3.8 Article

Dogs vaccinated with common Lyme disease vaccines do not respond to IR6, the conserved immunodominant region of the VNE surface protein of Borrelia burgdorferi

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/CDLI.11.3.458-462.2004

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A 25-amino-acid synthetic peptide (C-6 peptide) derived from an immunodominant conserved region (designated 1R(6)) of the VIsE protein of Borrelia burgdorferi has been identified and used to construct immunoenzyme-based diagnostic procedures. These procedures have excellent sensitivity and specificity. Previous reports have demonstrated the usefulness of the C-6 Peptide as an antigen for the serodiagnosis of human and canine Lyme disease. Results indicated that assays based on the C-6 peptide were nonreactive to sera from vaccinated nonexposed animals. The purpose of the present study was to confirm these results in a controlled trial by testing sera from experimentally vaccinated dogs known to be uninfected. Nine specific-pathogen-free beagles were assigned to one of three vaccine groups, each containing three dogs. Each group received one of three commercial Lyme vaccines: RECOMBITEK Lyme (Merial), LymeVax (Fort Dodge Animal Health), and Galaxy Lyme (Schering-Plough Animal Health). Each animal was administered a total of five doses of vaccine over a period of 39 weeks. Serum samples were collected prior to vaccination and then on a weekly basis from weeks 3 to 18 and from weeks 33 to 43. Selected samples were tested by the immunofluorescence assay (IFA) and the Western blot (WB) assay using whole-cell B. burgdorferi antigen extracts, and the results were compared to those obtained with two immunoenzyme-based procedures formatted by using the C-6 peptide. Serum specimens from all animals were reactive to the IFA and WB assay at week 5 and became highly reactive following the administration of multiple doses of vaccine. All serum specimens were uniformly nonreactive in the C-6 peptide immunoenzyme procedures at all time points throughout the study.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据