ArticleVeterinary research communications2026
Multivalent fowl Adenovirus-Newcastle disease vaccine: comprehensive evaluation in SPF and commercial broiler breeders.
Article in Veterinary research communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInclusion body hepatitis (IBH) and Newcastle disease (ND) impose substantial economic burdens on global poultry production, with combined annual losses exceeding $3 billion worldwide. Current vaccination strategies requiring separate immunizations increase handling stress and operational costs.
objectiveTo evaluate immunogenicity, cross-neutralization patterns, protective efficacy against virulent challenge, maternal antibody transfer, and commercial field performance of a novel multivalent inactivated vaccine containing fowl adenovirus (FAdV) serotypes 2, 8a, 8b, and 11 combined with Newcastle disease virus (NDV).
methodsTwo randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trials were conducted: SPF trial (n = 200, Egypt) and commercial field trial (n = 120,000, Saudi Arabia). The multivalent vaccine contained inactivated FAdV serotypes 2, 8a, 8b, and 11 plus NDV strains, administered at 10 and 16 weeks of age with 24-week monitoring.
resultsVaccination induced robust antibody responses with FAdV ELISA geometric mean titers (GMT) reaching 22,847 (95% CI: 18,245 - 28,589) at weeks 4-6 post-primary vaccination, with peak anamnestic response of 28,945 (95% CI: 23,186 - 36,115) at week 8 following booster (p < 0.001) and NDV hemagglutination inhibition titers of 9.8 log₂ (95% CI: 8.4-11.4) (p < 0.001). Challenge studies demonstrated 96.7% protection against FAdV-2 (species D) (29/30 vaccinated vs. 6/30 controls; Fisher's exact p < 0.0001) and 100% protection against NDV (30/30 vs. 0/30). Maternal antibody transfer efficiency was 68.6% for IBH and 81.7% for NDV, with half-lives of 4.2 and 4.8 days respectively, providing 24-28 days and 21-24 days protection in progeny. Commercial field trial (120,000 birds) demonstrated 94.2% reduction in IBH mortality with 3.47:1 return on investment.
conclusionsThe multivalent IBH-NDV vaccine provides comprehensive immunological protection and consistent field efficacy. Although the cross-neutralization assay included representative serotypes, broader testing across additional field isolates is warranted to further define cross-protective breadth. Cross-neutralization analysis confirms the necessity of multivalent formulations due to type-specific immunity patterns, supporting implementation for integrated disease control in commercial broiler operations. This study provides a detailed evaluation of a quadrivalent FAdV-NDV inactivated vaccine demonstrating efficient maternal antibody transfer in broiler breeders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41653345What 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.