ArticlePloS one2018
Examination of viraemia and clinical signs after challenge with a heterologous PRRSV strain in PRRS Type 2 MLV vaccinated pigs: A challenge-dose study.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing the understanding of coinfection outcomes: Impact of natural atypical porcine pestivirus infection on porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome in pigs.Virus research · 2024Article
- Protective evaluation of the commercialized porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus vaccines in piglets challenged by NADC34-like strain.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- A broadly neutralizing monoclonal antibody induces broad protection against heterogeneous PRRSV strains in piglets.Veterinary research · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vaccination with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) Type 2 modified-live vaccines (MLVs) has been shown to improve clinical signs and survival rates in PRRS virus (PRRSV)-challenged pigs. This study evaluated the dose of PRRSV challenge needed to cause and maintain viraemia in PRRS Type 2 MLV-vaccinated pigs and assessed clinical responses to various doses of virulent challenge. This controlled, randomised, blinded vaccination-challenge study involved 95 pigs who were either vaccinated with 2 mL of a PRRS Type 2 MLV on Day 0 or left unvaccinated. On Day 28, pigs were challenged intranasally with virulent PRRSV isolate (dose range <1.5 to 4 log10 50% tissue culture infectious dose/mL). Five pigs were left unchallenged and served as environmental controls. Viraemia levels, pyrexia, average daily weight gain and clinical signs were assessed. At all challenge doses, vaccinated groups had reduced viraemia levels and clinical signs, and higher average daily weight gain compared with non-vaccinated groups. Vaccinated groups challenged with ≤2 log had similar viraemia levels and clinical performance (days pyrexic and average daily weight gain) as the non-challenged group. Vaccinated groups had significantly reduced pyrexic days compared with non-vaccinated groups across all challenge doses (P <.05). Vaccinated pigs challenged with <3 log had significantly improved average daily weight gain (P <.05). In vaccinated groups, challenge dose correlated positively with viraemia levels and number of days pyrexic, and negatively with average daily weight gain. This is the first study to use a challenge-dose model to evaluate the efficacy of vaccination against PRRSV. PRRS Type 2 MLV was shown to mitigate the consequences of PRRSV infection at all evaluated PRRSV challenge doses. Lower levels of challenge had minimal impact on health and performance of vaccinated pigs, supporting the benefit of vaccinating swine with PRRS Type 2 MLV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.