Review Article

Comprehensive Assessment of Vaccines Against Leptospirosis: Effectiveness, Technological Development, and Future Perspectives in the Prevention of an Emerging Zoonotic Disease

Dilmareth Natera¹, Rebeca Beatriz Artola Hernandez², Sindhu Meghana Sunkara³, Muhammad Ali Aziz⁴, Rihane Salaheddine Zakraoui⁵, Vinoothna Reddy Kayeetha⁶, Ameer Mustafa Farrukh⁷, Neil Jahirz Roncancio Rey⁸, Rossy Maryory Roncancio Rey⁹ and Maria Isabel Gomez Coral¹⁰*

¹Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota, USA

²Universidad de El Salvador, El Salvador

³Caribbean Medical University, USA

⁴BronxCare Health System, USA

⁵University of Jordan, Jordan

⁶Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences, India

⁷University of Galway, Ireland

⁸Fundación Universitaria Juan N. Corpas, Colombia

⁹University of Puerto Rico

¹⁰Universidad del Valle de México, México

Submission: February 23, 2024; Published: March 01, 2024

*Corresponding author: Maria Isabel Gomez Coral, Universidad del Valle de México, México

How to cite this article: Dilmareth N, Rebeca B H, Sindhu Meghana S, Muhammad Ali A, Rihane Salaheddine Z, et al. Comprehensive Assessment of Vaccines Against Leptospirosis: Effectiveness, Technological Development, and Future Perspectives in the Prevention of an Emerging Zoonotic Disease. Ann Rev Resear. 2024; 10(4): 555795. DOI: 10.19080/ARR.2024.10.555795

Abstract

Leptospirosis, a zoonotic bacterial disease with a significant global impact, has garnered increasing attention due to its diverse clinical manifestations and widespread distribution. This comprehensive review explores the historical narrative, etiology, pathogenesis, epidemiology, and vaccination strategies associated with leptospirosis. Beginning with Adolph Weil's initial description in 1886, the article traces the historical evolution of leptospirosis and its association with activities involving livestock and contaminated water sources. The causative agent, identified as Spirochaeta Interrogans in 1907, presents a spectrum of clinical manifestations ranging from mild flu-like symptoms to severe forms like Weil's syndrome. Leptospirosis primarily targets the kidneys, leading to renal impairment and potential long-term complications. Epidemiological factors, including prevalent strains and geographical variability, are explored alongside the history of vaccines against leptospirosis. The advent of multivalent vaccines in the mid-2000s marked a significant advancement in leptospirosis prevention, but challenges remain in achieving optimal vaccine effectiveness and accessibility, particularly in endemic regions. The article also delves into future perspectives and challenges, highlighting the promise of continued research into novel vaccine formulations and diagnostic techniques while emphasizing the importance of addressing barriers to vaccine accessibility and fostering ethical and social considerations in disease control efforts.

Overall, this review provides valuable insights into the multifaceted nature of leptospirosis and the ongoing efforts to mitigate its impact on human and animal health worldwide. The development and deployment of vaccines against leptospirosis offer promising avenues for disease prevention, particularly in regions where the disease is endemic. However, several challenges persist, including improved vaccine formulations, enhanced surveillance systems, and addressing barriers to vaccine accessibility and affordability. Ethical and social considerations are also crucial for ensuring equitable vaccine access and fostering trust and acceptance of vaccination programs. Despite these challenges, continued research efforts and collaborative initiatives promise more effective prevention and control strategies against leptospirosis in the future, ultimately reducing its impact on human and animal health worldwide.

Keywords: Leptospirosis; Zoonotic Disease; Leptospirosis Vaccination

Abbreviations: LPS: Lipopolysaccharide; IL-6: Interleukin-6; TNF-alpha: Tumor necrosis factor-alpha; P1: Pathogenic Leptospira Interrogans sensu lato subclass; P2: Free-living Leptospira Biflexa sensu lato subclass; WHO: World Health Organization; DNA: Deoxyribonucleic acid; RNA: Ribonucleic acid; LS: Leptospira species; LB: Leptospira biflexa; EVD: Ebola Virus Disease; PLOS: Public Library of Science; CDC: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; MOH: Ministry of Health; R&D: Research and Development; NGOs: Non-Governmental Organizations

Introduction

The historical narrative of leptospirosis traces back to 1886 when Adolph Weil first described the condition, noting its flu-like symptoms and association with activities involving livestock and contaminated water sources. Throughout history, various cultures have documented similar symptoms under different names, such as "cane-cutter's disease" or "rice field jaundice," indicating its widespread presence across different regions. The causative agent, identified in 1907 as Spirochaeta Interrogans, presents a spectrum of clinical manifestations ranging from mild flu-like symptoms to severe forms like Weil's syndrome, characterized by jaundice, renal dysfunction, and hemorrhagic diathesis. Leptospirosis primarily targets the kidneys, leading to renal impairment and potential long-term complications due to bacterial persistence and fibrosis within the organ [1-4].

Leptospirosis is caused by Spirochetes belonging to the genus Leptospira, with two main species, Pathogenic L. Interrogans Sensu Lato and free-living L. Biflexa Sensu Lato. Within these species, subgroups like P1 and P2 exhibit varying levels of virulence. The disease affects many mammals, with dogs particularly susceptible to virulent strains such as Leptospira Interrogans. The global burden of leptospirosis is significant, with transmission primarily occurring through urine contamination from infected animals, complicating efforts to estimate its prevalence accurately. In response, vaccination has emerged as a crucial preventive measure, with vaccines targeting specific serogroups of the bacterium to provide adequate protection [2]. The introduction of multivalent vaccines in the mid-2000s marked a significant advancement in leptospirosis prevention, especially in regions where the disease is endemic. These vaccines, containing multiple leptospira serogroups, have been deployed in various parts of North America, Europe, and South America [2]. However, effective vaccine design requires understanding prevalent serogroups in specific regions to tailor vaccination strategies for optimal protection. Vaccines can reduce the incidence and severity of leptospirosis by targeting locally dominant serogroups, mitigating its impact on both human and animal populations, and highlighting the importance of vaccination in controlling this emerging zoonotic disease [3].

Etiology & Pathogenesis

Leptospirosis, a potentially fatal zoonotic disease, originates from an infection caused by the spirochete bacterium Leptospira. The transmission primarily occurs through exposure to contaminated animal urine via direct contact or contact with soil or water containing the pathogen. Its prevalence is notable in tropical regions, especially after heavy rainfall and flooding, posing increased risks to urban slum dwellers due to potential contact with infected rodents. Clinical manifestations range from asymptomatic cases to nonspecific febrile illnesses, with higher mortality rates observed in individuals aged 60 and older [5-7]. The intricate pathogenesis of leptospirosis unfolds in successive stages, beginning with the bacterium breaching tissue barriers and gaining entry through skin abrasions or mucous membranes. Subsequently, hematogenous dissemination occurs, with Leptospira infiltrating the bloodstream and colonizing essential organs such as the spleen, liver, lungs, and kidneys. The bacterium's ability to persist in the blood during the leptospiremic phase contributes to systemic dissemination, leading to severe outcomes resembling a sepsis-like syndrome or organ failure [6]. During infection, elevated levels of leptospiremia trigger immune responses characterized by cytokine storms, marked by increased levels of IL-6, TNF-alpha, and other cytokines. Host susceptibility, pathogen virulence, and epidemiological conditions influence disease severity. Pronounced organ involvement results in significant hepatic, pulmonary, and renal damage, manifesting as symptoms such as hemorrhagic disorders, jaundice, acute renal failure, and pulmonary hemorrhage syndrome. Understanding the intricate interplay between the bacterium and the host's immune responses is crucial for devising effective diagnostic and therapeutic interventions against leptospirosis [6,7].

Epidemiology & Risk factors

Leptospirosis, a zoonotic bacterial disease, exhibits a complex epidemiological profile characterized by its global distribution and varied prevalence across different regions. The disease thrives in environments where humans come into contact with contaminated water or soil containing the urine of infected animals, particularly rodents and livestock. Its incidence is notably higher in tropical and subtropical regions, with seasonal spikes often observed after heavy rainfall or flooding periods. Urban slum dwellers and individuals engaged in farming, fishing, and animal husbandry are at increased risk of contracting leptospirosis due to frequent exposure to contaminated environments. Additionally, the disease exhibits notable geographic variability, with specific serovars of the Leptospira bacterium being more prevalent in certain regions. Understanding the epidemiology of leptospirosis is crucial for implementing targeted prevention and control measures, including vaccination campaigns and improved sanitation practices [8].

The history of vaccines against leptospirosis traces back to the early 20^th century, with the development of the first killed whole-cell bacterin vaccines. These early vaccines, derived from inactivated Leptospira cultures, were initially used in animals such as guinea pigs, cattle, swine, and dogs. Over time, advancements in vaccine technology led to the introduction of multivalent vaccines containing multiple serovars of Leptospira, offering broader protection against the disease. However, challenges such as serovar-specific immunity and variable vaccine efficacy hindered the widespread adoption of these vaccines. More recently, efforts have focused on developing recombinant vaccines using reverse vaccinology approaches, leveraging genomic data to identify potential vaccine candidates. While promising, developing effective leptospirosis vaccines continues to face hurdles, such as antigenic variability among Leptospira strains and the need for standardized immunization protocols [9].

The prevalence of leptospirosis is influenced by the geographical distribution of specific Leptospira serovars, which exhibit varying degrees of virulence and antigenic diversity. Certain serovars may predominate in particular regions due to environmental factors, host reservoirs, and human activities. For example, serovars such as L. interrogans and L. borgpetersenii are commonly associated with urban environments and may thrive in areas with high rodent populations. In contrast, rural agricultural regions may harbor different serovars, reflecting the diverse range of animal reservoirs and ecological conditions. Understanding the prevalence and distribution of leptospira strains is essential for informing vaccination strategies and disease surveillance efforts, particularly in regions where leptospirosis poses a significant public health threat [10].

Types of Vaccines and Development

Leptospirosis is a neglected infectious illness with global significance. Vaccination is the most practical approach to controlling leptospirosis; however, despite efforts to create a vaccine that effectively prevents the illness, little progress has been made in this regard [11]. A year after Leptospira was first isolated, vaccines against leptospirosis were developed; the first application of a killed whole-cell bacterin vaccine in guinea pigs was reported in 1916. Bacterin vaccinations were the only licensed vaccines that have since been used in humans, cattle, swine, and dogs. Serovars with similar lipopolysaccharide (LPS) antigens are the sole types that induce immunization [12].

Similarly, vaccinations derived from LPS antigens have also shown a strong protective effect in animal models; however, these vaccines are only partially serogroup-specific [12]. However, due to their reactive responses and the lack of knowledge about the pathophysiology of leptospirosis, these vaccines, along with live-attenuated types, have not gained traction [13]. The creation of new vaccines, such as recombinant protein vaccines made possible by reverse vaccinology techniques, has shown promise in light of the recent discovery and availability of Leptospira complete genome sequences [12]. However, regional variations in serovar distribution, the establishment of renal carrier status after vaccination, and the determination of the acceptable dose and endpoint titer as conclusive markers of protective immunity are among the factors impeding the development of effective leptospiral vaccines [13]. The first report of a recombinant vaccination that offered leptospirosis protection was published twenty years ago. Numerous recombinant vaccines have since been tested, but none of the candidates have made it to clinical testing.

Since the bacterins don't elicit a cross-protective immune response, a global leptospirosis vaccine will probably only be possible through recombinant vaccination. A universal vaccination for Leptospira spp. is still 10 to 15 years away, even though there are hundreds of novel targets, due to the lack of immunological correlates and the need for additional research into the fundamental microbiology of the species [14]. "Reverse vaccinology" involves searching for putative vaccine antigens using high-throughput bioinformatics techniques, data analysis procedures, and organism genome knowledge. It differs from "conventional vaccinology," which entails the culture of organisms, the isolation of their antigens, and testing each individually until suitable vaccine candidates are identified and described. Finding vaccine candidates rapidly and effectively is made possible by reverse vaccinology; one of the primary benefits is the ability to identify proteins without regard to their quantity and the avoidance of in vitro microorganism growth [15].

Vaccine Effectiveness

Vaccine effectiveness against leptospirosis has been extensively evaluated through clinical studies and field trials, providing valuable insights into their protective efficacy. These studies have demonstrated varying effectiveness depending on vaccine formulation, antigen composition, and administration protocols. Results from clinical trials have consistently shown that vaccination significantly reduces the incidence and severity of leptospirosis in both human and animal populations. Field trials conducted in endemic regions have further confirmed the real-world effectiveness of vaccines in preventing disease transmission and reducing morbidity and mortality rates [16-17]. Evaluation of vaccine immunogenicity and the duration of the immune response is essential for assessing the long-term efficacy of leptospirosis vaccines. Studies have demonstrated robust immune responses following vaccination, characterized by the production of specific antibodies against leptospira antigens. However, the duration of protective immunity can vary among different vaccine formulations, necessitating regular booster doses to maintain optimal protection. Understanding the kinetics of the immune response is crucial for designing vaccination schedules that ensure sustained immunity against leptospirosis over time [18].

Given the diverse range of leptospira serotypes circulating globally, cross-protection against different serovars is a critical consideration in leptospirosis vaccine development. While vaccines targeting specific serovars effectively protect against homologous strains, their ability to confer cross-protection against heterologous serovars is variable. Studies have shown that some vaccines induce cross-reactive immune responses that confer partial protection against closely related serovars. However, achieving broad-spectrum cross-protection remains a challenge due to the antigenic diversity of leptospira serovars. Future research efforts should focus on identifying conserved antigens that elicit cross-protective immune responses against multiple serovars, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness and utility of leptospirosis vaccines in preventing this emerging zoonotic disease [16-19].

Target Populations and Vaccination Strategies

Leptospirosis has emerged as a zoonotic bacterial disease with a more significant impact in new settings due to globalization and climate change [20,21]. It is well known that impoverished subsistence farmers, cash croppers, and pastoralists in tropical regions are among the primary groups affected by leptospirosis, making them the most vulnerable population to the disease [22-25]. This vulnerability has led to these populations being a focus target in efforts for immunization [26]. Vaccination strategies aimed at these populations have shown promise in reducing the disease burden. However, challenges remain in achieving high vaccination coverage and reducing disease transmission [27]. Vaccination campaigns must be tailored to the specific needs and characteristics of the target populations, such as scheduling vaccination drives for farmers during agricultural downtime. Involving community leaders, local health workers, and other stakeholders in the planning and implementation of vaccination programs can increase acceptance and coverage [26].

High-risk populations, especially those in remote or rural areas, may face challenges accessing healthcare facilities where vaccines are available [27]. Some individuals may need to be made aware of the risk of leptospirosis or the benefits of vaccination, highlighting the importance of education and awareness campaigns. Cost can be a barrier to vaccination, particularly for populations with limited financial resources [27,28]. Addressing these challenges requires a multifaceted approach involving collaboration between healthcare providers, public health authorities, community leaders, and other stakeholders [27]. By overcoming these barriers, vaccination efforts can be more effective in reducing the burden of leptospirosis in high-risk populations.

Factors Affecting Effectiveness

The effectiveness of leptospirosis vaccines can be influenced by various factors, ranging from vaccine formulation and antigen composition to host factors and environmental conditions. Understanding these factors is crucial for optimizing vaccine strategies and maximizing their protective efficacy [29]. The formulation of leptospirosis vaccines plays a significant role in determining their effectiveness. Factors such as antigen concentration, adjuvant choice, and vaccine delivery system can impact vaccine immunogenicity and the magnitude of the immune response elicited. Novel vaccine formulations incorporating adjuvants or delivery systems designed to enhance antigen presentation and stimulate robust immune responses may improve vaccine effectiveness [29-31]. The selection of leptospira antigens included in vaccine formulations is critical for inducing protective immunity against diverse serovars. Vaccines targeting conserved antigens shared among different leptospira serovars have the potential to confer broad-spectrum protection. However, antigenic variation among leptospira strains poses challenges for vaccine design, necessitating the identification of conserved antigens capable of eliciting cross-protective immune responses. Host factors, including age, immune status, and genetic background, can influence vaccine effectiveness [30]. Immune responses to vaccines may vary among individuals due to differences in immune competence and previous exposure to leptospira antigens. Host factors such as nutritional status and concurrent illnesses can also impact vaccine efficacy. Optimizing vaccination strategies to account for host factors may enhance vaccine effectiveness and improve protection against leptospirosis [31,32].

Environmental factors, such as climate, geographical location, and animal reservoirs, can also influence vaccine effectiveness by affecting disease transmission dynamics. Seasonal variations in leptospira prevalence and environmental contamination may impact the risk of infection and the efficacy of vaccination programs. Understanding the environmental drivers of leptospirosis transmission is essential for implementing targeted vaccination interventions and mitigating disease burden in endemic regions. Multiple factors, including vaccine formulation, antigen composition, host factors, and environmental conditions, influence vaccine effectiveness against leptospirosis. Addressing these factors through innovative vaccine design, tailored vaccination strategies, and comprehensive disease control measures can enhance vaccine effectiveness and reduce the global burden of leptospirosis [29-32].

Ethical and Social Considerations

Ethical and social considerations play a vital role in the development and deployment of vaccines against leptospirosis. Ensuring equitable access to vaccines is a key ethical principle, particularly in regions where the disease disproportionately affects marginalized communities with limited healthcare resources [33,34]. Additionally, informed consent and transparent communication are essential for vaccine trials involving human participants, respecting individuals' autonomy and right to make informed decisions about their health. Moreover, addressing vaccine hesitancy and misinformation through education and community engagement initiatives is crucial for fostering trust and acceptance of vaccination programs [34]. Furthermore, prioritizing the welfare of animals in vaccine development, such as ensuring humane treatment and adherence to ethical standards in animal studies, reflects ethical concerns regarding animal welfare. Social considerations also encompass broader issues such as the socioeconomic impact of leptospirosis, highlighting the importance of addressing underlying determinants of disease transmission, such as poverty, inadequate sanitation, and urbanization, to effectively mitigate the burden of leptospirosis on vulnerable populations [35,36]. By integrating ethical and social considerations into vaccine development and public health policies, stakeholders can promote equitable access to vaccines, uphold ethical principles, and address societal challenges associated with leptospirosis prevention and control.

Future Perspectives and Challenges

Future perspectives in preventing leptospirosis present promising advancements and persistent challenges. Continued research into novel vaccine formulations, including developing recombinant vaccines and novel adjuvants, holds potential for enhancing vaccine efficacy and broadening cross-protection against diverse leptospira serovars [37]. Furthermore, advancements in diagnostic techniques, such as rapid point-of-care tests and molecular assays, offer early detection and timely intervention opportunities, facilitating more effective disease management and control efforts [38]. However, significant challenges remain, including improved surveillance systems to monitor disease prevalence and emerging strains, particularly in regions with limited healthcare infrastructure. Additionally, addressing vaccine accessibility and affordability, especially in low-resource settings, is essential for ensuring equitable distribution and maximizing the impact of vaccination programs [39]. Moreover, combating antimicrobial resistance and addressing environmental factors driving disease transmission, such as climate change and urbanization, will require coordinated efforts across disciplines and sectors to mitigate the global burden of leptospirosis effectively [40]. By addressing these challenges and leveraging emerging technologies and collaborative partnerships, the future promises more effective prevention and control strategies against leptospirosis, ultimately reducing its impact on human and animal health worldwide.

Conclusion

The development and deployment of vaccines against leptospirosis offer promising avenues for disease prevention, particularly in regions where the disease is endemic. However, several challenges persist, including improved vaccine formulations, enhanced surveillance systems, and addressing barriers to vaccine accessibility and affordability. Ethical and social considerations are also crucial for ensuring equitable vaccine access and fostering trust and acceptance of vaccination programs. Despite these challenges, continued research efforts and collaborative initiatives promise more effective prevention and control strategies against leptospirosis in the future, ultimately reducing its impact on human and animal health worldwide.

References

1. Rajapakse S (2022) Leptospirosis: clinical aspects. Clin Med (Lond) 22(1): 14-17.
2. Sykes JE, Francey T, Schuller S, Stoddard RA, Cowgill LD, et al. (2023) Updated ACVIM consensus statement on leptospirosis in dogs. J Vet Intern Med 37(6): 1966-1982.
3. Wang S, Stobart Gallagher MA, Dunn N (2024) Leptospirosis.
4. Wagenaar JP, Goris MA (2022) Leptospirosis. In: Loascalzo J, Fauci A, Kasper D, Hauser S, Longo D, Jameson J.eds. Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine, 21e. McGraw-Hill Education.
5. Wang S, Stobart Gallagher MA, Dunn N (2024) Leptospirosis [Internet]. PubMed. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing.
6. Cassiano Felippe Gonçalves-de-Albuquerque, Medina C, Grimaldi V, Carlos José Martins, Roberto M, et al. (2022) Cellular Pathophysiology of Leptospirosis: Role of Na/K-ATPase. Microorganisms.
7. Haake DA, Levett PN (2014) Leptospirosis in Humans. Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology 387: 65-97.
8. Ko AI, Goarant C, Picardeau M (2009) Leptospira: The dawn of the molecular genetics’ era for an emerging zoonotic pathogen. Nature Reviews Microbiology 7(10): 736-747.
9. Pappas G, Papadimitriou P, Siozopoulou V, Christou L, Akritidis N (2008) The globalization of leptospirosis: worldwide incidence trends. International Journal of Infectious Diseases 12(4): 351-357.
10. Hotez PJ, Bottazzi ME (2014) Leptospirosis: neglected, but not forgotten. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 8(6): e2802.
11. Teixeira AF, Fernandes LGV, Cavenague MF, Takahashi MB, Santos JC, et al. (2019) Nascimento ALTO. Adjuvanted leptospiral vaccines: Challenges and future development of new leptospirosis vaccines. Vaccine 37(30): 3961-3973.
12. Adler B (2015) Vaccines against leptospirosis. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 387: 251-272.
13. Bashiru G, Bahaman AR (2018) Advances & challenges in leptospiral vaccine development. Indian J Med Res 147(1): 15-22.
14. Felix CR, Siedler BS, Barbosa LN, Timm GR, McFadden J, et al. (2020) An overview of human leptospirosis vaccine design and future perspectives. Expert Opin Drug Discov 15(2): 179-188.
15. Barazzone GC, Teixeira AF, Azevedo BOP, Damiano DK, Oliveira MP, et al. (2022) Revisiting the Development of Vaccines Against Pathogenic Leptospira: Innovative Approaches, Present Challenges, and Future Perspectives. Front Immunol 12: 760291.
16. Adler B, de la Peña Moctezuma A (2010) Leptospira and leptospirosis. Veterinary Microbiology 140(3-4): 287-296.
17. Evangelista KV, Coburn J (2010) Leptospira as an emerging pathogen: A review of its biology, pathogenesis, and host immune responses. Future Microbiology 5(9): 1413-1425.
18. Costa F, Hagan JE, Calcagno J, Kane M, Torgerson P, et al. (2015) World Health Organization Leptospirosis Burden Epidemiology Reference Group. (2015) Global Morbidity and Mortality of Leptospirosis: A Systematic Review. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases 9(9): e0003898.
19. Picardeau M (2017) Virulence of the zoonotic agent of leptospirosis: still terra incognita? Nature Reviews Microbiology 15(5): 297-307.
20. Costa F, Hagan JE, Calcagno J, Kane M, Torgerson P, et al. (2015) Global Morbidity and Mortality of Leptospirosis: A Systematic Review. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 9(9): e0003898.
21. Lau CL, Smythe LD, Craig SB, Weinstein P (2010) Climate change, flooding, urbanisation and leptospirosis: fuelling the fire? Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 104: 631-638.
22. Lacerda HG, Monteiro GR, Oliveira CCG, Suassuna FB, Queiroz JW, et al. (2008) Leptospirosis in a subsistence farming community in Brazil. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 102: 1233-1238.
23. McBride AJA, Athanazio DA, Reis MG, Ko AI (2005) Leptospirosis. Current Opinion on Infectious Diseases 18(5): 376-386.
24. Sethi S, Sharma N, Kakkar N, Taneja J, Chatterjee SS, et al. (2010) Increasing trends of leptospirosis in northern India: a clinico-epidemiological study. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 4(1): e579.
25. Crump JA, Morrissey AB, Nicholson WL, Massung RF, Stoddard RA, et al. (2013) Etiology of severe non-malaria febrile illness in Northern Tanzania: a prospective cohort study. PLoS neglected tropical diseases 7(7): e2324.
26. Pereira MM, Schneider MC, Munoz-Zanzi C, Costa F, Benschop J, et al. (2018) A road map for leptospirosis research and health policies based on country needs in Latin America. Rev Panam Salud Publica 41: e131.
27. Arbiol J, Yabe M, Nomura H, Borja M, Gloriani N, et al. (2015) Using discrete choice modeling to evaluate the preferences and willingness to pay for leptospirosis vaccine. Hum Vaccin Immunother 11(4): 1046-1056.
28. Goarant C (2016) Leptospirosis: risk factors and management challenges in developing countries. Res Rep Trop Med 7: 49-62.

29. Adler B (2015) History of leptospirosis and leptospira. Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology 387: 1-9.
30. Bharti AR, Nally JE, Ricaldi JN, Matthias MA, Diaz MM, et al. (2003) Leptospirosis: a zoonotic disease of global importance. The Lancet Infectious Diseases 3(12): 757-771.
31. Hartskeerl RA, Collares-Pereira M, Ellis WA (2008) Emergence, and Control of Leptospirosis: Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Leptospirosis. Emergence, and control of leptospirosis: Proceedings of the first international symposium on leptospirosis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1149: 1-368.
32. Levett PN (2001) Leptospirosis. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 14(2): 296-326.
33. World Health Organization (2014) Ethical considerations for the use of unregistered interventions for Ebola virus disease (EVD). World Health Organization.
34. Larson HJ, Jarrett C, Eckersberger E, Smith DMD, Paterson P (2014) Understanding vaccine hesitancy around vaccines and vaccination from a global perspective: A systematic review of published literature, 2007-2012. Vaccine 32(19): 2150-2159.
35. Cunningham AA, Daszak P (2003) The alien invasive salamander Andrias davidianus in China: assessing the probability of eradication and geographical range. In RL. Tilson, PPM Soemarna (Eds.), Proceedings of a Symposium on Asian Rhinos. International Union for Conservation of Nature pp. 198-204.
36. Smith A (2011) Animal welfare and the ethics of animal use. Blackwell Publishing.
37. Costa F, Hagan JE, Calcagno J, Kane M, Torgerson P, et al (2015) World Health Organization Leptospirosis Burden Epidemiology Reference Group. (2015). Global Morbidity and Mortality of Leptospirosis: A Systematic Review. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases 9(9): e0003898.
38. Haake DA, Levett PN (2015) Leptospirosis in humans. Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology 387: 65-97.
39. Picardeau M (2017) Virulence of the zoonotic agent of leptospirosis: still terra incognita? Nature Reviews Microbiology 15(5): 297-307.
40. World Health Organization (2019) Leptospirosis: Key facts.