Serologic responses of dogs given a commercial vaccine against Leptospira interrogans serovar pomona and Leptospira kirschneri serovar grippotyphosa.
ABSTRACT To evaluate serum titers obtained by use of the microscopic agglutination test (ie, MAT titers) to Leptospira interrogans serovar pomona and autumnalis and Leptospira kirschneri serovar grippotyphosa in dogs given a commercial vaccine against serovars pomona and grippotyphosa.
Forty 12-week-old puppies and 20 mature Beagles.
Puppies received a commercial vaccine against serovars pomona and grippotyphosa at 12 weeks of age, then received a booster vaccine and 3 weeks later; mature dogs received the vaccine once. Serum MAT titers to serovars pomona, autumnalis, and grippotyphosa were measured before vaccination and at 2, 4, 6, 10, and 16 weeks after the first or only vaccination.
Of the 40 puppies vaccinated, 40, 0, and 40 developed MAT titers of > 100 after vaccination to serovars pomona, grippotyphosa, and autumnalis, respectively. Microscopic agglutination test titers to serovar autumnalis were higher than MAT titers to serovars pomona and grippotyphosa and persisted in some dogs for 16 weeks (6 weeks longer than for titers to serovar pomona). Of the 20 mature dogs, 13, 5, and 20 developed MAT titers of > 100 at 2 weeks to serovars pomona, grippotyphosa, and autumnalis, respectively. Titers to serovar pomona were higher and persisted in some dogs beyond 16 weeks after vaccination, compared with titers to serovars pomona and grippotyphosa, which persisted for 10 and 6 weeks, respectively.
Subunit vaccines against serovars pomona and grippotyphosa induce MAT titers not only to homologous antigens but also to serovar autumnalis, which could lead to a misdiagnosis of leptospirosis caused by serovar autumnalis.
- SourceAvailable from: scielo.br[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Currently, the serovar Copenhageni is the representative of serogroup Icterohaemorrhagiae maintained in synanthropic rodents found most frequently in dogs and humans in metropolitan areas of Brazil. Despite some authors have suggested the existence of cross-protection between serovars included in the same serogroup, this condition has not yet been sufficiently clarified for serovars Icterohaemorrhagiae and Copenhageni. In the present work, 2 to 6-year-old dogs, vaccinated at 60, 90 and 120 days of age and thereafter, revaccinated annually with commercial vaccine containing Canicola, Icterohaemorrhagiae, Grippotyphosa and Pomona bacterins were evaluated as to the immune status against leptospirosis before and 30 days after revaccination. Mycroscopic agglutination test (MAT) and in vitro growth inhibition test (GIT) were performed to search for agglutinating anti-Leptospira antibodies and neutralizing anti-Leptospira antibodies, respectively for serovars Canicola and Icterohaemorrhagiae, and additionally, for serovar Copenhageni, not included in the vaccine. The results showed that the immunity conferred by the vaccine to serovar Icterohaemorrhagiae is more lasting than that observed for serovar Canicola, since neutralizing antibody titers >1.0 log10 were observed before the booster vaccination with no substantial increase after revaccination. As for the serovar Canicola, revaccination resulted in a considerable increase in neutralizing antibody titer when compared to the one observed previously to the revaccination (p=0.001). The analysis of the data obtained by GIT allowed us to conclude that dogs given vaccine containing Icterohaemorrhagiae bacterin did not produce neutralizing antibodies against serovar Copenhageni enough to inhibit leptopiral growth at the same level as occurred for the homologous serovar. Despite this, the GIT titer found for serovar Copenhageni before and after revaccination showed that at least, some level of protection could be expected for dogs vaccinated with serovar Icterohaemorrhagiae bacterin, not a complete cross protection.Pesquisa Veterinária Brasileira 05/2013; 33(5):627-634. DOI:10.1590/S0100-736X2013000500013 · 0.44 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background Long-term microscopic agglutination test (MAT) results after vaccination with 4-serovar Leptospira vaccines are not available for all vaccines used in client-owned dogs. Hypothesis/Objectives To determine antibody responses of client-owned dogs given 1 of 4 commercially available Leptospira vaccines. AnimalsHealthy client-owned dogs (n = 32) with no history of Leptospira vaccination for at least the previous year. Methods Dogs were given 1 of 4 Leptospira vaccines on week 0 and then approximately on week 3 and week 52. Sera were collected before vaccine administration on week 0 and then within 3 days of week 3, within 2 days of week 4, and approximately on weeks 7, 15, 29, 52, and 56. Antibody titers against Leptospira serovars bratislava, canicola, grippotyphosa, hardjo, icterohemorrhagiae, and pomona and were determined by MAT. ResultsWhen compared among vaccines, MAT results varied in maximal titers, the serovars inducing maximal titers, and the time required to reach maximal titers. Each vaccine induced at least some MAT titers ≥1 : 800. Most dogs were negative for antibodies against all serovars 1 year after vaccination, and anamnestic responses were variable. Conclusions and Clinical ImportanceDogs vaccinated with Leptospira vaccines have variable MAT titers over time, and antibodies should not be used to predict resistance to Leptospira infection. MAT titers ≥1 : 800 can develop after Leptospira spp. vaccination, which can complicate the clinical diagnosis of leptospirosis.Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 03/2014; DOI:10.1111/jvim.12337 · 2.06 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A Labrador retriever dog was euthanized after unsuccessful treatment for severe, progressive, lethargy, gastroenteritis, icterus, and swelling of a previously diagnosed cutaneous angiomatosis lesion. The body was submitted for necropsy. This is the first report that suggests that cutaneous angiomatosis lesions may have caused life-threatening systemic complications in a dog.The Canadian veterinary journal. La revue veterinaire canadienne 04/2013; 54(4):397-402. · 0.47 Impact Factor