PMID- 26923880
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20170407
LR  - 20180116
IS  - 1873-2534 (Electronic)
IS  - 0165-2427 (Linking)
VI  - 181
DP  - 2016 Nov 15
TI  - Immunoprophylaxis in intensive farming systems: the way forward.
PG  - 2-9
LID - S0165-2427(16)30020-4 [pii]
LID - 10.1016/j.vetimm.2016.02.011 [doi]
AB  - High levels of production in intensive farming systems are associated with 
      increased replacement rates as a result of multifactorial diseases. The so-called 
      "production diseases" may include low-grade infection reducing profitability 
      without increased morbidity. Such infections are sustained by low pathogenic 
      viral and bacterial agents which give rise to full-blown disease in association 
      with poor environmental conditions. In these farms, the results of vaccination 
      may be disappointing. Therefore, fundamental issues should be dealt with toward 
      successful immunoprophylaxis. High lean meat and milk production are associated 
      with chronic inflammation and activation of the innate immune system vis-a-vis 
      cellular stress. This may negatively affect adaptive immune responses. A negative 
      modulation of the host microbiome by farm management practices and drug 
      treatments is a further risk factor. The immune response to stressed cells 
      questions the usual correlates of protection investigated after vaccination. In 
      particular, there is evidence that specific and non-specific immune responses may 
      overlap in vitro as a result of a high level of innate immune responses to 
      Damage-Associated Molecular Patterns (DAMPS) and stress antigens. A vigorous 
      adaptive immune response to microbial agents may be sometimes counterproductive, 
      as suggested in porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) 
      infection. Alternative outcomes should be sometimes pursued: a better homeostatic 
      control of the inflammatory response, effective and self-limiting innate immune 
      responses, and even tolerance induction. On the whole, successful 
      immunoprophylaxis in intensive farming systems demands co-ordinated and 
      multi-disciplinary efforts in terms of animal breeding, farm management and 
      hygiene, correct choice and harmonization of the prophylactic tools (vaccines, 
      immunomodulators, pre- and probiotics). Finally, there is evidence that 
      disease-predicting parameters of the innate immune response may greatly ease the 
      identification of herds and animals at risk, and contribute to reduced antibiotic 
      usage on farm.
CI  - Copyright A(c) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
FAU - Amadori, Massimo
AU  - Amadori M
AD  - Laboratory of Cellular Immunology, IZSLER, Brescia, Italy. Electronic address: 
      massimo.amadori@izsler.it.
FAU - Zanotti, Cinzia
AU  - Zanotti C
AD  - Laboratory of Cellular Immunology, IZSLER, Brescia, Italy.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20160220
PL  - Netherlands
TA  - Vet Immunol Immunopathol
JT  - Veterinary immunology and immunopathology
JID - 8002006
SB  - IM
MH  - Adaptive Immunity
MH  - *Agriculture
MH  - Animals
MH  - Immunity, Innate
MH  - *Immunomodulation
MH  - Microbiota/physiology
MH  - Probiotics/pharmacology
MH  - Risk Assessment
MH  - Swine/*immunology
MH  - *Vaccination
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - Disease control
OT  - Disease risk assessment
OT  - Farm animal
OT  - Immunosuppression
OT  - Inflammation
OT  - Stress
EDAT- 2016/03/01 06:00
MHDA- 2017/04/08 06:00
CRDT- 2016/03/01 06:00
PHST- 2015/06/22 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2016/02/10 00:00 [revised]
PHST- 2016/02/16 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2016/03/01 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2017/04/08 06:00 [medline]
PHST- 2016/03/01 06:00 [entrez]
AID - S0165-2427(16)30020-4 [pii]
AID - 10.1016/j.vetimm.2016.02.011 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2016 Nov 15;181:2-9. doi: 10.1016/j.vetimm.2016.02.011. 
      Epub 2016 Feb 20.