Animal welfare implications of surgical castration and its alternatives in pigs

This paper constitutes a review on the welfare aspects of piglet castration that considers the scientific literature published after 2004. Castrating during the neonatal period (1 to 3 days of age) is clearly painful. In addition, inflammatory processes may take place at the sites of incision, thus adding further pain to the procedure. Surgical castration with general and local anaesthesia, in combination with long-term analgesia, has been shown to reduce pain but the additional handling and injection of the anaesthetic, the effectiveness and limited safety margins have to be thoroughly evaluated. Raising entire males during the whole fattening period or immunocastration of males towards the end of the fattening period are other alternatives with welfare benefits in young pigs compared to current surgical castration, but with some potential welfare drawbacks regarding handling stress and behaviour during fattening. Based on the current knowledge, it can be concluded that sperm sexing and raising entire males after genetic control of boar taint are potentially preferable alternatives to current practices, but need further research, as these methods are not yet availabl

Forskellige systemers forventede produktionsmæssige, økonomiske og miljømæssige resultater

Selv om der de sidste fire år har været en kraftig stigning i den økologiske svineproduktion i Danmark, udgør den økologiske slagtesvineproduktion mindre end 0,5% af den totale slagtesvineproduktion, og erfaringsgrundlaget for gennemførelsen af den økologiske svineproduktion er derfor spinkelt. I mange tilfælde er svineproduktionen indrettet således, at søerne holdes på friland, mens slagtesvinene året rundt opstaldes i stalde med tilhørende udearealer, og det er for sådanne systemer, at videngrundlaget er bedst

Meeting Report: WHO Workshop on modelling global mortality and aetiology estimates of enteric pathogens in children under five. Cape Town, 28-29th November 2018.

Investment in vaccine product development should be guided by up-to-date and transparent global burden of disease estimates, which are also fundamental to policy recommendation and vaccine introduction decisions. For low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), vaccine prioritization is primarily driven by the number of deaths caused by different pathogens. Enteric diseases are known to be a major cause of death in LMICs. The two main modelling groups providing mortality estimates for enteric diseases are the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington, Seattle and the Maternal Child Epidemiology Estimation (MCEE) group, led by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Whilst previous global diarrhoea mortality estimates for under five-year-olds from these two groups were closely aligned, more recent estimates for 2016 have diverged, particularly with respect to numbers of deaths attributable to different enteric pathogens. This has impacted prioritization and investment decisions for vaccines in the development pipeline. The mission of the Product Development for Vaccines Advisory Committee (PDVAC) at the World Health Organisation (WHO) is to accelerate product development of vaccines and technologies that are urgently needed and ensure they are appropriately targeted for use in LMICs. At their 2018 meeting, PDVAC recommended the formation of an independent working group of subject matter experts to explore the reasons for the difference between the IHME and MCEE estimates, and to assess the respective strengths and limitations of the estimation approaches adopted, including a review of the data on which the estimates are based. Here, we report on the proceedings and recommendations from a consultation with the working group of experts, the IHME and MCEE modelling groups, and other key stakeholders. We briefly review the methodological approaches of both groups and provide a series of proposals for investigating the drivers for the differences in enteric disease burden estimates

AFCo1, a meningococcal B-derived cochleate adjuvant, strongly enhances antibody and T-cell immunity against Plasmodium falciparum merozoite surface protein 4 and 5

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Whilst a large number of malaria antigens are being tested as candidate malaria vaccines, a major barrier to the development of an effective vaccine is the lack of a suitable human adjuvant capable of inducing a strong and long lasting immune response. In this study, the ability of AFCo1, a potent T and B cell adjuvant based on cochleate structures derived from meningococcal B outer membrane proteoliposomes (MBOMP), to boost the immune response against two <it>Plasmodium falciparum </it>antigens, merozoite surface protein 4 (MSP4) and 5 (MSP5), was evaluated.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Complete Freund's adjuvant (CFA), which is able to confer protection against malaria in animal MSP4/5 vaccine challenge models, was used as positive control adjuvant. MSP4 and 5-specific IgG, delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH), T-cell proliferation, and cytokine production were evaluated in parallel in mice immunized three times intramuscularly with MSP4 or MSP5 incorporated into AFCo1, synthetic cochleate structures, CFA or phosphate buffered saline.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>AFCo1 significantly enhanced the IgG and T-cell response against MSP4 and MSP5, with a potency equivalent to CFA, with the response being characterized by both IgG1 and IgG2a isotypes, increased interferon gamma production and a strong DTH response, consistent with the ability of AFCo1 to induce Th1-like immune responses.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Given the proven safety of MBOMP, which is already in use in a licensed human vaccine, AFCo1 could assist the development of human malaria vaccines that require a potent and safe adjuvant.</p

The Full Value of Vaccine Assessments Concept—Current Opportunities and Recommendations

For vaccine development and adoption decisions, the ‘Full Value of Vaccine Assessment’ (FVVA) framework has been proposed by the WHO to expand the range of evidence available to support the prioritization of candidate vaccines for investment and eventual uptake by low- and middle-income countries. Recent applications of the FVVA framework have already shown benefits. Building on the success of these applications, we see important new opportunities to maximize the future utility of FVVAs to country and global stakeholders and provide a proof-of-concept for analyses in other areas of disease control and prevention. These opportunities include the following: (1) FVVA producers should aim to create evidence that explicitly meets the needs of multiple key FVVA consumers, (2) the WHO and other key stakeholders should develop standardized methodologies for FVVAs, as well as guidance for how different stakeholders can explicitly reflect their values within the FVVA framework, and (3) the WHO should convene experts to further develop and prioritize the research agenda for outcomes and benefits relevant to the FVVA and elucidate methodological approaches and opportunities for standardization not only for less well-established benefits, but also for any relevant research gaps. We encourage FVVA stakeholders to engage with these opportunities

The full value of vaccine assessments concept - current opportunities and recommendations

For vaccine development and adoption decisions, the ‘Full Value of Vaccine Assessment’ (FVVA) framework has been proposed by the WHO to expand the range of evidence available to support the prioritization of candidate vaccines for investment and eventual uptake by low- and middle-income countries. Recent applications of the FVVA framework have already shown benefits. Building on the success of these applications, we see important new opportunities to maximize the future utility of FVVAs to country and global stakeholders and provide a proof-of-concept for analyses in other areas of disease control and prevention. These opportunities include the following: (1) FVVA producers should aim to create evidence that explicitly meets the needs of multiple key FVVA consumers, (2) the WHO and other key stakeholders should develop standardized methodologies for FVVAs, as well as guidance for how different stakeholders can explicitly reflect their values within the FVVA framework, and (3) the WHO should convene experts to further develop and prioritize the research agenda for outcomes and benefits relevant to the FVVA and elucidate methodological approaches and opportunities for standardization not only for less well-established benefits, but also for any relevant research gaps. We encourage FVVA stakeholders to engage with these opportunities

World Health Organization Expert Working Group: Recommendations for assessing morbidity associated with enteric pathogens

BACKGROUND: Diarrhoeal infections are one of the leading causes of child's mortality and morbidity. Vaccines against Shigella, enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC), norovirus and invasive non-typhoidal Salmonella are in clinical development, however, their full value in terms of short and long-term health and socio-economic burden needs to be evaluated and communicated, to rationalise investment in vaccine development, and deployment. While estimates of mortality of enteric infections exist, the long-term morbidity estimates are scarce and have not been systematically collected. METHODS: The World Health Organization (WHO) has convened a Burden of Enteric Diseases Morbidity Working Group (BoED MWG) who identified key workstreams needed to characterise the morbidity burden of enteric infections. The group also identified four criteria for the prioritisation of pathogens of which impact on long-term morbidity needs to be assessed. RESULTS: The BoED MWG suggested to identify and analyse the individual level data from historical datasets to estimate the impact of enteric infections and confounders on long-term morbidity, including growth faltering and cognitive impairment in children (workstream 1); to conduct a systematic review of evidence on the association of aetiology specific diarrhoea with short- and long- term impact on growth, including stunting, and possibly cognitive impairment in children, while accounting for potential confounders (workstream 2); and to conduct a systematic review of evidence on the association of aetiology specific diarrhoea with short- and long- term impact on health outcomes in adults. The experts prioritised four pathogens for this work: Campylobacter jejuni, ETEC (LT or ST), norovirus (G1 or G2), and Shigella (dysenteriae, flexneri, sonnei). CONCLUSIONS: The proposed work will contribute to improving the understanding of the impact of enteric pathogens on long-term morbidity. The timing of this work is critical as all four pathogens have vaccine candidates in the clinical pipeline and decisions about investments in development, manufacturing or vaccine procurement and use are expected to be made soon

Vaccines to combat river blindness: expression, selection and formulation of vaccines against infection with Onchocerca volvulus in a mouse model.

Human onchocerciasis is a neglected tropical disease caused by Onchocerca volvulus and an important cause of blindness and chronic disability in the developing world. Although mass drug administration of ivermectin has had a profound effect on control of the disease, additional tools are critically needed including the need for a vaccine against onchocerciasis. The objectives of the present study were to: (i) select antigens with known vaccine pedigrees as components of a vaccine; (ii) produce the selected vaccine antigens under controlled conditions, using two expression systems and in one laboratory and (iii) evaluate their vaccine efficacy using a single immunisation protocol in mice. In addition, we tested the hypothesis that joining protective antigens as a fusion protein or in combination, into a multivalent vaccine, would improve the ability of the vaccine to induce protective immunity. Out of eight vaccine candidates tested in this study, Ov-103, Ov-RAL-2 and Ov-CPI-2M were shown to reproducibly induce protective immunity when administered individually, as fusion proteins or in combination. Although there was no increase in the level of protective immunity induced by combining the antigens into one vaccine, these antigens remain strong candidates for inclusion in a vaccine to control onchocerciasis in humans