Titers--Dr. W. Jean Dodds Interviews

[Kris Christine]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

Kris, if you get a chance can you answer these questions? Bc in the past, we've been informed of info that is now different than the new info you're posting. I'd really like to know how/why/when this philosophy toward titers changed.

It's best if you contact Dr. Ronald Schultz at schultzr@svm.vetmed.wisc.edu, I'm sure he'll be able to fully answer your questions.

[gemy]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

Wow, now I'm really confused, the last time this was discussed, it seemed like everyone told me titers were worthless and a waste of money. http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/gen...-our-pets.html

Nancy I am going back to my old medical textbooks, it is truly scarey how much I have forgotten about the immune system.

BUt like you I want to get to the "bottom" of this, if there even is a bottom

[Wylie's Mom]

Bummer, to have no answers . I'm really frustrated. I haven't heard of any studies or reasons that have shown we should change the way we've always been taught about titers. This sudden change makes no sense to me whatsoever, and I personally wouldn't rely on this new info until our questions are answered.

[Kris Christine]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

Bummer, to have no answers . I'm really frustrated. I haven't heard of any studies or reasons that have shown we should change the way we've always been taught about titers. This sudden change makes no sense to me whatsoever, and I personally wouldn't rely on this new info until our questions are answered.

Have you contacted Dr. Schultz yet?

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by Kris Christine

Have you contacted Dr. Schultz yet?

No, and I don't really feel it's appropriate for me to contact him either, to be honest.

Kris, I guess I'm just really disappointed that this info was posted without being fully fleshed out as it's now resulted in confusion and unanswered questions, questions that are really important ones too. In the past, titers were *not* considered truly reliable indicators -- so to now read they suddenly are, but without any concrete evidence as to why/how/when just leaves us all with more questions rather than answers.

[Kris Christine]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

In the past, titers were *not* considered truly reliable indicators -- so to now read they suddenly are, but without any concrete evidence as to why/how/when just leaves us all with more questions rather than answers.

Actually, antibody titer testing for the core vaccines have been considered reliable for at least the past 10 years according to the American Animal Hospital Association. It's the non-core vaccines that have been and continue to be considered unreliable (perhaps that's where the confusion arises). The information below may prove helpful.

2011 American Animal Hospital Association's Canine Vaccine Guidelines https://www.aahanet.org/PublicDocume...Guidelines.pdf p. 17 "Despite the confusion and controversy surrounding antibody testing, these serologic tests are useful for monitoring immunity to CDV, CPV-2, CAV-1, and RV. .....On completion of the puppy core vaccination series with the last dose given at 14-16 wk of age, a dog can be expected to have an antibody titer or positive test result, regardless of the serologic test performed, provided the serum sample is collected > 2 wk after the last dose of vaccine." (CDV=distemper, CPV-2 = parvovirus, CAV-1 hepatitis, RV= rabies)

On Page 19: "Antibody titers to vaccines other than CDV, CPV-2, CAV-1, and RV have limited or no value because the antibody may persist for a short time (e.g., Leptospira products), or there is no known correlation between serum antibody test routinely performed and protection (e.g., CPiV, Lyme, Leptospira). However, researchers are attempting to find serologic correlates of protective immunity for diseases other than the four core viruses (CDV, CPV-2, and RV)."

[Teresa Ford]

Thanks for sharing

[Kris Christine]

Originally Posted by Teresa Ford

Thanks for sharing

You're welcome.

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by Kris Christine

Actually, antibody titer testing for the core vaccines have been considered reliable for at least the past 10 years according to the American Animal Hospital Association. It's the non-core vaccines that have been and continue to be considered unreliable (perhaps that's where the confusion arises). The information below may prove helpful.

2011 American Animal Hospital Association's Canine Vaccine Guidelines https://www.aahanet.org/PublicDocume...Guidelines.pdf p. 17 "Despite the confusion and controversy surrounding antibody testing, these serologic tests are useful for monitoring immunity to CDV, CPV-2, CAV-1, and RV. .....On completion of the puppy core vaccination series with the last dose given at 14-16 wk of age, a dog can be expected to have an antibody titer or positive test result, regardless of the serologic test performed, provided the serum sample is collected > 2 wk after the last dose of vaccine." (CDV=distemper, CPV-2 = parvovirus, CAV-1 hepatitis, RV= rabies)

On Page 19: "Antibody titers to vaccines other than CDV, CPV-2, CAV-1, and RV have limited or no value because the antibody may persist for a short time (e.g., Leptospira products), or there is no known correlation between serum antibody test routinely performed and protection (e.g., CPiV, Lyme, Leptospira). However, researchers are attempting to find serologic correlates of protective immunity for diseases other than the four core viruses (CDV, CPV-2, and RV)."

This doesn't answer the questions that are still out there regarding humoral vs cell mediated - which are two very, very different things within immunity. Yes, we can use titers to 'monitor' immunity as stated above, but the questions are the same regarding whether or not it proves immunity, and what it means for humoral vs cell-mediated. I haven't seen anything that has shown this knowledge has yet changed for some reason.

[Teegy]

Originally Posted by Kris Christine

To shed some light on titer testing, the following is from Page 19 the American Animal Hospital Association's 2003 Canine Vaccine Guidelines under the heading "Serological Tests to Monitor Immunity Leerburg | Special Report : it states that "Although the committee does not feel it is necessary to determine titers to these core viruses on an annual basis because of the long minimum DOI [duration of immunity] for these products, titers can be used for your and/or your client's assurance that the animal has immunity. Experience with postvaccination titers for CDV [distemper], CAV [hepatitis], and CPV [parvo] shows that sterile immunity lasts for years...........The primary reason for the test is to ensure that you have a positive test after completing the puppy vaccination series."

2011 American Animal Hospital Association's Canine Vaccine Guidelines https://www.aahanet.org/PublicDocume...Guidelines.pdf p. 17 "Despite the confusion and controversy surrounding antibody testing, these serologic tests are useful for monitoring immunity to CDV, CPV-2, CAV-1, and RV. .....On completion of the puppy core vaccination series with the last dose given at 14-16 wk of age, a dog can be expected to have an antibody titer or positive test result, regardless of the serologic test performed, provided the serum sample is collected > 2 wk after the last dose of vaccine." (CDV=distemper, CPV-2 = parvovirus, CAV-1 hepatitis, RV= rabies)"

From Page 16 of the 2003 AAHA Guidelines it reports that, "The MLV [modified live virus (such as distemper, hepatitis, parvo)] vaccines create an immunity that is similar to immunity after an animal recovers from infection." Further, on Page 17, " When MLV [modified live virus (such as distemper, hepatitis, parvo)] vaccines are used to immunize a dog, memory cells develop and likely persist for the life of the animal."

since my smilies aren't working like like like

[Teegy]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

This doesn't answer the questions that are still out there regarding humoral vs cell mediated - which are two very, very different things within immunity. Yes, we can use titers to 'monitor' immunity as stated above, but the questions are the same regarding whether or not it proves immunity, and what it means for humoral vs cell-mediated. I haven't seen anything that has shown this knowledge has yet changed for some reason.

Dr Dodds has a facebook page, I bet if you emailed her directly or sent a question on her FB page she would be better able to answer this