Effects of oral meloxicam administration to beef cattle receiving lipopolysaccharide administration or vaccination against respiratory pathogens1

Abstract

This study evaluated the effects of oral meloxicam administration on metabolic, inflammatory, and acute-phase responses of beef cattle receiving a lipopolysaccharide (LPS) challenge (Exp. 1; d -1 to 6) or vaccinated against respiratory pathogens (Exp. 2; d 7 to 21). Twenty-one Angus steers ( = 11) and heifers ( = 10) were housed in individual pens on d -15 and were offered free-choice water, mineral-vitamin mix, and hay until d 21. In Exp. 1, cattle were ranked on d -1 by sex and BW and assigned to 1) oral meloxicam administration (1 mg/kg BW daily) from day -1 to 6 (MEL8), 2) oral meloxicam administration (1 mg/kg BW) on d 0 and oral lactose monohydrate administration (1 mg/kg BW) on d -1 and from d 1 to 6 (MEL1), or 3) oral lactose monohydrate administration (1 mg/kg BW daily) from d -1 to 6 (CON). On d 0, cattle received an intravenous LPS bolus (0.5 μg/kg BW) concurrently with treatment administration. Rectal temperature (RTEMP) was assessed, and blood samples were collected at -2, 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 96, 120, and 144 h relative to LPS administration. No treatment effects were detected ( ≥ 0.36) for RTEMP, concentrations of serum tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα), plasma haptoglobin, cortisol, insulin, and leptin, as well as blood mRNA expression of α and cyclooxygenase-2, although all variables increased ( < 0.01) across treatments after LPS administration. In Exp. 2, cattle received the same treatments that they were assigned to in Exp. 1 from d 7 to d 13 and were vaccinated against respiratory pathogens concurrently with treatment administration on d 8. Blood samples were collected, and RTEMP was assessed as in Exp. 1 in addition to 168, 240, and 336 h relative to vaccination. No treatment effects were detected ( ≥ 0.26) for RTEMP, the same plasma and serum variables evaluated in Exp. 1, and serum concentrations of antibodies against or serum titers against bovine respiratory syncytial virus, bovine herpesvirus-1, bovine viral diarrhea virus-1, and parainfluenza-3 virus. All variables increased ( < 0.01) across treatments after vaccination, except for serum TNFα and titers against bovine viral diarrhea virus-1 ( ≥ 0.40). Collectively, this study found no evidence that oral meloxicam administration, at the doses and intervals utilized herein, mitigated the metabolic, inflammatory, and acute-phase reactions elicited by LPS administration or vaccination against respiratory pathogens.

Physiologic, health, and production responses of dairy cows supplemented with an immunomodulatory feed ingredient during the transition period

“…These include synthesis of proinflammatory cytokines, such as TNFα from leukocytes, and a subsequent increase in body temperature and hepatic synthesis of acute phase proteins including haptoglobin (Carroll and Forsberg, 2007). Accordingly, time effects (P < 0.01) were detected for vaginal temperature, serum TNFα, and serum haptoglobin during the LPS challenge period (Figure 3), indicating that LPS administration elicited the expected innate immune responses (Carroll and Forsberg, 2007) as reported by others (Carroll et al, 2009;Rodrigues et al, 2015). In addition, a treatment × hour interaction was detected (P = 0.03) for serum TNFα concentration, which was greater (P ≤ 0.04) for OMN-supplemented cows compared with CON cows at 1, 2, and 3 h relative to LPS administration (Figure 3).…”

“…= 38). However, serum haptoglobin concentration was only greater (P ≤ 0.05) in OMN-supplemented versus CON cows from 36 to 72 h after LPS challenge ( Figure 3), when serum haptoglobin is expected to peak upon LPS administration (Rodrigues et al, 2015), although the treatment × hour interaction was not significant (P = 0.50). Supporting our results, Sanchez et al (2012) and Burdick Sanchez et al (2014) also reported increased acute phase reaction in beef cattle supplemented with OMN and receiving LPS administration.…”

“…As previously mentioned, vaginal temperature increased (P < 0.01) for both treatments after LPS administration (Figure 3), but no differences were detected (P = 0.29) between treatments (38.82 vs. 38.95°C for OMN-supplemented and CON cows, respectively; SEM = 0.08). Although the treatment × hour interaction was not significant (P = 0.59), OMN-supplemented cows had reduced (P ≤ 0.05) vaginal temperature from 1.5 to 3.5 h after LPS challenge (Figure 3), when body temperature is expected to largely increase upon LPS administration (Carroll et al, 2009;Rodrigues et al, 2015). These results do not agree with treatment differences reported for serum TNFα and haptoglobin, given that body temperature is upregulated by proinflammatory cytokine and subsequent acute phase protein responses (Carroll and Forsberg, 2007).…”

“…Indeed, evidence exists that OMN may play a role in thermoregulation of lactating dairy cows under heat stress conditions (Hall et al, 2014), which can help to understand the reduced (P ≤ 0.05) vaginal temperature in OMN-supplemented versus CON cows in the hours following LPS administration. Given that body temperature is known to return to baseline levels 12 h after LPS administration (Reuter et al, 2008;Carroll et al, 2009;Rodrigues et al, 2015), environmental THI and vaginal temperature collected herein from 24 to 120 h relative to LPS injection were used to address this theory. Cows were classified as undergoing heat stress if their vaginal temperature was ≥39.1 (Vasconcelos et al, 2011) during periods when THI was >68 (Zimbleman et al, 2009).…”

Impact of oral meloxicam and long-distance transport on cell-mediated and humoral immune responses in feedlot steers receiving modified live BVDV booster vaccination on arrival

“…Richeson et al (2009) examined the effect of vaccine administration immediately following transportation, and reported that anti-BVDV type I Ab reached a high titer sooner than animals vaccinated after 14 days, without compromising average daily weight gain or growth. Other investigations also confirm our findings that MEL did not affect vaccination response to respiratory pathogens (Rodrigues et al, 2015).…”