ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2024
Efficacy of a reduced-dosage PRRS MLV vaccine against a NADC34-like strain of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular epidemiology and genetic evolution of PRRSV ORF5 in Sichuan, Southwest China.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Epidemiological Review of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (PRRSV) in Japan: From Discovery and Spread to Economic Losses and Future Prospects.Veterinary sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: After being discovered for the first time in China in 2017, porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) NADC34-like strains have become the prevalent strain of PRRSV in certain regions of China. Our previous study showed that reduced Ingelvac PRRS MLV vaccination dosages against NADC30-like Methods: In this study, we immunized piglets with two different dosages of the MLV vaccine and infected piglets within a nasal way with NADC34-like CF PRRSV at 42 days post-vaccination. We observed the changes in growth performance before and after the NADC34-like PRRSV DX strain challenge and the protective effect of different vaccine dosages through multiple assays. Results: After the challenge, the piglets from the challenge control group displayed clinical signs typical of PRRSV infection, including transient fever, high viremia, mild clinical symptoms, and histopathological changes in the lungs and lymph nodes, which indicates DX is a virulent virus. Without the challenge, the average daily gain of the non-immunized group at 5 weeks after the vaccination is greater than that of the 0.01 dosage group than that of the 1 dosage group, which proved that the commercial MLV vaccine has a negative effect on the growth performance of pigs and this effect may be dose-dependent. After the NADC34-like PRRSV challenge, there was no difference in average daily gain between the immunized pigs and pigs from the challenge control group. From the perspective of clinical score, gross lung lesions, and microscopic lesions, immunization with MLV vaccine can indeed relieve symptoms and lesions caused by the virus, and 0.1 dosage vaccination has a better effect in these aspects. Also, both dosages of MLV immunization shortened viremia with similar effects. Discussion: Our research suggests that the MLV vaccine can provide piglets with some protection against NADC34-like PRRSV and the 0.1 dosage Ingelvac PRRS MLV vaccination showed greater benefits in our study. Therefore, considering the cost, side effects, and subsequent protective effects, we can adjust the immune dosage appropriately after further investigation to ensure safety, improve production efficiency, and reduce immunization costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.