A Chimeric Vaccine against Porcine Circovirus Type 2: Meta-Analysis of Comparative Clinical Trials

This meta-analysis compared the efficacy of a chimeric vaccine against porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) containing the genotypes PCV2a+b (Fostera((R)) Gold PCV MH [FOS-G]), with commonly used vaccines being derived from genotype PCV2a, considering the following parameters: average daily gain (ADG), mortality and market classification as full value and cull. Data from seven hitherto unpublished comparative US field trials with FOS-G (two experimental challenges and five natural environmental studies) were provided by the manufacturer. A complementary literature review revealed a Korean study, which was considered separately in meta-analysis. Competitors were Circumvent((R)) PCV-M (CV) and Ingelvac Circoflex((R)) + Ingelvac Mycoflex((R)) (IC + IM) in the US, and Porcilis((R)) (POR) in Republic of Korea. Heterogeneity between experimental and environmental challenge studies in the US was not significant, justifying a combined analysis. Over the entire feeding period, ADG (11 comparisons), mortality (12 comparisons) and market classification were not significantly different between FOS-G and its competitor in the US setting. In the Korean study, however, ADG was higher in pigs vaccinated with FOS-G compared to POR, whereas mortality was not significantly different.

Automated summary

This meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of a chimeric vaccine against porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) containing genotypes PCV2a+b (Fostera((R)) Gold PCV MH [FOS-G]) with commonly used vaccines derived from genotype PCV2a. The analysis considered parameters including average daily gain (ADG), mortality, and market classification. The results showed that in the US setting, there were no significant differences in ADG, mortality, and market classification between FOS-G and its competitor. However, in a Korean study, pigs vaccinated with FOS-G had higher ADG compared to those vaccinated with POR.