What Do Titre Tests Measure?

[sandgrubber]

Today I asked a vet -- one who I know keeps up with the veterinary literature -- whether kennels should accept titre test results. He gave an unqualified NO. He says titre tests measure only the amount of antibodies present . . . thus, in a sense, they tell about exposure to a virus, or a the dummy version of a virus in a vaccination . . . but they do not measure the dog's ability to fight the virus. I tried Google on "what do titre tests measure" and found that most of the articles that came up agreed with this point of view. The following link explained it succinctly without a lot of jargon

http://www.caberfeidh.com/Titers.htm

Curious to know what people think, cause this contradicts opinions that are often voiced on this forum.

[poodlefan]

Next time, ask your vet how animal vaccine manufacturers test the efficacy of their vaccines.

[Cavandra]

Titers far outway a Vaccination card!

It is the only proof the dog has memory cells.....It doesnt matter remotely what the levels are, purely that the dog registered a response, which is proof the dog has immunity.....

A dog presenting with a Vaccination card means nothing, as some dogs can never ever get immunity no matter how many times it is injected....

As far as kennels go though they want to see Canine Cough proof & you wont get that from titer.

[Guest Tess32]

What it shows is that when the dog comes in contact with the diseases, its immune system mounts a proper response to the threat. That's all we need to know.

If you vaccinate 10 times over the dog's life, how do you know it's even working?

[Cavalier]

Next time, ask your vet how animal vaccine manufacturers test the efficacy of their vaccines.

The companies test the efficacy by vaccinating animals, then exposing them to the virus and see how their body responds. When they get to the dose of vaccine that stops animals

developing clinical disease they know what dose to put in the vaccine vials.

[poodlefan]

Next time, ask your vet how animal vaccine manufacturers test the efficacy of their vaccines.

The companies test the efficacy by vaccinating animals, then exposing them to the virus and see how their body responds. When they get to the dose of vaccine that stops animals

developing clinical disease they know what dose to put in the vaccine vials.

They also titre test.

[Ptolomy]

Today I asked a vet -- one who I know keeps up with the veterinary literature -- whether kennels should accept titre test results. He gave an unqualified NO. He says titre tests measure only the amount of antibodies present . . . thus, in a sense, they tell about exposure to a virus, or a the dummy version of a virus in a vaccination . . . but they do not measure the dog's ability to fight the virus. I tried Google on "what do titre tests measure" and found that most of the articles that came up agreed with this point of view. The following link explained it succinctly without a lot of jargon

http://www.caberfeidh.com/Titers.htm

Curious to know what people think, cause this contradicts opinions that are often voiced on this forum.

Can I take a stab in the dark and ask if it was Steve at Applecross Vets that you asked?????

[sandgrubber]

It is the only proof the dog has memory cells.....It doesnt matter remotely what the levels are, purely that the dog registered a response, which is proof the dog has immunity.....

As far as kennels go though they want to see Canine Cough proof & you wont get that from titer.

Wrong . . . quoting from the article cited in my last post . . .

'A "titer" is a measurement of how much antibody to a certain virus (or other antigen) is circulating in the blood at that moment. Titers are usually expressed in a ratio, which is how many times they could dilute the blood until they couldn't find antibodies anymore. So let's say they could dilute it two times only and then they didn't find anymore, that would be a titer of 1:2. If they could dilute it a thousand times before they couldn't find any antibody, then that would be a titer of 1:1000.

A titer test does not and cannot measure immunity, because immunity to specific viruses is reliant not on antibodies, but on memory cells, which we have no way to measure. Memory cells are what prompt the immune system to create antibodies and dispatch them to an infection caused by the virus it "remembers." Memory cells don't need "reminders" in the form of re-vaccination to keep producing antibodies. (Science, 1999; "Immune system's memory does not need reminders.") If the animal recently encountered the virus, their level of antibody might be quite high, but that doesn't mean they are more immune than an animal with a lower titer. '

My vet says that KC (or BB, as the vets call it) vaccination doesn't work for very long, and that if people really want their dogs to be protected, they should take them in for a KC vaccination about two weeks before taking them to kennels. He says the annual KC is nonsense. Not all kennels require KC vaccination . . .

Edited August 31, 2009 by sandgrubber

[stormie]

Interesting, Sandgrubber, as that was my boss's understanding of the titre too. He said that if a dog would likely only show a titre if it had recently come into contact with the virus, so a dog that was up to date with its vaccines but yet never seen the outside world, could possibly show a 0 titre as its body has not come into contact with the virus.

It explains why we see so many titres coming back with low distemper and/or hep results - because these viruses are not around as much as they used to be and therefore dogs are no longer being challenged with them.

[Kavik]

So how useful are titre tests then?

Kaos is due for vaccs and I am deciding what to do. The whole titre test thing besides being very expensive still confuses me

Tempted to do the 3 yr vaccs but even that will require prompting for my vet to do

[Do No Harm]

The answers to some of the question being asked in this thread may be found in reports that led to the WSAVA Vaccination Guidelines for global application which the AVA has recently accepted in part.

All of these reports were to establish vaccination schedules that are based on the latest scientific research - as opposed to manufactuers' label recommendations based on what they needed to do in order to have their products licensed/registered for public use.

The reports give detailed information on duration of immunity following successful vaccination and, of course, there are graphs on the issue of determining immunity via serology vs challenge. The Canine Vaccination Taskforce Report 2003 may be a good starting point for a background to this (new recommended vaccination protocols) review process. The report is available here http://www.dogsports.com/aahavaccinereport.pdf On page 18 and in relation to the value of measureable titers it states:-

2. Piercy comments: “The value of revaccinating dogs

whose antibodies have declined to a low level, however,

is not in doubt.” Indeed, it is in doubt! Dogs with a CDV

antibody titer, no matter how low when challenged, may

become infected if antibody levels are below titers which

provide sterilizing immunity (i.e., resistance to infection),

but they will have protection from clinical disease

mediated by an anamnestic humoral and CMI response.

However, if after vaccination no antibody is detected

in the dog’s serum, then there is no doubt,as suggested

by Piercy, that revaccination will be of value in

boosting the animal's immune response.

(That's just one example of how some old beliefs have been succesfully challenged)!

The AAHA Canine Vaccination Guidelines were revised in 2006 and that Report can be found here http://www.aahanet.org/PublicDocuments/Vac...es06Revised.pdf

There's some more here http://www.i-love-dogs.com/forums/dog-chat...ding-light.html

Kris is well informed and keeps good company. She works with Jean Dodds on the Rabies Challenge Fund.

Schultz covers Titers here http://www.synbiotics.com/Products/PDF_lib/96-0460e.pdf

I do have a paper by Schultz entitled "What everyone needs to know about Canine Vaccines and Vaccination Programs". I'm afraid I do not have a link but it was given at the 2007NATIONALPARENTCLUBCANINEHEALTHCONFERENCE• OCTOBER19, 20& 21 and is largely a Q & A style paper. It may be available online otherwise I'm happy to send a copy to anyone wanting it if they PM me. Schultz does though in this paper have little to say about titers. It is really just about vaccines and immunity.

Edited September 3, 2009 by Do No Harm

[Staranais]

So how useful are titre tests then?

Kaos is due for vaccs and I am deciding what to do. The whole titre test thing besides being very expensive still confuses me

Tempted to do the 3 yr vaccs but even that will require prompting for my vet to do

Titres are IMO most useful in adult dogs when done a few weeks after vaccination, to see if the vaccine worked for your dog. If titre results say that the vaccine did work for your dog, you can be confident that your dog is protected for at least 3 and probably many more years, no matter what later titre results say.

If you just do a titre test 3 years after the vaccination and the result is negative, then either the dog is not immune, or it is immune but just doesn't have a high level of circulating antibodies. You can't tell which is the case from the titre test at that point, as you don't know if the vaccine worked initially, since you didn't titre after vaccinating.

Most boarding kennels or dog sport organisations that accept titre test results require a current titre test result, so you may still need to titre test when your dog is "due" for a vaccination in order to provide the results to those organisations which are willing to accept them in lieu of a revaccination certificate. So if you get a titre test done then, and it is positive, your dog avoids an unnecessary vaccination. If it is negative, you will probably need to revaccinate, even though your dog may actually still be immune.

Make sense?

Edited to add: I'm talking about the 3 core vaccines here, parvo, distemper, and hepatitis.

Edited September 3, 2009 by Staranais

[Kavik]

Thanks that makes more sense

I think I may go with 3 yr vaccine - unfortunately I am not made of money enough to do titre tests after vacc and then instead of vacc and possible revacc if necessary.

[Staranais]

Thanks that makes more sense

I think I may go with 3 yr vaccine - unfortunately I am not made of money enough to do titre tests after vacc and then instead of vacc and possible revacc if necessary.

Yes, that's the problem isn't it? These things do cost money!

If it's just for your own peace of mind, not for entry to dogsport organisations/kennels, I reckon you'd get away with titering once to prove to yourself your dog has responded to the C3 vaccine and then forget about revaccinating or titering C3 for the next 7 years. But if you need proof of immunity for some organisation, it can get expensive pretty fast with regular titering instead of or sometimes as well as vaccines.

I'm also doing the 3 year vaccination (from the studies I've read, you're actually just as safe doing the 'regular' core vaccine only every 3 years as you are using the special new official 3 year one, it's just that the new official 3 year one is more likely to be accepted as current by kennels etc).

I'll probably titre after that, but hope to be able to do it myself for cheap by then!

[CrazyCat]

Next time, ask your vet how animal vaccine manufacturers test the efficacy of their vaccines.

The companies test the efficacy by vaccinating animals, then exposing them to the virus and see how their body responds. When they get to the dose of vaccine that stops animals

developing clinical disease they know what dose to put in the vaccine vials.

Then the company examines the immune response further - part of this is measuring antibody titres, because even though antibodies aren't always the component responsible for killing the virus/bacteria, they are a very good measure of the strength and persistance of the immune response. After measuring antibody levels, companies can then say 'XX level of specific antibody can be correlated with protection'

So how useful are titre tests then?

In humans they are useful because the level of antibody that is correlated with protection against certain diseases (rubella, mumps, HepB, Chicken Pox, among others) is well defined and accepted by health authorities, so if your antibody titre is below the required level you get another vaccine - it's fairly straight forward.

I assume (but I could be wrong) that the problem for animals is that while required antibody levels are probably known by vaccine companies, there is no government (or other) authority that will set the official standards for acceptance of these antibody levels. Which means that a titre test will measure specific antibodies but won't actually mean anything unless the 'level correlated with protection' is known.

I hope that makes sense?

[sandgrubber]

Today I asked a vet -- one who I know keeps up with the veterinary literature -- whether kennels should accept titre test results. He gave an unqualified NO. He says titre tests measure only the amount of antibodies present . . . thus, in a sense, they tell about exposure to a virus, or a the dummy version of a virus in a vaccination . . . but they do not measure the dog's ability to fight the virus. I tried Google on "what do titre tests measure" and found that most of the articles that came up agreed with this point of view. The following link explained it succinctly without a lot of jargon

http://www.caberfeidh.com/Titers.htm

Curious to know what people think, cause this contradicts opinions that are often voiced on this forum.

Can I take a stab in the dark and ask if it was Steve at Applecross Vets that you asked?????

Yes, why?

[Ptolomy]

Today I asked a vet -- one who I know keeps up with the veterinary literature -- whether kennels should accept titre test results. He gave an unqualified NO.

Because Steve is vocal and doesn't believe in titre testing. It was the unqualified NO that gave it away

[lablab]

Today I asked a vet -- one who I know keeps up with the veterinary literature -- whether kennels should accept titre test results. He gave an unqualified NO. He says titre tests measure only the amount of antibodies present . . . thus, in a sense, they tell about exposure to a virus, or a the dummy version of a virus in a vaccination . . . but they do not measure the dog's ability to fight the virus. I tried Google on "what do titre tests measure" and found that most of the articles that came up agreed with this point of view. The following link explained it succinctly without a lot of jargon

http://www.caberfeidh.com/Titers.htm

Curious to know what people think, cause this contradicts opinions that are often voiced on this forum.

I would be interested to hear what this vet says about the difference between human and canine vaccinations. Can anyone think of a human disease that requires an annual vaccination (apart from the 'flu because of mutation) ?? In my experience human vaccinations last a minimum three years and often 10. Why does this not apply to dogs ?

BTW I can supply the name of a very highly regarded vet in the Brisbane/Gold Coast area who performs titre testing for approx $70 while you wait (approx 20 minutes).

[Guest Tess32]

It is the only proof the dog has memory cells.....It doesnt matter remotely what the levels are, purely that the dog registered a response, which is proof the dog has immunity.....

As far as kennels go though they want to see Canine Cough proof & you wont get that from titer.

Wrong . . . quoting from the article cited in my last post . . .

'A "titer" is a measurement of how much antibody to a certain virus (or other antigen) is circulating in the blood at that moment. Titers are usually expressed in a ratio, which is how many times they could dilute the blood until they couldn't find antibodies anymore. So let's say they could dilute it two times only and then they didn't find anymore, that would be a titer of 1:2. If they could dilute it a thousand times before they couldn't find any antibody, then that would be a titer of 1:1000.

A titer test does not and cannot measure immunity, because immunity to specific viruses is reliant not on antibodies, but on memory cells, which we have no way to measure. Memory cells are what prompt the immune system to create antibodies and dispatch them to an infection caused by the virus it "remembers." Memory cells don't need "reminders" in the form of re-vaccination to keep producing antibodies. (Science, 1999; "Immune system's memory does not need reminders.") If the animal recently encountered the virus, their level of antibody might be quite high, but that doesn't mean they are more immune than an animal with a lower titer. '

My vet says that KC (or BB, as the vets call it) vaccination doesn't work for very long, and that if people really want their dogs to be protected, they should take them in for a KC vaccination about two weeks before taking them to kennels. He says the annual KC is nonsense. Not all kennels require KC vaccination . . .

I'm not sure but I think maybe you didn't get what Cavandra was saying and I don't think what she said was wrong at all.

What you quoted says this "Memory cells are what prompt the immune system to create antibodies and dispatch them to an infection caused by the virus it "remembers." Which is basically the same thing - it sounded like she was saying that the presence of antibodies is reasonable proof that the dog has memory cells that ARE and WILL prompt the immune system to fight the virus. It's the only way we have of testing that the dog responds approopriately to the threat of that virus.

Vaccination proves nothing, you could be revaccinating a non responder for years...

The level of antibodies IMO, are mostly irrelevant.....a TT just proves as much as we can, that the dog mounts a proper response to the threat of the disease.

[sandgrubber]

Today I asked a vet -- one who I know keeps up with the veterinary literature -- whether kennels should accept titre test results. He gave an unqualified NO. He says titre tests measure only the amount of antibodies present . . . thus, in a sense, they tell about exposure to a virus, or a the dummy version of a virus in a vaccination . . . but they do not measure the dog's ability to fight the virus. I tried Google on "what do titre tests measure" and found that most of the articles that came up agreed with this point of view. The following link explained it succinctly without a lot of jargon

http://www.caberfeidh.com/Titers.htm

Curious to know what people think, cause this contradicts opinions that are often voiced on this forum.

I would be interested to hear what this vet says about the difference between human and canine vaccinations. Can anyone think of a human disease that requires an annual vaccination (apart from the 'flu because of mutation) ?? In my experience human vaccinations last a minimum three years and often 10. Why does this not apply to dogs ?

The vet in question says annual vaccination is neither necessary nor healthy. He says the ideal would be puppy shots at 12 and something like 18 weeks, and then a 14 month jab, then no need to vaccinate for many years. .. . perhaps for life, but 5 years would be reasonable.