A study was carried out to compare the efficacy of two injectable formulations of ivermectin, Ivomec(R),(1) Merial (IVM reference) and Ivogel1(R),(2) Intervet (IVM generic) in the treatment of psoroptic mange (Psoroptes ovis) in Charollais feedlot cattle. A total of 22 animals were ranked in order of the severity of mange and allocated to I I replicates of 2 animals each. Within each replicate, one animal was randomly allocated to IVM reference product treatment (Group 1) and one to IVM generic (Group 2). Animals were treated on Day 0 and on Day 8 at the recommended dosage of 200 mu g ivermectin/kg bodyweight. The pharmacokinetics profiles (pK) of both IVM formulations were evaluated in plasma samples taken from 6 cattle randomly chosen per group on Day 0, before treatment, and then at 6, 12, 24 hours and daily from Day 2 to Day 7 after the treatment on Day 0. Additionally, the severity of mange lesions was assessed and mites were counted in skin scrapings on Days 0, 8, 15 and 25. Animals were weighed on Day 0 and 25 and body weight and average daily gains (ADG) were evaluated. No statistical differences were found between the cattle of the two groups in any pK parameters, although the mean IVM plasma concentrations in cattle treated with the IVM reference product were consistently higher than those found in cattle treated with the generic compound. By Day 25, all animals in Group 1 had recovered clinically and parasitologically from psoroptic mange while cattle from Group 2 still had mange lesions and, in two animals, living mites were found in the skin scrapings; these differences were significant (P < 0.001). The mean body weight of the two groups was significantly different on Day 25 (P < 0.01) when animals in Group 1 weighed 20 kg more than those in Group 2. In conclusion, despite similarities in their pharmacokinetic profiles and formulations, the clinical efficacy of the two injectable formulations of IVM differed significantly in their therapeutic efficacy against psoroptic mange in feedlot cattle up to 25 days after treatment: this difference in response was reflected in an incomplete clinical and parasitological response in Group 2 and a slower growth rate.
Comparative evaluation of two ivermectin injectable formulations against psoroptic mange in feedlot cattle / C., Genchi; M., Alvinerie; A., Forbes; M., Bonfanti; Genchi, Marco; S., Vandoni; M., Innocenti; C. A., Sgoifo Rossi. - In: VETERINARY PARASITOLOGY. - ISSN 0304-4017. - 158:1-2(2008), pp. 110-116. [10.1016/j.vetpar.2008.08.007]
Comparative evaluation of two ivermectin injectable formulations against psoroptic mange in feedlot cattle
GENCHI, Marco;
2008-01-01
Abstract
A study was carried out to compare the efficacy of two injectable formulations of ivermectin, Ivomec(R),(1) Merial (IVM reference) and Ivogel1(R),(2) Intervet (IVM generic) in the treatment of psoroptic mange (Psoroptes ovis) in Charollais feedlot cattle. A total of 22 animals were ranked in order of the severity of mange and allocated to I I replicates of 2 animals each. Within each replicate, one animal was randomly allocated to IVM reference product treatment (Group 1) and one to IVM generic (Group 2). Animals were treated on Day 0 and on Day 8 at the recommended dosage of 200 mu g ivermectin/kg bodyweight. The pharmacokinetics profiles (pK) of both IVM formulations were evaluated in plasma samples taken from 6 cattle randomly chosen per group on Day 0, before treatment, and then at 6, 12, 24 hours and daily from Day 2 to Day 7 after the treatment on Day 0. Additionally, the severity of mange lesions was assessed and mites were counted in skin scrapings on Days 0, 8, 15 and 25. Animals were weighed on Day 0 and 25 and body weight and average daily gains (ADG) were evaluated. No statistical differences were found between the cattle of the two groups in any pK parameters, although the mean IVM plasma concentrations in cattle treated with the IVM reference product were consistently higher than those found in cattle treated with the generic compound. By Day 25, all animals in Group 1 had recovered clinically and parasitologically from psoroptic mange while cattle from Group 2 still had mange lesions and, in two animals, living mites were found in the skin scrapings; these differences were significant (P < 0.001). The mean body weight of the two groups was significantly different on Day 25 (P < 0.01) when animals in Group 1 weighed 20 kg more than those in Group 2. In conclusion, despite similarities in their pharmacokinetic profiles and formulations, the clinical efficacy of the two injectable formulations of IVM differed significantly in their therapeutic efficacy against psoroptic mange in feedlot cattle up to 25 days after treatment: this difference in response was reflected in an incomplete clinical and parasitological response in Group 2 and a slower growth rate.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
