Changes in vaccination administration in Japan.

This paper reviews the administration related to vaccination in Japan after the enactment of the Immunization Act in 1948, under which vaccination was implemented mandatory for the public. To enhance the effectiveness of vaccination activities, the government implemented group vaccination, which is convenient for vaccinating recipients all at once. In 1976, Japan established the relief system for health damage after vaccination. While some projects, such as the mass administration of live oral polio vaccine in 1961, achieved excellent results, incidents leading to health damage occurred, such as the diphtheria toxoid immunization incident (1948) and frequent occurrence of aseptic meningitis owing to the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (1989). In December 1992, the Tokyo High Court sentenced that the onset of health damage after vaccination could be attributed to the negligence of the national government. In the revision of the Immunization Act in 1994, the "mandatory vaccination" enforced until then was changed to "recommended vaccination." The Act was also changed to recommend "individual vaccination" in principle, which is performed after primary care physicians investigate the physical condition of individual recipients and carefully conduct preliminary examination. For approximately 20 years from the 1990s, a vaccine gap existed between Japan and other countries. From around 2010, efforts have been made to bridge this gap and establish the global standard in vaccination.

Past as Prologue-Use of Rubella Vaccination Program Lessons to Inform COVID-19 Vaccination.

The rapid rollout of vaccines against COVID-19 as a key mitigation strategy to end the global pandemic might be informed by lessons learned from rubella vaccine implementation in response to the global rubella epidemic of 1963-1965. That rubella epidemic led to the development of a rubella vaccine that has been introduced in all but 21 countries worldwide and has led to elimination of rubella in 93 countries. Although widespread introduction and use of rubella vaccines was slower than that for COVID-19 vaccines, the process can provide valuable insights for the continued battle against COVID-19. Experiences from the rubella disease control program highlight the critical and evolving elements of a vaccination program, including clearly delineated goals and strategies, regular data-driven revisions to the program based on disease and vaccine safety surveillance, and evaluations to identify the vaccine most capable of achieving disease control targets.

Routine Vaccination Coverage - Worldwide, 2021.

In 2020, the World Health Assembly endorsed the Immunization Agenda 2030, an ambitious global immunization strategy to reduce morbidity and mortality from vaccine-preventable diseases (1). This report updates a 2020 report (2) with global, regional,* and national vaccination coverage estimates and trends through 2021. Global estimates of coverage with 3 doses of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis-containing vaccine (DTPcv3) decreased from an average of 86% during 2015-2019 to 83% in 2020 and 81% in 2021. Worldwide in 2021, 25.0 million infants (19% of the target population) were not vaccinated with DTPcv3, 2.1 million more than in 2020 and 5.9 million more than in 2019. In 2021, the number of infants who did not receive any DTPcv dose by age 12 months (18.2 million) was 37% higher than in 2019 (13.3 million). Coverage with the first dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV1) decreased from an average of 85% during 2015-2019 to 84% in 2020 and 81% in 2021. These are the lowest coverage levels for DTPcv3 and MCV1 since 2008. ​Global coverage estimates were also lower in 2021 than in 2020 and 2019 for bacillus Calmette-Guérin vaccine (BCG) as well as for the completed series of Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine (Hib), hepatitis B vaccine (HepB), polio vaccine (Pol), and rubella-containing vaccine (RCV). The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in disruptions to routine immunization services worldwide. Full recovery to immunization programs will require context-specific strategies to address immunization gaps by catching up missed children, prioritizing essential health services, and strengthening immunization programs to prevent outbreaks (3).

Who gets vaccinated in a measles-rubella campaign in Nepal?: results from a post-campaign coverage survey.

BACKGROUND: Following the 2015 earthquake, a measles-rubella (MR) supplementary immunization activity (SIA), in four phases, was implemented in Nepal in 2015-2016. A post-campaign coverage survey (PCCS) was then conducted in 2017 to assess SIA performance and explore factors that were associated with vaccine uptake. METHODS: A household survey using stratified multi-stage probability sampling was conducted to assess coverage for a MR dose in the 2015-2016 SIA in Nepal. Logistic regression was then used to identify factors related to vaccine uptake. RESULTS: Eleven thousand two hundred fifty-three households, with 4870 eligible children provided information on vaccination during the 2015-2016 MR SIA. Overall coverage of measles-rubella vaccine was 84.7% (95% CI: 82.0-87.0), but varied between 77.5% (95% CI: 72.0, 82.2) in phase-3, of 21 districts vaccinated in Feb-Mar 2016, to 97.7% (CI: 95.4, 98.9) in phase-4, of the last seven mountainous districts vaccinated in Mar-Apr 2016. Coverage in rural areas was higher at 85.6% (CI: 81.9, 88.8) than in urban areas at 79.0% (CI: 75.5, 82.1). Of the 4223 children whose caregivers knew about the SIA, 96.5% received the MR dose and of the 647 children whose caregivers had not heard about the campaign, only 1.8% received the MR dose. CONCLUSIONS: The coverage in the 2015-2016 MR SIA in Nepal varied by geographical region with rural areas achieving higher coverage than urban areas. The single most important predictor of vaccination was the caregiver being informed in advance about the vaccination campaign. Enhanced efforts on social mobilization for vaccination have been used in Nepal since this survey, notably for the most recent 2020 MR campaign.

Protective heterologous T cell immunity in COVID-19 induced by the trivalent MMR and Tdap vaccine antigens.

BACKGROUND: T cells control viral infection, promote vaccine durability, and in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associate with mild disease. We investigated whether prior measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) or tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis (Tdap) vaccination elicits cross-reactive T cells that mitigate COVID-19. METHODS: Antigen-presenting cells (APC) loaded ex vivo with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), MMR, or Tdap antigens and autologous T cells from COVID-19-convalescent participants, uninfected individuals, and COVID-19 mRNA-vaccinated donors were co-cultured. T cell activation and phenotype were detected by interferon-γ (IFN-γ) enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) assays and flow cytometry. ELISAs (enzyme-linked immunosorbant assays) and validation studies identified the APC-derived cytokine(s) driving T cell activation. TCR clonotyping and single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) identified cross-reactive T cells and their transcriptional profile. A propensity-weighted analysis of COVID-19 patients estimated the effects of MMR and Tdap vaccination on COVID-19 outcomes. FINDINGS: High correlation was observed between T cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 (spike-S1 and nucleocapsid) and MMR and Tdap proteins in COVID-19-convalescent and -vaccinated individuals. The overlapping T cell population contained an effector memory T cell subset (effector memory re-expressing CD45RA on T cells [TEMRA]) implicated in protective, anti-viral immunity, and their detection required APC-derived IL-15, known to sensitize T cells to activation. Cross-reactive TCR repertoires detected in antigen-experienced T cells recognizing SARS-CoV-2, MMR, and Tdap epitopes had TEMRA features. Indices of disease severity were reduced in MMR- or Tdap-vaccinated individuals by 32%-38% and 20%-23%, respectively, among COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Tdap and MMR memory T cells reactivated by SARS-CoV-2 may provide protection against severe COVID-19. FUNDING: This study was supported by a National Institutes of Health (R01HL065095, R01AI152522, R01NS097719) donation from Barbara and Amos Hostetter and the Chleck Foundation.

After the honeymoon, the divorce: Unexpected outcomes of disease control measures against endemic infections.

The lack of effective vaccines for many endemic diseases often forces policymakers to rely on non-immunizing control measures, such as vector control, to reduce the massive burden of these diseases. Controls can have well-known counterintuitive effects on endemic infections, including the honeymoon effect, in which partially effective controls cause not only a greater initial reduction in infection than expected, but also large outbreaks during control resulting from accumulation of susceptibles. Unfortunately, many control measures cannot be maintained indefinitely, and the results of cessation are poorly understood. Here, we examine the results of stopped or failed non-immunizing control measures in endemic settings. By using a mathematical model to compare the cumulative number of cases expected with and without control, we show that deployment of control can lead to a larger total number of infections, counting from the time that control started, than without any control-the divorce effect. This result is directly related to the population-level loss of immunity resulting from non-immunizing controls and is seen in a variety of models when non-immunizing controls are used against an infection that confers immunity. Finally, we examine three control plans for minimizing the magnitude of the divorce effect in seasonal infections and show that they are incapable of eliminating the divorce effect. While we do not suggest stopping control programs that rely on non-immunizing controls, our results strongly argue that the accumulation of susceptibility should be considered before deploying such controls against endemic infections when indefinite use of the control is unlikely. We highlight that our results are particularly germane to endemic mosquito-borne infections, such as dengue virus, both for routine management involving vector control and for field trials of novel control approaches, and in the context of non-pharmaceutical interventions aimed at COVID-19.