Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Significance of tests for non-infectivity of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines

  • W. M. Henderson (a1)

Extract

An appreciation of the chance of failing to detect small amounts of infectivity is the main consideration in the design of any test for non-infectivity. The absence of infectivity can never be proved, and many samples must be tested and found negative before there is reasonable assurance that a supposedly non-infective vaccine is safe to use.

The highest percentage, p, of samples likely to be infective for various numbers of negative observations, n, has been calculated from the expression (1−p)n = P for different levels of P, the chance of failure to detect a positive. For example, if 100 observations are made and found negative the percentage of infective samples would be unlikely (P = 0·05) to exceed 3·0 and highly unlikely (P = 0·01) to exceed 4·5. It is suggested that at least this number of observations be made.

The particular problem of detecting foot-and-mouth disease virus by inoculation of a susceptible host is considered in relation to the theoretical requirements of a test of sound design.

The multiple intradermal tongue inoculation of a number of cattle is the method that best meets these requirements. It is shown that this method is the most sensitive for the detection of foot-and-mouth disease virus, at least twenty observations can be provided by one animal, the presence of non-infective but antigenic material in the inoculum does not hinder the detection of a trace of active virus, and an estimate of the initial susceptibility of the tongue tissue of non-reactors can usually be obtained.

Although a much larger volume can be tested by subcutaneous inoculation, disadvantages of this route are shown to be that with some strains very large amounts of virus are required for infection, only one observation is provided by each animal, the presence of non-infective but antigenic material in the inoculum may mask the presence of active virus, and non-reactors to an immunizing dose of vaccine cannot subsequently be tested for a measure of their initial susceptibility relevant to this route of inoculation.

I am indebted to Dr J. O. Irwin, of the Statistical Research Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, for advice on the use of the binomial distribution and for his helpful criticism of the manuscript; to Dr Ian A. Galloway, Director of this Institute for his interest and encouragement and to Mr W. J. Brownsea for technical assistance during the work described in this and the previous paper.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Significance of tests for non-infectivity of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Significance of tests for non-infectivity of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Significance of tests for non-infectivity of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

References

Hide All
Fisher, R. A. (1941). Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 8th ed.Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.
Galloway, I. A. (1950). Observations on immunological and other characteristics of strains of the virus of foot-and-mouth disease with special reference to experimental methods, epizootiology and methods of control, including vaccination. Report submitted to Joint Meeting of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Office international des Epizooties, Paris, 05, 1950.
Henderson, W. M. (1949). The quantitative study of foot-and-mouth disease virus. Rep. Ser. agric. Res. Coun., Lond., no. 8. H.M. Stationery Office.
Henderson, W. M. (1952). A comparison of different routes of inoculation of cattle for detection of the virus of foot-and-mouth disease. J. Hyg., Camb., 50, 182.
Skinner, H. H. (1951). Propagation of Strains of foot-and-mouth disease virus in unweaned white mice. Proc. roy. Soc. Med. 44, 1041.

Significance of tests for non-infectivity of foot-and-mouth disease vaccines

  • W. M. Henderson (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed