Why the Rationale for Canine Borrelia burgdorferi Vaccination Is Unpersuasive.

Canine Borrelia burgdorferi vaccines have long been a bone of contention in the veterinary profession (1, 2). Proponents of this non-core vaccine maintain that it is important to provide protective immunity to dogs exposed to tick-infested areas. While B. burgdorferi vaccines were never intended to replace tick preventives, in cases of poor compliance with product administration or product failure, pet owners can rest assured that their animal is protected against Lyme borreliosis. In the 2018 small animal consensus statement by the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine, however, experts did not reach a consensus on whether or not to recommend the vaccine: three were in favor, and three were against (3). According to the vaccination guidelines from the American Animal Hospital Association (AAHA), not generally recommended vaccines are ones for “diseases of low clinical significance or that respond readily to treatment; vaccines for which evidence of efficacy in the field is minimal; or vaccines that may produce a relatively higher incidence of adverse events with limited benefit” (4). In this brief critical discussion, we argue that B. burgdorferi vaccines in dogs meet all of the criteria outlined by AAHA for a vaccine that is not generally recommended, and that these vaccines do not confer any clear benefit to public health, as Lyme borreliosis is a vector-borne disease. For these reasons, we conclude that the rationale for canine B. burgdorferi vaccination is unpersuasive.