ArticleVaccines2025
Efficacy of Three Vaccine Regimens Against Infectious Hematopoietic Necrosis Virus Transmission Potential in Rainbow Trout.
Article in Vaccines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVaccination is often a highly effective approach for protecting against clinical disease and mortality caused by viruses. However, vaccine efficacy against viral transmission has rarely been assessed, which can provide vital information on the eradication efficacy and sustainability of vaccines in the field.
methodsHere, we evaluated the host mortality, shedding, and direct fish-to-fish transmission protection efficacy of three vaccine regimens (DNA, inactivated, and attenuated) against infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus (IHNV) in rainbow trout. We quantified protection against single- and mixed-genotype IHNV infections when the vaccines were delivered by intramuscular injection, intraperitoneal injection, and bath immersion, respectively, to reflect field conditions.
resultsAll three vaccine regimens provided significant protection against fish mortality. The DNA vaccine regimen was qualitatively the most protective and the attenuated vaccine regimen the least. However, these three vaccines provided limited protection against viral shedding. Cumulative shedding over the course of the infection was only slightly reduced compared to unvaccinated fish. There was some indication that the viral genotype fish were exposed to influenced vaccine efficacy, perhaps as a result of genetic similarity to the vaccine strain. Likewise, the DNA vaccine reduced direct transmission in fish cohabitation experiments from 100% to 50%. The inactivated and attenuated vaccine had little impact on IHNV transmission.
conclusionsCollectively, our results suggest that existing IHNV vaccines that increase host survival provide minimal virus transmission protection in rainbow trout, which is likely to limit their long-term efficacy in the field. This work contributes to a growing body of evidence that enhancement of the transmission protection of IHNV and other vaccines will likely bolster disease reduction in the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.