Editorial Type: Special Feature
 | 
Online Publication Date: 01 Mar 2006

2006 AAHA Canine Vaccine Guidelines

DVM,
DVM, PhD Diplomate ACVM,
DVM Diplomate ABVP,
DVM Diplomate ACVIM,
DVM Diplomate ACVIM,
DVM Diplomate ACVIM,
DVM, MPVM,
DVM, PhD Diplomate ACVM,
PhD Diplomate ACVM,
DVM Diplomate ACVM, and
DVM Diplomate ABVP
Article Category: Research Article
Page Range: 80 – 89
DOI: 10.5326/0420080
Save
Download PDF

In 2005, AAHA’s Canine Vaccine Task Force met to reexamine and revise guidelines on the use of vaccines in dogs. The results of the Task Force’s work are summarized and tabulated in this article and are published in their entirety on the AAHA website (www.aahanet.org). The 2006 AAHA Canine Vaccine Guidelines contain information on new technological developments in vaccines, an introduction to conditionally licensed vaccines, and detailed recommendations on the use of available vaccines. Perhaps the most noteworthy addition to the guidelines is a separate set of recommendations created for shelter facilities. Vaccines are classified as core (universally recommended), noncore (optional), or not recommended. The Task Force recognizes that vaccination decisions must always be made on an individual basis, based on risk and lifestyle factors.

Executive Summary

Since the publication of the AAHA Canine Vaccine Guidelines in 2003, the profession and the biologics industry have moved in the direction advocated in that document by the Canine Vaccine Task Force. The profession has witnessed no negative medical ramifications to the recommendations issued by the Task Force, several well-documented studies have demonstrated the extended duration of immunity (DOI) and supported the extended vaccine intervals advocated by the guidelines, and the industry has responded in the main by supporting the use of products with extended DOI protocols. While a number of rabies vaccines have long been available as licensed for 3 years by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), vaccines against other infectious diseases of dogs have generally been licensed as 1-year vaccines. At least one manufacturer has been successful in obtaining a 3-year license from the USDA Center for Veterinary Biologics (USDA/CVB).

In early 2005, the Canine Vaccine Guidelines Task Force was reconvened with the charge of updating the guidelines and developing a plan to simplify the revision process and make it more responsive to the emergence of new vaccines and developments. To that end, the guidelines will be published in their entirety electronically on the AAHA web site (www.aahanet.org), where they can be readily accessed by the profession.

The Task Force recognizes that individual readers will find some sections of immediate interest and others of background interest. However, practitioners are urged to read the entire document for reference, with special attention to certain key sections that have been revised and new sections that have been added.

Revised sections include those addressing the vaccine licensing process and the medical and legal implications of vaccine medicine. Because serologic interpretation in conjunction with or in lieu of vaccination is of major interest to the profession, the section addressing serologic testing has been expanded. The question is not the validity of serology but the application and indication for serologic testing.

A key section of the 2003 guidelines focused on vaccine adverse events and emphasized the importance of reporting adverse events to the appropriate agency. A vaccine adverse event is any undesirable or unintended outcome (including failure to achieve the desired result) that occurs in conjunction with vaccine administration. The section on vaccine adverse events has been updated to reflect recent developments in reporting procedures. The Task Force reiterates its recommendation that practitioners take the time to document and report all adverse events. As changes in protocols are adopted and innovative vaccines and vaccine technologies gain ground, such vigilance is even more essential.

Included in the 2006 guidelines is a section highlighting the science of vaccine development, specifically such technologies as live vectored, subunit, gene-deleted, and deoxyribonucleic acid vaccines. In adding this material, the Task Force’s intent is to introduce its audience to new concepts and future technologies and to stimulate awareness of where the science of vaccine development is headed.

The Task Force has also introduced the subject of conditionally licensed vaccines in one of the several tables included in this update. These vaccines have demonstrated safety and purity and in preliminary studies have demonstrated a reasonable expectation of efficacy. Though only granted conditional licenses by the USDA/CVB, these products may have definite indications in individual animals and bear consideration in selected animals.

Another notable addition to these updated guidelines is a section devoted to shelter medicine. The impetus for separate shelter vaccination guidelines was the Task Force’s recognition that this rapidly developing area of veterinary practice faces unique challenges. What best serves a clinical companion animal practice may not be ideal in an environment housing an ever-changing population. This section discusses some of the special considerations and issues confronting shelter medicine and provides tables listing vaccines that are recommended, optional, and not recommended for the shelter environment.

For many readers, a highlight of the 2006 guidelines will be the recommendations for selecting appropriate vaccines to be administered to the individual patient. The vaccine type, optimal time of administration for puppies and adult dogs, and general comments are compiled in an easy-to-use table within the main guidelines. Vaccines are now categorized as core, noncore (or optional), and not recommended. Core vaccines are those that all dogs should receive in one form or other. Optional vaccines should be administered selectively, based on the animal’s geographic and lifestyle exposure and an assessment of risk/benefit ratios. The table does not mention specific products or manufacturers; it is the position of the Task Force that all major manufacturers produce quality canine vaccines and that these decisions are best left to the clinician.

Even in their revised and updated form, the 2006 guidelines reflect the same underlying principles that imbued the 2003 edition:

  • Vaccination is a medical decision and a medical procedure that should be individualized based on the risk and lifestyle of the individual animal.

  • An extended vaccine interval is reasonable, safe, and effective in preventing most infectious diseases.

  • Veterinary medicine must remain vigilant of emerging diseases, changes in incidence of known diseases, and adverse events associated with vaccine administration. It is incumbent on veterinarians to proactively report adverse events.

  • Decisions surrounding vaccination of client-owned pets should include a discussion with clients and always be fully documented in the medical record.

Table 1 2006 AAHA Canine Vaccination Guidelines* for the General Veterinary Practice
Table 1
Table 1 (cont′d)
Table 1
Table 1 (cont′d)
Table 1
Table 1 (cont′d)
Table 1
Table 1 (cont′d)
Table 1
Table 1 (cont′d)
Table 1

Footnotes

    This document was developed by the American Animal Hospital Association through a collaborative effort among Task Force members to aid practitioners in making decisions about appropriate care of their canine patients with respect to currently available vaccines. The Task Force included experts in immunology, infectious diseases, internal medicine, and medicine and clinical practice. The guidelines are supported by professional, scientific and clinical evidence, as well as published and unpublished documentation. These guidelines and recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive protocol, course of treatment, or procedure. Variations in practice may be warranted based on the needs of the individual patient, resources, and limitations unique to each individual practice setting. The guidelines are not intended to be an AAHA standard of care. Please visit www.aahanet.org for a complete copy of this report.

References

  • 1
    American Animal Hospital Association Canine Vaccine Task Force. Report of the AAHA canine vaccine task force: executive summary and 2003 canine vaccine guidelines, recommendations. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2003;39:119–131.
  • 2
    Mouzin DE, Lorenzen MJ, Haworth JD et al. Duration of immunity in dogs after vaccination or naturally acquired infection. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004;224:55–60.
  • 3
    Schultz RD et al. Information provided at International Vaccines and Diagnostics Conf, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, 2003.
  • 4
    Carmichael LE. Canine viral vaccines at a turning point—A personal perspective. In: Schultz RD, ed. Advances in Veterinary Medicine 41: Veterinary Vaccines and Diagnostics. San Diego: Academic Press, 1999:289–307.
  • 5
    Bowman D. Companion Animal Parasite Council Guidelines. North Am Vet Conf, Orlando, FL, 2004.
  • 6
    Roth JA, Henderson LM. New technology for improved vaccine safety and efficacy. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract 2001;17:585–597.
  • 7
    Spickler AR, Roth JA. Adjuvants in veterinary vaccines: modes of action and side effects. J Vet Intern Med 2003;17:273–281.
  • 8
    Pardo MC, Bauman JE, Mackowiak M. Protection of dogs against canine distemper by vaccination with a canarypox virus recombinant expressing canine distemper virus fusion and hemagglutinin glycoproteins. Am J Vet Res 1997;58:833–836.
  • 9
    Levy SA, Clark KK, Glickman LT. Infection rates in dogs vaccinated and not vaccinated with an OspA Borrelia burgdorferi vaccine in a Lyme disease-endemic area of Connecticut. Intl J of Appl Res 2005; 3:1–5.
  • 10
    Pastoret PP. Veterinary vaccinology. CR Acad Sci 1999;322:967–972.
  • 11
    Shedlock DJ, Weiner DB. DNA vaccination: antigen presentation and induction of immunity. J Leuk Biol 2000;68:793–806.
  • 12
    USDA issues license for West Nile virus DNA vaccine for horses. Press release of July 18, 2005. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/pa/news/2005/07/wnvdna-vs.html.
  • 13
    Animals and animal products. Viruses, serums, toxins, and analogous products. Testing terminology; pure or purity (9 CFR 101.5 (c)). Fed Reg Apr 18, 1997;62:19037.
  • 14
    Animals and animal products. Viruses, serums, toxins, and analogous products. Testing terminology; safe or safety (9 CFR 101.5 (d)). Fed Reg Apr 18, 1997;62:19037.
  • 15
    Animals and animal products. Viruses, serums, toxins, and analogous products. Testing terminology; potent or portency (9 CFR 101.5 (f)). Fed Reg Apr 18, 1997;62:19037.
  • 16
    Animals and animal products (9 CFR 101). Fed Reg Apr 18, 1997; 62:19037.
  • 17
    Animals and animal products. Viruses, serums, toxins, and analogous products. Testing terminology; efficacious or efficacy (9 CFR 101.5 (g)). Fed Reg Apr 18, 1997;62:19037.
  • 18
    Aubert M. Practical significance of rabies antibodies in cats and dogs. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz 1992;11:735–760.
  • 19
    Böhm M, Thompson H, Weir A et al. Serum antibody titres to canine parvovirus, adenovirus, and distemper. Vet Rec 2004;154:457–462.
  • 20
    Greene CE, ed. Immunoprophylaxis and immunotherapy. In: Infectious Diseases of the Dog and Cat. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1998:723–744.
  • 21
    Larson LJ, Schultz RD. High-titer canine parvovirus vaccine: serologic response and challenge-of-immunity study. Vet Med 1996; 91:210–218.
  • 22
    Mansfield PD. Vaccination of dogs and cats in veterinary teaching hospitals in North America. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1996;208:1242–1247.
  • 23
    Neimeier-Forster M. Duration of immunity study in dogs as determined by serologic testing of canine distemper, parvovirosis and rabies. Thesis, Vetsuisse Univ, Berne, Switzerland 2004.
  • 24
    Olson P, Klingeborn B, Hedhammar A. Serum antibody response to canine parvovirus, canine adenovirus-1, and canine distemper virus in dogs with known status of immunization: study of dogs in Sweden. Am J Vet Res 1988;49:1460–1466.
  • 25
    PyrdieJ.Persistenceofantibodiesfollowingvaccinationagainstcanine distemper and the effect of revaccination. Vet Rec 1966;78:486–488.
  • 26
    Rikula U, Nuotio L, Sihvonen L. Canine distemper virus neutralizing antibodies in vaccinated dogs. Vet Rec 2000;147:598–603.
  • 27
    Schultz RD. Current and future canine and feline vaccination programs. Vet Med 1998;93:3:233–254.
  • 28
    Tizard I, Ni YW. Use of serologic testing to assess immune status of companion animals. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1998;213:54–60.
  • 29
    Twark L, Dodds WJ. Clinical use of serum parvovirus and distemper virus antibody titers for determining revaccination strategies in healthy dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:1021–1024.
  • 30
    Appel M, Robson DS. A microneutralization test for canine distemper virus. Am J Vet Res 1973;34:1459–1463.
  • 31
    Chappuis G. Control of canine distemper. Vet Microbiol 1995; 44:351–358.
  • 32
    Carmichael LE, Joubert JC, Pollock RV. A modified live canine parvovirus vaccine. II. Immune response. Cornell Vet 1983;73:13–29.
  • 33
    Schultz RD, Ford RB, Olsen J et al. Titer testing and vaccination: a new look at traditional practices. Vet Med 2002;97(2):1–13.
  • 34
    Appel MJG. Forty years of canine vaccination. In: Schultz RD, ed. Advances in Veterinary Medicine 41: Veterinary Vaccines and Diagnostics. San Diego: Academic Press, 1999;309–324.
  • 35
    Schultz RD, Conklin S. The immune system and vaccines. Compend Contin Educ Pract Vet 1998;20:5–18.
  • 36
    Roth JA. Mechanistic bases for adverse vaccine reactions and vaccine failures. In: Schultz RD, ed. Advances in Veterinary Medicine 41: Veterinary Vaccines and Diagnostics. San Diego: Academic Press, 1999;681–700.
  • 37
    Schultz RD, Appel MJ, Carmichael LE et al. Canine vaccines and immunity. In: Kirk RW, ed. Current Veterinary Therapy VI. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1977;1271–1275.
  • 38
    Olson P, Finnsdottir H, Klingeborn B et al. Duration of antibodies elicited by canine distemper virus vaccinations in dogs. Vet Rec 1997; 141:654–655.
  • 39
    Abdelmagid OY, Larson L, Payne L et al. Evaluation of the efficacy and duration of immunity of a canine combination vaccine against virulent parvovirus, infectious canine hepatitis virus, and distemper virus experimental challenges. Vet Therapeutics 2004;5:173–186.
  • 40
    Schultz RD. Information presented at Central Veterinary Conf, Kansas City, MO, 2005.
  • 41
    Cliquet F, Aubert M, Sagne L. Development of a fluorescent antibody virus neutralization test (FAVN test) for the quantitation of rabies-neutralizing antibody. J Immun Methods 1998;212:79–87.
  • 42
    Cliquet F et al. Neutralizing antibody titration in 25,000 sera of dogs and cats vaccinated against rabies in France, in the framework of the new regulations that offer an alternative to quarantine. Rev Sci Tech 2003;22:857–866.
  • 43
    67 Fed Reg 1910 (2002) proposed Jan 15, 2002; withdrawn at 70 Fed Reg 48325 (2005).
  • 44
    70 Fed Reg 48325b (2005) proposed Aug 15, 2005.
  • 45
    Principles of vaccination. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;219:575–576.
  • 46
    Greene CE, Schultz RD. Immunoprophylaxis and immunotherapy. In: Infectious Diseases of the Dog and Cat. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 2005:1069–1119.
  • 47
    Schultz R. Canine distemper and vaccination. Duluth, GA: Merial, 2005.
  • 48
    Edinboro CH, Ward MP, Glickman LT. A placebo-controlled trial of two intranasal vaccines to prevent tracheobronchitis (kennel cough) in dogs entering a humane shelter. Prev Vet Med 2004;62:89–99.
  • 49
    Glickman LT, Appel MJ. Intranasal vaccine trial for canine infectious tracheobronchitis (kennel cough). Lab Anim Sci 1981;31:397–399.
  • 50
    Bey RF, Shade FJ, Goodnow RA et al. Intranasal vaccination of dogs with live avirulent Bordetella bronchiseptica: correlation of serum agglutination titer and the formation of secretory IgA with protection against experimentally induced infectious tracheobronchitis. Am J Vet Res 1981;42:1130–1132.
  • 51
    Ellis JA, Krakowka GS, Dayton AD et al. Comparative efficacy of an injectable vaccine and an intranasal vaccine in stimulating Bordetella bronchiseptica-reactive antibody responses in seropositive dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;220:43–48.
  • 52
    Schroeder JP, Bordt DW, Mitchell FE. Studies of canine distemper immunization of puppies in a canine distemper-contaminated environment. Vet Med Small Anim Clin 1967;62:782–787.
  • 53
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. General recommendations on immunization: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR 2002;51(RR-2):18–19.
  • 54
    Greene CE, ed. Immunoprophylaxis and immunotherapy. In: Infectious Diseases of the Dog and Cat. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1998:717–750.
  • 55
    Miyamoto T, Taura Y, Une S et al. Immunological responses after vaccination pre- and post-surgery in dogs. J Vet Med Sci 1995; 57(1):29–32.
Copyright: Copyright 2006 by The American Animal Hospital Association 2006
  • Download PDF