PLoS ONE (Jan 2020)

Influenza A virus vaccine research conducted in swine from 1990 to May 2018: A scoping review.

  • Sheila Keay,
  • Zvonimir Poljak,
  • Mackenzie Klapwyk,
  • Annette O'Connor,
  • Robert M Friendship,
  • Terri L O'Sullivan,
  • Jan M Sargeant

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236062
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 15, no. 7
p. e0236062

Abstract

Read online

BackgroundInfluenza A viruses of swine (IAV-S) are a global zoonotic and economic concern. Primary control is through vaccination yet a formal evidence map summarizing vaccine research conducted in pigs is not available.ObjectiveTen characteristics of English language primary IAV-S vaccine research, conducted at the level of the pig or higher, were charted to identify research gaps, topics for systematic review, and coverage across different publication types.DesignSix online databases and grey literature were searched, without geographic, population, or study type restrictions, and abstracts screened independently and in duplicate for relevant research published between 1990 and May 2018. Full text data was charted by a single reviewer.ResultsOver 11,000 unique citations were screened, identifying 376 for charting, including 175 proceedings from 60 conferences, and 170 journal articles from 51 journals. Reported outcomes were heterogeneous with measures of immunity (86%, n = 323) and virus detection (65%, n = 246) reported far more than production metrics (9%, n = 32). Study of transmissibility under conditions of natural exposure (n = 7), use of mathematical modelling (n = 11), and autogenous vaccine research reported in journals (n = 7), was limited.ConclusionsMost research used challenge trials (n = 219) and may have poor field relevance or suitability for systematic review if the purpose is to inform clinical decisions. Literature on vaccinated breeding herds (n = 89) and weaned pigs (n = 136) is potentially sufficient for systematic review. Research under field conditions is limited, disproportionately reported in conference proceedings versus journal articles, and may be insufficient to support systematic review.