Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38989029›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2024

Protective evaluation of the commercialized porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus vaccines in piglets challenged by NADC34-like strain.

Zhicheng Liu, Chaosi Li, Yulong Hu, Shuhe Fang, Xiangdong Li, Chunhong Zhang, Lv Huang, Jie Qian, Gang Wang, Aihua Fan and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

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

12 authors.

Zhicheng Liu *College of Veterinary Medicine, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China.
Chaosi Li *Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Yulong HuBoehringer Ingelheim Animal Health (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Shuhe FangBoehringer Ingelheim Animal Health (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Xiangdong LiCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, China.
Chunhong ZhangKey Laboratory of Livestock Disease Prevention of Guangdong Province (2023B1212060040), Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
Lv HuangBoehringer Ingelheim Animal Health (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Jie QianBoehringer Ingelheim Animal Health (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Gang WangShandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Animal Biotechnology and Disease Control and Prevention, College of Veterinary Medicine, Shandong Agricultural University, Taian, China.
Aihua FanBoehringer Ingelheim Animal Health (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Jianfeng ZhangKey Laboratory of Livestock Disease Prevention of Guangdong Province (2023B1212060040), Institute of Animal Health, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
Letu GeriCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In China, the porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) has undergone several variations over the decades and contributed to the diversity of the clinical epidemic PRRSV strains. This has complicated the prevention and control of PRRS. In particular, the efficacy of the currently available commercial vaccines against the highly pathogenic NADC34-like strains is unclear. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the protection efficacy of three commercial PRRS modified-live virus (MLV) vaccines derived from classical PRRS VR2332 MLV and R98 MLV against challenge with a heterologous NADC34-like PRRSV strain, JS2021NADC34, which has high pathogenicity in pigs. PRRSV- and antibody-free piglets were immunized with the PRRS VR2332 MLV vaccine or either of two R98 MLV vaccines (from different manufacturers) and were challenged with the JS2021NADC34 strain 28 days after immunization. Rectal temperature, clinical symptoms, viremia and viral shedding from the nose, gross lesions in the thymus and lungs, microscopic lesions and viral distribution in the lungs, as well as the humoral immune response and mortality rates were recorded over a 14-day post-challenge period. The results showed that PRRS VR2332 MLV had better efficacy against the JS2021NADC34 challenge than PRRS R98 MLV, with vaccinated piglets in the former group showing transient and mild symptoms, mild pathological lesions in the lungs, mild thymic atrophy, and low viral levels in sera and nasal swabs, as well as better growth performance and a 100% survival rate. In contrast, two PRRS R98 MLVs exhibited limited efficacy against the JS2021NADC34 challenge, with the piglets in two R98 groups showing obvious clinical symptoms and pathological changes in the lungs and thymus; moreover, there were two deaths caused by PRRS in two R98 groups, respectively. Despite this, the mortality rate was lower than that of the unvaccinated piglets that were challenged with JS2021NADC34. The cumulative results demonstrate that PRRS VR2332 MLV was partly effective against the highly pathogenic PRRSV NADC34-like strain based on the observations over the 14-day post-challenge period. Thus, it might be a viable option among the commercially available vaccines for control of NADC34-like virus infections in swine herds.

Indexed as

pigletsprotection efficacyPRRSV NADC34-likeR98 MLVVR2332 MLV

Identifiers

PMID38989029
PMCPMC11233820

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.