medigraphic.com

2007, Número 3

<< Anterior Siguiente >>

Vet Mex 2007; 38 (3)


Evaluación de diferentes inmunógenos contra la tuberculosis bovina mediante la presencia de lesiones a la necropsia

González SD, Díaz OF, Jaramillo ML, Pérez GR, Padilla UJ, Santillán FMA, Arriaga DC, Bojórquez NL

Idioma: Español/Inglés
Referencias bibliográficas: 62
Paginas: 271-284
Archivo PDF: 276.11 Kb.


RESUMEN

The objective of this work was to compare the degree of protection given by three immunogens against bovine tuberculosis in heifers, based on the presence of lesions at necropsy, after challenge with a pathogenic M. bovis strain. Twenty-four tuberculosis free heifers were divided into four groups: group 1 was vaccinated with M. bovis culture fi ltrate protein extract (CFPE); group 2 with CFPE plus interferon-gamma (IFN-γ); group 3 with Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) and group 4 remained as control. At six months post-vaccination all animals were challenged with a fi eld strain of M. bovis and after six months they were slaughtered and the presence of lesions was evaluated. At necropsy, the lymph nodes looked like abscesses and histopathology showed pyogranulomatous lymphadenitis. All the animals of the control group had tuberculosis lesions and this was the group with the highest number of lesions, 66.6% of them being severe. Several animals of the three immunized groups did not show any lesions, and only moderate lesions were observed in the others. None of the vaccination protocols gave 100% protection, since lesions were observed in all the groups. Nevertheless, it is evident that different degrees of protection were obtained in the vaccinated groups, as shown by the absence or decrease in severity of lesions; this reduction being greater in the group vaccinated with BCG. It was concluded that BCG was the immunogen that gave better results; therefore, it could be used for tuberculosis control in high prevalence areas.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Berrada J, Barajas-Rojas JA. Control of bovine tuberculosis in developing countries. In : Thoen CO, Steele JE, editors. Mycobacterium bovis in animals and humans. Iowa: Iowa state University Press, 1995:159-166.

  2. Griffin JM, Dolan IA. The role of cattle-to cattle transmission of Mycobacterium bovis in the epidemiology of tuberculosis in cattle in the Republic of Ireland: A review. Ir Vet J 1995; 48: 228-234.

  3. Hardie RM, Watson JM, Mycobacterium bovis in England and Wales: past, present and future. Epidemiol Infect 1992; 109: 23-33.

  4. Tweddle NE, Livingstone P. Bovine tuberculosis control and eradication programs in Australia and New Zeland. Vet Microbiol 1994; 40: 23-39.

  5. Buddle BM, Pollock JM, Skinner MA, Wedlock N. Development of vaccines to control bovine tuberculosis in cattle and relationship to vaccine development for other intracellular pathogens. Int J Parasitol 2003; 33: 555-566.

  6. Wood PR, Rothel JS. In vitro immunodiagnostic assays for bovine tuberculosis. Vet Microbiol 1994; 40:125-135.

  7. Díaz F, Banda V, Jaramillo L, Arriaga C, González D, Estrada- Chávez C. Identifi cación de bovinos portadores de Mycobacterium bovis aplicando técnicas inmunológicas y moleculares. Vet Méx 2003; 34 :13-26.

  8. Rothel JS, Jones SL, Corner LA, Cox JC, Wood PR. A sandwich enzyme immunoassay for bovine interferon-γ and its use for the detection of tuberculosis in cattle. Aust Vet J 1990; 67:134-137.

  9. Norma Oficial Mexicana. NOM- 031-Z00-1995. Comité Consultivo Nacional de Normalización de Protección Zoosanitaria (CONAPROZ), Normas Ofi ciales Mexicanas en materia de Salud Animal. Actualizado: 27 agosto 1998 (citado: 25 septiembre 2005) Disponible en URL: http://web2.senasica.sagarpa.gob.mx/xportal/dgsa/mrni/Doc222/2004.

  10. Skinner MA, Wedlock DN, Buddle BM. Vaccination of animals against Mycobacterium bovis. Rev Sci Tech 2001; 20:112-132.

  11. Buddle BM, Skinner MA, Wedlock DM, Collins DM, De Lisle GW. New generation vaccines and delivery systems for control of bovine tuberculosis in cattle and wildlife. Vet Immun Immunopathol 2002; 87:177-185.

  12. Wedlock DN, Vesosky B, Skinner MA, De Lisle GW, Orme IM, Buddle BM. Vaccination of cattle with Mycobacterium bovis culture fi ltre protein and interleukin-2 for protection against bovine tuberculosis. Infec Immun 2000; 68: 5809-5815.

  13. Buddle BM, de Lisle GW, Pfeffer A, Aldwell FE. Immunological responses and protection against Mycobacterium bovis in calves vaccinated with a low dose of BCG. Vaccine 1995; 13: 1123-1130.

  14. Griffin JF, Chinn DN, Rodgers CR, Mackintosh CG. Optimal models to evaluate the protective effi cacy of tuberculosis vaccines. Tuberculosis 2001; 81: 133-139.

  15. Stover CK, De la Cruz VF, Fuerst TR, Burlein JE, Benson LA, Bennet LT et al. New use of BCG for recombinant vaccines. Nature 1991; 351: 456-458.

  16. Horwitz MA, Harth G, Dillon BJ, Maslesa-Galic S. Recombinant bacillus Calmette- Guerin (BCG) vaccines expressing the Mycobacterium tuberculosis 30-kDa major secretory protein induce greater protective immunity against tuberculosis than conventional BCG vaccines in a highly susceptible animal model. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000; 97: 13853-13858.

  17. Roberts AD, Sonnenberg MG, Ordway DJ, Furney SK, Brennan PJ, Belisle JT et al. Characteristics of protective immunity engendered by vaccination of mice with purified culture fi ltrate protein antigens of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Immunol 1995; 85: 502-508.

  18. Wedlock DN, Skinner MA, Parlane NA, Vordermeier HM, Hewinson RG, De Lisli GW et al. Vaccination with DNA vaccines encoding MPB70 or MPB83 or a MPB70 DNA prime-protein boost does not protect cattle against bovine tuberculosis. Tuberculosis 2003; 83: 339-349.

  19. Cockle PJ, Gordon SV, Lalvani A, Buddle BM, Hewinson RG, Vordermeier HM. Identifi cation of novel Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigens with potential as diagnostic reagents or subunit vaccine candidates by comparative genomic. Infect Immun 2002; 70: 6996-7003.

  20. Wedlock DN, Skinner MA, Parlane NA, Vordermeier HM, Hewinson RG, Hecker R et al. Vaccination of cattle with Mycobacterium bovis culture fi ltrate proteins and CpG oligodeoxynucleotides induces protection against bovine tuberculosis. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 2005; 106: 53-63.

  21. Bosio CM, Orme IM. Effective nonsensitizing vaccination with culture fi ltrate proteins against virulent Mycobacterium bovis in mice. Infect Immun 1998; 66: 5048-5051.

  22. Haslo K, Ardersen A, Nagai S, Gottschau A, Sorensen T, Ardersen P. Guinea pig cellular immune responses to proteins secreted by Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Infect Immun 1995; 63:804-810.

  23. Buddle BM, Wards BJ, Aldwell FE, Collins DM, De Lisle GW. Infl uence of sensitization to enviromental mycobacteria on subsequent vaccination against bovine tuberculosis. Vaccine 2002; 20: 1126-1133.

  24. Williams DE. Mycobacterium bovis BCG Infection in Humans. In: Thoen CO, Steele JE, editors. Mycobacterium bovis infection in Animals and Humans. Iowa: Iowa state University Press, 1995: 47-61.

  25. Hewinson RG, Vordermier HM, Buddle BM. Use of the bovine model of tuberculosis for the development of improved vaccines and diagnostics. Tuberculosis 2003; 83: 119-130.

  26. Lyashchenko K, Whelan AO, Greenwald R, Pollock JM, Andersen P, Hewinson RG et al. Association of tuberculin- boosted antibody responses with pathology and cell-mediated immunity in cattle vaccinated with Mycobacterium bovis BCG and infected with M.bovis. Infect Immun 2004; 72: 2462-2467.

  27. Milian SF, Anaya EA, Gallegos TR. A review of M. bovis BCG protection against BT in cattle and other animal species. Prev Vet Med 2003; 58: 1-13.

  28. Liebana E, Aranaz A, Aldwell FE, Nair J, Neill SD, Smyth AJ et al. Cellular interactions in bovine tuberculosis: release of active mycobacteria from infected macrophages by antigen-stimulated T cells. Immunol 2000; 99: 23-29.

  29. Ramirez IC, Santillan MA, Gonzalez SD. The goat experimental ruminant model for tuberculosis infection. Small Rumin Res 2003; 47: 113-116.

  30. Buddle BM, Aldwell FF, Pfeffer A, De Lisle GW, Corner LA. Experimental Mycobacterium bovis infection of cattle- effect of dose of Mycobacterium bovis and pregnancy on immune responses and distributions of lesions. NZ Vet J 1994; 42: 167-172.

  31. Brandt L, Fehino Cunha J, Weinreich Olsen A, Chilima B, Hirsch P, Appelberg R et al. Failure of the Mycobacterium bovis BCG vaccine; some species of environmental mycobacteria block multiplication of BCG and induction of protective immunity to tuberculosis. Infect Immun 2002; 70: 672-678.

  32. Behr MA, Wilson MA, Gill WP, Salamon H, Schoolnik GK, Rane S et al. Comparative genomics of BCG vaccines by whole-genome DNA microarray. Science 1999; 284:1520-1523.

  33. Aldwel FE, Keen DL, Stent VC, Thomson A, Yates GF, De Lisle GW et al. Route of BCG administration in possums affects protection against bovine tuberculosis. N Z Vet J 1995; 43: 356-359.

  34. Brewer TF. Preventing tuberculosis with bacillus Calmette-Guerin vaccine. A meta-analysis of the literature. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31:64-67.

  35. Quinn PJ. Mechanisms of action of some immunomodulators used in veterinary medicine. Adv Vet Sci Com Med 1990; 35: 43-99.

  36. Cooper AM, Dalton DK, Stewart TA, Griffi n JP, Russell DG, Orme IM. Disseminated tuberculosis in interferon gamma gene-disrupted mice. J Exp Med 1993; 178: 2243-2247.

  37. Kennedy HE, Welsh MD, Bryson DG, Cassidy JP, Forster FI, Howard CJ et al. Modulation of immune responses to Mycobacterium bovis in cattle depleted of WC1+ γ δ T Cell. Infect Immun 2002; 70: 1488-1500.

  38. Thoen CO. The genus Mycobacterium. In: Carter GW, Cole JR, editors. Diagnostic Procedures in Veterinary Bacteriology and Mycology. 5th edition. San Diego, Calif: Academic Press Inc, 1990: 287-298.

  39. Díaz OF. Aislamiento y caracterización de antígenos inmunodominantes de Mycobacterium bovis que estimulan linfocitos T de bovino (tesis de doctorado). México (DF): UNAM, 2000.

  40. Bradford MM. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantification of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 1976; 72: 248-254.

  41. Norma Oficial Mexicana. NOM-033-ZOO-1995. Sacrificio Humanitario de los Animales Domésticos y Silvestres. Diario Ofi cial de la Federación. 24 junio de 1995.

  42. Whipple DL, Bolin CA, Miller JM. Distribution of lesions in cattle infected with Mycobacterium bovis. J Vet Diagn Invest 1996; 8: 351-354.

  43. Neill SD, Pollock JM, Bryson DB, Hanna J. Pathogenesis of Mycobacterium bovis infection in cattle. Vet Microbiol 1994; 40: 41-52.

  44. Cassidy JP, Bryson DG, Pollock JM, Evans RT, Forster F, Neill SD. Early Lesion Formation in Cattle Experimentally Infected with Mycobacterium bovis. J Comp Pathol 1998; 119: 27-44.

  45. Luna LG. Manual of Histologic Staining Methods of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968.

  46. Budle BM, Aldwell FE, Skinner MA, Lisle GW, Denis M, Vordermeier HM et al. Effect of oral vaccination of cattle with lipid-formulated BCG on immune responses and protection against bovine tuberculosis. Vaccine 2005; 23: 3581-3589.

  47. Andersen P, Askgaard D, Gottschau A, Bennedsen J, Nagai S. Heron I. Identifi cation of immunodominant antigens during infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Scan J Immunol 1992; 36: 823-831.

  48. Neill SD, Hanna J, O, Brien JJ, McCracken RM. Excretion of Mycobacterium bovis by experimentally infected cattle. Vet Rec 1988; 123: 340-343.

  49. Neill SD, Bryson DG, Pollock JM. Pathogenesis of tuberculosis in cattle. Tuberculosis 2001; 81:79-86.

  50. Corner LA. Post mortem diagnosis of Mycobacterium bovis infection in cattle. Vet Microbiol 1994; 40: 53-63.

  51. Palmer MV, Whipple DL, Rhyan JC, Bolin CA, Saari DA. Granuloma development in cattle alter intratonsilar inoculation with Mycobacterium bovis. Am J Vet Res 1999; 60: 310-315.

  52. Carding SR. Role of gamma delta T cells in immunity to infections diseases and the regulation development. Immunol Res 1998; 17:13-22.

  53. Thoen CO, Schliesser T, Kormendy B. Tuberculosis in Captive Wild Animals. In: Thoen CO, Steele JE, editors. Mycobacterium bovis infection in Animals and Humans. Iowa: Iowa state University Press, 1995: 93-104.

  54. Stuart FA, Manser PA, McIntosh FG. Tuberculosis in imported red deer (Cervus elaphus). Vet Rec 1988; 122:508-511.

  55. Rhyan J C, Saari DA, Williams ES, Miller MW, Davis AJ, Wilson AJ. Gross and microscopic lesions of naturally ocurring tuberculosis in a captive herd of wapiti (Cervvus elaphalus nelsoni) in Colorado. J Vet Diagn Invest 1992; 4: 428-433.

  56. Pollock JM, Neill SD. Mycobacterium bovis Infection and Tuberculosis in Cattle. Vet J 2002; 163: 115-127.

  57. Corner LA, Melville L, MccubinK, Small KJ, Mc Cormick BS, Wood PR et al. Effi ciency of inspection procedures for the detection of tuberculous lesions in cattle. Aust Vet J 1990; 67: 389-392.

  58. Thoen CO, Bloom BR. Pathogenesis of Mycobacterium bovis: In: Thoen CO, Steele JE, editors. Mycobacterium bovis infection in Animals and Humans. Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1995: 3-14.

  59. Buddle MB, Wedlock DN, Parlane NA, Corner LA, De Lisle GW, Skinner MA. Revaccination of neonatal calves with Mycobacterium bovis BCG reduces the level of protection against bovine tuberculosis induced by a single vaccination. Infect Immun 2003; 71: 6411-6419.

  60. Hope JC, Thom ML, Villareal-Ramos B, Vordermeier HM, Hewinson RG, Howard CJ. Vaccination of neonatal calves with Mycobacterium bovis BCG induces protection against intranasal challenge with virulent M. Bovis. Clin Exp Immunol 2005; 139: 48-56.

  61. Vordermeier HM, Cockle PJ, Whelan AO, Rhodes S, Chambers MA, Clifford D et al. Effective DNA vaccination of cattle with the mycobacterial antigens MPB83 and MPB70 does not compromise the specifi city of the comparative intradermal tuberculin skin test. Vaccine 2001; 19:1246–1255.

  62. Vordermeier HM, Whelan A, Cokle PJ, Farrant L, Palmer N, Hewinson RG. Use of synthetic peptides derived from the antigens ESAT-6 and CFP-10 for diferential diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis in cattle. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 2001; 8: 571-578.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com