Review of in vitro methods for foot-and-mouth disease vaccine immunogenicity assessmentScientists explore new lab tests to check foot-and-mouth disease vaccine strength without using animals

Frontiers in Medicine Published May 2, 2026 Study authors: Lebogang Othusitse, Tshephang I. Kabelo, Kaone A. Nkwe, LaToya Seoke, Elliot M. Fana, Kebaneilwe Leb… DOI ↗ Editorial oversight: Dr. Ji-eun Park, MD · Brain, Mind & Pain

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway

Consider in vitro assays as a complementary tool for foot-and-mouth disease vaccine assessment, noting current validation gaps.

This is a narrative review that synthesizes evidence on in vitro approaches for assessing foot-and-mouth disease vaccine immunogenicity, compared to traditional in vivo potency testing methods. The authors discuss the potential of these in vitro methods to complement conventional animal-based testing, particularly as non-invasive endpoints aligned with the principles of the 3Rs.

The review does not report pooled effect sizes or specific numerical findings from primary studies. Instead, it presents a qualitative argument for the utility of in vitro assays in vaccine evaluation. The authors note that these approaches could reduce reliance on animal testing while maintaining assessment rigor.

Key limitations acknowledged by the authors include the standardization of assay protocols, ensuring reproducibility across different laboratories, addressing the complexities of immune responses that occur in vivo, and the need for robust validation of in vitro assays using a broad range of field isolates.

The practice relevance is restrained, focusing on how in vitro methods could complement rather than replace existing animal-based potency testing. The review does not provide specific recommendations for clinical or field application, given the preliminary nature of the evidence and the noted limitations.

Scientists are looking at ways to test vaccines in a lab instead of using live animals. This review focuses on foot-and-mouth disease, a serious illness that affects livestock. The goal is to find better ways to make sure vaccines are strong enough to protect herds.

Currently, doctors and farmers use tests that require animals to check if a vaccine works. These old methods take time and can be hard on the animals. New lab tests promise to be faster and kinder. They look at how the vaccine triggers the immune system without needing a living creature.

However, making these new tests work is not easy. Different labs need to agree on how to run the tests so results are the same everywhere. Also, the immune system in a petri dish is not exactly like the one inside a cow. Scientists must prove these new tests match the old ones before they can be used widely.

Using these new lab methods fits with rules that try to reduce animal use. This approach helps farmers and health officials protect their animals better. If these tests become standard, it means fewer animals are needed for research. This is a big step forward for science and animal welfare.

What this means for you:

New lab tests for foot-and-mouth disease vaccines could replace animal testing while ensuring vaccines are effective.

Study Details

Study typeSystematic review

EvidenceLevel 1

PublishedMay 2026

View Original Abstract ↓

Vaccination is widely used to control foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), necessitating robust approaches for evaluating vaccine potency to ensure a consistent supply of effective and safe vaccines. Traditional (in vivo) potency testing methods rely on live animal models, raising ethical concerns, logistical constraints, procedural variability and significant financial costs. In vitro approaches have therefore been increasingly explored to complement these methods and address these challenges. Recent advancements in in vitro methodologies have focused on assessing vaccine-induced immune responses and virus-neutralizing activity using a variety of innovative cell-based assays, recombinant protein-based immunoassays, and molecular techniques, all of which have shown promise as surrogate tools that support vaccine potency evaluation. However, several challenges persist in optimizing these in vitro methods. Key obstacles include the standardization of assay protocols, ensuring reproducibility across different laboratories, and addressing the complexities of immune responses that occur in vivo, which are difficult to replicate in in vitro environments. Furthermore, there remains a need for robust validation of in vitro assays using a broad range of field isolates to ensure their relevance to diverse viral strains. This review examines the current landscape of in vitro approaches supporting FMD vaccine-induced immune responses, detailing both the advancements made in assay development and the challenges that remain to be overcome. Furthermore, there is discussion of the role of these methods in complementing conventional animal-based testing, particularly as non-invasive endpoints aligned with the principles of the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, and refinement), with potential to improve efficiency, ethical standards, and global FMD control strategies.

Review of in vitro methods for foot-and-mouth disease vaccine immunogenicity assessmentScientists explore new lab tests to check foot-and-mouth disease vaccine strength without using animals

Study Details

Intravenous tenecteplase improves functional outcomes but increases hemorrhage risk in non-large vessel occlusion acute ischemic stroke

Tenecteplase improves stroke recovery but increases bleeding risk in late treatment window

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Review of in vitro methods for foot-and-mouth disease vaccine immunogenicity assessmentScientists explore new lab tests to check foot-and-mouth disease vaccine strength without using animals

Study Details

Intravenous tenecteplase improves functional outcomes but increases hemorrhage risk in non-large vessel occlusion acute ischemic stroke

Tenecteplase improves stroke recovery but increases bleeding risk in late treatment window

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Related in Neurology

From Other Specialties