Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30859618›Full record

ArticleEquine veterinary journal2019

Immunogenicity of Potomac horse fever vaccine when simultaneously co-administered with rabies vaccine in a multivalent vaccine or as two monovalent vaccines at separate sites.

H C McKenzie, R A Funk, L Trager, S R Werre, M Crisman

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial, Veterinary
In one paragraph

Article in Equine veterinary journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 53% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Bacterial and viral enterocolitis in horses: a review.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2022
    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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H C McKenzieDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Virginia Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8230-2237
R A FunkDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Virginia Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.
L TragerDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Virginia Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.
S R WerreLaboratory for Study Design and Statistical Analysis, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.
M CrismanDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Virginia Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.
Virginia–Maryland College of Veterinary Medicine · US

Funding

Zoetis, Inc.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPotomac horse fever (PHF) is a potentially fatal enterocolitis of horses caused by Neorickettsia risticii. The disease was originally recognised almost 40 years ago in the state of Maryland in the US. It is now known to occur in many areas of North America, as well as having been described in South America and Europe. Monocomponent PHF vaccines are available, but clinical protection with vaccination has been reported to be inconsistent.

objectivesThis study was designed to assess the immunogenicity of a commercially available Potomac Horse Fever (PHF) vaccine when administered as either a monovalent PHF vaccine simultaneously co-administered with a separate monovalent Rabies vaccine or as a multivalent PHF/Rabies vaccine in horses. STUDY

designRandomised parallel group trial.

methodsNinety-one client or University owned horses participated in this open-label randomised study, with 45 horses receiving the monovalent vaccines at separate sites and 46 receiving the multivalent vaccine at a single site. Serum PHF IFA titres were determined twice prior to vaccination and at 1, 2 and 3 months after vaccination.

resultsBoth vaccination protocols exhibited poor immunogenicity, with only one-third of all the animals demonstrating seroconversion, defined as an increase in titre of greater than 400 over baseline, at any time point after vaccination. The monovalent PHF vaccine exhibited significantly greater immunogenicity in terms of the number of horses exhibiting seroconversion, as compared to the multivalent vaccine, at one (20 vs. 11, P = 0.03) and two (18 vs. 9, p = 0.02) months post vaccination. The monovalent PHF vaccine also exhibited significantly greater immunogenicity in terms of the median (interquartile range) IFA titres, as compared to the multivalent vaccine, at one (800 [200-1600] vs. 400 [200-800], P = 0.009) and 2 months (400 [200-1600] vs. 400 [100-800], P = 0.02) post vaccination. There was no significant difference between groups at 3 months in either seroconversion rate or median IFA titers. MAIN LIMITATIONS: This study did not assess the actual protective effects of PHF vaccination but rather used the serologic response to vaccination as a surrogate biomarker of immunity.

conclusionsThe multivalent PHF/Rabies vaccine exhibited lower immunogenicity as compared to the monovalent PHF vaccine co-administered with a separate Rabies vaccine.

Indexed as

Neorickettsia risticiiAnaplasmataceae InfectionsAnimalsAntibodies, BacterialFemaleHorse DiseasesHorsesImmunogenicity, VaccineMaleRabiesRabies VaccinesRickettsial VaccinesVaccinationVaccines, InactivatedAntibodies, BacterialRabies VaccinesRickettsial VaccinesVaccines, Inactivatedequine neorickettsiosishorsemonovalent vaccinemultivalent vaccineNeorickettsia risticiiPotomac horse fever

Identifiers

PMID30859618
PMCPMC6850380
OpenAlexW2921260171

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.