Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this study was to identify knowledge gaps in the global prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) and to obtain professional opinions and experiences regarding FIV in selected countries. We conducted a literature review of abstracts that reported the prevalence of FIV and interviewed experts in feline medicine and retroviruses from different countries to determine regional perspectives.

Methods

A total of 90 articles reporting FIV prevalence as a primary unbiased population-level analysis between 1980 and 2017 were indexed. FIV prevalence, demographics, year and location were analyzed. Statistics were evaluated and compared. In total, 10 experts were interviewed. Results were analyzed for congruence with the findings of the literature review.

Results

FIV prevalence was typically in the range of 5–8%, with a global prevalence of 4.7%, and remained largely constant over the reporting period (1980–2017). Over 90% of articles reported greater prevalence in older male cats. More studies were conducted in North America and Europe and reported the lowest prevalence. Expert-estimated prevalence approximated literature review prevalence. Attitudes and recommendations for management were consistent among experts. The limitations of the present review include varying inclusion criteria of cats tested in different studies, variation in testing modalities and the inability to conduct summary statistics across dissimilar cohorts.

Conclusions and relevance

The global prevalence of FIV has not changed since its discovery 40 years ago. Prevalence is higher in older male cats and is lower in North America and Europe than other continents. Experts agree that FIV is not typically a disease of high concern and is often associated with infections of the oral cavity. Vaccination is not typically recommended and has been discontinued in North America. The evaluation of risk factors for FIV progression is useful in managing infections. Recommendations for future research include analyses to determine copathogen and environmental factors that impact progression, assessment of life span impacts and investigations of treatment efficacy and side effects.

Keywords

Feline immunodeficiency virus FIV retroviruses prevalence review management

Introduction

Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) was first reported in 1986 in a cat colony in California with a high rate of morbidity and immunodeficiency-related clinical signs.¹ FIV is a lentivirus that has similar biological and pathological characteristics to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and therefore serves as an animal model for HIV research.^1,2 FIV infects immunocytes, results in CD4/CD8 inversion and has been associated with progressive immunosuppression.^1,3,4 The first phase is the primary infection with FIV characterized by viremia and malaise.⁵ The second phase is a long infection without clinical signs, where viral replication is limited and the cat appears healthy.⁵ This phase may be followed by a third phase where clinical signs of immunodeficiency, lymphomas or other chronic diseases occur.^1,5 The clinical course of FIV, while similar to HIV, is not as predictable or well-defined as acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) in humans.⁶

Common clinical signs of FIV infection include weight loss, fever, inappetence, leukopenia, anemia, gingivitis, stomatitis, secondary infections, opportunistic infections, neoplasia, upper respiratory infections, dermatitis, lymphadenopathy, chronic gastrointestinal issues and persistent wounds.^4,7
–9 Some infected cats remain without clinical signs and survive to a normal life expectancy.⁶ The American Academy of Feline Practitioners (AAFP) and Association of Shelter Veterinarians (ASV) do not recommend euthanasia of cats solely based on FIV status.¹⁰

FIV infects domestic cats worldwide and transmission is primarily through bite wounds.⁴ The prevalence of FIV varies greatly geographically, which is thought to be based upon associated risk factors of different cat populations and cat management worldwide.¹¹ Known risk factors for FIV are outdoor access, ownership status, age, sex, breed and population density.^12
–14 Free-roaming cats with outdoor access are likely to encounter cats that are FIV-positive.¹⁴ Aggressive male cats might be at higher risk than female cats as they are more likely to engage in aggressive behaviors that result in bites.¹⁴

The AAFP’s 2008 feline retrovirus management guidelines¹⁵ were updated in 2020¹⁰ and represent knowledge on pathogenesis, diagnosis, prevention and treatment of retrovirus infections in cats.¹⁰ This guidance recommends that FIV-positive cats be housed separately from FIV-negative animals, while noting that most cats in stable homes pose little risk for FIV transmission to other cats in the home.^5,10,16 This document notes that the Fel-O-Vax FIV vaccine (Boehringer Ingelheim) is not recommended, and production was discontinued in 2017 in North America.^5,17 The AAFP guidelines also include recommendations for frequent examination of FIV-positive cats to detect any health issues, deworming and parasite prevention treatments.¹⁰ In addition, core vaccine boosters for common feline infectious diseases should be considered in FIV-positive animals; however, at the present time, targeted therapies, such as zidovudine (AZT) and interferon, tend to have a low efficacy with high costs, as well as potential toxic side effects.¹⁰

We reviewed 90 published works^{1
–4,6
–9,11
–14,18
–95} to evaluate the worldwide prevalence of FIV over time. In addition, we interviewed 10 specialists in feline medicine from different countries to obtain their expert opinion on FIV, the unique perspective in their region, and to identify areas of consensus and variation in opinion and perspective.

FIV continues to be a commonly diagnosed disease across the world since its initial discovery more than 40 years ago. Originally thought to be analogous to HIV and a cause of high morbidity and mortality in cats, in more recent times, the prevailing sentiment among feline practitioners is that FIV is a manageable disease in most settings.¹⁰ Many unanswered questions about FIV remain, including the length of time it has been in existence, whether it is a cofactor for other infections, how it results in neoplasia and whether vaccines can protect against natural infections. We thus conducted this literature review to assess the reported worldwide prevalence of FIV since its original discovery, and to determine whether the opinions of expert feline practitioners mirrored observations from the literature.

Materials and methods

Literature review

The literature review was conducted by means of PubMed and Google Scholar searches using the keywords ‘feline immunodeficiency virus’ and ‘prevalence’ or ‘rate’ or ‘seroprevalence’ or ‘seroepidemiology’ or ‘epidemiology’ or ‘incidence’. Articles were chosen for the study if the abstracts included reported FIV prevalence that was not associated with other specific disease status or infections that could bias our analysis and conclusions. A total of 90 articles were indexed between 1980 and 2017 from North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa and Oceania, which represented information from 104 cat populations. An Excel (Microsoft) spreadsheet was used to record and analyze information from each article to include the geographic area the study was conducted in, time frame, population size tested and prevalence. When available, an analysis of age, sex, neuter status, breed, health status, ownership status and access to the outdoors was recorded.

Prevalence in geographic regions was assessed by computing weighted arithmetic means and ranges reported across comparable geographic areas by multiple authors. The weighted arithmetic mean was calculated to account for the variations in different population sizes between groups, testing methods and demographics. To calculate this number, we added the total number of FIV-positive cats and divided it by the total number of animals tested across referenced studies. To assess changes in reported prevalence of FIV over time, linear regression models were performed using Excel with prevalence as variable 1 and time as variable 2.

Interviews

We defined ‘relative experts’ as veterinarians with a primary interest in feline practice and feline infectious diseases, including retroviral infections. Potential survey participants were identified through personal and professional contacts, via officers in the AAFP and the International Society of Companion Animal Infectious Diseases (ISCAID), and prior participants of the International Feline Retrovirus Research Symposium (IFRRS). A total of 28 individuals who met the relative expert criteria were emailed to determine their interest in participating in the study. Interviews were conducted between 2019 and 2020.

Interview protocols and questions (see Tables 1–12 in the supplementary material) were developed based on the purpose of the research and through consultation with FIV experts at Colorado State University. Approval from the institutional review board at Colorado State University was obtained, and interviews were scheduled and conducted via telephone or video conferencing. After participants provided consent for audio recordings, each was asked a series of questions relating to their professional opinion and experiences regarding FIV. Topics included regional cat ownership practices, prevalence, signs and risk factors, best practices for management and prevention, perception about attitudes and recommendations for further research. Finally, open-ended questions were analyzed using a constant-comparative method to determine common themes in responses.

Results

Literature review

Prevalence of FIV by country

The prevalence of FIV ranged from 0% in some studies from Australia, Ethiopia and Vietnam to 33.9% in Egypt (Figure 1).^13,60,69,88

Figure 1

Prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) by country. This was a retrospective study based on the review of 90 articles reporting FIV prevalence.^{1
–4,6
–9,11
–14,18
–95} In countries where more than one study was reported, we calculated the weighted arithmetic mean to account for differences in population size between groups, testing methods and demographics

Figure 2

A prevalence map showing the weighted arithmetic mean of the reported feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) rates in any country where a study was conducted.^{1
–4,6
–9,11
–14,18
–95} Countries with the lowest rates of FIV are shown in blue, countries with moderate rates of FIV are shown in green and those with the highest rates of FIV are shown in yellow

Prevalence by continent

The 90 studies identified in the literature review were conducted in countries from North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa and Oceania (Figure 2). Countries defined by region of study are provided in Table 13 in the supplementary material. North America (the USA and Canada) reported a total study population of 101,716 cats, with a relatively low prevalence of FIV with a weighted arithmetic mean of 3.8% (range 2.19–23%) (Figure 3).^{9,23,24,27,30,31,35,37
–39,44,46
–48,51,55,66,70,72,74,77,81,92,95} The island nations of Grenada and St Kitts reported a total sample size of 347 cats and found a prevalence range of 8–22% with a weighted arithmetic mean of 15.3%.^30,44 In Central American countries (Mexico, Guatemala and Costa Rica), a total sample size of 359 cats was evaluated and reported FIV positivity in the range of 2.2–8.8% with a weighted arithmetic mean of 4.2%.^23,48,70 For this study, Mexico was categorized as Central America due to limited non-USA and non-Canadian studies.

Europe had a total of 34,537 cats tested and a weighted arithmetic mean of 5.3% (range 3.1–27%) (Figure 3).^{1,3,12,14,18,20,21,26,28,29,34,36,40,45,53,61,64,67,71,73,75,76,80,81,84,85} Studies from countries in Western Europe (Belgium, the UK, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal and Spain) reported a total sample size of 32,743 cats with a weighted arithmetic mean of 5.1% (range 3–24%).^{1,3,14,18,20,21,26,28,29,34,36,40,53,61,64,67,71,73,80,81,84,85} In contrast, studies from three Eastern European countries (Czech Republic, Poland and Serbia) had a higher prevalence of FIV with a weighted arithmetic mean of 9.0% (range 4–24%) from 1794 cats.^12,45,75,76 Studies in Cyprus, Iran and Turkey had a total sample size of 946 cats and a weighted arithmetic mean of 13.6% (range 3–22%).^{8,19,63,87,93,94}

Figure 3

Worldwide feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) prevalence, cats sampled and number of studies.^{1
–4,6
–9,11
–14,18
–95} Countries with the lowest rates of FIV are shown in blue, countries with moderate rates of FIV are shown in green and those with the highest rates of FIV are shown in yellow

The weighted arithmetic mean for all South American countries was reported as 10.3% (range 3–22%) (Figure 3).^{22,33,56,58,62,65,79} A small study in Chile found an FIV positivity of 2.6%, while a study in Argentina reported an FIV prevalence of 21.6%.^33,62 Several studies in Brazil, reporting a total sample size of 1046 cats, found a weighted arithmetic mean of 8.1% (range 5–22%).^{22,56,58,65,79} Studies in China, Japan, Malaysia, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam, with a total sample size of 5393 cats, found a weighted arithmetic mean of 12.3% (range 0–31%).^{2,11,25,41,50,59,60,68,83} The lowest prevalence of FIV was 0% in one population in Vietnam, with a sample size of 69 cats.⁶⁰ The highest prevalence was in Malaysia, with a rate of 31.3% from a sample size of 368 cats.¹¹

Africa was the continent with the highest FIV prevalence, although there was a wide range of reported prevalence between countries (Figure 3). For example, no cases were detected in Ethiopia, while 33.9% of cats tested in Egypt were reported as seropositive for FIV.^13,88 The prevalence of FIV in Oceania was moderately high, with a weighted arithmetic mean of 14% (range 0–25%) in a sample size of 12,028 cats (Figure 3).^{4
–7,32,42,54,57,69,89,91} In Australia, the total sample size was 8743 cats, with a weighted arithmetic mean of 12.8% (range 0–26%),^{4
–6,32,57,69,89,91} while New Zealand reported a weighted arithmetic mean of 17.3% (range 10–18.5%) from a sample size of 3285 cats.^7,42,54

Global prevalence over time

The 90 evaluated studies took place between 1980 and 2017.^{1
–4,6
–9,11
–14,18
–95} There was no observed change in the global prevalence of FIV over this time (Figure 4). Fourteen studies were reported from Australia between 1980 and 2013, providing the opportunity to evaluate temporal changes in prevalence (Figure 5). A linear regression analysis of Australia’s FIV prevalence over time was negative with a goodness of fit (R²) of 0.197, suggesting that the prevalence of FIV has decreased in Australia.^{4,6,32,57,69,89–91} Of note, some studies conducted in Australia tested healthy cats and others unhealthy cats, which may contribute to the difference in reported prevalence.4 ,6,32,57,69,89 –91 For example, Australian studies evaluating the prevalence of FIV in 1995 and 2012 were about cats presenting for illness, and reported a higher FIV prevalence (20.8% and 14.2%, respectively).5,57 A study conducted on Australian stray cats in 2003–2004 found an FIV positivity of 22%.⁶⁹ In contrast, five Australian reports studied cats without clinical disease and reported an FIV prevalence in the range of 0–14.6%.^{4
–6,57,69,89,91} Thus, cats with disease or strays tended to have a higher reported FIV prevalence than that of owned cats.

Figure 4

Global prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) associated with year of study.^{1
–4,6
–9,11
–14,18
–95} The linear regression line shows an R² value of 0.0015 and a slope of 0.0003, illustrating no relationship between the two variables

Figure 5

Prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) in Australia over the reported period.^{4,6,32,57,69,89–91} The linear regression line shows an R² value of 0.197 and a slope of −0.0033, illustrating a negative relationship between FIV and time

Risk factors for FIV

Consistent with the age and sex generally associated with FIV prevalence, 90% of studies concluded that older cats had a higher prevalence of FIV than younger cats. Furthermore, nearly 90% of the studies that reported sex and FIV prevalence found that male cats had a higher prevalence of FIV than female cats.

Of the 17 studies that looked at an association between FIV and breed, nine found that mixed breeds were at higher risk for FIV, while the other eight found that there was no statistical difference between crossbred and purebred cats.6,11,14,15,24,36,38,39,45,54,57,64,71,75,76,78,89 Approximately three-quarters (76.3%) of the studies found that cats with clinical signs and a history of fighting had a higher prevalence of FIV.

Of the studies examining cat ownership, 70% found that the prevalence of FIV was higher in stray or shelter cats than in owned cats,^{7,11,19,21,50,51,67,71,92,95} while 85% of the studies reporting housing conditions associated a higher prevalence of FIV with outdoor access.^{4,9,14,22,24,26,31,36
–38,45,51,59,63,76,77,95}

Expert opinions mirror literature review conclusions

Of the 10 experts interviewed, three were from Australia, two from the UK, three from the USA, one from Canada and one from Brazil. Interview questions and individual coded responses are provided in Tables 1–12 in the supplementary material. Most of the experts primarily evaluated owned cats, though several occasionally worked with shelter or stray cats. The expert from Brazil reported that typical cat ownership in the area primarily consisted of feeding outdoor cats. Half of the experts said that most of the cats they saw were indoor-only, while the other half reported that more than half their feline patients had outdoor access. Several of those interviewed noted that the proportion of indoor-only, cats was increasing in their area. Most experts believed that at least half of the cats in their area did not receive veterinary care, with some noting that they primarily served owners presenting cats with medical problems vs owners seeking preventive care. This was attributed to the fact that we interviewed experts working in specialty practices vs general practice clinics. All the specialists, except for the expert in Brazil, reported that nearly all the owned cats in their region were spayed or castrated. The Brazilian expert identified that the cost of neutering was often prohibitive; therefore, many cats in the region were intact.

The estimated prevalence of FIV varied greatly by region and was similar to the reported prevalence summarized from the literature review. The USA- and Canada-based specialists estimated a prevalence of FIV of <3%, whereas those in Australia estimated a prevalence of FIV in the range of 6–15%, consistent with the literature reports. UK specialists estimated a prevalence of FIV of approximately 4–5%, also consistent with reported studies in this region.^14,64,67,81 In Brazil, the FIV prevalence was estimated to be in the range of 2–37%, with large regional variation. Most experts thought that FIV prevalence was approximately the same as it had been 10 years ago, though two experts (from Australia and the USA) thought FIV prevalence had declined. The decrease in FIV prevalence was attributed to more cats being indoor-only and fewer dense populations of roaming cats.

Specialists emphasized that many FIV-seropositive cats do not present with any disease. Dental disease was the most common and the primary sign of FIV reported. Nearly all the experts identified outdoor access as a risk factor for FIV infection and many identified male cats, aggressive cats and stray cats as being at higher risk for infection.

To prevent the spread of FIV, most experts recommended keeping cats indoors or in an enclosure to prevent contact with other cats. Nearly all the experts did not recommend the commercial FIV vaccine due to concerns about its efficacy, the possible risk of false positives when testing vaccinated cats and the cost-effectiveness of the vaccine in areas with a low prevalence of FIV. The expert who did recommend the vaccine reported using it in high-risk populations as prophylaxis within 24 h of possible exposure.

Most of the experts recommended some form of targeted testing for high-risk populations (free-roaming cats or those with a history of aggressive interactions with other cats). About half of those interviewed tested for FIV as part of a clinical workup for cats with illness of unknown origin; several emphasized that they would usually only test if the cat was sick and was part of a higher-risk population with possible exposure. Six of the experts recommended routine point-of-care ELISA testing at the first examination to reveal FIV status to provide appropriate preventive care. Several experts identified the low prevalence of FIV in their area as a reason for not routinely testing. Several experts used confirmatory tests such as Western blot for antigen detection or PCR to determine the proviral load for better management.

Nearly all of the experts interviewed recommended ways to prevent transmission, such as indoor housing and maintaining a stable multi-cat household where the risk of transmission is low. Nearly all emphasized that FIV-positive cats can live a normal and full life but recommended more vigilant health screening for those cats, such as annual examinations and routine bloodwork. Other recommendations included reducing stressors and exposure to pathogens and ensuring a healthy and balanced diet. Half of the experts specifically emphasized that cats should not be euthanized based on FIV status alone and that decisions about euthanasia should be based on quality of life. Several discussed the risk of coinfections and the higher incidence of neoplasia in FIV-positive animals. AZT had been used in FIV-positive cats with clinical signs but was not considered widely effective and noted to be cost-prohibitive for most clients.

Five of the experts felt that their perception of the severity of FIV as a disease issue in cats had decreased over time, as they observed that most cats manifest mild or no specific clinical signs.

When asked what research should be conducted to improve the management of FIV-seropositive cats, several experts suggested research was FIV disease progression could assist in better advising clients and managing patients. Two of the experts noted that research on co-pathogens and comorbidities associated with FIV would be beneficial for assisting with treatment options. Four experts said more research was needed to assess antiretroviral and other FIV treatments, as published studies were limited. Treatments that could improve quality of life without causing adverse effects would be beneficial. In addition, research investigating the association between FIV and dental disease would be helpful, especially if management options to prevent severe dental disease and full mouth extractions could be identified.

Discussion

The lowest prevalence of FIV was in North America and Europe, with the highest prevalence in Africa and Oceania. The studies in the USA, Canada, Western Europe and Oceania were conducted over time and included the largest populations, providing more confidence in prevalence in these areas. Studies conducted in other regions were much smaller and a large variance was noted;^{22,33,56,58,62,65,79} for example, only 800 cats have been tested across Africa, making conclusions about prevalence on this continent difficult.^13,43,86,88 It is important to note that in similar study populations within a country, there may be a wide range of variation in prevalence rates.⁶⁹ Studies of FIV prevalence outside of North America, Australia and Europe are needed to test larger populations of cats to avoid bias and to increase the number of areas studied as there might be significant regional variation.

We documented that most published studies associate FIV prevalence with age (being older) and sex (being male). Older cats have potentially more cumulative exposure to and risk of infection with FIV.¹⁴ The long latent phase of FIV may also contribute to diagnosis at a later age since the subclinical phase may last for years.¹⁴ The higher risk for male cats may be explained by behavioral factors. For example, since male cats are more likely to be involved in cat fights, this may increase their risk of infection.¹⁴ It would be beneficial for more large sample size studies to be performed to test for an association between neuter status and prevalence of FIV infection to determine if hormonal factors predispose male cats to a lower or higher incidence of infection.

The association between crossbreed cats and higher incidence of FIV may be related to crossbreed cats tending to have more outdoor access, which was also independently noted to be associated with a higher prevalence.^{6,11,14,24,36,39,45,54,57,64,71,75,76,78,89,95} It is possible that the high density of animals in a shelter might predispose them to increased transmission, or coinfection with other viruses commonly identified in shelter settings might predispose them to FIV infection. Finally, cats relinquished to shelters may be more likely to be infected with FIV. More research is needed to determine the true association and pathogenesis of health status and FIV prevalence.

Though we included 90 published reports in this study, there are likely other manuscripts in journals not indexed in PubMed and Google Scholar that were not identified. However, the geographic and temporal scope of the 90 studies provided a significant data set for this comparison. Other limitations of this study include the lack of consistent FIV testing in the reported studies. Many point-of-care test kits that detect FIV antibodies are not considered accurate for vaccinated cats as the vaccine induces production of similar antibodies to those produced during active FIV infection.¹⁰ High mutation rates between FIV subtypes can lead to low sensitivity on PCR,⁹⁶ resulting in unreported cases of FIV. Due to a lack of specificity and sensitivity in serologic and nucleic acid assays, the prevalence of FIV could be higher or lower than reported. The sensitivity and specificity of FIV tests vary by laboratory and have likely varied over time, which limits direct comparisons between studies. Finally, inclusion criteria, including age, breed, health status, ownership and housing status, sex and other factors, were variable across reports, which hampers direct comparisons among studies and precluded more sophisticated statistical analysis.

Conclusions

FIV has maintained an overall global prevalence rate of 5% since the discovery of the virus over 40 years ago, indicating that this virus remains a constant and potentially important infection in domestic cats, and perhaps has been in existence for a significant period of time in cats. Experts in feline medicine are aware of the local prevalence in their region and define FIV infection as a manageable disease in many settings. Many areas were identified by experts for further study of this pathogen, including association with gingival disease and other pathogens, potential treatments, situations that may benefit from vaccination and more analysis of factors that result in FIV-associated morbidity.

Supplemental Material

Table 1

Interview questions posed to experts during qualitative analysis

Supplemental Material

Table 2

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to cat ownership

Supplemental Material

Table 3

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to FIV prevalence in regions serviced by each interviewee

Supplemental Material

Table 4

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to most commonly observed clinical signs associated with FIV infection

Supplemental Material

Table 5

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to perceived risk factors for acquiring FIV infection

Supplemental Material

Table 6

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to standard of care implemented for cats diagnosed with FIV infection

Supplemental Material

Table 7

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to FIV vaccination protocols

Supplemental Material

Table 8

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to FIV testing protocols

Supplemental Material

Table 9

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to pharmaceutical interventions used in cats diagnosed with FIV infection

Supplemental Material

Table 10

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to standard communication provided to clients with cats diagnosed with FIV infection

Supplemental Material

Table 11

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to opinions about FIV relevance for cat health

Supplemental Material

Table 12

Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to additional research that should be conducted on FIV infections in cats

Supplemental Material

Table 13

Each country categorized by region of study

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank the FIV experts who agreed to be interviewed and the Colorado State University Institute for Research in the Social Sciences for its expertise during all aspects of the interviews.

Conflict of interest

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

This work was supported by the Colorado State University Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Pathology undergraduate research fund.

Supplementary material

The following files are available as supplementary material:

Table 1: Interview questions posed to experts during qualitative analysis.

Table 2: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to cat ownership.

Table 3: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to FIV prevalence in regions serviced by each interviewee.

Table 4: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to most commonly observed clinical signs associated with FIV infection.

Table 5: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to perceived risk factors for acquiring FIV infection.

Table 6: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to standard of care implemented for cats diagnosed with FIV infection.

Table 7: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to FIV vaccination protocols.

Table 8: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to FIV testing protocols.

Table 9: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to pharmaceutical interventions used in cats diagnosed with FIV infection.

Table 10: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to standard communication provided to clients with cats diagnosed with FIV infection.

Table 11: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to opinions about FIV relevance for cat health.

Table 12: Synopsis of responses to interview questions relating to additional research that should be conducted on FIV infections in cats.

Table 13: Each country categorized by region of study.

Author note

The summarized results in this paper were presented at the IFRRS/ISCAID symposium in Glasgow, Scotland, UK in September 2022 by S VandeWoude.

Ethical approval

This work did not involve the use of animals and therefore ethical approval was not specifically required for publication in JFMS.

Informed consent

This work did not involve the use of animals (including cadavers) and therefore informed consent was not required. No animals or people are identifiable within this publication, and therefore additional informed consent for publication was not required.

ORCID iD

Mary Nehring

References

D’Amore

Falcone

Busani

, et al. A serological survey of feline immunodeficiency virus and Toxoplasma gondii in stray cats. Vet Res Commun 1997; 21: 355–359.

Aiyaranoi

Boonchalaew

Chawnan

, et al. Prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus & feline leukemia virus in clinically healthy cats in Khon Kaen province. The Thai Journal of Veterinary Medicine 2018; 48: 117–121.

Bandecchi

Matteucci

Baldinotti

, et al. Prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus and other retroviral infections in sick cats in Italy. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 1992; 31: 337–345.

Chang-Fung-Martel

Gummow

Burgess

, et al. A door-to-door prevalence study of feline immunodeficiency virus in an Australian suburb. J Feline Med Surg 2013; 15: 1070–1078.

Westman

Malik

Norris

Diagnosing feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) and feline leukaemia virus (FeLV) infection: an update for clinicians. Aust Vet J 2019; 97: 47–55.

Liem

Dhand

Pepper

, et al. Clinical findings and survival in cats naturally infected with feline immunodeficiency virus. J Vet Intern Med 2013; 27: 798–805.

Gates

Vigeant

Dale

Prevalence and risk factors for cats testing positive for feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukaemia virus infection in cats entering an animal shelter in New Zealand. N Z Vet J 2017; 65: 285–291.

Akhtardanesh

Ziaali

Sharifi

, et al. Feline immunodeficiency virus, feline leukemia virus and Toxoplasma gondii in stray and household cats in Kerman-Iran: seroprevalence and correlation with clinical and laboratory findings. Res Vet Sci 2010; 89: 306–310.

Burling

Levy

Scott

, et al. Seroprevalences of feline leukemia virus and feline immunodeficiency virus infection in cats in the United States and Canada and risk factors for seropositivity. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2017; 251: 187–194.

10.

Little

Levy

Hartmann

, et al. 2020 AAFP feline retrovirus testing and management guidelines. J Feline Med Surg 2020; 22: 5–30.

11.

Bande

Arshad

Hassan

, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of feline leukaemia virus and feline immunodeficiency virus in peninsular Malaysia. BMC Vet Res 2012; 8. DOI: 10.1186/1746-6148-8-33.

12.

Aleksandar

Vuk

Ivan

, et al. Occurrence of Bartonella henselae, FeLV and FIV infection in 60 stray cats from Serbia. Acta Veterinaria-Beograd 2014; 64: 378–385.

13.

Al-Kappany

Lappin

Kwok

OCH

, et al. Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii and concurrent Bartonella spp., feline immunodeficiency virus, feline leukemia virus, and Dirofilaria immitis infections in Egyptian cats. J Parasitol 2011; 97: 256–258.

14.

Hosie

Robertson

Jarrett

Prevalence of feline leukaemia virus and antibodies to feline immunodeficiency virus in cats in the United Kingdom. Vet Rec 1989; 125: 293–297.

15.

Levy

Crawford

Hartmann

, et al. 2008 American Association of Feline Practitioners’ feline retrovirus management guidelines. J Feline Med Surg 2008; 10: 300–316.

16.

Litster

AL.

Transmission of feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) among cohabiting cats in two cat rescue shelters. Vet J 2014; 201: 184–188.

17.

Stickney

Ghosh

Cave

, et al. Lack of protection against feline immunodeficiency virus infection among domestic cats in New Zealand vaccinated with the Fel-O-Vax FIV vaccine. Vet Microbiol 2020; 250. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2020.108865.

18.

Arjona

Escolar

Soto

, et al. Seroepidemiological survey of infection by feline leukemia virus and immunodeficiency virus in Madrid and correlation with some clinical aspects. J Clin Microbiol 2000; 38: 3448–3449.

19.

Attipa

Papasouliotis

Solano-Gallego

, et al. Prevalence study and risk factor analysis of selected bacterial, protozoal and viral, including vector-borne, pathogens in cats from Cyprus. Parasit Vectors 2017; 10: 130. DOI: 10.1186/s13071-017-2063-2.

20.

Ayllón

Diniz

PPVP

Breitschwerdt

, et al. Vector-borne diseases in client-owned and stray cats from Madrid, Spain. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 2012; 12: 143–150.

21.

Bandecchi

Dell’Omodarme

Magi

, et al. Feline leukaemia virus (FeLV) and feline immunodeficiency virus infections in cats in the Pisa district of Tuscany, and attempts to control FeLV infection in a colony of domestic cats by vaccination. Vet Rec 2006; 158: 555–557.

22.

Biezus

Machado

Ferian

, et al. Prevalence of and factors associated with feline leukemia virus (FeLV) and feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) in cats of the state of Santa Catarina, Brazil. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis 2019; 63: 17–21.

23.

Blanco

Prendas

Cortes

, et al. Seroprevalence of viral infections in domestic cats in Costa Rica. J Vet Med Sci 2009; 71: 661–663.

24.

Cohen

Carter

Thomas

, et al. Epizootiologic association between feline immunodeficiency virus infection and feline leukemia virus seropositivity. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1990; 197: 220–225.

25.

Cong

Meng

Blaga

, et al. Toxoplasma gondii, Dirofilaria immitis, feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV), and feline leukemia virus (FeLV) infections in stray and pet cats (Felis catus) in northwest China: co-infections and risk factors. Parasitol Res 2016; 115: 217–223.

26.

Courchamp

Yoccoz

Artois

, et al. At-risk individuals in feline immunodeficiency virus epidemiology: evidence from a multivariate approach in a natural population of domestic cats (Felis catus). Epidemiol Infect 1998; 121: 227–236.

27.

Danner

Goltz

Hess

, et al. Evidence of feline immunodeficiency virus, feline leukemia virus, and Toxoplasma gondii in feral cats on Mauna Kea, Hawaii. J Wildl Dis 2007; 43: 315–318.

28.

Dorny

Speybroeck

Verstraete

, et al. Serological survey of Toxoplasma gondii, feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukaemia virus in urban stray cats in Belgium. Vet Rec 2002; 151: 626–629.

29.

Duarte

Castro

Pereira

Fonseca

, et al. Survey of infectious and parasitic diseases in stray cats at the Lisbon Metropolitan Area, Portugal. J Feline Med Surg 2010; 12: 441–446.

30.

Dubey

Lappin

Kwok

OCH

, et al. Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii and concurrent Bartonella spp., feline immunodeficiency virus, and feline leukemia virus infections in cats from Grenada, West Indies. J Parasitol 2009; 95: 1129–1133.

31.

Fisch

Altman

NH.

Feline immunodeficiency virus infection in a population of pet cats from southeastern Florida. J Vet Diagn Invest 1989; 1: 339–342.

32.

Friend

Birch

Lording

, et al. Feline immunodeficiency virus: prevalence, disease associations and isolation. Aust Vet J 1990; 67: 237–243.

33.

Galdo Novo

Bucafusco

Diaz

, et al. Viral diagnostic criteria for feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukemia virus infections in domestic cats from Buenos Aires, Argentina. Rev Argent Microbiol 2016; 48: 293–297.

34.

Garigliany

Jolly

Dive

, et al. Risk factors and effect of selective removal on retroviral infections prevalence in Belgian stray cats. Vet Rec 2016; 178: 45. DOI: 10.1136/vr.103314.

35.

Gibson

Keizer

Golding

A trap, neuter, and release program for feral cats on Prince Edward Island. Can Vet J 2002; 43: 695–698.

36.

Gleich

Krieger

Hartmann

Prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukaemia virus among client-owned cats and risk factors for infection in Germany. J Feline Med Surg 2009; 11: 985–992.

37.

Goldkamp

Levy

Edinboro

, et al. Seroprevalences of feline leukemia virus and feline immunodeficiency virus in cats with abscesses or bite wounds and rate of veterinarian compliance with current guidelines for retrovirus testing. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2008; 232: 1152–1158.

38.

Grindem

Corbett

Ammerman

, et al. Seroepidemiologic survey of feline immunodeficiency virus infection in cats of Wake County, North Carolina. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1989; 194: 226–228.

39.

Hitt

Spangler

McCarville

Prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus in submissions of feline serum to a diagnostic laboratory in Atlantic Canada. Can Vet J 1992; 33: 723–726.

40.

Holznagel

Lutz

Steinhauer

, et al. Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection in cats at necropsy: a serological study. J Comp Pathol 1997; 116: 339–352.

41.

Hwang

Gottdenker

Min

M-S

, et al. Evaluation of biochemical and haematological parameters and prevalence of selected pathogens in feral cats from urban and rural habitats in South Korea. J Feline Med Surg 2016; 18: 443–451.

42.

Jenkins

Dittmer

Marshall

, et al. Prevalence and risk factor analysis of feline haemoplasma infection in New Zealand domestic cats using a real-time PCR assay. J Feline Med Surg 2013; 15: 1063–1069.

43.

Schoeman

Kahn

Meers

, et al. Seroprevalence of FIV and FeLV infection and determination of FIV subtypes in sick domestic cats in South Africa. Proceedings of the 15th European College of Veterinary Internal Medicine - Companion Animals; 2005 Sept 1–3; Glasgow, UK. Hoboken: Wiley, 2005, p 950. DOI: 10.1111/j.1939-1676.2005.tb02791.x.

44.

Kelly

Moura

Miller

, et al. Feline immunodeficiency virus, feline leukemia virus and Bartonella species in stray cats on St Kitts, West Indies. J Feline Med Surg 2010; 12: 435–440.

45.

Knotek

Hajkova

Svoboda

, et al. Epidemiology of feline leukaemia and feline immunodeficiency virus infections in the Czech Republic. Zentralbl Veterinarmed B 1999; 46: 665–671.

46.

Lee

Levy

Gorman

, et al. Prevalence of feline leukemia virus infection and serum antibodies against feline immunodeficiency virus in unowned free-roaming cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002; 220: 620–622.

47.

Levy

Edinboro

Glotfelty

, et al. Seroprevalence of Dirofilaria immitis, feline leukemia virus, and feline immunodeficiency virus infection among dogs and cats exported from the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricane disaster area. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2007; 231: 218–225.

48.

Lickey

ALA

Kennedy

Patton

, et al. Serologic survey of domestic felids in the Petén region of Guatemala. J Zoo Wildl Med 2005; 36: 121–123.

49.

Lin

Cheng

Inoshima

, et al. Seroepidemiological survey of feline retrovirus infections in cats in Taiwan in 1993 and 1994. J Vet Med Sci 1995; 57: 161–163.

50.

Lin

Lai

Bowman

, et al. Feline immunodeficiency virus, feline leukaemia virus, Toxoplasma gondii, and intestinal parasitic infections in Taiwanese cats. Br Vet J 1990; 146: 468–475.

51.

Little

Sears

Lachtara

, et al. Seroprevalence of feline leukemia virus and feline immunodeficiency virus infection among cats in Canada. Can Vet J 2009; 50: 644–648.

52.

Little

SE.

Feline immunodeficiency virus testing in stray, feral, and client-owned cats of Ottawa. Can Vet J 2005; 46: 898–901.

53.

Lopes

Cardoso

Rodrigues

Serological survey of Toxoplasma gondii infection in domestic cats from northeastern Portugal. Vet Parasitol 2008; 155: 184–189.

54.

Luckman

Gates

MC.

Epidemiology and clinical outcomes of feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukaemia virus in client-owned cats in New Zealand. JFMS Open Rep 2017; 3. DOI: 10.1177/2055116917729311.

55.

Luria

Levy

Lappin

, et al. Prevalence of infectious diseases in feral cats in Northern Florida. J Feline Med Surg 2004; 6: 287–296.

56.

Macieira

de Menezes

RdCAA

Damico

, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for hemoplasmas in domestic cats naturally infected with feline immunodeficiency virus and/or feline leukemia virus in Rio de Janeiro – Brazil. J Feline Med Surg 2008; 10: 120–129.

57.

Malik

Kendall

Cridland

, et al. Prevalences of feline leukaemia virus and feline immunodeficiency virus infections in cats in Sydney. Aust Vet J 1997; 75: 323–327.

58.

Marcondes

Hirata

Vides

, et al. Infection by Mycoplasma spp., feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukemia virus in cats from an area endemic for visceral leishmaniasis. Parasit Vectors 2018; 11: 131. DOI: 10.1186/s13071-018-2716-9.

59.

Maruyama

Kabeya

Nakao

, et al. Seroprevalence of Bartonella henselae, Toxoplasma gondii, FIV and FeLV infections in domestic cats in Japan. Microbiol Immunol 2003; 47: 147–153.

60.

Miyazawa

Ikeda

Maeda

, et al. Seroepidemiological survey of feline retrovirus infections in domestic and leopard cats in Northern Vietnam in 1997. J Vet Med Sci 1998; 60: 1273–1275.

61.

Montoya

Garcia

Galvez

, et al. Implications of zoonotic and vector-borne parasites to free-roaming cats in central Spain. Vet Parasitol 2018; 251: 125–130.

62.

Mora

Napolitano

Ortega

, et al. Feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukemia virus infection in free-ranging guignas (Leopardus guigna) and sympatric domestic cats in human perturbed landscapes on Chiloé Island, Chile. J Wildl Dis 2015; 51: 199–208.

63.

Mosallanejad

Shapouri

Avizeh

, et al. Seroprevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) among client-owned cats in Ahvaz, Southwestern of Iran. Veterinary Research Forum 2010; 3: 180–187.

64.

Muirden

Prevalence of feline leukaemia virus and antibodies to feline immunodeficiency virus and feline coronavirus in stray cats sent to an RSPCA hospital. Vet Rec 2002; 150: 621–625.

65.

Munhoz

Hage

Cruz

RDS

, et al. Toxoplasmosis in cats in northeastern Brazil: frequency, associated factors and coinfection with Neospora caninum, feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukemia virus. Vet Parasitol Reg Stud Reports 2017; 8: 35–38.

66.

Munro

Berghuis

Lang

, et al. Seroprevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) and feline leukemia virus (FeLV) in shelter cats on the island of Newfoundland, Canada. Can J Vet Res 2014; 78: 140–144.

67.

Murray

Roberts

Skillings

, et al. Risk factors for feline immunodeficiency virus antibody test status in Cats Protection adoption centres (2004). J Feline Med Surg 2009; 11: 467–473.

68.

Nakamura

Miyazawa

Ikeda

, et al. Contrastive prevalence of feline retrovirus infections between Northern and Southern Vietnam. J Vet Med Sci 2000; 62: 921–923.

69.

Norris

Bell

Hales

, et al. Prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus infection in domesticated and feral cats in eastern Australia. J Feline Med Surg 2007; 9: 300–308.

70.

Ortega-Pacheco

Aguilar-Caballero

Colin-Flores

, et al. Seroprevalence of feline leukemia virus, feline immunodeficiency virus and heartworm infection among owned cats in tropical Mexico. J Feline Med Surg 2014; 16: 460–464.

71.

Peri

Ponti

Dall’ara

, et al. Seroepidemiological and clinical survey of feline immunodeficiency virus infection in northern Italy. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 1994; 40: 285–297.

72.

Ravi

Wobeser

Taylor

, et al. Naturally acquired feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection in cats from western Canada: prevalence, disease associations, and survival analysis. Can Vet J 2010; 51: 271–276.

73.

Ravicini

Pastor

Hawley

, et al. Prevalence of selected infectious disease agents in stray cats in Catalonia, Spain. JFMS Open Rep 2016; 2. DOI: 10.1177/2055116916634109.

74.

Rodgers

Baldwin

CA.

A serologic survey of Oklahoma cats for antibodies to feline immunodeficiency virus, coronavirus, and Toxoplasma gondii and for antigen to feline leukemia virus. J Vet Diagn Invest 1990; 2: 180–183.

75.

Rypuła

Płoneczka-Janeczko

Bierowiec

, et al. Prevalence of viral infections in cats in southwestern Poland in the years 2006 to 2010. Berl Munch Tierarztl Wochenschr 2014; 127: 163–165.

76.

Sarvani

Tasker

Filipovic

, et al. Prevalence and risk factor analysis for feline haemoplasmas in cats from Northern Serbia, with molecular subtyping of feline immunodeficiency virus. JFMS Open Rep 2018; 4. DOI: 10.1177/2055116918770037.

77.

Shelton

Waltier

Connor

, et al. Prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukemia-virus infections in pet cats. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1989; 25: 7–12.

78.

Sivagurunathan

Atwa

Lobetti

Prevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukaemia virus infection in Malaysia: a retrospective study. JFMS Open Rep 2018; 4. DOI: 10.1177/2055116917752587.

79.

Sobrinho

LSV

Rossi

Vides

, et al. Coinfection of Leishmania chagasi with Toxoplasma gondii, feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) and feline leukemia virus (FeLV) in cats from an endemic area of zoonotic visceral leishmaniasis. Vet Parasitol 2012; 187: 302–306.

80.

Spada

Proverbio

della Pepa

, et al. Seroprevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus, feline leukaemia virus and Toxoplasma gondii in stray cat colonies in northern Italy and correlation with clinical and laboratory data. J Feline Med Surg 2012; 14: 369–377.

81.

Stavisky

Dean

Molloy

MH.

Prevalence of and risk factors for FIV and FeLV infection in two shelters in the United Kingdom (2011–2012). Vet Rec 2017; 181: 451. DOI: 10.1136/vr.103857.

82.

Stojanovic

Foley

Infectious disease prevalence in a feral cat population on Prince Edward Island, Canada. Can Vet J 2011; 52: 979–982.

83.

Sukhumavasi

Bellosa

Lucio-Forster

, et al. Serological survey of Toxoplasma gondii, Dirofilaria immitis, feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) and feline leukemia virus (FeLV) infections in pet cats in Bangkok and vicinities, Thailand. Vet Parasitol 2012; 188: 25–30.

84.

Sukura

Salminen

Lindberg

LA.

A survey of FIV antibodies and FeLV antigens in free-roaming cats in the capital area of Finland. Acta Vet Scand 1992; 33: 9–14.

85.

Tabar

Altet

Francino

, et al. Vector-borne infections in cats: molecular study in Barcelona area (Spain). Vet Parasitol 2008; 151: 332–336.

86.

Tchamo

De Rugeriis

Noormahomed

EV.

Occurrence of feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukaemia virus in Maputo city and province, Mozambique: a pilot study.

JFMS Open Rep 2019; 5. DOI: 10.1177/2055116919870877.

87.

Tekelioglu

Berriatua

Turan

, et al. A retrospective clinical and epidemiological study on feline coronavirus (FCoV) in cats in Istanbul, Turkey. Prev Vet Med 2015; 119: 41–47.

88.

Tiao

Darrington

Molla

, et al. An investigation into the seroprevalence of Toxoplasma gondii, Bartonella spp., feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV), and feline leukaemia virus (FeLV) in cats in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Epidemiol Infect 2013; 141: 1029–1033.

89.

Tran

Kelman

Ward

, et al. Risk of feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection in pet cats in Australia is higher in areas of lower socioeconomic status. Animals 2019; 9. DOI: 10.3390/ani9090592.

90.

Westman

Paul

Malik

, et al. Seroprevalence of feline immunodeficiency virus and feline leukaemia virus in Australia: risk factors for infection and geographical influences (2011–2013). JFMS Open Rep 2016; 2. DOI: 10.1177/2055116916646388.

91.

Winkler

Löchelt

Flower

RLP

. Epidemiology of feline foamy virus and feline immunodeficiency virus infections in domestic and feral cats: a seroepidemiological study. J Clin Microbiol 1999; 37: 2848–2851.

92.

Witt

Moench

Gittelsohn

, et al. Epidemiologic observations on feline immunodeficiency virus and Toxoplasma gondii coinfection in cats in Baltimore, Md. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1989; 194: 229–233.

93.

Yilmaz

Ilgaz

Harbour

Prevalence of FIV and FELV infections in cats in Istanbul. J Feline Med Surg 2000; 2: 69–70.

94.

Yuksek

Kaya

Altug

, et al. Prevalence of feline retrovirus infections in Van cats. Bulletin of the Veterinary Institute in Pulawy 2005; 49: 375–377.

95.

Levy

Scott

Lachtara

, et al. Seroprevalence of feline leukemia virus and feline immunodeficiency virus infection among cats in North America and risk factors for seropositivity. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006; 228: 371–376.

96.

Bęczkowski

Hughes

Biek , et al. Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) env recombinants are common in natural infections. Retrovirology 2014; 11. DOI: 10.1186/s12977-014-0080-1.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB

Study of feline immunodeficiency virus prevalence and expert opinions on standards of care

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Keywords

Introduction

Materials and methods

Literature review

Interviews

Results

Literature review

Prevalence of FIV by country

Prevalence by continent

Global prevalence over time

Risk factors for FIV

Expert opinions mirror literature review conclusions

Discussion

Conclusions

Supplemental Material

Table 1

Supplemental Material

Table 2

Supplemental Material

Table 3

Supplemental Material

Table 4

Supplemental Material

Table 5

Supplemental Material

Table 6

Supplemental Material

Table 7

Supplemental Material

Table 8

Supplemental Material

Table 9

Supplemental Material

Table 10

Supplemental Material

Table 11

Supplemental Material

Table 12

Supplemental Material

Table 13

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Conflict of interest

Funding

Supplementary material

Author note

Ethical approval

Informed consent

ORCID iD

References

Supplementary Material