Search

Background: The safety and efficacy of a new spot-on formulation of selamectin plus sarolaner were evaluated for the treatment and control of natural flea infestations on cats in two non-randomised, multi-centre clinical trials conducted in 8 different locations in Queensland, Australia. Methods: One hundred and four cats from 65 different households were enrolled across the two studies. Demographic characteristics of cats in the two studies were similar. The new spot-on formulation of selamectin and sarolaner was administered topically once a month for 3 consecutive months at a minimum dosage of 6 mg/kg selamectin (dose range 6–12 mg/kg) plus 1 mg/kg sarolaner (dose range 1–2 mg/kg). Cats were dosed on Days 0 (pre-treatment), 30 and 60 and physical examinations and flea counts were conducted on Days 0, 30, 60 and 90. Efficacy assessments were based on the percentage reduction in live flea counts post-treatment compared to Day 0. Results: In Study A, at enrolment, primary cats had flea counts ranging from 6 to 107 (arithmetic mean 21.0). The selamectin and sarolaner spot-on formulation resulted in arithmetic mean efficacy of 98.0%, 100% and 100% on Days 30, 60 and 90, respectively. In Study B, at enrolment, primary cats had flea counts ranging from 6 to 22 (arithmetic mean 10.0). The selamectin and sarolaner spot-on formulation resulted in arithmetic mean efficacy of 99.7%, 100% and 100% on Days 30, 60 and 90, respectively. Conclusions: The new spot-on formulation of selamectin plus sarolaner topically administered at monthly intervals at the minimum dosage of 6.0 mg/kg selamectin and 1.0 mg/kg sarolaner was safe and highly effective against natural infestations of fleas under a range of geographical conditions, representative of both tropical and subtropical regions of Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ticks are increasingly reported on cats worldwide, with Ixodes ricinus being a relevant species across Europe and in near by areas of North Africa and the Middle East. Yet there are few acaracidal products with proven efficacy approved for use in cats. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of a new spot-on formulation containing selamectin and sarolaner with a topical application of fluralaner (Bravecto®) against Ixodes ricinus ticks on cats. To that end, twenty-four (24) cats were randomly allocated to one of three treatment groups. The cats in the control group remained untreated. Cats in group 2 were treated with selamectin/sarolaner (Stronghold®Plus; Zoetis) at the minimum recommended dose of 1.0 mg/kg sarolaner and 6.0 mg/kg selamectin on Days 0, 30 and 60. The cats in group 3 received a fluralaner treatment (Bravecto®spot-on solution for cats, MSD) at the minimum recommended dose of 40.0 mg/kg on Day 0. Cats were infested with 50 (± 4) viable, adult, unfed I. ricinus ticks on Days 26, 54, 82 and 89 and ticks were removed for counting 48 h (± 2 h) later. Results: Three monthly treatments with selamectin/sarolaner provided high and consistent efficacy against I. ricinus for the entire duration of the study period. In contrast, the efficacy of fluralaner declined in the second month after treatment and was below the efficacy threshold of 90% on Days 56, 84 and 91. The percentage efficacy against I. ricinus was numerically higher in the selemectin/sarolaner treated group than in the fluralaner-treated group on Days 56, 84 and 91. Furthermore, greasiness and spiking of the hair, as well as white deposits were frequently observed in the fluralaner-treated cats. Conclusion: The results of the present study confirm the high and consistent efficacy of a new spot-on combination product containing selamectin and sarolaner against I. ricinus in cats, and indicate a decline in fluralaner efficacy during the 91 day period after treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dog owners and veterinarians in small animal practices began to waive prevention of canine heartworm disease after heartworm infections seemed to have disappeared in Brazil. After 2013, infection rates rebounded, and an evaluation of the efficacy of chemoprophylactic drugs became necessary. Included in this re-evaluation was the efficacy of selamectin in client-owned dogs residing in a high infection-risk area. Methods: The preventive efficacy of selamectin was evaluated by the topical application of selamectin to 24 client-owned dogs at the recommended rate (minimum of 6 mg/kg) by a veterinarian monthly for 36 months. Blood samples were collected before the first treatment and at the end of the study for testing to detect microfilariae by the modified Knott's test and Dirofilaria immitis antigens using a commercial antigen test. Exposure to risk of heartworm infection was confirmed by the presence of infection in dogs living in low-income communities within a 2 km radius from the homes of dogs in the study. The dogs were managed according to routine practice by the owners within each household throughout the study. Results: All dogs tested negative by both tests after receiving topical treatment with selamectin monthly for 36 months. Testing of 204 dogs from the communities confirmed the presence of heartworm in the area by detection of microfilariae or D. immitis antigen in 44 dogs (21.6 %). Conclusions: Topical selamectin was 100 % effective for D. immitis prevention in 24 dogs that received monthly treatments by a veterinarian. Detection of heartworm infections in untreated dogs in the area suggests that clients need to be better informed regarding the prevalence of D. immitis and the importance of maintaining regular preventive treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A study was conducted to evaluate and compare the efficacy of selamectin, spinosad, and spinosad/milbemycin oxime against the KS1 strain of Ctenocephalides felis on dogs. Methods: Forty-eight dogs were selected for the study and two batches of 24 were blocked and allocated randomly to treatment groups and flea count times. There were four treatment groups of 12 dogs each: negative control, topical selamectin, oral spinosad/milbemycin oxime, and oral spinosad. Each dog was infested with 100 fleas on Days -2, 7, 14, 21 and 28. Within each treatment group, six dogs were flea counted at 24 hours and six at 48 hours after treatment or post-infestation. On Day 0, dogs received a single treatment of the appropriate drug according to the approved commercial label. Results: Efficacy of selamectin against an existing flea infestation was 60.4% and 91.4% at 24 and 48 hours, respectively, whereas spinosad/milbemycin oxime and spinosad were 100% at both time points. All products were >90% effective within 24 hours after subsequent infestations on Days 7, 14 and 21. Following the Day 28 flea infestation, selamectin was 93% and 95.7% effective at 24 and 48 hours, respectively. Whereas the efficacy of spinosad/milbemycin oxime following the day 28 infestation was 84.7% and 87.5% at 24 and 48 hours, respectively and spinosad alone was 72.9% and 76.3% effective at 24 and 48 hours, respectively. Conclusions: After initial application, the two oral spinosad products had a more rapid onset of flea kill than topical selamectin which took up to 48 hours to control (>90%) the existing infestation. However, for subsequent weekly flea infestations selamectin had similar or better efficacy than spinosad or spinosad/milbemycin oxime at 24 and 48 hours after infestation. Spinosad/milbemycin oxime and spinosad were >90% effective against the KS1 strain from Day 1 to Day 23. Whereas, selamectin was >90% effective against the KS1 strain of C. felis from Day 2 to Day 30. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]