U.S. Department of Agriculture: Agricultural Research Service, Lincoln, Nebraska



Tavis K. Anderson

Document Type


Date of this Version



Journal of Virology Volume 87 Number 17 September 2013 p. 9895–9903 doi:10.1128/JVI.01038-13


Copyright © 2013, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.


Vaccines provide a primary means to limit disease but may not be effective at blocking infection and pathogen transmission. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of commercial inactivated swine influenza A virus (IAV) vaccines and experimental live attenuated influenza virus (LAIV) vaccines against infection with H3N2 virus and subsequent indirect transmission to naive pigs. The H3N2 virus evaluated was similar to the H3N2v detected in humans during 2011-2012, which was associated with swine contact at agricultural fairs. One commercial vaccine provided partial protection measured by reduced nasal shedding; however, indirect contacts became infected, indicating that the reduction in nasal shedding did not prevent aerosol transmission. One LAIV vaccine provided complete protection, and none of the indirect-contact pigs became infected. Clinical disease was not observed in any group, including nonvaccinated animals, a consistent observation in pigs infected with contemporary reassortant H3N2 swine viruses. Serum hemagglutination inhibition antibody titers against the challenge virus were not predictive of efficacy; titers following vaccination with a LAIV that provided sterilizing immunity were below the level considered protective, yet titers in a commercial vaccine group that was not protected were above that level. While vaccination with currently approved commercial inactivated products did not fully prevent transmission, certain vaccines may provide a benefit by limitating shedding, transmission, and zoonotic spillover of antigenically similar H3N2 viruses at agriculture fairs when administered appropriately and used in conjunction with additional control measures.