Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 22(11): 1606-1616, 2022 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35961362

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: A head-to-head comparison of the most widely used oral rotavirus vaccines has not previously been done, particularly in a high child mortality setting. We therefore aimed to compare the immunogenicity of RotaTeq (Merck, Kenilworth, NJ, USA) and Rotarix (GlaxoSmithKline, Rixensart, Belgium) rotavirus vaccines in the same population and examined risk factors for low seroresponse. METHODS: We did a randomised, controlled, open-label, parallel, phase 4 trial in urban slums within Mirpur and Mohakahli (Dhaka, Bangladesh). We enrolled eligible participants who were healthy infants aged 6 weeks and full-term (ie, >37 weeks' gestation). We randomly assigned participants (1:1), using block randomisation via a computer-generated electronic allocation with block sizes of 8, 16, 24, and 32, to receive either three RotaTeq vaccine doses at ages 6, 10, and 14 weeks or two Rotarix doses at ages 6 and 10 weeks without oral poliovirus vaccine. Coprimary outcomes were the rotavirus-specific IgA seroconversion in both vaccines, and the comparison of the rotavirus IgA seroconversion by salivary secretor phenotype in each vaccine arm. Seroconversion at age 18 weeks in the RotaTeq arm and age of 14 weeks in the Rotarix arm was used to compare the complete series of each vaccine. Seroconversion at age 14 weeks was used to compare two RotaTeq doses versus two Rotarix doses. Seroconversion at age 22 weeks was used to compare the immunogenicity at the same age after receiving the full vaccine series. Safety was assessed for the duration of study participation. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02847026. FINDINGS: Between Sept 1 and Dec 8, 2016, a total of 1144 infants were randomly assigned to either the RotaTeq arm (n=571) or Rotarix arm (n=573); 1080 infants (531 in the RotaTeq arm and 549 in the Rotarix arm) completed the study. Rotavirus IgA seroconversion 4 weeks after the full series occurred in 390 (73%) of 531 infants age 18 weeks in the RotaTeq arm and 354 (64%) of 549 infants age 14 weeks in the Rotarix arm (p=0·01). At age 14 weeks, 4 weeks after two doses, RotaTeq recipients had lower seroconversion than Rotarix recipients (268 [50%] of 531 vs 354 [64%] of 549; p<0·0001). However, at age 22 weeks, RotaTeq recipients had higher seroconversion than Rotarix recipients (394 [74%] of 531 vs 278 [51%] of 549; p<0·0001). Among RotaTeq recipients, seroconversion 4 weeks after the third dose was higher than after the second dose (390 [73%] of 531 vs 268 [50%] of 531; p<0·0001]. In the RotaTeq arm, rotavirus IgA seroconversion was lower in non-secretors than in secretors at ages 14 weeks (p=0·08), 18 weeks (p=0·01), and 22 weeks (p=0·02). Similarly, in the Rotarix arm, rotavirus IgA seroconversion was lower in non-secretors than in secretors at ages 14 weeks (p=0·02) and 22 weeks (p=0·01). 65 (11%) of 571 infants had adverse events in the RotaTeq arm compared with 63 (11%) of 573 infants in the Rotarix arm; no adverse events were attributed to the use of either vaccine. One death due to aspiration occurred in the RotaTeq arm, which was not related to the vaccine. INTERPRETATION: RotaTeq induced a higher magnitude and longer duration of rotavirus IgA response than Rotarix in this high child mortality setting. Additional vaccination strategies should be evaluated to overcome the suboptimal performance of current oral rotavirus vaccines in these settings. FUNDING: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.


Assuntos
Infecções por Rotavirus , Vacinas contra Rotavirus , Rotavirus , Humanos , Bangladesh , Vacinas Atenuadas , Anticorpos Antivirais , Imunoglobulina A , Infecções por Rotavirus/prevenção & controle , Imunogenicidade da Vacina
2.
J Infect Dis ; 226(8): 1319-1326, 2022 10 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35575051

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The polio eradication endgame called for the removal of trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) and introduction of bivalent (types 1 and 3) OPV and inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV). However, supply shortages have delayed IPV administration to tens of millions of infants, and immunogenicity data are currently lacking to guide catch-up vaccination policies. METHODS: We conducted an open-label randomized clinical trial assessing 2 interventions, full or fractional-dose IPV (fIPV, one-fifth of IPV), administered at age 9-13 months with a second dose given 2 months later. Serum was collected at days 0, 60, 67, and 90 to assess seroconversion, priming, and antibody titer. None received IPV or poliovirus type 2-containing vaccines before enrolment. RESULTS: A single fIPV dose at age 9-13 months yielded 75% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6%-82%) seroconversion against type 2, whereas 2 fIPV doses resulted in 100% seroconversion compared with 94% (95% CI, 89%-97%) after a single full dose (P < .001). Two doses of IPV resulted in 100% seroconversion. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirmed increased IPV immunogenicity when administered at an older age, likely due to reduced interference from maternally derived antibodies. Either 1 full dose of IPV or 2 doses of fIPV could be used to vaccinate missed cohorts, 2 fIPV doses being antigen sparing and more immunogenic. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03890497.


Assuntos
Poliomielite , Poliovirus , Idoso , Anticorpos Antivirais , Bangladesh , Humanos , Esquemas de Imunização , Lactente , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado , Vacina Antipólio Oral , Vacinação/métodos
3.
Vaccine X ; 10: 100143, 2022 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35243320

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Japanese encephalitis (JE) virus is one of the leading causes of viral encephalitis across temperate and tropical zones of Asia. The live attenuated SA 14-14-2 JE vaccine (CD-JEV) is one of three vaccines prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) to prevent JE. WHO currently recommends a single CD-JEV dose for infants in endemic settings. However, in the absence of long-term immunogenicity data, WHO has indicated a need for long-term immunogenicity studies to inform optimal dosing schedules and determine the need for booster doses. METHODS: This Phase 4, open-label clinical study measured neutralizing antibody (NAb) titers in Bangladeshi children three and four years after primary CD-JEV vaccination and 7 and 28 days after a booster CD-JEV vaccination given four years after primary vaccination. The study also assessed the tolerability and safety of the booster dose. A NAb titer of ≥1:10 was considered seroprotective. RESULTS: Of 560 children vaccinated between 10 and 12 months of age with CD-JEV three years earlier and enrolled in this study from 30 July 2015 through 03 January 2016, 52 (9.3%; 95% CI: 7.2-12.0) had a seroprotective titer at enrollment. One year later, of 533 children, 66 (12.4%; 95% CI: 9.9-15.5) had a seroprotective titer before receiving a booster dose. Of 524 children who received a booster CD-JEV dose, 479 (91.4%; 95% CI: 88.7-93.5) and 514 (98.1%; 95% CI: 96.5-99.0) were seroprotected 7 and 28 days later, respectively. The geometric mean titer (GMT) was 6 (95% CI: 6-6) at baseline, 105 (95% CI: 93-119) 7 days post-booster, and 167 (95% CI: 152-183) 28 days post-booster. No vaccine-associated neurologic adverse events or other serious adverse events were noted following the booster dose. CONCLUSIONS: Although most children did not have measurable antibody titers three and four years after a single primary CD-JEV dose, more than 90% of seronegative children had a strong anamnestic response within one week of a booster dose. This suggests that these children were immune despite the absence of measurable NAb prior to their booster.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02514746.

4.
PLoS Comput Biol ; 17(12): e1009690, 2021 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34932560

RESUMO

Since the global withdrawal of Sabin 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) from routine immunization, the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) has reported multiple circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 (cVDPV2) outbreaks. Here, we generated an agent-based, mechanistic model designed to assess OPV-related vaccine virus transmission risk in populations with heterogeneous immunity, demography, and social mixing patterns. To showcase the utility of our model, we present a simulation of mOPV2-related Sabin 2 transmission in rural Matlab, Bangladesh based on stool samples collected from infants and their household contacts during an mOPV2 clinical trial. Sabin 2 transmission following the mOPV2 clinical trial was replicated by specifying multiple, heterogeneous contact rates based on household and community membership. Once calibrated, the model generated Matlab-specific insights regarding poliovirus transmission following an accidental point importation or mass vaccination event. We also show that assuming homogeneous contact rates (mass action), as is common of poliovirus forecast models, does not accurately represent the clinical trial and risks overestimating forecasted poliovirus outbreak probability. Our study identifies household and community structure as an important source of transmission heterogeneity when assessing OPV-related transmission risk and provides a calibratable framework for expanding these analyses to other populations. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02477046.


Assuntos
Vacinação em Massa/estatística & dados numéricos , Modelos Estatísticos , Poliomielite , Vacina Antipólio Oral , Poliovirus , Bangladesh , Humanos , Poliomielite/epidemiologia , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Poliomielite/virologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto
5.
Int J Infect Dis ; 101: 98-101, 2020 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32916249

RESUMO

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face many challenges in controlling COVID-19. Healthcare resources are limited and so are ICU beds. RT-PCR testing is conducted on a limited scale and treatment options are few. There is no vaccine. Therefore, what low-cost solutions remain for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of SARS-CoV-2? How should these essential health services be delivered in order to reach the most vulnerable in our societies? In this editorial we discuss several important strategies for controlling COVID-19 including: vaccination, molecular and serological diagnostics, hygiene and WaSH interventions, and low-cost therapeutics. We also discuss the delivery of such services in order to reach the most in need. The proposed integrated control strategy requires immediate action and political will in order to reduce the widening health inequalities caused by the pandemic.


Assuntos
COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Recursos em Saúde , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Teste Sorológico para COVID-19 , Vacinas contra COVID-19/imunologia , Atenção à Saúde , Desinfecção das Mãos , Humanos , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase em Tempo Real , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA