Vaccines (Oct 2024)

Field Trial with Vaccine Candidates Against Bovine Tuberculosis Among Likely Infected Cattle in a Natural Transmission Setting

  • Ximena Ferrara Muñiz,
  • Elizabeth García,
  • Federico Carlos Blanco,
  • Sergio Garbaccio,
  • Carlos Garro,
  • Martín Zumárraga,
  • Odir Dellagostin,
  • Marcos Trangoni,
  • María Jimena Marfil,
  • Maria Verónica Bianco,
  • Alejandro Abdala,
  • Javier Revelli,
  • Maria Bergamasco,
  • Adriana Soutullo,
  • Rocío Marini,
  • Rosana Valeria Rocha,
  • Amorina Sánchez,
  • Fabiana Bigi,
  • Ana María Canal,
  • María Emilia Eirin,
  • Angel Adrián Cataldi

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines12101173
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 10
p. 1173

Abstract

Read online

Background/Objectives: Vaccines may improve the control and eradication of bovine tuberculosis. However, the evaluation of experimental candidates requires the assessment of the protection, excretion, transmission and biosafety. A natural transmission trial among likely infected animals was conducted. Methods: Seventy-four male heifers were randomly distributed (five groups) and vaccinated subcutaneously with attenuated strains (M. bovis Δmce2 or M. bovis Δmce2-phoP), a recombinant M. bovis BCG Pasteur (BCGr) or M. bovis BCG Pasteur. Then, they cohoused with a naturally infected bTB cohort under field conditions exposed to the infection. Results: A 23% of transmission of wild-type strains was confirmed (non-vaccinated group). Strikingly, first vaccination did not induce immune response (caudal fold test and IFN-gamma release assay). However, after 74 days of exposure to bTB, animals were re-vaccinated. Although their sensitization increased throughout the trial, the vaccines did not confer significant protection, when compared to the non-vaccinated group, as demonstrated by pathology progression of lesions and confirmatory tools. Besides, the likelihood of acquiring the infection was similar in all groups compared to the non-vaccinated group (p > 0.076). Respiratory and digestive excretion of viable vaccine candidates was undetectable. To note, the group vaccinated with M. bovis Δmce2-phoP exhibited the highest proportion of animals without macroscopic lesions, compared to the one vaccinated with BCG, although this was not statistically supported. Conclusions: This highlights that further evaluation of these vaccines would not guarantee better protection. The limitations detected during the trial are discussed regarding the transmission rate of M. bovis wild-type, the imperfect test for studying sensitization, the need for a DIVA diagnosis and management conditions of the trials performed under routine husbandry conditions. Re-vaccination of likely infected bovines did not highlight a conclusive result, even suggesting a detrimental effect on those vaccinated with M. bovis BCG.

Keywords