogs. However, the expected efficacy for the vaccine in inducing clinical protection was not evident since 43% of vaccine recipients developed disease over time. Our estimates also indicated that immunoprophylaxis by Leish-tec® vaccine in addition to dog culling might not have an impact on bringing down the incidence of canine infection with L. infantum in areas of high transmission rates. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Leish-tec® as a prophylactic vaccine showed promise but needs to be further optimized to be effective in dogs under field conditions, and thereby positively impacts human incidence.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, ProtozoanBrazilDisease ProgressionDog DiseasesDogsLeishmania infantumLeishmaniasis VaccinesLeishmaniasis, VisceralPrevalenceProspective StudiesAntibodies, ProtozoanLeishmaniasis Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID28953944
PMCPMC5617193

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.