CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 35Dermatology and Skin DiseasesDermatological diseases and infestationsContact Dermatitis and Allergies

The immunopathogenesis of flea allergy dermatitis in dogs, an experimental study

Wilkerson, Melinda J, Bagladi-Swanson, Mary, Wheeler, David W, Floyd-Hawkins, Kim, Craig, Carol, Lee, Kenneth W, Dryden, Michael·2004·Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology
DOI 10.1016/j.vetimm.2004.02.006
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this study, we investigated the development of clinical disease and immune responses in the development of an experimental model of flea allergy dermatitis. Dogs were randomly divided into four treatment groups and were infested with fleas on two different feeding schedules (continuous and episodic). Group 1 consisted of four non-exposed dogs (negative controls) and Group 2 consisted of six dogs exposed to fleas continually. Groups 3 and 4 consisted of 14 dogs each that were exposed to fleas on an episodic schedule (two consecutive days every other week for 12 weeks). Group 4 also received intraperitoneal injections of a low dose of lectin (ricin) with immunomodulatory properties. The purpose of Group 4 was to investigate the effects of ricin on enhancing the development of clinical signs, flea antigen-specific IgE levels and altering the number of CD4+ and CD8+ T cell subsets in peripheral blood. Clinical signs developed in all flea exposed dogs, however, the dermatology lesion scores were less and shorter in duration for continuously exposed dogs compared to episodic exposed dogs, independent of ricin treatment. Lesion development was concentrated in the flea triangle and consisted principally of erythema, followed by alopecia, excoriation, papules, and crusts. CD4+ and CD8+ lymphocyte subsets or IgE levels were not altered by ricin treatment. Flea antigen-specific IgE values were highest in dogs exposed to fleas on a continuous basis compared to those episodically exposed. A greater percentage of clinical responder dogs with negative flea-specific IgE titers or negative intradermal test (IDT) were present in the episodic exposure groups than in the continuous exposure group. IgE titers corresponded slightly better with clinical responders than the IDT. The agreement between the IgE titers and IDT was good (weighted K = 0.67). Histopathology of skin samples were consistent with a Type I hypersensitivity. In conclusion, we were able to develop a model of flea allergy dermatitis by experimentally exposing dogs to fleas on an episodic and continuous feeding schedule. In this study, continuously exposed dogs did not develop immunotolerance, and ricin did not enhance the development of FAD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.vetimm.2004.02.006

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Repeated exposure to flea bites induces flea allergy dermatitis (FAD) in susceptible dogs and cats.

    “Repeated exposure to flea bites induces, in susceptible dogs and cats, a condition called flea allergy dermatitis (FAD).”

    From Fleas infesting pets in the era of emerging extra-intestinal nematodes (2013) · cites this paper as [16]

  • Dogs with FAD present with erythema, alopecia, excoriation, papules, crusts and itching often leading to self-traumas, while cats show a miliary dermatitis with nibbling, alopecia, intense pruritus, licking, scratching and self-traumas.

    “Dogs with FAD (Figure 4) present with erythema, alopecia, excoriation, papules, crusts, itching often leading to self-traumas (Figure 5), while cats show a miliary dermatitis (Figure 6) with nibbling, alopecia (Figure 7), intense pruritus, licking, scratching, self-traumas [15-18].”

    From Fleas infesting pets in the era of emerging extra-intestinal nematodes (2013) · cites this paper as [16]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Wilkerson, M. J., Bagladi-Swanson, M., Wheeler, D. W., Floyd-Hawkins, K., Craig, C., Lee, K. W., & Dryden, M.
Affiliations
  • Kansas State University (US)
  • Pfizer (United States) (US)
  • Heska (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Wilkerson, Melinda J
ORCID
Lee, Kenneth W
Venue
Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-06
Volume
99
Issue
3-4
Pages
179-192
ISSN
0165-2427 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.vetimm.2004.02.006
OpenAlex
W2050931636
Cited by
35
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3
FWCI
1.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Pfizer
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatology and Skin Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Dermatological diseases and infestations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Contact Dermatitis and Allergies
Keywords
flea allergy dermatitis, dogs, ricin, immunomodulation, intradermal test, CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, immediate hypersensitivity, immune tolerance, skin lesions
MeSH terms
Animals, Biopsy, Blood Cell Count, Dermatitis, Dog Diseases, Dogs, Ectoparasitic Infestations, Female, Siphonaptera, Histocytochemistry, Hypersensitivity, Immunoglobulin E, Immunoenzyme Techniques, Random Allocation, Skin Tests, Immunophenotyping

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review