Reply to Letter to the Editor by Blasco and Moriyon (2009) concerning the manuscript “Eradication of bovine brucellosis (BB) in the Azores, Portugal—Outcome of a 5-year programme (2002–2007) based on test-and-slaughter and RB51 vaccination” by H. Martins et al. (2009)

Comparative performance of lateral flow immunochromatography, iELISA and Rose Bengal tests for the diagnosis of cattle, sheep, goat and swine brucellosis

BACKGROUND

Brucellosis is a world-wide extended zoonosis that causes a grave problem in developing economies. Animal vaccination and diagnosis are essential to control brucellosis, and the need for accurate but also simple and low-cost tests that can be implemented in low-infrastructure laboratories has been emphasized.

METHODOLOGY

We evaluated bovine, sheep, goat and swine lateral flow immunochromatography assay kits (LFA), the Rose Bengal test (RBT) and a well-validated protein G indirect ELISA (iELISA) using sera of Brucella culture-positive and unvaccinated brucellosis free livestock. Sera from cattle vaccinated with S19 and RB51 brucellosis vaccines were also tested. Finally, we compared RBT and LFA using sera of white Fulani cattle of unknown bacteriological status from a brucellosis endemic area of Nigeria.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Although differences were not statistically significant, RBT showed the highest values for diagnostic sensitivity/specificity in cattle (LFA, 96.6/98.8; RBT, 98.9/100; and iELISA, 96.6/100) and the iELISA yielded highest values in sheep (LFA, 94.0/100; RBT, 92.0/100; iELISA, 100/100), goats (LFA, 95.7/96.2; RBT, 97.8/100; iELISA, 100/100) and pigs (LFA, 92.3/100; RBT, 92.3/100; iELISA, 100/100). Vaccine S19 administered subcutaneously interfered in all tests but conjunctival application minimized the problem. Although designed not to interfere in serodiagnosis, vaccine RB51 interfered in LFA and iELISA but not in the RBT. We found closely similar apparent prevalence results when testing the Nigerian Fulani cattle by RBT and LFA. Although both RBT and LFA (showing similar diagnostic performance) are suitable for small laboratories in resource-limited areas, RBT has the advantage that a single reagent is useful in all animal species. Considering these advantages, its low cost and that it is also useful for human brucellosis diagnosis, RBT might be a good choice for resource-limited laboratories.

Control of Bovine Brucellosis from Persistently Infected Holdings Using RB51 Vaccination with Test-and-Slaughter: A Comparative Case Report from a High Incidence Area in Portugal

Bovine brucellosis due to Brucella abortus infection causes significant reproductive and production losses in cattle and is a major zoonosis. Eradication of this disease has proved difficult to achieve in Portugal where it still occurs in some regions despite an ongoing national eradication programme. In 2004, the Alentejo region, a major cattle producing area, reported one of the highest levels of bovine brucellosis in the country, especially in one divisional area. In that area, bovine brucellosis was particularly problematic in a holding of ten herds, the largest extensive cattle unit in the country, which remained infected despite an extensive test-and-slaughter programme and depopulation of five herds. A 5-year programme of RB51 vaccination with biannual test-and-slaughter was thus implemented in 2004. The apparent animal seroprevalence decreased from 19% (646/3,400) to 3% (88/2930) on the third herd-level test and remained below 0.8% (27/3324) after the fourth test. After the tenth test, the holding had a prevalence of 0.1% (2/2332) and only one herd remained positive with a within-herd prevalence of 1.1% (2/177). The results were compared to all other herds (n = 10) in the divisional area that were also persistently infected but were subject only to test-and-slaughter before being depopulated. In these herds, the strategy of test-and-slaughter did not reduce the prevalence, which remained significantly higher than the vaccinated group (median = 0.48% and 8.5% in vaccinated versus non-vaccinated herds; Wilcoxon rank sum test; P < 0.01). The success of this pilot programme in continental Portugal provided a valuable case study to the official veterinary services by illustrating the value of RB51 vaccination with parallel testing and improved biosecurity as a comprehensive and sustainable strategy for bovine brucellosis control in persistently infected herds.

Brucellosis at the animal/ecosystem/human interface at the beginning of the 21st century

Following the recent discovery of new Brucella strains from different animal species and from the environment, ten Brucella species are nowadays included in the genus Brucella. Although the intracellular trafficking of Brucella is well described, the strategies developed by Brucella to survive and multiply in phagocytic and non-phagocytic cells, particularly to access nutriments during its intracellular journey, are still largely unknown. Metabolism and virulence of Brucella are now considered to be two sides of the same coin. Mechanisms presiding to the colonization of the pregnant uterus in different animal species are not known. Vaccination is the cornerstone of control programs in livestock and although the S19, RB51 (both in cattle) and Rev 1 (in sheep and goats) vaccines have been successfully used worldwide, they have drawbacks and thus the ideal brucellosis vaccine is still very much awaited. There is no vaccine available for pigs and wildlife. Animal brucellosis control strategies differ in the developed and the developing world. Most emphasis is put on eradication and on risk analysis to avoid the re-introduction of Brucella in the developed world. Information related to the prevalence of brucellosis is still scarce in the developing world and control programs are rarely implemented. Since there is no vaccine available for humans, prevention of human brucellosis relies on its control in the animal reservoir. Brucella is also considered to be an agent to be used in bio- and agroterrorism attacks. At the animal/ecosystem/human interface it is critical to reduce opportunities for Brucella to jump host species as already seen in livestock, wildlife and humans. This task is a challenge for the future in terms of veterinary public health, as for wildlife and ecosystem managers and will need a "One Health" approach to be successful.