ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Vet. Sci.

Sec. One Health

Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1620497

This article is part of the Research TopicOne Health Approach to Mycobacterial Infections in Veterinary ScienceView all 9 articles

Protection and diagnostic interference induced by heat inactivated, phage-inactivated and live vaccine prototypes against animal tuberculosis

Provisionally accepted
  • 1Departamento de Sanidad Animal, NEIKER-Instituto Vasco de Investigación y Desarrollo Agrario, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Derio, Spain
  • 2Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health and Microbiology, School of Medicine, Universidad Autónoma de Madridsp, Madrid, Spain
  • 3Université Paris-Est, Laboratoire de Santé Animale, Unité Zoonoses Bactériennes, Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l'alimentation, de l'environnement et du travail (ANSES), Maisons-Alfort, France
  • 4IRTA, Programa de Sanitat Animal, Centre de Recerca en Sanitat Animal (CReSA), Campus de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Bellaterra, Spain
  • 5Unitat mixta d’investigació IRTA-UAB en Sanitat Animal, CReSA, Campus de la UAB, Bellaterra, Spain
  • 6Department of Bacteriology, Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA), Surrey, United Kingdom

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Vaccination emerges as a promising cost-effective tool to reduce the impact and spread of animal tuberculosis, especially in regions where test-and-slaughter eradication strategy is socioeconomically unfeasible or unfruitful for different reasons, provided it is safe, efficacious and compatible with diagnosis. In this study, we preliminarily evaluated the diagnostic interference (using guinea pigs) and the protective efficacy (using mice) of three heat-inactivated, three phage-inactivated and one live attenuated vaccine prototypes prepared from M. bovis, M. caprae and M. microti. Phage-inactivation killed almost all (96.41-99.92%) bacteria to be included in vaccines and filtering was used to remove the remaining viable cells. All the assayed vaccines induced skin test reactions in response to bovine tuberculin, but they were smaller in the phage-inactivated vaccine groups. All the vaccines were diagnosis-compatible with defined skin test antigens based on ESAT-6, CFP-10 and Rv3615c. In contrast with the rest of prototypes, vaccination with heat- and phage-inactivated M. microti did not prompt the production of detectable anti-MPB70+MPB83 antibodies. Mean bacterial burden was lower in all vaccinated groups in comparison with the control, being significantly reduced in the lungs of the heat-inactivated M. microti and M. caprae and phage-inactivated M. caprae groups. Considering both diagnostic interference and protection collectively, the heat-inactivated M. microti vaccine showed the best performance. Further studies to evaluate these vaccines and to improve phage-driven inactivation are warranted.

Keywords: Animal tuberculosis, Vaccine, Diagnostic interference, Mycobactrerium bovis, Mycobacterium caprae, Mycobacterium microti, Phage

Received: 29 Apr 2025; Accepted: 20 Jun 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Fernández, Fuertes, Geijo, Elguezabal, Serrano-Mestre, Vázquez-Iniesta, Prados-Rosales, MICHELET, Boschiroli, Pérez de Val, Jones, Juste, Garrido and Sevilla. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Iker A Sevilla, Departamento de Sanidad Animal, NEIKER-Instituto Vasco de Investigación y Desarrollo Agrario, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Derio, Spain

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.