{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02268041237113402, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0027491408934707906, 'mean_word_length': 5.588235294117647, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Challenges in foot-and-mouth disease virus strain selection as an input to attain broad vaccine intraserotype cross-protection

ABSTRACT Introduction: Vaccination against foot-and-mouth disease virus is regarded as the most effective way to prevent disease. Selection of appropriate vaccine strains is challenging due to lack of cross-protection between serotypes and incomplete protection between some strains within a serotype. Vaccine effectiveness can be affected by vaccine formulation, vaccination approaches, and also by emerging field variants. Therefore, a precise evaluation of the protective capacity of the selected vaccine virus is essential. Areas covered: This article discusses the limitations of currently in use in vitro methods to assess the protective capacity of vaccine strains. It includes the assessment of well-established South American vaccine strains, O1/Campos and A24/Cruzeiro, against outbreaks/emergencies in the continent, as well as against recent isolates from East and Southeast Asia. Expert opinion: In vitro methods, and particularly r1 values, used to evaluate the protective capacity of vaccine strains are not conclusive and do not cover the variety of field scenarios. At present, an option when facing emergencies could be to use well-established vaccine strains with broad antigenic/immunogenic coverage, including conditions that lead to increased coverage such as vaccine formulations and vaccination schemes.