Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31619295›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2019

Evaluation of the efficacy of a trivalent vaccine mixture against a triple challenge with Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae, PCV2, and PRRSV and the efficacy comparison of the respective monovalent vaccines against a single challenge.

Taehwan Oh, Kee Hwan Park, Siyeon Yang, Jiwoon Jeong, Ikjae Kang, Changhoon Park, Chanhee Chae

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Taehwan OhCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Veterinary Pathology, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea.
Kee Hwan ParkCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Veterinary Pathology, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea.
Siyeon YangCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Veterinary Pathology, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea.
Jiwoon JeongCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Veterinary Pathology, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea.
Ikjae KangCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Veterinary Pathology, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea.
Changhoon ParkCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Veterinary Pathology, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea.
Chanhee ChaeCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Veterinary Pathology, Seoul National University, Gwanak-ro 1, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea. swine@snu.ac.kr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0190-1957
Seoul National University · KR

Funding

BK 21 Plus Program for Creative Veterinary Science Research 5260-20150100Research Institute for Veterinary Science 550-20170104
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of a trivalent vaccine mixture and compare it to the respective monovalent vaccines against Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae, porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2), and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV).

resultsPigs that were triple challenged with M. hyopneumoniae, PCV2, and PRRSV following vaccination with the trivalent vaccine mixture exhibited a significantly better growth performance when compared to unvaccinated and challenged pigs. A statistical difference was not found when comparing pig populations which were vaccinated with the trivalent vaccine followed by a triple challenge and pigs vaccinated with monovalent M hyopneumoniae vaccine followed by mycoplasmal single challenge in the following areas: M. hyopneumoniae nasal shedding, the number of M. hyopneumoniae-specific interferon-γ secreting cells (IFN-γ-SC), and mycoplasmal lung lesion scores. Pigs vaccinated with the trivalent vaccine mixture followed by a triple challenge resulted in a similar reduction of PCV2 viremia, an increase in the number of PCV2-specific IFN-γ-SC and reduction in interstitial lung lesion scores when compared to pigs vaccinated with a PCV-2 vaccine and challenged with PCV2 only. Lastly, there was a significant difference in the reduction of PRRSV viremia, an increase in PRRSV-specific IFN-γ-SC and a reduction of interstitial lung lesion scores between pigs vaccinated with the trivalent vaccine mixture followed by a triple challenge and pigs vaccinated with a monovalent PRRSV vaccine followed by PRRSV challenge only.

conclusionThe trivalent vaccine mixture was efficacious against a triple challenge of M. hyopneumoniae, PCV2, and PRRSV. The trivalent vaccine mixture, however, did not result in equal protection when compared against each respective monovalent vaccine, with the largest vaccine occurring within PRRSV.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacterial VaccinesCircoviridae InfectionsCircovirusFemaleMaleMycoplasma hyopneumoniaePneumonia of Swine, MycoplasmalPorcine Reproductive and Respiratory SyndromePorcine respiratory and reproductive syndrome virusSus scrofaSwineSwine DiseasesVaccinationVaccines, CombinedViral VaccinesBacterial VaccinesVaccines, CombinedViral VaccinesMycoplasma hyopneumoniaePorcine circovirus type 2Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virusPorcine respiratory disease complex

Identifiers

PMID31619295
PMCPMC6794872
OpenAlexW2980878090

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.