In vivo challenge studies on vaccinated chickens indicate a virus genotype mismatched vaccine still offers significant protection against NDV

• Published in: Vaccine Vol. 42; no. 3; pp. 653 - 661
• Main Authors: Mahmood, Sahar, Skinner, Paul, Warren, Caroline J., Mayers, Jo, James, Joe, Núñez, Alejandro, Lean, Fabian Z.X., Brookes, Sharon M., Brown, Ian H., Banyard, Ashley C., Ross, Craig S.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands Elsevier Ltd 25-01-2024; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Antigens; Birds; Chickens; Eggs; Genetic diversity; Genotype & phenotype; Genotypes; Heterogeneity; HN gene; Immunization; In vivo methods and tests; Mortality; Newcastle disease; Pathogens; Penicillin; Poultry; Serology; Shedding; Strains (organisms); Vaccine efficacy; Vaccines; Virulence; Viruses; Cyprus; Germany
• ISSN: 0264-410X; 1873-2518
• DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.12.037

•ND vaccines are broadly protective against clinical disease and mortality but do not induce sterilising immunity.•Genotype mismatch alone does not contribute to vaccine failure.•Overcompensation of antibody response by genotype mismatched vaccines provides protection against clinical disease.•Two significant mutations observed in HN: I192M and H199M from subset of birds given genotype mismatched vaccinates.•Mutational processes in genotype mismatched scenarios may contribute to generation of vaccine escape mutants.
Although commercial vaccines against Newcastle Disease have been available for decades, outbreaks still occur in the face of vaccination Further vaccination may accelerate viral evolution resulting in a further reduction in vaccine efficacy. A key question is whether genotype-matched vaccines can confer better protection against contemporary type 1 Avian Paramyxoviruses. To assess this, an in vivo vaccine-challenge study was undertaken to assess protection afforded by ‘genotype-matched’ and commercial vaccine formulations. Groups of chickens were vaccinated twice (prime-boost) with an inactivated preparation of either La Sota Clone 30, AV632-chicken-Cyprus-13 (genotype VII.2), or mock vaccine, and later challenged with virulent AV632-chicken-Cyprus-13. Post vaccinal serological responses differed, although both vaccination/challenge groups showed similar levels of clinical protection compared to the unvaccinated group, where 100 % mortality was observed. Shedding was significantly reduced in the vaccinated groups compared to the unvaccinated group. Virus dissemination in the tissues of vaccinated birds was comparable, but onset of infection was delayed. Two mutations were observed in the HN gene of the heterologous vaccine group; H199N and I192M, the latter thought to be associated with increased fusogenic potential. These data demonstrate that existing vaccine formulations confer similar levels of clinical protection to contemporary strains and that the antigenic heterogeneity of circulating strains does not impact upon shedding profiles in immunised birds. In conclusion, the ability of virulent APMV-1 to cause disease in vaccinated flocks is unlikely to be the result of antigenic mismatch alone, and other factors likely contribute to vaccination failure and breakthrough.