Polymorphisms in the ABCB1 gene in phenobarbital responsive and resistant idiopathic epileptic Border Collies

BACKGROUND: Variation in the ABCB1 gene is believed to play a role in drug resistance in epilepsy. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: Variation in the ABCB1 gene encoding the permeability-glycoprotein could have an influence on phenobarbital (PB) resistance, which occurs with high frequency in idiopathic epileptic Border Collies (BCs). Animals: Two hundred and thirty-six client-owned BCs from Switzerland and Germany including 25 with idiopathic epilepsy, of which 13 were resistant to PB treatment. METHODS: Prospective and retrospective case-control study. Data were collected retrospectively regarding disease status, antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy, and drug responsiveness. The frequency of a known mutation in the ABCB1 gene (4 base-pair deletion in the ABCB1 gene [c.296_299del]) was determined in all BCs. Additionally, the ABCB1 coding exons and flanking sequences were completely sequenced to search for additional variation in 41 BCs. Association analyses were performed in 2 case-control studies: idiopathic epileptic and control BCs and PB-responsive and resistant idiopathic epileptic BCs. RESULTS: One of 236 BCs (0.4%) was heterozygous for the mutation in the ABCB1 gene (c.296_299del). A total of 23 variations were identified in the ABCB1 gene: 4 in exons and 19 in introns. The G-allele of the c.-6-180T > G variation in intron 1 was significantly more frequent in epileptic BCs resistant to PB treatment than in epileptic BCs responsive to PB treatment (P(raw) = .0025). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: A variation in intron 1 of the ABCB1 gene is associated with drug responsiveness in BCs. This might indicate that regulatory mutations affecting the expression level of ABCB1 could exist, which may influence the reaction of a dog to AEDs.

Bovine viral diarrhea (BVD): from biology to control

Bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) is endemic worldwide. Together with classical swine fever and border disease viruses, it belongs to the genus Pestivirus of the family Flaviviridae. Most infections with BVDV take a transient, acute, course. Only rarely BVDV persists in its hosts. Due to the early time point of infection in utero, persistently infected (PI) animals are immunotolerant to the infecting non-cytopathic BVDV. In such animals the virus may mutate to a cytopathic biotype, causing lethal mucosal disease. In BVD-endemic regions, approximately 1% of the animals are PI. Removal of all PI animals leads to extinction of BVD. This approach to BVD eradication has been vindicated in Scandinavia. Following the same principles, regional and country-wide eradication programs are run in different parts of the world. These programs differ in the way PI animals are detected and in the role of vaccines. The Scandinavian two-step method of detecting PI animals is based on (i) the high level of seroprevalence in herds where PI animals are present and (ii) on testing all animals for virus in such herds. However, the high average herd seroprevalence in Switzerland made it impossible to define a reasonable threshold for virus testing. Therefore, all animals were directly tested for virus in the year 2008 and all newborn calves until the end of 2012, when the PI prevalence had dropped to 0.02%. Vaccination remains prohibited. Since 2013, surveillance for BVD is accomplished by serology. As a unique consequence of eradication, over 7500 viral strains are available to us for genetic studies.

Transmission of border disease virus from a persistently infected calf to seronegative heifers in early pregnancy

BACKGROUND: This study describes the transmission of border disease virus (BDV) from a persistently infected calf to seronegative heifers in early pregnancy, resulting in persistently infected fetuses. On day 50 of pregnancy (= day 0 of the infection phase), six heifers were co-housed in a free stall with a bull calf persistently infected with BDV (pi BVD) for 60 days. The heifers underwent daily clinical examination, and blood samples were collected regularly for detection of pestiviral RNA and anti-pestivirus antibodies. After day 60 (= day 110 of pregnancy), the heifers were slaughtered, and the fetuses and placentae underwent post-mortem and immunohistochemical examination and RT-PCR for viral RNA detection. RESULTS: Three heifers had mild viraemia from day 8 to day 14, and by day 40 all heifers had pestivirus antibodies identified as anti-BDV antibodies in the serum neutralisation test. The placenta of the three viraemic heifers had histological evidence of inflammation, and fetal organs from these heifers were positive for pestivirus antigen by immunohistochemical examination and for BD viral RNA by RT-PCR and sequencing. Thus, co-housing of heifers in early pregnancy with a pi-BDV calf led to seroconversion in all heifers and persistent fetal infection in three. CONCLUSIONS: Considering that pi-BDV cattle can infect other cattle and lead to persistent infection of the fetus in pregnant cows, BDV should not be ignored in the context of the mandatory BVDV eradication and monitoring program. This strongly suggests that BDV should be taken into account in BVD eradication and control programs.