Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29155877›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Immune response profiles of calves following vaccination with live BCG and inactivated Mycobacterium bovis vaccine candidates.

E M D L van der Heijden, J Chileshe, J C M Vernooij, C Gortazar, R A Juste, I Sevilla, J E Crafford, V P M G Rutten, A L Michel

Open access · goldAbstract 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 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Anti-phenolic glycolipid antibodies inOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Will we ever eradicate animal tuberculosis?Irish veterinary journal · 2023
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Effects of InactivatedPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  15. Challenges for controlling bovine tuberculosis in South Africa.The Onderstepoort journal of veterinary research · 2020
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

E M D L van der HeijdenDepartment of Infectious Diseases & Immunology, Division of Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8444-6928
J ChilesheBovine Tuberculosis and Brucellosis Research Programme, Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
J C M VernooijDepartment of Farm Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
C GortazarSaBio Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos IREC (CSIC-UCLM-JCCM), Ciudad Real, Spain.
R A JusteNEIKER-Instituto Vasco de Investigación y Desarrollo Agrario, Animal Health Department, Bizkaia Science and Technology Park, Derio (Bizkaia), Spain.
I SevillaNEIKER-Instituto Vasco de Investigación y Desarrollo Agrario, Animal Health Department, Bizkaia Science and Technology Park, Derio (Bizkaia), Spain.
J E CraffordBovine Tuberculosis and Brucellosis Research Programme, Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
V P M G RuttenDepartment of Infectious Diseases & Immunology, Division of Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
A L MichelBovine Tuberculosis and Brucellosis Research Programme, Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
Utrecht University · NLEuskadiko Parke Teknologikoa · ESUniversity of Pretoria · ZAInstituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos · ESNational Zoological Gardens of South Africa · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conventional control and eradication strategies for bovine tuberculosis (BTB) face tremendous difficulties in developing countries; countries with wildlife reservoirs, a complex wildlife-livestock-human interface or a lack of veterinary and veterinary public health surveillance. Vaccination of cattle and other species might in some cases provide the only suitable control strategy for BTB, while in others it may supplement existing test-and-slaughter schemes. However, the use of live BCG has several limitations and the global rise of HIV/AIDS infections has furthermore warranted the exploration of inactivated vaccine preparations. The aim of this study was to compare the immune response profiles in response to parenteral vaccination with live BCG and two inactivated vaccine candidates in cattle. Twenty-four mixed breed calves (Bos taurus) aged 4-6 months, were allocated to one of four groups and vaccinated sub-cutaneously with live M. bovis BCG (Danish 1331), formalin-inactivated M. bovis BCG, heat-killed M. bovis or PBS/Montanide™ (control). Interferon-γ responsiveness and antibody production were measured prior to vaccination and at weekly intervals thereafter for twelve weeks. At nine weeks post-priming, animals were skin tested using tuberculins and MTBC specific protein cocktails and subsequently challenged through intranodular injection of live M. bovis BCG. The animals in the heat-killed M. bovis group demonstrated strong and sustained cell-mediated and humoral immune responses, significantly higher than the control group in response to vaccination, which may indicate a protective immune profile. Animals in this group showed reactivity to the skin test reagents, confirming good vaccine take. Lastly, although not statistically significant, recovery of BCG after challenge was lowest in the heat-killed M. bovis group. In conclusion, the parenteral heat-killed M. bovis vaccine proved to be clearly immunogenic in cattle in the present study, urging further evaluation of the vaccine in challenge studies using virulent M. bovis and assessment of vaccine efficacy in field conditions.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, BacterialBCG VaccineCattleFormaldehydeHot TemperatureImmunity, CellularImmunity, HumoralImmunization ScheduleImmunogenicity, VaccineInjections, SubcutaneousInterferon-gammaMaleMycobacterium bovisTuberculosis, BovineVaccines, AttenuatedAntibodies, BacterialBCG VaccineFormaldehydeInterferon-gammaVaccines, AttenuatedVaccines, Live, Unattenuated

Identifiers

PMID29155877
PMCPMC5695775
OpenAlexW2771019031

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.