Guidelines For Clinical Practice Open Access
Copyright ©2012 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Virol . Feb 12, 2012; 1(1): 23-30
Published online Feb 12, 2012. doi: 10.5501/wjv.v1.i1.23
Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus vaccines: Immunogenicity, efficacy and safety aspects
Wasin Charerntantanakul, Research Laboratory for Immunity Enhancement in Humans and Domestic Animals, Program of Biotechnology, Faculty of Science, Maejo University, Chiang Mai 50290, Thailand
Author contributions: Charerntantanakul W solely contributed to this paper.
Supported by The Thailand Research Fund, NO. DIG5180032
Correspondence to: Wasin Charerntantanakul, DVM, PhD, Assistant Professor, Director, Research Laboratory for Immunity Enhancement in Humans and Domestic Animals, Program of Biotechnology, Faculty of Science, Maejo University, Chiang Mai 50290, Thailand. wasin@mju.ac.th
Telephone: +66-53-873535-117 Fax: +66-53-878225
Received: July 13, 2011
Revised: September 21, 2011
Accepted: September 29, 2011
Published online: February 12, 2012

Abstract

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) infection is the leading cause of economic casualty in swine industry worldwide. The virus can cause reproductive failure, respiratory disease, and growth retardation in the pigs. This review deals with current status of commercial PRRS vaccines presently used to control PRRS. The review focuses on the immunogenicity, protective efficacy and safety aspects of the vaccines. Commercial PRRS modified-live virus (MLV) vaccine elicits delayed humoral and cell-mediated immune responses following vaccination. The vaccine confers late but effective protection against genetically homologous PRRSV, and partial protection against genetically heterologous virus. The MLV vaccine is of concern for its safety as the vaccine virus can revert to virulence and cause diseases. PRRS killed virus (KV) vaccine, on the other hand, is safe but confers limited protection against either homologous or heterologous virus. The KV vaccine yet helps reduce disease severity when administered to the PRRSV-infected pigs. Although efforts have been made to improve the immunogenicity, efficacy and safety of PRRS vaccines, a better vaccine is still needed in order to protect against PRRSV.

Key Words: Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, Vaccine

INTRODUCTION

Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) causes severe economic loss in swine production industry worldwide[1]. The virus has brought about severe PRRS outbreaks in many countries in Southeast Asia including Thailand, leading to an unusually high mortality of pigs of all ages[2]. The virus also has recently devastated pig industry in China, causing losses of more than 30% of pig populations[3].

PRRSV belongs to the Arteriviridae family. The virus possesses enveloped positive-sense, single-stranded RNA genome of approximately 15 kb in size and with nine open-reading frames (ORF)[4]. The up-to-date information of PRRSV ORF is summarized in Table 1. PRRSV can be classified into two genotypes, the North American (NA) and the European (EU). Both genotypes of PRRSV share an approximately 60% nucleotide sequence homology to each other[4]. Within each genotype, the virus isolates can exhibit up to 20% variability of nucleotide sequences, making them a variety of heterogeneous clusters or subpopulations[5].

Table 1 Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus genome and relevant information.
ORFProductFunctionRole in immunity/protectionRef.
1aNsp1αPapain-like cysteine proteasePotential IFN and TNFα antagonist[66-68]
Nsp1βPapain-like cysteine proteasePotential IFN and TNFα antagonist[66,68,69]
Nsp2Cysteine proteasePotential IFN antagonist[70]
Nsp3Transmembrane proteinNA[70]
Nsp4Serine proteaseNA[70]
Nsp5Transmembrane proteinNA[70]
Nsp6NANA[70]
Nsp7αNAPotential antigen for serological determination of persistence infection[70]
Nsp7βNAPotential antigen for serological determination of persistence infection[70]
Nsp8NANA[70]
1bNsp9RNA-dependent RNA polymeraseNA[70]
Nsp10HelicaseNA[70]
Nsp11EndoribonucleasePotential IFN antagonist[70,71]
Nsp12NANA[70]
2aGP2Minor envelope protein; interacts with CD163Minor neutralizing epitope[72]
2bE proteinMinor envelope protein; possibly form oligomeric ion channelNA[72]
3GP3Minor envelope proteinMinor neutralizing epitope[72]
4GP4Minor envelope protein; interacts with CD163Minor neutralizing epitope[72]
5GP5Major envelope protein; interacts with sialoadhesinMajor neutralizing epitope[72]
6M proteinMajor envelope protein; interacts with heparan sulfateT cell epitope; minor neutralizing epitope[72]
7N proteinNucleocapsidNon-neutralizing epitope[72]
Nsp: Non-structural protein; GP: Glycoprotein; NA: No data available; ORF: Open-reading frames.

PRRSV of either genotype causes reproductive failures in breeding age swine, which are characterized by mummification, stillbirth, late-term abortion and delayed return to estrus[4]. The virus also causes respiratory disorders in growing pigs, which can be subclinical or fatal depending on the virulence of the virus[4]. PRRSV-infected pigs usually suffer from poor growth performance and are highly susceptible to co- or secondary bacterial and other viral infections[4].

The measures used currently to control PRRS include management (e.g. whole herd depopulation/repopulation and herd closure), bio-security, test and removal, and vaccination[6]. Vaccination is used generally for the purpose of reduction of clinical losses, but not of prevention of virus infection. The vaccination strategy costs lowest to the pig producers and is feasible to all sizes of pig producers (i.e. small, medium and large), compared with other PRRS control strategies. There are two types of PRRS vaccines that are commercially available. One is a modified-live virus (MLV) vaccine and the other is a killed virus (KV) vaccine. PRRS MLV vaccine is well recognized for its protective efficacy against PRRSV that are genetically homologous to the vaccine virus. It is of concern, however, for its immunogenicity, cross protective efficacy and safety. PRRS KV vaccine, on the other hand, is well known for its safety, but it only confers limited protection.

This article aims to summarize the current status of commercial PRRS vaccines with respect to their immunogenicity, efficacy and safety. The article also discusses current efforts to develop an ideal PRRS vaccine.

MLV VACCINE
General information

PRRS MLV vaccine is licensed for use in several countries worldwide (http://www.cfsph.iastate.edu/Vaccines/disease_list.php?disease=porcine-reproductive-respiratory-syndrome&lang=en). The MLV vaccines licensed for use in the US are derived from the NA PRRSV, which include Ingelvac PRRS MLV and ReproCyc PRRS-PLE (both from VR-2332; Boehringer Ingelheim), and Ingelvac PRRS ATP (from JA-142; Boehringer Ingelheim). The MLV vaccines licensed for use in the EU countries are, likewise, derived only from the EU PRRSV, which comprise Porcilis PRRS (from DV; Merck), Amervac-PRRS (from VP046; Hipra), and Pyrsvac-183 (from All-183; Syva). The MLV vaccines licensed for use in other countries may not be restricted to either virus genotype and may be available for both PRRSV genotypes. Details of the commercial PRRS MLV vaccines are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 Recommendation and vaccination schedule of commercial PRRS modified-live virus vaccines.
Vaccine1Pigs2RouteDose (mL)Program
Ingelvac PRRS MLVGilt/Sowim2At any stage of production3
Piglet/Nursery/Growingim2At any stage of production3
ReproCyc PRRS-PLEGilt/Sowim5Primary: 4-6 wk prior to breeding
Booster: prior to subsequent breeding
Ingelvac PRRS ATPNursery/Growingim2At 3-18 wk of age
Porcilis PRRSGilt/Sowim/id2/0.2Primary: 2-4 wk prior to breeding
Booster: 2-4 wk prior to subsequent breeding/or every 4 mo
At 2 wk of age or older
Piglet/Nursery/Growingim/id2/0.2
Amervac-PRRSNursery/Growingim2At 4 wk of age or older
Pyrsvac-183Gilt/Sowim2Primary: 2-4 wk prior to breeding
Booster: 3-4 wk prior to subsequent breeding
Piglet/Nursery/Growingim2At 2-3 wk of age or older
1Not recommended for use in porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus-negative farms;
2Not recommended for use in boars due to negative impact on semen quality[73];
3Recommended to revaccinate every 3-4 mo for whole herd vaccination program. im: Intramuscularly; id: Intradermally.
Immunogenicity

Commercial PRRS MLV vaccine of either NA or EU genotype elicits relatively weak humoral and cell-mediated immune (CMI) responses. PRRSV-specific antibodies appear approximately 2 wk, and peak around 4 wk after vaccination[7]. Majority of the antibodies are against viral nucleocapsid (N) proteins which have no neutralizing activity[7]. These antibodies do confer some clinical protection, but their protective mechanism is yet unknown[7].

PRRSV-specific neutralizing antibodies appear approximately 4 wk after vaccination, and have relatively low titers (approximately 23-25) throughout the course of immunization[7]. The reason for poor neutralizing titers is not exactly known but is proposedly attributed to the presence of decoy neutralizing epitopes and the heavy glycosylation of the major and minor neutralizing epitopes[8-10].

PRRSV-specific CMI response appears approximately 2-4 wk after vaccination as determined by lymphocyte blastogenesis and interferon γ (IFNγ) production in recall reaction[11,12]. Majority of T cell subsets responsive to PRRSV are CD4+CD8lo and CD4-CD8+[11-13], which are identified as porcine memory T helper cells and cytotoxic T cells, respectively[14,15]. The frequency of PRRSV-specific T cells producing IFNγ increases gradually with age, reaching a peak at approximately 32 wk of vaccination[11]. This is extremely delayed compared with T cell response to pseudorabies virus (PRV) MLV vaccine, which appears within 1 wk of vaccination and peaks approximately at 4 wk after vaccination[11]. The reason for delayed and weak CMI response to PRRSV is not thoroughly known, but is reported to be attributed, at least in part, to virus-mediated suppression of type I IFN and other pro-inflammatory cytokines, e.g. interleukin-1 (IL-1), IL-12, and tumor-necrosis factor α (TNFα)[16]. The poor CMI response might be also attributed to the virus capacity to up-regulate anti-inflammatory cytokine production, i.e. IL-10 and transforming-growth factor β, in infected cells, and to induce regulatory T cell response[17-19].

Following a challenge exposure to virulent PRRSV, MLV-vaccinated pigs do not develop systemic anamnestic antibody and CMI responses to the challenge viruses that are genetically homologous to the vaccine virus, but do develop anamnestic immune responses to the genetically heterologous viruses[12,20,21]. This absence of anamnestic antibody and CMI responses is observed also following repeated immunizations with PRRS MLV vaccine[12]. The reason for the absence of anamnestic immune responses to homologous virus, and the presence of anamnestic responses to heterologous virus is yet unknown. These phenomena, however, seem not to affect the protective efficacy of the MLV vaccine[12,20,21].

Protective efficacy

PRRS MLV vaccine effectively protects pigs from PRRSV-mediated reproductive and respiratory diseases. The vaccine helps protect gilts from viremia and helps reduce numbers of pre- and post-natal death and congenitally infected piglets[22]. Piglets born to vaccinated gilts had higher body weight and survival rate at weaning than those born to non-vaccinated control gilts[23]. The MLV vaccine, when used in PRRSV-infected sows, effectively helps reduce abortion and return to estrus rate, and increase farrowing rate and number of weaning pigs[24,25].

In growing pigs, immunization with PRRS MLV vaccine associates with reduced viremia, respiratory signs, and improved growth performance[13,26,27]. The MLV vaccine, when vaccinated during acute PRRS outbreak or in endemically PRRSV-infected pigs, helps reduce virus shedding and respiratory disease, and improve growth performance[26-28].

Despite good protection, several concerns have been raised with respect to the MLV vaccine efficacy. First, PRRS MLV vaccine confers relatively delayed protection, which is usually detectable around 3-4 wk after vaccination[29]. Second, vaccine protection is rather virus genotype-specific and, to the most extent, strain-specific. Protection conferred by EU PRRS MLV vaccine is seen only after EU, but not NA PRRSV challenge[20,22]. Likewise, protection by NA PRRS MLV vaccine is seen after NA, and to some extent, EU PRRSV challenge[13,29]. And third, immunization with PRRS MLV vaccine might interfere with the protective efficacy of other swine vaccines, e.g. Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae bacterin. The MLV vaccine, when administered with certain schedule of the bacterin, might lower the bacterin efficacy[30,31].

Safety

The major concern of PRRS MLV vaccine is reversion to virulence. This is predominantly through genetic mutations of the vaccine virus and/or recombination with field virulent PRRSV[32]. The revert-to-virulent vaccine virus can cause clinical diseases, both reproductive and respiratory, and affect growth performance[23]. The vaccine-like virus can potentially cross placenta during late gestation, and cause mummification and stillbirth[23]. Piglets born to these infected sows can be carriers of PRRSV and can shed the virus to other naive pigs[23]. In addition, the MLV-vaccinated pigs can develop viremia of the vaccine virus at least 4 wk after vaccination, and during this period, the animals can spread the virus to other naïve animals[33].

KV VACCINE
General information

PRRS KV vaccine is licensed for use in EU countries and other parts of the world, but not in the US. In the US, the vaccine appeared once in the market (under the trade name PRRomiSe™; Intervet), but the manufacturer discontinued it in 2005. The PRRS KV vaccines licensed for use in the EU can be derived from both EU and NA PRRSV. These vaccines include Ingelvac PRRS KV (derived from P120; Boehringer Ingelheim), Suipravac-PRRS (from 5710; Hipra), Progressis (from proprietary strain; Merial), Suivac PRRS-INe (from VD-E1 and VD-E2; Dyntec), and Suivac PRRS-IN (from VD-E1, VD-E2, and VD-A1; Dyntec). Details of the commercial PRRS KV vaccines are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3 Recommendation and vaccination schedule of commercial PRRS killed virus vaccines.
VaccinePigsRouteDose (mL)Program
Progressis/Giltim2Primary: twice, 3-4 wk interval, at least 3 wk prior to breeding
Ingelvac PRRS KVBooster: 60-70 d of each gestation
SowPrimary: twice, 3-4 wk interval, at any stage of production
im2Booster: 60-70 d of each gestation
Suipravac-PRRSGiltim2Primary: twice, 3-4 wk interval, when entering the farm
Booster: Follow sows’ vaccination program
Sowim2Primary: twice, 3-4 wk interval, during pregnancy or lactation
Booster: every 4 mo
Suivac PRRS-INe/Suivac PRRS-INGilt/Sowim2Primary: three times; 1st at 5-6 mo of age, 2nd at 3-4 wk after 1st, and 3rd at 6-4 wk prior to expected farrowing
Booster: twice; 1st at 3-4 wk after the farrowing, and 2nd at 6-4 wk prior to the further expected farrowing
Boarim2Primary: twice, 4 wk interval, starting at 6 mo of age
Booster: every 4-6 mo
Nursery/Growingim2Three times: 3-4 wk interval, starting at 6-10 wk of age
im: Intramuscularly; KV: Killed virus.
Immunogenicity

In contrast to PRRS MLV vaccine, vaccination with PRRS KV vaccine does not elicit detectable antibodies as determined by IDEXX ELISA and serum virus neutralization assay[34]. The vaccine also barely elicits CMI response as determined by lymphocyte proliferation and IFNγ production in recall response[12,35].

When PRRS KV vaccine is used in PRRSV-positive pigs, the vaccine helps increase antibody and CMI responses to the infecting virus[12,34]. The enhanced immune responses are detected approximately 2 wk after the second shot of vaccination, and correlate with protection[12,34]. These findings lead to the potential application of PRRS KV vaccine as a therapeutic vaccine in PRRSV-positive farms.

Protective efficacy

PRRS KV vaccine is considered less efficacious than PRRS MLV vaccine. In naïve animals, the vaccine fails to prevent reproductive losses and congenital infection in fetuses[36]. When used off-label in growing pigs and boars, the vaccine fails to reduce viremia, duration and titers of virus shedding in semen, and respiratory signs after virulent PRRSV challenge[29].

The benefit of PRRS KV vaccine is seen more obviously in virus-infected animals. In these cases, the vaccine helps improve reproductive performance, e.g. increased farrowing rate, number of weaned pigs, and health status of piglets born to vaccinated sows[37].

Safety

The PRRS KV vaccine is considered safe. Up to date, there has been no report on the negative impact of PRRS KV vaccine on pig health.

CURRENT EFFORTS ON PRRS VACCINE DEVELOPMENT

Numerous efforts have been made to develop an ideal PRRS vaccine, i.e. vaccine that possesses high immunogenicity, confers broad protection, and is safe[38,39]. These efforts reportedly included use of several adjuvants[40-42], use of mixed strains of PRRSV[43,44], and generation of alternative vaccines, i.e. DNA vaccine[45,46], subunit vaccine[47,48], synthetic peptide vaccine[13], viral vector vaccines using adenovirus[49-51], PRV[52,53], poxvirus[54,55], and transmissible gastroenteritis virus[56] as vectors, alphavirus-derived replicon[57], bacterial vector vaccine[58], insect cell-derived vaccine[59], and plant-derived vaccine[60,61] (Table 4). These efforts, however, can achieve at best some, but not all, properties of an ideal PRRS vaccine. In fact, none of these efforts can confer significantly better protection than PRRS MLV vaccine.

Table 4 Alternative PRRS vaccines.
Encoded ORF/GPImmunogenicity
Protection
Ref.
AntibodyCMIHomologousHeterologous
DNA vaccineORF1-7+++ND[45,46]
Subunit vaccineGP5PoorPoor-ND[47,48]
Synthetic peptide vaccineGP5--ND-[13]
Adenovirus vector vaccineGP3, 4, 5++NDND[49-51]
PRV vector vaccineGP5, M+++ND[52,53]
Poxvirus vector vaccineGP3, 5, M+++ND[54,55]
TGEV vector vaccineGP5, M+ND+ND[56]
Alphavirus-derived repliconGP5, M++++[57]
Bacterial vector vaccineGP5, M+-+ND[58]
Insect cell-derived vaccineORF3, 5, 7+ND+ND[59]
Plant-derived vaccineGP5++NDND[60,61]
Gene-deleted MLV (deleted15-mer nsp2 epitope)+NDNDND[65]
+: Success; -: Failure; ND: Not determined.

Development of mucosal vaccine also has been attempted in order to induce protective mucosal immunity, primarily at the site of PRRSV entry, i.e. respiratory and vaginal[62]. The success of mucosal vaccination concept has been reported in many other virus models, e.g. poliovirus, influenza virus and human immunodeficiency virus[63]. PRRSV glycoprotein 5 and N proteins conjugated with cholera toxin, a potent inducer of mucosal immunity[64], were shown to enhance the antibody response in mucosal surfaces, i.e. intestinal and genital, when the vaccine was administered orally, but the protective efficacy of the vaccine was not evaluated[62]. The vaccine, when administered intramuscularly, however, failed to confer respiratory and viremia protection[13].

There is also an effort to produce a PRRS vaccine that can differentiate infected from vaccinated animals for PRRS eradication[65]. This is accomplished by a deletion of 15-mer of non-structural protein 2 (nsp2) epitope of PRRSV. This gene-deleted vaccine is waiting for evaluation of its protective efficacy in the pigs (Table 4).

FUTURE PROSPECTS

Current major obstacle for development of an ideal PRRS vaccine is the lack of complete knowledge on several aspects of PRRSV, including (1) the virus strategies to suppress and evade host innate and adaptive immune responses; (2) the virus epitope(s) responsible for such immune suppression and evasion; (3) the virus epitope(s) common to both NA and EU PRRSV and can confer broad protection; and (4) the roles of PRRSV non-structural proteins and structural proteins on virus replication, virulence, immunity and protection. Efforts are needed to elucidate all these gap of knowledge. Addressing these questions will be essential to advance our understanding on PRRSV immunology and to provide valuable information for vaccine development.

CONCLUSION

There are two types of commercial PRRS vaccines currently used to control PRRS. PRRS MLV vaccine confers effective genotype/strain-specific protection, but provides only partial protection against genetically heterologous PRRSV. The MLV vaccine elicits relatively late humoral and CMI responses which lead to delayed protection. The vaccine virus has a potential to revert to virulence and cause diseases. PRRS KV vaccine, on the other hand, has poor immunogenicity and poor protective efficacy against either homologous or heterologous PRRSV. The vaccine, however, confers some protection when administered to the PRRSV-infected pigs.

The development of PRRS vaccine is and will be the topic of interest among PRRS researchers for years to come. With efforts from laboratories worldwide, it is possible that we will come up with a better PRRS vaccine.

Footnotes

Peer reviewers: Igor M Belyakov, MD, PhD, Principal Scientist, Professor, Midwest Research Institute, 110 Thomas Johnson Drive, Frederick, MD 21702, United States; Hua-Ji Qiu, PhD, Professor, Division of Swine Infectious Diseases, Harbin Veterinary Research Institute, CAAS, No. 427 Maduan Street, Harbin 150001, Heilongjiang Province, China

S- Editor Wang JL L- Editor Ma JY E- Editor Zheng XM

References
1.  Neumann EJ, Kliebenstein JB, Johnson CD, Mabry JW, Bush EJ, Seitzinger AH, Green AL, Zimmerman JJ. Assessment of the economic impact of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome on swine production in the United States. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2005;227:385-392.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
2.  An TQ, Tian ZJ, Leng CL, Peng JM, Tong GZ. Highly pathogenic porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, Asia. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011;17:1782-1784.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
3.  Zhou L, Yang H. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome in China. Virus Res. 2010;154:31-37.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 210]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 220]  [Article Influence: 15.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
4.  Lunney JK, Benfield DA, Rowland RR. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus: an update on an emerging and re-emerging viral disease of swine. Virus Res. 2010;154:1-6.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 195]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 198]  [Article Influence: 14.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
5.  Shi M, Lam TT, Hon CC, Hui RK, Faaberg KS, Wennblom T, Murtaugh MP, Stadejek T, Leung FC. Molecular epidemiology of PRRSV: a phylogenetic perspective. Virus Res. 2010;154:7-17.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 231]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 263]  [Article Influence: 18.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
6.  Corzo CA, Mondaca E, Wayne S, Torremorell M, Dee S, Davies P, Morrison RB. Control and elimination of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Virus Res. 2010;154:185-192.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 138]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 149]  [Article Influence: 10.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
7.  Darwich L, Díaz I, Mateu E. Certainties, doubts and hypotheses in porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus immunobiology. Virus Res. 2010;154:123-132.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 105]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 108]  [Article Influence: 7.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
8.  Ansari IH, Kwon B, Osorio FA, Pattnaik AK. Influence of N-linked glycosylation of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus GP5 on virus infectivity, antigenicity, and ability to induce neutralizing antibodies. J Virol. 2006;80:3994-4004.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 202]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 210]  [Article Influence: 11.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
9.  Faaberg KS, Hocker JD, Erdman MM, Harris DL, Nelson EA, Torremorell M, Plagemann PG. Neutralizing antibody responses of pigs infected with natural GP5 N-glycan mutants of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Viral Immunol. 2006;19:294-304.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 70]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 72]  [Article Influence: 4.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
10.  Vu HL, Kwon B, Yoon KJ, Laegreid WW, Pattnaik AK, Osorio FA. Immune evasion of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus through glycan shielding involves both glycoprotein 5 as well as glycoprotein 3. J Virol. 2011;85:5555-5564.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 85]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 92]  [Article Influence: 7.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
11.  Meier WA, Galeota J, Osorio FA, Husmann RJ, Schnitzlein WM, Zuckermann FA. Gradual development of the interferon-gamma response of swine to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus infection or vaccination. Virology. 2003;309:18-31.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
12.  Bassaganya-Riera J, Thacker BJ, Yu S, Strait E, Wannemuehler MJ, Thacker EL. Impact of immunizations with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus on lymphoproliferative recall responses of CD8+ T cells. Viral Immunol. 2004;17:25-37.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
13.  Charerntantanakul W, Platt R, Johnson W, Roof M, Vaughn E, Roth JA. Immune responses and protection by vaccine and various vaccine adjuvant candidates to virulent porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2006;109:99-115.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
14.  Charerntantanakul W, Roth JA. Biology of porcine T lymphocytes. Anim Health Res Rev. 2006;7:81-96.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
15.  Gerner W, Käser T, Saalmüller A. Porcine T lymphocytes and NK cells--an update. Dev Comp Immunol. 2009;33:310-320.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
16.  Yoo D, Song C, Sun Y, Du Y, Kim O, Liu HC. Modulation of host cell responses and evasion strategies for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Virus Res. 2010;154:48-60.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 105]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 115]  [Article Influence: 8.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
17.  Charerntantanakul W, Platt R, Roth JA. Effects of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus-infected antigen-presenting cells on T cell activation and antiviral cytokine production. Viral Immunol. 2006;19:646-661.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
18.  Charerntantanakul W, Kasinrerk W. Interleukin-10 antisense oligodeoxynucleotide suppresses IL-10 expression and effects on proinflammatory cytokine responses to porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Viral Immunol. 2010;23:425-435.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 13]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 13]  [Article Influence: 1.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
19.  Wongyanin P, Buranapraditkun S, Chokeshai-Usaha K, Thanawonguwech R, Suradhat S. Induction of inducible CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ regulatory T lymphocytes by porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV). Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2010;133:170-182.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
20.  Martelli P, Cordioli P, Alborali LG, Gozio S, De Angelis E, Ferrari L, Lombardi G, Borghetti P. Protection and immune response in pigs intradermally vaccinated against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) and subsequently exposed to a heterologous European (Italian cluster) field strain. Vaccine. 2007;25:3400-3408.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 49]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 52]  [Article Influence: 3.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
21.  Martelli P, Gozio S, Ferrari L, Rosina S, De Angelis E, Quintavalla C, Bottarelli E, Borghetti P. Efficacy of a modified live porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vaccine in pigs naturally exposed to a heterologous European (Italian cluster) field strain: Clinical protection and cell-mediated immunity. Vaccine. 2009;27:3788-3799.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 119]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 130]  [Article Influence: 8.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
22.  Scortti M, Prieto C, Simarro I, Castro JM. Reproductive performance of gilts following vaccination and subsequent heterologous challenge with European strains of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Theriogenology. 2006;66:1884-1893.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 53]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 53]  [Article Influence: 2.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
23.  Rowland RR. The interaction between PRRSV and the late gestation pig fetus. Virus Res. 2010;154:114-122.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 54]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 51]  [Article Influence: 3.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
24.  Alexopoulos C, Kritas SK, Kyriakis CS, Tzika E, Kyriakis SC. Sow performance in an endemically porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS)-infected farm after sow vaccination with an attenuated PRRS vaccine. Vet Microbiol. 2005;111:151-157.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 31]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 31]  [Article Influence: 1.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
25.  Pejsak Z, Markowska-Daniel I. Randomised, placebo-controlled trial of a live vaccine against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus in sows on infected farms. Vet Rec. 2006;158:475-478.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
26.  Cano JP, Dee SA, Murtaugh MP, Pijoan C. Impact of a modified-live porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus vaccine intervention on a population of pigs infected with a heterologous isolate. Vaccine. 2007;25:4382-4391.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 77]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 77]  [Article Influence: 4.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
27.  Cano JP, Dee SA, Murtaugh MP, Trincado CA, Pijoan CB. Effect of vaccination with a modified-live porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus vaccine on dynamics of homologous viral infection in pigs. Am J Vet Res. 2007;68:565-571.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 42]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 42]  [Article Influence: 2.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
28.  Kritas SK, Alexopoulos C, Kyriakis CS, Tzika E, Kyriakis SC. Performance of fattening pigs in a farm infected with both porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) virus and porcine circovirus type 2 following sow and piglet vaccination with an attenuated PRRS vaccine. J Vet Med A Physiol Pathol Clin Med. 2007;54:287-291.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 16]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 16]  [Article Influence: 0.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
29.  Zuckermann FA, Garcia EA, Luque ID, Christopher-Hennings J, Doster A, Brito M, Osorio F. Assessment of the efficacy of commercial porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vaccines based on measurement of serologic response, frequency of gamma-IFN-producing cells and virological parameters of protection upon challenge. Vet Microbiol. 2007;123:69-85.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
30.  Drexler CS, Witvliet MH, Raes M, van de Laar M, Eggen AA, Thacker EL. Efficacy of combined porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus and Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae vaccination in piglets. Vet Rec. 2010;166:70-74.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 11]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11]  [Article Influence: 0.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
31.  Thacker EL, Thacker BJ, Young TF, Halbur PG. Effect of vaccination on the potentiation of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV)-induced pneumonia by Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae. Vaccine. 2000;18:1244-1252.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
32.  Murtaugh MP, Stadejek T, Abrahante JE, Lam TT, Leung FC. The ever-expanding diversity of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Virus Res. 2010;154:18-30.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 212]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 229]  [Article Influence: 16.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
33.  Thanawongnuwech R, Suradhat S. Taming PRRSV: revisiting the control strategies and vaccine design. Virus Res. 2010;154:133-140.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 65]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 69]  [Article Influence: 4.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
34.  Kim H, Kim HK, Jung JH, Choi YJ, Kim J, Um CG, Hyun SB, Shin S, Lee B, Jang G. The assessment of efficacy of porcine reproductive respiratory syndrome virus inactivated vaccine based on the viral quantity and inactivation methods. Virol J. 2011;8:323.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 31]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 34]  [Article Influence: 2.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
35.  Piras F, Bollard S, Laval F, Joisel F, Reynaud G, Charreyre C, Andreoni C, Juillard V. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) virus-specific interferon-gamma(+) T-cell responses after PRRS virus infection or vaccination with an inactivated PRRS vaccine. Viral Immunol. 2005;18:381-389.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 30]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30]  [Article Influence: 1.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
36.  Scortti M, Prieto C, Alvarez E, Simarro I, Castro JM. Failure of an inactivated vaccine against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome to protect gilts against a heterologous challenge with PRRSV. Vet Rec. 2007;161:809-813.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
37.  Papatsiros VG, Alexopoulos C, Kritas SK, Koptopoulos G, Nauwynck HJ, Pensaert MB, Kyriakis SC. Long-term administration of a commercial porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV)-inactivated vaccine in PRRSV-endemically infected sows. J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health. 2006;53:266-272.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 27]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 28]  [Article Influence: 1.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
38.  Huang YW, Meng XJ. Novel strategies and approaches to develop the next generation of vaccines against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV). Virus Res. 2010;154:141-149.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 79]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 81]  [Article Influence: 5.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
39.  Kimman TG, Cornelissen LA, Moormann RJ, Rebel JM, Stockhofe-Zurwieden N. Challenges for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) vaccinology. Vaccine. 2009;27:3704-3718.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 250]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 261]  [Article Influence: 17.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
40.  Charerntantanakul W. Adjuvants for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus vaccines. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2009;129:1-13.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
41.  Zhang D, Xia Q, Wu J, Liu D, Wang X, Niu Z. Construction and immunogenicity of DNA vaccines encoding fusion protein of murine complement C3d-p28 and GP5 gene of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Vaccine. 2011;29:629-635.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 16]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 16]  [Article Influence: 1.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
42.  Cao J, Wang X, Du Y, Li Y, Wang X, Jiang P. CD40 ligand expressed in adenovirus can improve the immunogenicity of the GP3 and GP5 of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus in swine. Vaccine. 2010;28:7514-7522.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 35]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 35]  [Article Influence: 2.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
43.  Mengeling WL, Lager KM, Vorwald AC, Koehler KJ. Strain specificity of the immune response of pigs following vaccination with various strains of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Vet Microbiol. 2003;93:13-24.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
44.  Mengeling WL, Lager KM, Vorwald AC, Clouser DF. Comparative safety and efficacy of attenuated single-strain and multi-strain vaccines for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome. Vet Microbiol. 2003;93:25-38.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
45.  Barfoed AM, Blixenkrone-Møller M, Jensen MH, Bøtner A, Kamstrup S. DNA vaccination of pigs with open reading frame 1-7 of PRRS virus. Vaccine. 2004;22:3628-3641.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
46.  Rompato G, Ling E, Chen Z, Van Kruiningen H, Garmendia AE. Positive inductive effect of IL-2 on virus-specific cellular responses elicited by a PRRSV-ORF7 DNA vaccine in swine. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2006;109:151-160.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
47.  Pirzadeh B, Dea S. Immune response in pigs vaccinated with plasmid DNA encoding ORF5 of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. J Gen Virol. 1998;79:989-999.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
48.  Prieto C, Martínez-Lobo FJ, Díez-Fuertes F, Aguilar-Calvo P, Simarro I, Castro JM. Immunisation of pigs with a major envelope protein sub-unit vaccine against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) results in enhanced clinical disease following experimental challenge. Vet J. 2011;189:323-329.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 12]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 12]  [Article Influence: 0.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
49.  Jiang W, Jiang P, Wang X, Li Y, Du Y, Wang X. Enhanced immune responses of mice inoculated recombinant adenoviruses expressing GP5 by fusion with GP3 and/or GP4 of PRRS virus. Virus Res. 2008;136:50-57.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 41]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 38]  [Article Influence: 2.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
50.  Cai J, Ma Y, Li J, Yan C, Hu R, Zhang J. Construction and characterization of a recombinant canine adenovirus expressing GP5 and M proteins of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. J Vet Med Sci. 2010;72:1035-1040.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
51.  Zhou JX, Xue JD, Yu T, Zhang JB, Liu Y, Jiang N, Li YL, Hu RL. Immune responses in pigs induced by recombinant canine adenovirus 2 expressing the glycoprotein 5 of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Vet Res Commun. 2010;34:371-380.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 9]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8]  [Article Influence: 0.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
52.  Jiang Y, Fang L, Xiao S, Zhang H, Pan Y, Luo R, Li B, Chen H. Immunogenicity and protective efficacy of recombinant pseudorabies virus expressing the two major membrane-associated proteins of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Vaccine. 2007;25:547-560.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 70]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 70]  [Article Influence: 3.9]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
53.  Qiu HJ, Tian ZJ, Tong GZ, Zhou YJ, Ni JQ, Luo YZ, Cai XH. Protective immunity induced by a recombinant pseudorabies virus expressing the GP5 of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus in piglets. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2005;106:309-319.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 79]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 80]  [Article Influence: 4.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
54.  Shen G, Jin N, Ma M, Jin K, Zheng M, Zhuang T, Lu H, Zhu G, Jin H, Jin M. Immune responses of pigs inoculated with a recombinant fowlpox virus coexpressing GP5/GP3 of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus and swine IL-18. Vaccine. 2007;25:4193-4202.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 59]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 59]  [Article Influence: 3.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
55.  Zheng Q, Chen D, Li P, Bi Z, Cao R, Zhou B, Chen P. Co-expressing GP5 and M proteins under different promoters in recombinant modified vaccinia virus ankara (rMVA)-based vaccine vector enhanced the humoral and cellular immune responses of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV). Virus Genes. 2007;35:585-595.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 43]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 42]  [Article Influence: 2.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
56.  Cruz JL, Zúñiga S, Bécares M, Sola I, Ceriani JE, Juanola S, Plana J, Enjuanes L. Vectored vaccines to protect against PRRSV. Virus Res. 2010;154:150-160.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 31]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 32]  [Article Influence: 2.3]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
57.  Mogler MA, Vander Veen RL, Erdman MM, Harris DL. Replicon particles expressing PRRSV GP5 and Matrix reduce viremia following homologous and heterologous challenge. International PRRS Symposium. 2009;107.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
58.  Bastos RG, Dellagostin OA, Barletta RG, Doster AR, Nelson E, Zuckermann F, Osorio FA. Immune response of pigs inoculated with Mycobacterium bovis BCG expressing a truncated form of GP5 and M protein of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Vaccine. 2004;22:467-474.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
59.  Plana Duran J, Climent I, Sarraseca J, Urniza A, Cortés E, Vela C, Casal JI. Baculovirus expression of proteins of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus strain Olot/91. Involvement of ORF3 and ORF5 proteins in protection. Virus Genes. 1997;14:19-29.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]
60.  Chen X, Liu J. Generation and immunogenicity of transgenic potato expressing the GP5 protein of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. J Virol Methods. 2011;173:153-158.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 22]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 16]  [Article Influence: 1.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
61.  Chia MY, Hsiao SH, Chan HT, Do YY, Huang PL, Chang HW, Tsai YC, Lin CM, Pang VF, Jeng CR. Immunogenicity of recombinant GP5 protein of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus expressed in tobacco plant. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2010;135:234-242.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 30]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 28]  [Article Influence: 2.0]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
62.  Hyland K, Foss DL, Johnson CR, Murtaugh MP. Oral immunization induces local and distant mucosal immunity in swine. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2004;102:329-338.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 23]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 24]  [Article Influence: 1.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
63.  Belyakov IM, Ahlers JD. What role does the route of immunization play in the generation of protective immunity against mucosal pathogens? J Immunol. 2009;183:6883-6892.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 182]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 190]  [Article Influence: 12.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
64.  Datta SK, Sabet M, Nguyen KP, Valdez PA, Gonzalez-Navajas JM, Islam S, Mihajlov I, Fierer J, Insel PA, Webster NJ. Mucosal adjuvant activity of cholera toxin requires Th17 cells and protects against inhalation anthrax. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107:10638-10643.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 119]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 123]  [Article Influence: 8.8]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
65.  de Lima M, Kwon B, Ansari IH, Pattnaik AK, Flores EF, Osorio FA. Development of a porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus differentiable (DIVA) strain through deletion of specific immunodominant epitopes. Vaccine. 2008;26:3594-3600.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 35]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 35]  [Article Influence: 2.2]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
66.  Shi X, Zhang G, Wang L, Li X, Zhi Y, Wang F, Fan J, Deng R. The nonstructural protein 1 papain-like cysteine protease was necessary for porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus nonstructural protein 1 to inhibit interferon-β induction. DNA Cell Biol. 2011;30:355-362.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 18]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 18]  [Article Influence: 1.4]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
67.  Song C, Krell P, Yoo D. Nonstructural protein 1α subunit-based inhibition of NF-κB activation and suppression of interferon-β production by porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Virology. 2010;407:268-280.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 88]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 86]  [Article Influence: 6.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
68.  Subramaniam S, Kwon B, Beura LK, Kuszynski CA, Pattnaik AK, Osorio FA. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus non-structural protein 1 suppresses tumor necrosis factor-alpha promoter activation by inhibiting NF-κB and Sp1. Virology. 2010;406:270-279.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 60]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 65]  [Article Influence: 4.6]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
69.  Patel D, Nan Y, Shen M, Ritthipichai K, Zhu X, Zhang YJ. Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus inhibits type I interferon signaling by blocking STAT1/STAT2 nuclear translocation. J Virol. 2010;84:11045-11055.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 118]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 133]  [Article Influence: 9.5]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
70.  Fang Y, Snijder EJ. The PRRSV replicase: exploring the multifunctionality of an intriguing set of nonstructural proteins. Virus Res. 2010;154:61-76.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 272]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 309]  [Article Influence: 22.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
71.  Shi X, Wang L, Li X, Zhang G, Guo J, Zhao D, Chai S, Deng R. Endoribonuclease activities of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus nsp11 was essential for nsp11 to inhibit IFN-β induction. Mol Immunol. 2011;48:1568-1572.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 62]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 66]  [Article Influence: 5.1]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
72.  Dokland T. The structural biology of PRRSV. Virus Res. 2010;154:86-97.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]  [Cited by in Crossref: 231]  [Cited by in F6Publishing: 220]  [Article Influence: 15.7]  [Reference Citation Analysis (0)]
73.  Christopher-Hennings J, Nelson EA, Nelson JK, Benfield DA. Effects of a modified-live virus vaccine against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome in boars. Am J Vet Res. 1997;58:40-45.  [PubMed]  [DOI]  [Cited in This Article: ]