Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Protection in cats after killed and canarypox FeLV vaccines
By Grosenbaugh, Deborah A et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2006·Merial Ltd, United States·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Protection from challenge following administration of a canarypox virus-vectored recombinant feline leukemia virus vaccine in cats previously vaccinated with a killed virus vaccine.
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
A group of 9-week-old domestic shorthair cats was tested to see how well different vaccination methods protected them from feline leukemia virus (FeLV). Some cats received two doses of a traditional killed virus vaccine, while others got one dose of that vaccine followed by a newer type of vaccine delivered through the skin. After being exposed to FeLV, only one cat from the first group became infected, while none from the second group did. This suggests that the combination of vaccines offers strong protection against FeLV, similar to the traditional two-dose method.
People also search for: cat leukemia vaccine effectiveness · feline leukemia virus prevention · best vaccine for cats FeLV
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare protection against FeLV challenge obtained following administration of 2 doses of an adjuvanted, chemically inactivated, whole FeLV (FeLV-k) vaccine with protection obtained following administration of 1 dose of an FeLV-k vaccine followed by 1 dose of a canarypox virus-vectored recombinant FeLV (rCP-FeLV) vaccine. DESIGN: Prospective study. ANIMALS: Thirty-two 9-week-old domestic shorthair cats. PROCEDURE: Cats received 2 doses of the FeLV-k vaccine SC, 21 days apart (n = 11); 1 dose of the FeLV-k vaccine SC and, 21 days later, 1 dose of the rCP-FeLV vaccine transdermally (11); or 2 doses of physiologic saline (0.9% NaCl) solution (control; 10). Four weeks after the second vaccine dose, all cats were challenged with FeLV by means of oronasal administration. Blood samples were collected at weekly intervals beginning 21 days after challenge, and serum was tested for FeLV antigen. RESULTS: All 10 control cats became persistently infected (ie, FeLV antigen detected in > or = 3 consecutive serum samples) following FeLV challenge, whereas only 1 of 11 cats that received 2 doses of the FeLV-k vaccine and none of the 11 cats that received 1 dose of the FeLV-k vaccine and 1 dose of the rCP-FeLV vaccine did. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggest that protection against FeLV challenge obtained following SC administration of a single dose of an FeLV-k vaccine followed, 21 days later, by transdermal administration of a single dose of an rCP-FeLV vaccine was similar to that obtained following SC administration of 2 doses of the FeLV-k vaccine 21 days apart.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16506935/