Rift Valley Fever: C H A P T E R 2 - 1 - 1 4
Rift Valley Fever: C H A P T E R 2 - 1 - 1 4
Rift Valley Fever: C H A P T E R 2 - 1 - 1 4
CHAPTER 2.1.14.
SUMMARY
Rift Valley fever (RVF) is a peracute or acute zoonotic disease of domestic ruminants. The virus is
currently confined to the African continent and Arabian Peninsula. It is caused by a single serotype
of a mosquito-borne virus of the Bunyaviridae family (genus Phlebovirus). The disease occurs in
climatic conditions favouring the breeding of mosquito vectors and is characterised by abortion,
neonatal mortality and liver damage. The disease is most severe in sheep, goats and cattle. Older
non-pregnant animals, although susceptible to infection, are more resistant to clinical disease.
There is considerable variation in the susceptibility to RVF of animals of different species. Camels
usually have an inapparent infection with RVF virus (RVFV), but sudden mortality, neonatal
mortality and abortion occurs and abortion rates can be as high as in cattle.
Humans are susceptible to infection and are contaminated through contact with infected animal
material (body fluids or tissues) or mosquito bites. RVFV has also caused serious infections in
laboratory workers and must be handled with biosafety and biocontainment measures. It is
recommended that laboratory workers be vaccinated if possible.
Identification of the agent: RVFV consists of a single serotype of Phlebovirus that has
morphological and physicochemical properties typical of this genus.
Identification of RVFV can be achieved by virus isolation, antigen-detection enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assay (ELISA) or immunopathology. Viral RNA can be detected by reversetranscription polymerase chain reaction.
The virus can be isolated from blood, preferably collected with anticoagulant, during the febrile
stage of the disease, or from organs (e.g. liver, spleen and brain tissues) of animals that have died
and from the organs of aborted fetuses. Primary isolations are usually made on cell cultures of
various types, such as African green monkey kidney (Vero) and baby hamster kidney (BHK) cells.
Alternatively, sucking mice may be used for primary virus isolation.
Serological tests: Identification of specific antibodies is mostly achieved by ELISA or the virus
neutralisation test.
Requirements for vaccines: Live attenuated or inactivated vaccines can be used in countries
where RVF is endemic or that are at risk of its introduction. These vaccines should preferably be
prepared from attenuated strains of RVFV grown in cell cultures.
In RVF-free countries, vaccines and diagnostic tests should preferably be limited to those using
inactivated virus. Work with live virus should be performed by trained personnel in biocontainment
facilities following appropriate biosafety procedures.
There are two OIE Reference Laboratories for RVF (see Table given in Part 4 of this Terrestrial
Manual).
A. INTRODUCTION
Rift Valley fever (RVF) is a peracute or acute, febrile, mosquito-borne, zoonotic disease caused by a virus of the
family Bunyaviridae, genus Phlebovirus. It is usually present in epizootic form over large areas of a country
following heavy rains and flooding, and is characterised by high rates of abortion and neonatal mortality, primarily
in sheep, goats, cattle and camels. The susceptibility of different species and breeds to RVF may vary
considerably. Some animals may have inapparent infections, while others have severe clinical disease with
mortality and abortion. Susceptible, older non-pregnant animals often do not show signs of disease.
Signs of the disease tend to be nonspecific, rendering it difficult to recognise individual cases during epidemics
(Coackley et al., 1967; Coetzer, 1982; Coetzer & Barnard, 1977; Easterday, 1965; Gerdes, 2004; Meegan &
Bailey, 1989; Swanepoel & Coetzer, 1994; Weiss, 1957); however, the occurrence of numerous abortions and
mortalities among young animals, together with disease in humans, is characteristic of RVF. RVF has a short
incubation period of about 1236 hours in lambs. A biphasic fever of up to 41C may develop, and the fever
remains high until shortly before death. Affected animals are listless, disinclined to move or feed, and may show
enlarged superficial lymph nodes and evidence of abdominal pain. Lambs rarely survive longer than 36 hours
after the onset of signs of illness. Animals older than 2 weeks may die peracutely, acutely or may recover or
develop an inapparent infection. Some animals may regurgitate ingesta and may show melaena or bloody, foulsmelling diarrhoea and bloodstained mucopurulent nasal discharge. Icterus may sometimes be observed,
particularly in cattle. In addition to these signs, adult cattle may show lachrymation, salivation and dysgalactia. In
pregnant sheep, the mortality and abortion rates vary from 5% to almost 100% in different outbreaks and between
different flocks. The death rate in cattle is usually less than 10%. Camels have been regularly involved in the RVF
epidemics in East Africa, Egypt and more recently Mauritania. Clinical disease is usually not seen in adult camels,
but sudden deaths, abortion and some early post-natal deaths have been observed. Differential diagnosis
includes: bluetongue, Wesselsbron disease, enterotoxemia of sheep, ephemeral fever, brucellosis, vibriosis,
trichomonosis, Nairobi sheep disease, heartwater, ovine enzootic abortion, toxic plants, bacterial septicaemias,
peste des petits ruminants, anthrax and Schmallenberg disease.
The hepatic lesions of RVF are very similar in all species, varying mainly with the age of the infected individual
(Coetzer, 1982). The most severe lesion, occurring in aborted fetuses and newborn lambs, is a moderately to
greatly enlarged, soft, friable liver with a yellowish-brown to dark reddish-brown colour with irregular congested
patches. Numerous greyish-white necrotic foci are invariably present in the parenchyma, but may not be clearly
discernible. In adult sheep, the lesions are less severe and pinpoint reddish to greyish-white necrotic foci are
distributed throughout the parenchyma. Haemorrhage and oedema of the wall of the gallbladder are common.
Hepatic lesions in lambs are almost invariably accompanied by numerous small haemorrhages in the mucosa of
the abomasum. The contents of the small intestine and abomasum can be dark chocolate-brown as a result of the
presence of partially digested blood. In all animals, the spleen and peripheral lymph nodes can be enlarged,
oedematous and may have petechiae.
Microscopically, hepatic necrosis is the most obvious lesion of RVF in both animals and humans. In fetuses and
neonates of cattle and sheep, foci of necrosis consist of dense aggregates of cellular and nuclear debris, some
fibrin and a few inflammatory cells. There is a severe lytic necrosis of most hepatocytes and the normal
architecture of the liver is lost. In about 50% of affected livers, intranuclear inclusion bodies that are eosinophilic
and oval or rod-shaped are found. Mineralisation of necrotic hepatocytes is also seen. In adult animals, hepatic
necrosis is less diffuse, and in sheep, icterus is more common than in lambs (Coetzer, 1982; Swanepoel &
Coetzer, 1994).
In humans, RVF infections are usually inapparent or associated with a moderate to severe, nonfatal, influenza-like
illness (Madani et al., 2003; McIntosh et al., 1980; Meegan, 1981). A minority of patients may develop retinal
lesions, encephalitis, or severe hepatic disease with haemorrhagic manifestations, which is generally fatal. RVF
virus (RVFV) has caused serious human infections in laboratory workers. Staff should be vaccinated when a
vaccine is available. An inactivated vaccine has been developed for human use. However, this vaccine is not
licensed and is not commercially available. It has been used experimentally to protect veterinary and laboratory
personnel at high risk of exposure to RVF. Further information about the disease and vaccination in humans is
available from WHO1. RVFV is classed in Risk Group 3 for human infection and should be handled with
appropriate measures as described in Chapter 1.1.3 Biosafety and biosecurity in the veterinary microbiology
laboratory and animal facilities. Biocontainment measures should be determined by risk analysis as described in
Chapter 1.1.3a Standard for managing biorisk in the veterinary laboratory and animal facilities. Particular care
needs to be exercised when working with infected animals or when performing post-mortem examinations.
RVFV consists of a single serotype of the Bunyaviridae family (genus Phlebovirus) and has morphological and
physicochemical properties typical of bunyaviruses. The virus is enveloped, spherical and 80120 nm in diameter.
Glycoprotein spikes project through a bilayered lipid envelope. The virus is readily inactivated by lipid solvents
and acid conditions below pH 6. RVFV has a three-segmented, single-stranded, negative-sense RNA genome
and consists of the following segments: L (large), M (medium) and S (small), each of which is contained in a
separate nucleocapsid within the virion. The S segment is an ambisense RNA, i.e. has bi-directional coding
(Giorgi, 1991).
No significant antigenic differences have been demonstrated between RVF isolates and laboratory-passaged
strains from many countries, but differences in pathogenicity between genotypes have been shown (Bird et al.,
2007; Swanepoel et al., 1986).
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs207/en/
RVFV is endemic in many African countries and may involve several countries in the region at the same time or
progressively expand geographically over the course of a few years. In addition to Africa, large outbreaks have
been observed in the Arabian Peninsula and some Indian Ocean Islands. These generally, but not
exclusivelyfollow the periodic cycles of unusually heavy rainfall, which may occur at intervals of several years, or
the flooding of wide areas favouring the proliferation of mosquitoes.
Rainfall facilitates mosquito eggs to hatch. Aedes mosquitoes acquire the virus from feeding on infected animals,
and may potentially vertically transmit the virus, so that new generations of infected mosquitoes may hatch from
their eggs (Linthicum et al., 1985). This provides a potential mechanism for maintaining the virus in nature, as the
eggs of these mosquitoes may survive for periods of up to several years in dry conditions. Once livestock is
infected, a wide variety of mosquito species may act as the vector for transmission of RVFV and can spread the
disease.
Low level RVF activity may take place during inter-epizootic periods. RVF should be suspected when exceptional
flooding and subsequent abundant mosquito populations are followed by the occurrence of abortions together
with fatal disease marked by necrosis and haemorrhages in the liver that particularly affect newborn lambs, kids
and calves, potentially concurrent with the occurrence of an influenza-like illness in farm workers and people
handling raw meat.
During an outbreak, preventive measures to protect workers from infection should be employed when there are
suspicions that RVFV-infected animals or animal products are to be handled.
B. DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES
The collection of specimens and their transport should comply with the Chapter 1.1.1 Collection, submission and
storage of diagnostic specimens and Chapter 1.1.2 Transport of specimens of animal origin of this Terrestrial
Manual.
Proper diagnosis should always use a combination of techniques based on history, the purpose of the testing and
the stage of the suspected infection. For a definitive interpretation, combined epidemiological, clinical and
laboratory information should be evaluated carefully.
All the test methods described below should be validated in each laboratory using them (see Chapter 1.1.5
Principles and methods of validation of diagnostic assays for infectious diseases of this Terrestrial Manual). The
OIE Reference Laboratories for RVF should be contacted for technical support. Table 1 provides a general
guidance summary on the use of the diagnostic tests methods. More detailed aspects are addressed in the test
descriptions that follow.
Table 1. Test methods available for diagnosis of Rift Valley fever and their purposes
Purpose
Method
Population
freedom from
infection (nonvaccinated
animals)
Individual
animal
freedom from
infection prior
to movement
Contribute to
eradication
policies
Confirmation
of clinical
cases2
Prevalence
of infection
surveillance
Immune status
in individual
animals or
populations
post-vaccination
Agent identification3
Virus isolation in
cell culture
+++
Virus isolation in
sucking mice
RT-PCR
+++
Laboratory confirmation of clinical cases should require a combination of at least two positive results from two different
diagnostic test methods: either positive for virus/viral RNA and antibodies or positive for IgM and IgG with demonstration
of rising titres between paired sera samples collected 24 weeks apart. Depending of the stage of the disease, virus
and/or antibodies will be detected.
A combination of agent identification methods applied on the same clinical sample is recommended.
Purpose
Population
freedom from
infection (nonvaccinated
animals)
Individual
animal
freedom from
infection prior
to movement
Contribute to
eradication
policies
Confirmation
of clinical
cases2
Prevalence
of infection
surveillance
Immune status
in individual
animals or
populations
post-vaccination
Antigen detection
++
Histopathology
with immunohistochemistry
++
Method
+++
++
+++
++
+++
+++
VN
+++
+++
+++
++
++
+++
Key: +++ = recommended method; ++ = suitable method; + = may be used in some situations, but cost, reliability, or other
factors severely limits its application; = not appropriate for this purpose.
Although not all of the tests listed as category +++ or ++ have undergone formal validation, their routine nature and the fact that
they have been used widely without dubious results, makes them acceptable.
RT-PCR = reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction;
ELISA = enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; VN = Virus neutralisation.
1.
RVFV may be isolated from serum but preferentially from plasma or blood collected with anticoagulant during the
febrile stage of the disease in live animals, or from liver, spleen and brain of animals that have died, or from
aborted fetuses. Primary isolation is usually performed in cell cultures of various types or by intracerebral
inoculation of sucking mice.
containing sodium penicillin (1000 International Units [IU]/ml), streptomycin sulphate (1 mg/ml),
mycostatin (100 IU/ml), or fungizone (2.5 g/ml). The suspension is centrifuged at 1000 g for
10 minutes and the supernatant fluid is injected intracerebrally into 1- to 5-day-old mice. Sucking mice
will either die or be obviously ill by day 2 post-inoculation.
Confirmation of virus isolation should be performed preferably by immunostaining or PCR.
Test procedure
RNA is extracted by an appropriate chemical method according to the procedure
recommended by the manufacturer of the commercial kit. When the procedure is finished,
keep the extracted RNA samples on ice if the RT step is about to be performed. Otherwise
store at 20C or 70C. For RT-PCR, the protocol from Sall et al. (2001) is used. For the
first RT-PCR step, NSca (5-CCT-TAA-CCT-CTA-ATC-AAC-3) and NSng (5-TA-TCATGG-ATT-ACT-TTC-C-3) primers are used.
a)
Prepare the PCR mix described below for each sample. It is recommended to
prepare the mix in bulk for the number of samples to be tested plus one extra
sample.
Nuclease-free water (15.5 l); RT-PCR reaction buffer, 5 conc (10 l); MgCl2,
25 mM (1 l); dNTPs, 10 mM mixture each of dATP, dCTP, dGTP, dTTP (1 l);
primer NSca, 10 M (2.5 l); primer NSng 10 M (2.5 l): Enzyme Mix, 5 units/l
(0.25 l).
b)
Add 40 l of PCR reaction mix to a well of a PCR plate or to a microcentifuge tube for
each sample to be assayed followed by 10 l of the RNA (prepared in step i) to give
a final reaction volume of 50 l.
c)
Spin the plate or tubes for 1 minute in a suitable centrifuge to mix the contents of
each well.
d)
Place the plate in a thermal cycler for PCR amplification and run the following
programme:
45C for 30 minutes: 1 cycle;
95C for 2 minutes: 1 cycle;
94C for 30 seconds, 44C for 30 seconds, 72C for 1 minute: 40 cycles;
72C for 5 minutes: 1 cycle.
e)
Mix a 20 l aliquot of each PCR reaction product with 4 l of staining solution and
load onto a 1.2% agarose gel. After electrophoresis a positive result is indicated by
the presence of a 810 bp (242 bp for Clone 13) band corresponding to RVFV
sequence in the NSs coding region of the S segment of the genome.
For the nested RT-PCR step, NS3a (5-ATG-CTG-GGA-AGT-GAT-GAG-CG-3) and
NS2g (5-GAT-TTG-CAG-AGT-GGT-CGT-C-3) are used.
f)
Prepare the PCR mix described below for each sample. It is recommended to
prepare the mix in bulk for the number of samples to be tested plus one extra
sample.
Nuclease-free water (35.5 l); RT-PCR reaction buffer, 10 conc (5 l); MgCl2,
25 mM (1.25 l); dNTPs, 10 mM mixture each of dATP, dCTP, dGTP, dTTP (1 l);
primer NS3a
(5-ATG-CTG-GGA-AGT-GAT-GAG-CG-3),
10
M
(2.5 l);
primer NS2g (5-GAT-TTG-CAG-AGT-GGT-CGT-C-3), 10 M (2.5 l): Enzyme Mix,
5 units/l (0.25 l).
g)
Add 49 l of PCR reaction mix to a well of a PCR plate or to a microcentifuge tube for
each sample to be assayed followed by 1 l of the amplicon obtained from RT-PCR
reaction with NSca and NSng to give a final reaction volume of 50 l.
h)
Spin the plate or tubes for 1 minute in a suitable centrifuge to mix the contents of
each well.
i)
Place the plate in a thermal cycler for PCR amplification and run the following
programme:
95C for 2 minutes: 1 cycle;
94C for 1 minute, 55C for 1 minute, 72C for 1 minute: 25 cycles;
72C for 5 minutes: 1 cycle.
j)
Mix a 20 l aliquot of each PCR reaction product with 4 l of staining solution and
load onto a 1.2% agarose gel. After electrophoresis a positive result is indicated by
the presence of a 668 bp (129 bp for Clone 13) band corresponding to RVFV
sequence in the NSs coding region of the S segment of the genome.
Test procedure
a)
Prepare the PCR mix described below for each sample. Again it is recommended to
prepare the mix in bulk for the number of samples to be tested plus one extra
sample.
Nuclease-free water (1.4 l); RT-PCR reaction master mix, 2 conc. (10 l); real-time
PCR forward primer RVS: 5-AAA-GGA-ACA-ATG-GAC-TCT-GGT-CA-3, 10 M
(2 l); real-time PCR reverse primer RVAs: 5-CAC-TTC-TTA-CTA-CCA-TGT-CCTCCA-AT-3, 10 M (2 l); RVP: FAM 5-AAA-GCT-TTG-ATA-TCT-CTC-AGT-GCCCCA-A-3 TAMRA 20 M (0.2 l).
b)
Add 17 l PCR reaction mix to a well of a real-time PCR plate for each sample to be
assayed followed by 3 l of the prepared RNA to give a final reaction volume of 20 l.
c)
Spin the plate for 1 minute in a suitable centrifuge to mix the contents of each well.
d)
Place the plate in a real-time PCR machine for PCR amplification and run the
following programme:
45C for 30 minutes: 1 cycle;
95C for 5 minutes: 1 cycle;
95C for 5 seconds, 57C for 35 seconds: 45 cycles.
e)
Reading the results: assign a threshold cycle (CT) value to each PCR reaction from
the amplification plots (fluorescence signal versus cycle number); different cut-off
values may be appropriate for different sample types. The CT values used to assign
samples as either RVFV positive or negative should be defined by individual
laboratories using appropriate reference material.
The basic approach is that of a double antibody sandwich capture assay in which the
antigen is captured by antibody on a solid phase and then detected by a second antibody.
A detection system using horseradish peroxidase (HRPO)ABTS (2,2-azino-di-(3-ethylbenzthiazoline)-6-sulphonic acid) is then applied to determine how much of the detection
antibody has been retained on the solid phase of the system.
a)
Capture (coating) antibody (diluted 1/2000 in PBS [no Tween], pH 7.4 and coated
overnight at 4C; control wells are coated with a similar dilution of normal fluid)
Plates are coated with a specific anti-viral antibody (available in OIE or WHO
Reference Laboratories) capable of capturing viral antigen from the test sample.
Normal serum is added to rows to serve as controls used to determine the
nonspecific background or noise of the system. In this instance it is a hyperimmune
mouse ascitic fluid (HMAF) (it could also be monoclonal antibodies) specific for RVF
viruses.
b)
Suspect samples and control antigen (diluted 1/4 and then diluted four-fold, down the
plate)
These are added in serum diluent to allow specific viral antigens to bind to the
capture antibody. The serum diluent (PBS, 0.01 M, pH 7.4, with or without
thiomersal) contains 5% skim milk and 0.1% Tween 20 to reduce nonspecific binding.
c)
Detection antibody
An antibody, high titred for specific viral antigen, is added to allow detection of the
bound viral antigen. In this experiment, it is an anti-RVF hyperimmune rabbit serum
(available in OIE or WHO Reference Laboratories) that has a high titre against RVF
viruses.
d)
e)
1.6. Histopathology
Histopathological examination of the liver of affected animals will reveal characteristic cytopathology,
and immunostaining will allow the specific identification of RVF viral antigen in tissue (Coetzer, 1982;
Swanepoel et al., 1986). This is an important diagnostic tool because liver or other tissue placed in
neutral buffered formaldehyde in the field is inactivated and does not require a cold chain, which
facilitates handling and transport from remote areas .
2.
Serological tests
Samples collected from animals for antibody testing may contain live virus and appropriate inactivation steps
should be put in place. A combination of heat and chemical inactivation has been described (Van Vuren &
Paweska, 2010). Immunofluorescence assays are still used, although cross-reactions may occur between RVFV
and other phleboviruses. Techniques such as the agar gel immunodiffusion (AGID), radioimmunoassays,
haemagglutination inhibition (HI), and complement fixation are no longer used.
Several assays are available for detection of anti-RVFV antibodies in a variety of animal species. Currently the
most widely used technique is the ELISA for the detection of IgM and IgG. Virus neutralisation tests (VNT) have
been used to detect antibodies against RVFV in the serum of a variety of species. Neutralisation tests are the
most specific diagnostic serological tests, but these tests can only be performed with live virus and are not
recommended for use outside endemic areas or in laboratories without appropriate biosecurity facilities and
vaccinated personnel. However, alternative neutralisation assays not requiring handling of highly virulent RVFV
and not requiring high containment, are being developed and validated.
Test procedure
a)
Coat each well of the 96-well ELISA plates with 100 l of the capture antibody
(affinity purified rabbit anti-sheep IgM1) diluted to 1 g/ml in PBS (that is a 1/1000
dilution if so determined by the titration), and incubate overnight at room temperature
in a humid chamber.
b)
c)
Block the plates with 300 l blocking buffer and incubate for 1 hour at 37C.
d)
e)
Dilute both control (positive and negative) and test sera 1/100 in blocking buffer and
add each serum in a designated well at volumes of 100 l /well.
f)
Incubate the plates for 1 hour at 37C. Avoid drying by putting plates in a humid
chamber.
g)
Following the incubation step, wash the ELISA plates with wash buffer three times.
h)
Dilute the rN-HRP conjugate 1/6000 and add 100 l of this in each well. Use blocking
buffer as the conjugate control.
i)
j)
k)
Stop the reaction with 100 l stop solution, and read the OD values using an ELISA
plate reader at 450 nm.
l)
It should be noted that the cut-off value for an ELISA can be adjusted for different target
populations as well as for different diagnostic purposes (Jacobson, 1998). The cut-off values
determined by the validation exercise at the OIE Reference Laboratory in South Africa are the
following: PP (%) values: negative <4; suspicious 45; positive>6.
Test procedure
a)
Coat each well of the 96-well ELISA plate with 100 l of rN diluted in 50 mM of
carbonate buffer (pH 9.6) using the dilution ratio determined by prior titration as
explained above; incubate overnight at room temperature in a humid chamber.
b)
Wash the plates three times with approximately 300 l wash buffer per well.
c)
Block the plates with approximately 300 l blocking buffer and incubate for 1 hour at
37C.
d)
Wash the plates again three times with nearly 300 l of wash buffer per well.
e)
Dilute both control (positive and negative) and test sera 1/100 in blocking buffer.
f)
g)
Incubate the plates for 1 hour at 37C. Avoid drying by putting plates in a humid
chamber.
h)
Following the incubation step, wash the ELISA plates with wash buffer three times.
i)
Dilute protein G-HRP conjugate 1/32,000 in blocking buffer and add 100 l of the
conjugate in each well.
j)
k)
The plates are washed, as in step b above. Add 100 l of ready to use TMB
substrate to each well and allow the plates to stand at room temperature for a few
minutes, while avoiding exposure to direct light. The plates are read at 650 nm to
determine if OD of 0.40.6 has been reached.
l)
Stop the reaction with 100 l stop solution, and read the plates using ELISA plate
reader at 450 nm.
m)
It should be noted that the cut-off value for an ELISA can be adjusted for different target
populations as well as for different diagnostic purposes (Jacobson, 1998). The cut-off values
determined by the validation exercise at the OIE Reference Laboratory in South Africa are the
following: PP values (%): negative <4; suspicious 46; positive>7.
generally used to measure vaccine efficacy. The Smithburn neurotropic mouse brain strain of highly
attenuated RVFV (Smithburn, 1949) or any other, preferably attenuated, RVFV, is used as challenge
virus. The virus is stored at 80C, or 4C in freeze-dried form. The stock is titrated to determine the
dilution that will give 100 TCID50 (50% tissue culture infective dose) in 25 l under the conditions of the
test.
ii)
Add 25 l of cell culture medium with 5% RVF-negative serum and antibiotics to each well
of a 96-well cell culture plate.
iii)
Add 25 l of test serum to the first well of each row and make twofold dilutions. Titrate
each serum in duplicate from 1/10 to 1/80 for screening purposes or in quadruplet and to
higher dilutions for determination of end-point titres. Include known positive and negative
control sera.
iv)
Add 25 l per well of RVFV (diluted in cell culture medium and calculated to provide
100 TCID50 per well) to each well that contains diluted test serum and to wells in rows
containing negative and positive control serum. In addition, make twofold dilutions of
challenge virus in at least two rows each containing cell culture medium only.
v)
vi)
Add 50 l per well of Vero, BHK or any other suitable cell suspension at 3 105 cells/ml or
at a dilution known to produce a confluent monolayer within 12 hours.
vii)
viii) Using an inverted microscope, the monolayers are examined daily for evidence of CPE.
There should be no CPE in rows containing positive control serum and clear evidence of
CPE in rows containing negative control serum indicating the presence of virus. Determine
the results by the SpearmanKrber method.
Background
Currently available RVF vaccines are either live attenuated or inactivated vaccines.
Table 2. Summary of the current RVF vaccine strains
10
Smithburn live
attenuated virus
vaccines
Clone-13 live
attenuated
virus vaccine
Inactivated
virus vaccines
TSIGSD200 inactivated
human vaccine
(presently not available)
Origin of the
isolate
Mosquito isolate,
Uganda, 1948
Human isolate,
1974
Field strains
(South Africa and
Egypt) used
Attenuation
Natural deletion in
NSs gene
Not applicable
Not applicable
Production
substrate
Target
livestock
livestock
livestock
human
DIVA policy
No
No
No
Not applicable
ii)
11
Safe for the staff involved in the production of the vaccines and for the users, safe to all physiological stages
of animals, and with minimal risk of introduction into the environment (potential vectors);
ii)
Protective in multispecies and if possible in all susceptible species of economic importance, to prevent
infection and transmission;
iii)
Cost effective for producers and users preferentially with a single-dose vaccination;
iv)
Easy to use (e.g. preferably needle-free delivery), suitable for stockpiling (vaccine bank) and quick
availability.
Staff handling virulent RVFV should preferably work in high containment facilities and be vaccinated, if vaccines
are available, to minimise the risk of infection.
Guidelines for the production of veterinary vaccines are given in Chapter 1.1.6 Principles of veterinary vaccine
production. The guidelines given below and in chapter 1.1.6 are intended to be general in nature and may be
supplemented by national and regional requirements.
In the following description of vaccine production, information is given on live vaccine production adjacent to
information on inactivated vaccine production.
2.
12
Live vaccines
Virus seed is produced in cell culture. Selection of a cell type for culture is dependent on
the degree of virus adaptation, growth in medium, and viral yield in the specific culture
system. Vaccine products should be limited to the number of passages from the MSV and
should be restricted to five. Generally, large-scale monolayer or suspension cell systems
are operated under strict temperature-controlled, aseptic conditions and defined
production methods, to assure lot-to-lot consistency. Dose of virus used to inoculate cell
culture should be kept to a minimum to reduce the potential for defective interfering viral
particles. When the virus has reached its appropriate titre, as determined by CPE or other
approved technique, the harvest can be clarified. Generally, the vaccine is freeze-dried,
preferably in the presence of a suitable stabiliser.
ii)
Inactivated vaccines
Antigens used in inactivated vaccines are generally prepared in a similar way to live
vaccines. The virus present in the virus maintenance medium is inactivated using a
validated inactivation method then can be eventually concentrated/purified and formulated
with a suitable adjuvant.
In the case where a virulent RVFV is used for inactivated vaccine production, staff
handling the live virus should be vaccinated, if vaccines are available, and the facilities and
practices should conform with high containment level minimising the risk of infection of the
staff and release into the environment.
Sterility
The final products should be tested for absence of bacteria, Mycoplasma and fungal
contamination (see chapter 1.1.7).
ii)
Identity
The bulk live attenuated virus or the inactivated antigen as well as the final formulated
product (freeze-dried or liquid) should undergo identity testing before release to
demonstrate that the relevant RVF strain is present.
13
iii)
Safety
Unless consistent safety of the product is demonstrated and approved in a registration
dossier and the production process is approved for consistency in accordance with the
standard requirements referred to in chapter 1.1.6, batch safety testing is to be performed.
The final product batch safety test is designed to detect any abnormal local or systemic
adverse reactions.
If batch safety testing needs to be performed, each of at least two healthy sero-negative
target animals have to be inoculated by the recommended route of administration with the
recommended dose of vaccine. The animals are observed for local and systemic reactions
to vaccination for no fewer than 14 days. Any adverse reaction attributable to the vaccine
should be assessed and may prevent acceptance of the batch. If the potency test is
performed in the target species, observation of the safety during this test can also be
considered as an alternative to the batch safety test described here.
iv)
Batch potency
For live vaccines, potency is usually based on live virus titre. For batch release of
inactivated vaccines, indirect tests can be used for practicability and animal welfare
considerations, as long as correlation has been validated to the percentage of protection in
the target animal. Frequently indirect potency tests include antibody titration after
vaccination of suitable species. Alternative methods (antigen mass) could be used if
suitably validated.
v)
Moisture content
The moisture content of the lyophilised attenuated vaccine should not exceed 5%.
Live vaccines
Vaccines should be tested for any pathogenic effects in each of the target species claimed
on the label.
a)
14
b)
c)
Non-transmissibility
This test should be performed in the most susceptible species for RVF, which is
sheep.
Keep together no fewer than 12 healthy lambs, at the minimum age recommended
for vaccination and of the same origin, and that do not have antibodies against
RVFV. Use vaccine virus at the lowest passage level that will be present between the
MSV and a batch of the vaccine. Administer by a recommended route to no fewer
than six lambs a quantity of the vaccine virus equivalent to not less than the
maximum virus titre likely to be contained in 1 dose of the vaccine.
Maintain no fewer than six lambs as contact controls. The mixing of vaccinated lambs
and contact lambs is done 24 hours after vaccination.
After 45 days, euthanise all lambs. Carry out appropriate tests on the lambs to detect
antibodies against RVF virus and on the control lambs to detect RVFV in the spleen
and liver. The vaccine complies with the test if antibodies are found in all vaccinated
lambs and if no antibodies and no virus are found in the control lambs.
d)
Reversion-to-virulence
This test is carried out using the master seed lot. If the quantity of the master seed lot
sufficient for performing the test is not available, the lowest passage material used for
the production that is available in sufficient quantity may be used. At the time of
inoculation, the animals in all groups are of an age suitable for recovery of the strain.
Serial passages are carried out in target animals using five groups of animals, unless
there is justification to carry out more passages or unless the strain disappears from
the test animal sooner. In-vitro propagation may not be used to expand the passage
inoculum.
The passages are carried out using animals most appropriate to the potential risk
being assessed.
Initially, the vaccine is administered by the recommended route most likely to lead to
reversion-to-virulence, using an initial inoculum containing the maximum release titre.
After this, no fewer than four further serial passages through animals of the target
species are undertaken. The passages are undertaken by the route of administration
most likely to lead to reversion-to-virulence. If the properties of the strain allow
sequential passage via natural spreading, this method may be used, otherwise
passage of the virus is carried out and the virus that is recovered at the final passage
is tested for increase in virulence. For the first four groups, a minimum of two animals
is used. The last group consists of a minimum of eight animals. At each passage, the
15
Environmental considerations
A risk assessment should be prepared where potential spread or risk of live vaccines
to non-target species or spread by vector is considered.
f)
Precautions (hazards)
Modified live virus vaccines may pose a hazard to the vaccinator depending on the
strain and level of attenuation of the virus. Manufacturers should provide adequate
warnings that medical advice should be sought in case of self-injection of vaccine.
ii)
Inactivated vaccines
a)
b)
16
c)
Precautions (hazards)
Inactivated RVFV vaccines present no danger to vaccinators, although accidental
inoculation may result in an adverse reaction caused by the adjuvant and secondary
components of the vaccine. Manufacturers should provide adequate warnings that
medical advice should be sought in case of self-injection of vaccine.
ii)
17
performed with a sufficient quantity of virulent RVFV (observe until lambing or harvest of
fetuses at 28 days). Observe the animals clinically at least daily from challenge, and either
until the end of gestation or until harvest of fetuses after 28 days. If abortion occurs,
examine the aborted fetus for the presence of the RVFV. If animals are observed until
lambing, immediately after birth and prior to ingestion of colostrum, examine all lambs for
viraemia and antibodies against RVFV. If fetuses are harvested 28 days after challenge,
examine the fetuses for RVFV by suitable methods. Transplacental infection is considered
to have occurred if virus is detected in fetal organs or in the blood of newborn lambs or if
antibodies are detected in precolostral sera of lambs.
The test is invalid if any of the control animals have neutralising antibody before challenge.
The test should show significant difference in protection and transplacental transmission
between the vaccinated and control groups of animals.
2.3.6. Stability
The stability of all vaccines should be demonstrated as part of the shelf-life determination
studies for authorisation.
The period of validity of a batch of lyophilised RVF vaccine or a batch of liquid inactivated
vaccine should not be less than 1 year.
REFERENCES
AFETINE J.M., TIJHAAR E., PAWESKA J.T., NEVES L.C., HENDRIKS J., SWANEPOEL R., COETZER J.A., EGBERINK H.F. &
RUTTEN V.P. (2007). Cloning and expression of Rift Valley fever virus nucleocapsid (N) protein and evaluation of
an N-protein based indirect ELISA for the detection of specific IgG and IgM antibodies in domestic ruminants. Vet.
Microbiol., 31, 2938.
BARNARD B.J.H. (1979). Rift Valley fever vaccine antibody and immune response in cattle to a live and an
inactivated vaccine. J. S. Afr. Vet. Assoc., 50, 155157.
BARNARD B.J.H. & BOTHA M.J. (1977). An inactivated Rift Valley fever vaccine. J. S. Afr. Vet. Assoc., 48, 4548.
BIRD B.H., KHRISTOVA M.L., ROLLIN P.E. & NICHOL S.T. (2007). Complete genome analysis of 33 ecologically and
biologically diverse Rift Valley fever virus strains reveals widespread virus movement and low genetic diversity
due to recent common ancestry. J. Virol., 81, 28052816.
BOTROS B., OMAR A., ELIAN K., MOHAMED G., SOLIMAN A., SALIB A., SALMAN D., SAAD M. & EARHART K. (2006).
Adverse response of non-indigenous cattle of European breeds to live attenuated Smithburn Rift Valley fever
vaccine. J. Med. Virol., 78, 787791.
CETTRE-SOSSAH C., BILLECOCQ A., LANCELOT R., DEFERNEZ C., FAVRE J., BOULOY M., MARTINEZ D. & ALBINA E. (2009).
Evaluation of a commercial competitive ELISA for the detection of antibodies to Rift Valley fever virus in sera of
domestic ruminants in France. Prev. Vet. Med., 90, 146149.
COACKLEY W., PINI A. & GOSDIN D. (1967). Experimental infection of cattle with pantropic Rift Valley fever virus.
Res. Vet. Sci., 8, 399405.
COETZER J.A.W. (1982). The pathology of Rift Valley fever. 11. Lesions occurring in field cases in adult cattle,
calves and aborted fetuses. Onderstepoort J. Vet. Res., 49, 1117.
COETZER J.A.W. & BARNARD B.J.H. (1977). Hydrops amnii in sheep associated with hydranencephaly and
arthrogryposis with Wesselsbron disease and Rift Valley fever viruses as ethological agents. Onderstepoort J.
Vet. Res., 44, 119126.
18
DIGOUTTE J.P., JOUAN A., LEGUENNO B., RIOU O., PHILIPPE B., MEEGAN J.M., KSIAZEK T.G. & PETERS C.J. (1989).
Isolation of the Rift Valley fever virus by inoculation into Aedes pseudoscutellaris cells: comparison with other
diagnostic methods. Res. Virol., 140, 3141.
DROSTEN C., GOTTIG S., SCHILLING S., ASPER M., PANNING M., SCHMITZ H. & GUNTHER S. (2002). Rapid detection and
quantification of RNA of Ebola and Marburg viruses, Lassa virus, CrimeanCongo hemorrhagic fever virus, Rift
Valley fever virus, Dengue virus, and Yellow fever virus by real-time reverse transcription-PCR. J. Clin. Microbiol.,
40, 23232330.
DUNGU B., LOUW I., LUBISI A., HUNTER P., VON TEICHMAN B.F. & BOULOY M. (2010). Evaluation of the efficacy and
safety of the Rift Valley fever clone 13 vaccine in sheep. Vaccine, 28, 45814587.
EASTERDAY B.C. (1965). Rift Valley fever. Adv. Vet. Sci., 10, 65127.
EUROPEAN PHARMACOPOEIA (2012). Version 7.5. Editions of the Council of Europe, Strasbourg. France.
FOOD AND AGRICULUTRE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (FAO) (2011). Rift Valley fever vaccine development,
progress and constraints. Proceedings of the GF-TADs meeting, Rome, Italy, FAO Animal Production and Health
Proceedings, No 12.
GARCIA S., CRANCE J.M., BILLECOCQ A., PEINNEQUIN A., JOUAN A., BOULOY M. & GARIN D. (2001). Quantitative realtime PCR detection of Rift Valley fever virus and its application to evaluation of antiviral compounds. J. Clin.
Microbiol., 39, 44564461.
GERDES G.H. (2004). Rift Valley fever. Rev. sci. tech. Off. int. Epiz., 23(2), 613623.
GIORGI C., ACCARDI L., NICOLETTI L., GRO M.C., TAKEHARA K., HILDITCH C., MORIKAWA S. & BISHOP D.H. (1991).
Sequences and coding strategies of the S RNAs of Toscana and Rift Valley fever viruses compared to those of
Punta Toro, Sicilian Sandfly fever, and Uukuniemi viruses. Virology, 180 (2), 738573.
HUNTER P. & BOULOY M. (2001). Investigation of C13 RVF mutant as a vaccine strain. Proceedings of 5th
International sheep veterinary congress, 2125 January 2001, Stellenbosch, South Africa. University of Pretoria,
South Africa.
HUNTER P., ERASMUS B.J. & VORSTER J.H. (2002). Teratogenicity of a mutagenised Rift Valley fever virus (MVP 12)
in sheep. Onderstepoort J. Vet. Res., 69, 9598.
JACOBSON R.H. (1998). Validation of serological assays for diagnosis of infectious diseases. Rev. sci. tech. Off.
int. Epiz., 17, 469486.
JANSEN VAN VUREN P., POTGIETER A.C., PAWESKA J.T. & VAN DIJK A.A. (2007). Preparation and evaluation of a
recombinant Rift Valley fever virus N protein for the detection of IgG and IgM antibodies in humans and animals
by indirect ELISA. J. Virol. Methods, 140, 106114.
JUPP P.G., GROBBELAAR A.A., LEMAN P.A., KEMP A., DUNTON R.F., BURKOT T.R., KSIAZEK T.G. & SWANEPOEL R.
(2000). Experimental detection of Rift Valley fever virus by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction assay
in large samples of mosquitoes. J. Med. Entomol., 37(3), 467471.
LINTHICUM KENNETH J., DAVIES F.G., KAIRO A. & BAILEY C.L. (1985). Rift Valley fever virus (family Bunyaviridae,
genus Phlebovirus). Isolations from Diptera collected during an inter-epizootic period in Kenya. J. Hygiene, 95 (1),
197209.
MADANI T.A., AL-MAZROU Y.Y., AL-JEFFRI M.H., MISHKHAS A.A., AL-RABEAH A.M., TURKISTANI A.M., AL-SAYED M.O.,
ABODAHISH A.A., KHAN A.S., KSIAZEK T.G. & SHOBOKSHI O. (2003). Rift Valley fever epidemic in Saudi Arabia:
epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory characteristics. Clin. Infect. Dis., 37, 10841092.
MCINTOSH B.M., RUSSEL D., DOS SANTOS I. & GEAR J.H.S. (1980). Rift Valley fever in humans in South Africa. S.
Afr. Med. J., 58, 803806.
MEADORS G.F., GIBBS P.H., & PETERS C.J. (1986). Evaluations of a new Rift Valley fever vaccine: Safety and
immunogenicity trials. Vaccine, 4, 179184.
MEEGAN J.M. (1981). Rift Valley fever in Egypt: An overview of the epizootics in 1977 and 1978. Contrib.
Epidemiol. Biostat., 3, 100103.
19
MEEGAN J.M. & BAILEY C.L. (1989). Rift Valley fever. In: The Arboviruses: Epidemiology and Ecology, Vol. IV,
Monath T.P., ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, 5276.
MULLER R., SALUZZO J.F., LOPEZ N., DREIER T., TURRELL M., SMITH J. & BOULOY M. (1995). Characterization of clone
13 a naturally attenuated avirulent isolate of Rift Valley fever virus which is altered in the small segment. Am. J.
Trop. Med. Hyg., 53, 405411.
MUNYUA P., MURITHI R.M., WAINWRIGHT S., GITHINJI J., HIGHTOWER A., MUTONGA D., MACHARIA J., ITHONDEKA P.M.,
MUSAA J., BREIMAN R.F., BLOLAND P. & NJENGA M.K. (2010). Rift Valley fever outbreak in livestock in Kenya, 2006
2007. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., 83, 5864.
NAKANE P.K. & AKIRA KAWAOI A. (1974). Peroxidase-labeled antibody. A new method of conjugation. J. Histochem.
Cytochem., 22, 10841091.
PAWESKA J.T., BURT F.J., ANTHONY F., SMITH S.J., GROBBELAAR A.A., CROFT J.E., KSIAZEK T.G. & SWANEPOEL R.
(2003). IgG-sandwich and IgM-capture enzyme-linked immunosorvent assay for the detection of antibody to Rift
Valley fever virus in domestic ruminants. J. Virol. Methods, 113 (2), 103112.
PAWESKA J.T., MORTIMER E., LEMAN P.A. & SWANEPOEL R. (2005). An inhibition enzyme-linked immunosorbent
assay for the detection of antibody to Rift Valley fever virus in humans, domestic and wild ruminants. J. Virol.
Methods, 127, 1018.
SALL A.A., THONNON J., SENE O.K., FALL A., NDIAYE M., BAUDES B., MATHIOT C. & BOULOY M. (2001). Single-tube and
nested reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction for the detection of Rift Valley fever virus in human and
animal sera. J. Virol. Methods, 91, 8592.
SMITHBURN K.C. (1949). Rift Valley fever; the neurotropic adaptation of the virus and the experimental use of this
modified virus as a vaccine. Br. J. Exp., 30, 116.
SWANEPOEL R. & COETZER J.A.W. (1994). Rift Valley fever. In: Infectious Diseases of Livestock with Special
Reference to Southern Africa. Vol. 1, Coetzer J.A.W., Thomson G.R. & Tustin R.C., eds. Oxford University Press,
UK.
SWANEPOEL R., STUTHERS J.K., ERASMUS M.J., SHEPHERD S.P., MCGILLIVRAY G.M., SHEPHERD A.J., ERASMUS B.J. &
BARNARD B.J.H. (1986). Comparative pathogenicity and antigenic cross-reactivity of Rift Valley fever and other
African phleboviruses in sheep. J. Hyg. (Camb.), 97, 331346.
VAN VUREN P.J. & PAWESKA J.T. (2010). Comparison of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-based techniques for
the detection of antibody to Rift Valley fever virus in thermochemically inactivated sheep sera. Vector Borne
Zoonotic Dis., 10, 697699.
WEISS K.E. (1957). Rift Valley fever a review. Bull. Epizoot. Dis. Afr., 5, 431458.
WILLIAMS R., ELLIS C.E., SMITH S.J., POTGIETER C.A., WALLACE D., MARELEDWANE V.E. & MAJIWA P.A. (2011).
Validation of an IgM antibody capture ELISA based on a recombinant nucleoprotein for identification of domestic
ruminants infected with Rift Valley fever virus. J. Virol. Methods, 177 (2), 140146.
*
* *
NB: There are OIE Reference Laboratories for Rift Valley fever
(see Table in Part 4 of this Terrestrial Manual or consult the OIE Web site for the most up-to-date list:
http://www.oie.int/en/our-scientific-expertise/reference-laboratories/list-of-laboratories/ ).
Please contact the OIE Reference Laboratories for any further information on
diagnostic tests, reagents and vaccines for Rift Valley fever
20