Challenging boundaries: is cross-protection evaluation necessary for African swine fever vaccine development? A case of oral vaccination in wild boar
Résumé fourni par la source
African swine fever (ASF) poses a significant threat to domestic pigs and wild boar (Sus scrofa) populations, with the current epidemiological situation more critical than ever. The disease has spread across five continents, causing devastating losses in the swine industry. Although extensive research efforts are ongoing to develop an effective and safe vaccine, this goal remains difficult to achieve. Among the potential vaccine candidates, live attenuated viruses (LAVs) have emerged as the most promising option due to their ability to provide strong protection against experimental challenges. However, ASF virus (ASFV) is highly diverse, with genetic and phenotypic variations across different isolates, which differ in virulence. This study highlights the limitations of a natural LAV strain (Lv17/WB/Rie1), which showed partial efficacy against a highly virulent and partially heterologous isolate (Arm07; genotype II). However, the LAV's effectiveness was incomplete when tested against a more phylogenetically distant virus (Ken06.Bus; genotype IX). These findings raise concerns about the feasibility of developing a universal vaccine for ASFV in the near future, emphasizing the urgent need to assess the protective scope of LAV candidates across different ASFV isolates to better define their limitations.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Challenging boundaries: is cross-protection evaluation necessary for African swine fever vaccine development? A case of oral vaccination in wild boar
- Date Crossref
- 01/10/2024
- Éditeur
- Frontiers Media SA
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.