Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31411533›Full record

ArticleJournal of feline medicine and surgery2020

Temporally separated feline calicivirus isolates do not cluster phylogenetically and are similarly neutralised by high-titre vaccine strain FCV-F9 antisera in vitro.

Shirley L Smith, Maria M Afonso, Gina L Pinchbeck, Rosalind M Gaskell, Susan Dawson, Alan D Radford

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shirley L SmithInstitute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Neston, Wirral, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1287-4277
Maria M AfonsoInstitute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Neston, Wirral, UK.
Gina L PinchbeckInstitute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Neston, Wirral, UK.
Rosalind M GaskellInstitute of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool, Neston, Wirral, UK.
Susan DawsonInstitute of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool, Neston, Wirral, UK.
Alan D RadfordInstitute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Neston, Wirral, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4590-1334
University of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesFeline calicivirus (FCV) is a highly variable and globally important feline pathogen for which vaccination has been the mainstay of control. Here, we test whether the continued use of FCV-F9, one of the most frequently used vaccine strains globally, is driving the emergence of vaccine-resistant viruses in the field.

methodsThis study made use of two representative panels of field isolates previously collected from cats visiting randomly selected veterinary practices across the UK as part of separate cross-sectional studies from 2001 and 2013/2014. Phylogenetic analysis and in vitro virus neutralisation tests were used to compare the genetic and antigenic relationships between these populations and FCV-F9.

resultsPhylogenetic analysis showed a typically radial distribution dominated by 52 distinct strains, with strains from both 2001 and 2013/2014 intermingled. The sequence for FCV-F9 appeared to be integral to this phylogeny and there were no significant differences in the genetic distances within each studied population (intra-population distances), or between them (inter-population distances), or between each population and FCV-F9. A 1 in 8 dilution neutralised 97% and 100% of the 2001 and 2013/14 isolates, respectively, and a 1 in 16 dilution neutralised 87% and 75% of isolates, respectively. There was no significant difference either in variance between the FCV-F9 neutralising titres for the two populations, or in the distribution of neutralisation titres across the two populations. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although FCV is a highly variable virus, we found no evidence for a progressive divergence of field virus from vaccine strain FCV-F9, either phylogenetically or antigenically, with FCV-F9 antisera remaining broadly and equally cross-reactive to two geographically representative and temporally separated FCV populations. We suggest this may be because the immunodominant region of the FCV capsid responsible for neutralisation may have structural constraints preventing its longer term progressive antigenic evolution.

Indexed as

AnimalsCaliciviridae InfectionsCalicivirus, FelineCat DiseasesCatsImmune SeraUnited KingdomVaccinationViral VaccinesImmune SeraViral VaccinesFeline calicivirusneutralisationphylogenyvaccine

Identifiers

PMID31411533
PMCPMC7252219
OpenAlexW2967551830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.