ArticleVaccines2025
Challenges and Lessons Learned from a Field Trial on the Understanding of the Porcine Respiratory Disease Complex.
Article in Vaccines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cross-Protection in PRRSV: Mechanisms, Limitations, and Implications for Vaccine Design.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Macroepidemiologic assessment of swine disease co-occurrences in the United States of America.Porcine health management · 2026Article
- Article
- Mitochondrial dysfunction in PRRSV-2-infected macrophages.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThe porcine respiratory disease complex (PRDC) is a multifaceted, polymicrobial syndrome resulting from a combination of environmental stressors, primary infections (e.g., PRRSV) and secondary infectious agents (viruses and bacteria). PRDC causes severe lung pathology, leading to reduced performance, increased mortality rates, and higher production costs in the global pig industry. Our goal was to conduct a comprehensive study correlating both the anti-PRRSV immune response and 21 secondary infectious agents with PRDC severity.
methodsTo this end, PRRSV-negative weaners were vaccinated with a PRRSV-2 MLV and put into a farm with a history of PRDC. Subsequently, anti-PRRSV cellular and antibody responses were monitored pre-vaccination, at 28 days post vaccination (dpv) and during PRDC outbreak (49 dpv). NanoString was used to quantify 21 pathogens within the bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) at the time of necropsy (51 dpv). PRRSV-2 was present in 53 out of 55 pigs, and the other five pathogens (PCMV, PPIV,
resultsAlthough the uncontrolled settings of field trials complicated data interpretation, multivariate correlation analyses highlighted valuable lessons: (i) high weaning weight predicted animal resilience to disease and high weight gains correlated with the control of the PRRSV-2 field strain; (ii) most pigs cleared MLV strain within 7 weeks, and the field PRRSV-2 strain was the most prevalent lung pathogen during PRDC; (iii) all pigs developed a systemic PRRSV IgG antibody response which correlated with IgG and IgA levels in BAL; (iv) the induction of anti-field strain-neutralizing antibodies by MLV PRRSV-2 vaccination was both late and limited; (v) cellular immune responses were variable but included strong systemic IFN-γ production against the PRRSV-2 field strain; (vi) the most detected lung pathogens correlated with PRRSV-2 viremia or lung loads; (vii) within the six detected pathogens, two viruses, PRRSV-2 and PCMV, significantly correlated with the severity of the clinical outcome.
conclusionsWhile a simple and conclusive answer to the multifaceted nature of PRDC remains elusive, the key lessons derived from this unique study provide a valuable framework for future research on porcine respiratory diseases.
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.