We are grateful for the opportunity to respond to the comments made by Zwijnenberg and Yamamoto following the publication earlier this year of our article reviewing FIV vaccination.1 Our aim was to review the published scientific evidence surrounding FIV vaccination and to present our independent perspective based on our combined experience of vaccinology and clinical feline medicine. We believe it is important to highlight to veterinary practitioners that vaccination interferes with serological testing for FIV; indeed, interference with testing has been considered by others to be an adverse reaction to vaccination.2 In regions where Fel-O-Vax® FIV has been licensed, it is not possible to use serology to distinguish vaccinated, uninfected cats from infected cats (which may or may not be vaccinated), since all are likely to test seropositive. Molecular diagnostics go some way towards resolving these problems but the performance of PCR tests will continue to vary significantly between laboratories and perhaps between regions depending on sequence variation amongst FIV isolates. In contrast, serological tests with their high sensitivity and specificity lend themselves to rapid cage-side assessment of FIV serostatus. Such rapid diagnosis has been particularly important in shelter situations to inform crucial decisions regarding the future of large numbers of cats. Given the failure of the Fel-O-Vax® FIV to protect cats in an independent study,3 it is imperative that the breadth of protection afforded by the vaccine be ascertained. Although Zwijnenberg and Yamamoto state that ‘no cases of vaccine breakdown have been reported’, we are not aware of the proportion of cats immunised with the 1.8 million vaccine doses sold that has been monitored for infection by PCR. Therefore we urge the manufacturer to follow-up groups of pet cats receiving either the Fel-O-Vax® FIV or placebo, testing (by PCR) both prior to vaccination and after an appropriate follow-up period. A randomised, controlled field trial would permit a comparison of the proportions of vaccinated versus non-vaccinated cats that are protected from FIV infection. It is our hope that many of the contentious issues highlighted in our recent review article may be resolved through cooperation between researchers, vaccine manufacturers and veterinarians in the field.
Read full abstract