Duration of serologic response to three viral antigens in cats

Douglas E. Mouzin Veterinary Medicine Biologicals Research and Development, Pfizer Animal Health, Pfizer Inc, 7000 Portage Rd, Kalamazoo, MI 49001.

Search for other papers by Douglas E. Mouzin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MS, MBA
,
Marianne J. Lorenzen Veterinary Medicine Biologicals Research and Development, Pfizer Animal Health, Pfizer Inc, 7000 Portage Rd, Kalamazoo, MI 49001.

Search for other papers by Marianne J. Lorenzen in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
John D. Haworth Veterinary Medicine Biologicals Research and Development, Pfizer Animal Health, Pfizer Inc, 7000 Portage Rd, Kalamazoo, MI 49001.

Search for other papers by John D. Haworth in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD
, and
Vickie L. King Veterinary Medicine Biologicals Research and Development, Pfizer Animal Health, Pfizer Inc, 7000 Portage Rd, Kalamazoo, MI 49001.

Search for other papers by Vickie L. King in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 PhD

Click on author name to view affiliation information

Abstract

Objective—To determine whether vaccinated cats either remained seropositive or responded serologically to revaccination against 3 key viral antigens after extended periods since their last vaccination.

Design—Serologic survey.

Animals—272 healthy client-owned cats.

Procedure—Cats were ≥ 2 years old and vaccinated for feline panleukopenia virus (FPV), feline calicivirus (FCV), and feline herpesvirus (FHV). On day 0, cats were revaccinated with a vaccine from the same line of vaccines as they had historically received. Antibody titers were measured in sera collected on day 0 (prevaccination titer) and 5 to 7 days later (postvaccination titer). Cats were considered to have responded serologically if they had a day-0 hemagglutination inhibition titer to FPV ≥ 1:40, serum neutralization (SN) titer to FCV ≥ 1:32, SN titer to FHV ≥ 1:16, or ≥ 4-fold increase in antibody titer after revaccination.

Results—The percentage of cats that had titers at or above the threshold values or responded to revaccination with a ≥ 4-fold increase in titer was 96.7% for FPV, 97.8% for FCV, and 88.2% for FHV.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—In most cats, vaccination induced a response that lasted up to and beyond 48 months for all 3 antigens. Although not equivalent to challenge-of-immunity studies as a demonstration of efficacy, results suggest that revaccination with the vaccine used in our study provides adequate protection even when given less frequently than the traditional 1-year interval. The study provides valuable information for clinicians to determine appropriate revaccination intervals. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004;224:61–66)

Abstract

Objective—To determine whether vaccinated cats either remained seropositive or responded serologically to revaccination against 3 key viral antigens after extended periods since their last vaccination.

Design—Serologic survey.

Animals—272 healthy client-owned cats.

Procedure—Cats were ≥ 2 years old and vaccinated for feline panleukopenia virus (FPV), feline calicivirus (FCV), and feline herpesvirus (FHV). On day 0, cats were revaccinated with a vaccine from the same line of vaccines as they had historically received. Antibody titers were measured in sera collected on day 0 (prevaccination titer) and 5 to 7 days later (postvaccination titer). Cats were considered to have responded serologically if they had a day-0 hemagglutination inhibition titer to FPV ≥ 1:40, serum neutralization (SN) titer to FCV ≥ 1:32, SN titer to FHV ≥ 1:16, or ≥ 4-fold increase in antibody titer after revaccination.

Results—The percentage of cats that had titers at or above the threshold values or responded to revaccination with a ≥ 4-fold increase in titer was 96.7% for FPV, 97.8% for FCV, and 88.2% for FHV.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—In most cats, vaccination induced a response that lasted up to and beyond 48 months for all 3 antigens. Although not equivalent to challenge-of-immunity studies as a demonstration of efficacy, results suggest that revaccination with the vaccine used in our study provides adequate protection even when given less frequently than the traditional 1-year interval. The study provides valuable information for clinicians to determine appropriate revaccination intervals. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004;224:61–66)

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 261 0 0
Full Text Views 702 553 89
PDF Downloads 357 219 16
Advertisement