Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31181078›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Comparison of antibody titres between intradermal and intramuscular rabies vaccination using inactivated vaccine in cattle in Bhutan.

Karma Wangmo, Richard Laven, Florence Cliquet, Marine Wasniewski, Aaron Yang

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Karma WangmoInstitute of Veterinary, Animal and Biomedical Sciences, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-5306-4417
Richard LavenInstitute of Veterinary, Animal and Biomedical Sciences, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Florence CliquetANSES, Nancy Laboratory for Rabies and Wildlife, European Union Reference Laboratory for Rabies,- European Union Reference Laboratory for Rabies Serology, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Management in Zoonoses Control, OIE Reference Laboratory for Rabies, Paris, France.
Marine WasniewskiANSES, Nancy Laboratory for Rabies and Wildlife, European Union Reference Laboratory for Rabies,- European Union Reference Laboratory for Rabies Serology, WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Management in Zoonoses Control, OIE Reference Laboratory for Rabies, Paris, France.
Aaron YangInstitute of Veterinary, Animal and Biomedical Sciences, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-3893-9403
Agence Nationale de Sécurité Sanitaire de l’Alimentation, de l’Environnement et du Travail · FRMassey University · NZMinistry of Agriculture and Forests · BT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In developing countries, the cost of vaccination limits the use of prophylactic rabies vaccination, especially in cattle. Intradermal vaccination delivers antigen directly to an area with higher number of antigen-presenting cells. Therefore, it could produce equivalent or higher antibody titres than conventional intramuscular vaccination even when a lower dose is given. This study aimed to compare the antibody response in cattle vaccinated intramuscularly with 1mL of inactivated rabies vaccine (Raksharab, Indian Immunologicals) against intradermally vaccinated cattle with 0.2mL of the same vaccine. The study was conducted in Haa province of Bhutan where rabies is not endemic. One hundred cattle from 27 farms were selected for the study. Virus neutralising antibody (VNA) response was measured using the fluorescent antibody virus neutralisation test on the day of vaccination (day 0) and 14, 30, 60 and 90 days later. Overall, 71% of intradermally vaccinated cattle and 89% of the intramuscularly vaccinated cattle produced an adequate response (≥0.5IU/mL). On days 14 and 30 post vaccination fewer cattle (P<0.02) in the intradermal group had adequate titres with 36% and 58%, respectively, having titres ≥0.5 IU/mL compared to the equivalent figures of 78% and 77% in the intramuscular group. The mean VNA titres were lower for the intradermal group than intramuscular group (p<0.001) with the mean difference being > 0.6 IU/mL. Although low dose intradermal vaccination did produce a detectable antibody response, it was inferior to intramuscular vaccination. Thus, although intradermal vaccination has the potential to reduce the cost of vaccination by reducing the dose required, this study showed that a single dose of 0.2 mL intradermally was inferior to an intramuscular dose of 1 mL. Further research evaluating dose and dose regimen is needed before intradermal vaccination using the Raksharab rabies vaccine can be recommended in cattle.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, ViralBhutanCattleImmunologic TestsInjections, IntradermalInjections, IntramuscularNeutralization TestsRabiesRabies VaccinesVaccines, InactivatedAntibodies, ViralRabies VaccinesVaccines, Inactivated

Identifiers

PMID31181078
PMCPMC6557474
OpenAlexW2951997195

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.