RESUMO
Guatemala implemented wastewater-based poliovirus surveillance in 2018, and three genetically unrelated vaccine-derived polioviruses (VDPVs) were detected in 2019. The Ministry of Health (MoH) response included event investigation through institutional and community retrospective case searches for acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) during 2018-2020 and a bivalent oral polio/measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination campaign in September 2019. This response was reviewed by an international expert team in July 2021. During the campaign, 93% of children 6 months <7 years of age received a polio-containing vaccine dose. No AFP cases were detected in the community search; institutional retrospective searches found 37% of unreported AFP cases in 2018â2020. No additional VDPV was isolated from wastewater. No evidence of circulating VDPV was found; the 3 isolated VDPVs were classified as ambiguous VDPVs by the international team of experts. These detections highlight risk for poliomyelitis reemergence in countries with low polio vaccine coverage.
Assuntos
Poliomielite , Poliovirus , Criança , Humanos , Vacina Antipólio Oral/efeitos adversos , Águas Residuárias , Guatemala/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Poliomielite/epidemiologia , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Monitoramento AmbientalRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The monovalent type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (mOPV2) stockpile is low. One potential strategy to stretch the existing mOPV2 supply is to administer a reduced dose: 1 drop instead of 2. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label, noninferiority trial (10% margin) to compared immunogenicity after administration of 1 versus 2 drops of mOPV2. We enrolled 9-22-month-old infants from Mocuba district of Mozambique. Poliovirus neutralizing antibodies were measured in serum samples collected before and 1 month after mOPV2 administration. Immune response was defined as seroconversion from seronegative (<1:8) at baseline to seropositive (≥1:8) after vaccination or boosting titers by ≥4-fold for those with titers between 1:8 and 1:362 at baseline. The trial was registered at anzctr.org.au (no. ACTRN12619000184178p). RESULTS: We enrolled 378 children, and 262 (69%) completed per-protocol requirements. The immune response of mOPV2 was 53.6% (95% confidence interval, 44.9%-62.1%) and 60.6% (52.2%-68.4%) in 1-drop and 2-drop recipients, respectively. The noninferiority margin of the 10% was not reached (difference, 7.0%; 95% confidence interval, -5.0% to 19.0%). CONCLUSION: A small loss of immunogenicity of reduced mOPV2 was observed. Although the noninferiority target was not achieved, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization recommended the 1-drop strategy as a dose-sparing measure if mOPV2 supplies deteriorate further.
Assuntos
Poliomielite , Poliovirus , Anticorpos Antivirais , Criança , Humanos , Esquemas de Imunização , Imunogenicidade da Vacina , Lactente , Moçambique , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado , Vacina Antipólio OralRESUMO
BACKGROUND: We performed a cross-sectional survey in April-May 2018 among Rohingya in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh, to assess polio immunity and inform vaccination strategies. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Rohingya children aged 1-6 years (younger group) and 7-14 years (older group) were selected using multi-stage cluster sampling in makeshift settlements and simple random sampling in Nayapara registered camp. Surveyors asked parents/caregivers if the child received any oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) in Myanmar and, for younger children, if the child received vaccine in any of the 5 campaigns delivering bivalent OPV (serotypes 1 and 3) conducted during September 2017-April 2018 in Cox's Bazar. Dried blood spot (DBS) specimens were tested for neutralizing antibodies to poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 in 580 younger and 297 older children. Titers ≥ 1:8 were considered protective. Among 632 children (335 aged 1-6 years, 297 aged 7-14 years) enrolled in the study in makeshift settlements, 51% were male and 89% had arrived after August 9, 2017. Among 245 children (all aged 1-6 years) enrolled in the study in Nayapara, 54% were male and 10% had arrived after August 9, 2017. Among younger children, 74% in makeshift settlements and 92% in Nayapara received >3 bivalent OPV doses in campaigns. Type 1 seroprevalence was 85% (95% CI 80%-89%) among younger children and 91% (95% CI 86%-95%) among older children in makeshift settlements, and 92% (88%-95%) among younger children in Nayapara. Type 2 seroprevalence was lower among younger children than older children in makeshift settlements (74% [95% CI 68%-79%] versus 97% [95% CI 94%-99%], p < 0.001), and was 69% (95% CI 63%-74%) among younger children in Nayapara. Type 3 seroprevalence was below 75% for both age groups and areas. The limitations of this study are unknown routine immunization history and poor retention of vaccination cards. CONCLUSIONS: Younger Rohingya children had immunity gaps to all 3 polio serotypes and should be targeted by future campaigns and catch-up routine immunization. DBS collection can enhance the reliability of assessments of outbreak risk and vaccination strategy impact in emergency settings.
Assuntos
Poliomielite/epidemiologia , Vacina Antipólio Oral/administração & dosagem , Refugiados/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Bangladesh/epidemiologia , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Masculino , Mianmar/etnologia , Poliomielite/etiologia , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Prevalência , Estudos SoroepidemiológicosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: During August 2017-January 2018, more than 700,000 forcibly displaced Rohingyas crossed into Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. In response to measles and diphtheria cases, first documented in September and November 2017, respectively, vaccination campaigns targeting children <15 years old were mobilized during September 2017-March 2018. However, in a rapidly evolving emergency situation, poor sanitation, malnutrition, overcrowding, and lack of access to safe water and healthcare can increase susceptibility to infectious diseases, particularly among children. We aimed to estimate population immunity to vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) after vaccination activities in the camps to identify any remaining immunity gaps among Rohingya children. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a cross-sectional serologic and vaccination coverage survey in Nayapara Registered Refugee Camp ("Nayapara") and makeshift settlements (MSs) April 28, 2018 to May 31, 2018, among 930 children aged 6 months to 14 years. MSs are informal, self-settled areas with a population of more than 850,000, the majority of whom arrived after August 2017, whereas Nayapara is a registered camp and has better infrastructure than MSs, including provision of routine immunization services. Households were identified using simple random sampling (SRS) in Nayapara and multistage cluster sampling in MSs (because household lists were unavailable). Dried blood spots (DBSs) were collected to estimate seroprotection against measles, rubella, diphtheria, and tetanus, using Luminex multiplex bead assay (MBA). Caregiver interviews assessed vaccination campaign participation using vaccination card or recall. In Nayapara, 273 children aged 1 to 6 years participated; 46% were female and 88% were registered refugees. In MSs, 358 children aged 1 to 6 years and 299 children aged 7 to 14 years participated; 48% of all children in MSs were female, and none were registered refugees. In Nayapara, estimated seroprotection among 1- to 6-year-olds was high for measles, rubella, diphtheria, and tetanus (91%-98%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 87%-99%); children >6 years were not assessed. In MSs, measles seroprotection was similarly high among 1- to 6-year-olds and 7- to 14-year-olds (91% [95% CI 86%-94%] and 99% [95% CI 96%-100%], respectively, p < 0.001). Rubella and diphtheria seroprotection in MSs were significantly lower among 1- to 6-year-olds (84% [95% CI 79%-88%] and 63% [95% CI 56%-70%]) compared to 7- to 14-year-olds (96% [95% CI 90%-98%] and 77% [95% CI 69%-84%]) (p < 0.001). Tetanus seroprevalence was similar among 1- to 6-year-olds and 7- to 14-year-olds (76% [95% CI 69%-81%] and 84% [95% CI 77%-89%], respectively; p = 0.07). Vaccination campaign coverage was consistent with seroprotection in both camps. However, nonresponse, the main limitation of the study, may have biased the seroprotection and campaign coverage results. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that despite multiple vaccination campaigns, immunity gaps exist among children in MSs, particularly for diphtheria, which requires serial vaccinations to achieve maximum protection. Therefore, an additional tetanus-diphtheria campaign may be warranted in MSs to address these remaining immunity gaps. Rapid scale-up and strengthening of routine immunization services to reach children and to deliver missed doses to older children is also critically needed to close immunity gaps and prevent future outbreaks.
Assuntos
Refugiados/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Doenças Preveníveis por Vacina/epidemiologia , Doenças Preveníveis por Vacina/terapia , Adolescente , Bangladesh/epidemiologia , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Masculino , Mianmar/etnologia , Prevalência , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos , Doenças Preveníveis por Vacina/etiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Intradermal administration of fractional inactivated poliovirus vaccine (fIPV) is a dose-sparing alternative to the intramuscular full dose. We aimed to compare the immunogenicity of two fIPV doses versus one IPV dose for routine immunisation, and also assessed the immunogenicity of an fIPV booster dose for an outbreak response. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, controlled, inequality, non-inferiority trial in two clinics in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Healthy infants were randomly assigned at 6 weeks to one of four groups: group A received IPV at age 14 weeks and IPV booster at age 22 weeks; group B received IPV at age 14 weeks and fIPV booster at age 22 weeks; group C received IPV at age 6 weeks and fIPV booster at age 22 weeks; and group D received fIPV at 6 weeks and 14 weeks and fIPV booster at age 22 weeks. IPV was administered by needle-syringe as an intramuscular full dose (0·5 mL), and fIPV was administered intradermally (0·1 mL of the IPV formulation was administered using the 0·1 mL HelmJect auto-disable syringe with a Helms intradermal adapter). Both IPV and fIPV were administered on the outer, upper right thigh of infants. The primary outcome was vaccine response to poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 at age 22 weeks (routine immunisation) and age 26 weeks (outbreak response). Vaccine response was defined as seroconversion from seronegative (<1:8) at baseline to seropositive (≥1:8) or four-fold increase in reciprocal antibody titres adjusted for maternal antibody decay and was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (infants who received polio vaccines per group assignment and polio antibody titre results to serotypes 1, 2, and 3 at 6, 22, 23, and 26 weeks of age). The non-inferiority margin was 12·5%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02847026. FINDINGS: Between Sept 1, 2016 and May 2, 2017, 1076 participants were randomly assigned and included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 271 in Group A, 267 in group B, 268 in group C, and 270 in group D. Vaccine response at 22 weeks to two doses of fIPV (group D) was significantly higher (p<0·0001) than to one dose of IPV (groups A and B) for all three poliovirus serotypes: the type 1 response comprised 212 (79% [95% CI 73-83]) versus 305 (57% [53-61]) participants, the type 2 response comprised 173 (64% [58-70]) versus 249 (46% [42-51]) participants, and the type 3 response comprised 196 (73% [67-78]) versus 196 (36% [33-41]) participants. At 26 weeks, the fIPV booster was non-inferior to IPV (group B vs group A) for serotype 1 (-1·12% [90% CI -2·18 to -0·06]), serotype 2 (0·40%, [-2·22 to 1·42]), and serotype 3 (1·51% [-3·23 to -0·21]). Of 129 adverse events, 21 were classified as serious including one death; none were attributed to IPV or fIPV. INTERPRETATION: fIPV appears to be an effective dose-sparing strategy for routine immunisation and outbreak responses. FUNDING: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Assuntos
Surtos de Doenças/prevenção & controle , Poliomielite/imunologia , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/administração & dosagem , Poliovirus/imunologia , Anticorpos Antivirais/metabolismo , Bangladesh , Feminino , Humanos , Imunização Secundária , Lactente , Injeções Intramusculares/instrumentação , Masculino , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/imunologiaRESUMO
The Sierra Leone Trial to Introduce a Vaccine against Ebola (STRIVE), a phase 2/3 trial of investigational rVSV∆G-ZEBOV-GP vaccine, was conducted during an unprecedented Ebola epidemic. More than 8600 eligible healthcare and frontline response workers were individually randomized to immediate (within 7 days) or deferred (within 18-24 weeks) vaccination and followed for 6 months after vaccination for serious adverse events and Ebola virus infection. Key challenges included limited infrastructure to support trial activities, unreliable electricity, and staff with limited clinical trial experience. Study staff made substantial infrastructure investments, including renovation of enrollment sites, laboratories, and government cold chain facilities, and imported equipment to store and transport vaccine at ≤-60oC. STRIVE built capacity by providing didactic and practical research training to >350 staff, which was reinforced with daily review and feedback meetings. The operational challenges of safety follow-up were addressed by issuing mobile telephones to participants, making home visits, and establishing a nurse triage hotline. Before the Ebola outbreak, Sierra Leone had limited infrastructure and staff to conduct clinical trials. Without interfering with the outbreak response, STRIVE responded to an urgent need and helped build this capacity. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov [NCT02378753] and Pan African Clinical Trials Registry [PACTR201502001037220].
Assuntos
Surtos de Doenças , Vacinas contra Ebola/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra Ebola/efeitos adversos , Doença pelo Vírus Ebola/epidemiologia , Doença pelo Vírus Ebola/prevenção & controle , Ensaios Clínicos Fase II como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Fase III como Assunto , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/patologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Serra Leoa/epidemiologia , Vacinas Sintéticas/administração & dosagem , Vacinas Sintéticas/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Background: We assessed programmatic adaptations and infants' uptake of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) after its introduction into the routine immunization schedule in Bangladesh. Methods: Using convenience and probability sampling, we selected 23 health facilities, 36 vaccinators, and 336 caregivers, within 5 districts and 3 city corporations. We collected data during August-October 2015 by conducting interviews, reviewing vaccination records, and observing activities. Results: Knowledge about IPV was high among vaccinators (94%). No problems with IPV storage, transport, or waste disposal were detected, but shortages were reported in 20 health facilities (87%). Wastage per 5-dose vaccine vial was above the recommended 30% in 20 health facilities (87%); all were related to providing <5 doses per open vial. Among eligible infants, 87% and 86% received the third dose of pentavalent and oral poliovirus vaccine, respectively, but only 65% received IPV at the same visit. Among 73 infants not vaccinated with IPV, 58% of caregivers reported that vaccine was unavailable. Conclusions: Bangladesh successfully introduced IPV, but shortages related to insufficient global supply and high vaccine wastage in small outreach immunization sessions might reduce its impact on population immunity. Minimizing wastage and use of a 2-dose fractional-IPV schedule could extend IPV immunization to more children.
Assuntos
Pessoal de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Programas de Imunização/provisão & distribuição , Programas de Imunização/estatística & dados numéricos , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/administração & dosagem , Bangladesh/epidemiologia , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Humanos , Esquemas de Imunização , LactenteRESUMO
Background: Introduction of inactivated polio vaccine creates challenges in maintaining the cold chain for vaccine storage and distribution. Methods: We evaluated the cold chain in 23 health facilities and 36 outreach vaccination sessions in 8 districts and cities of Bangladesh, using purposive sampling during August-October 2015. We interviewed immunization and cold-chain staff, assessed equipment, and recorded temperatures during vaccine storage and transportation. Results: All health facilities had functioning refrigerators, and 96% had freezers. Temperature monitors were observed in all refrigerators and freezers but in only 14 of 66 vaccine transporters (21%). Recorders detected temperatures >8°C for >60 minutes in 5 of 23 refrigerators (22%), 3 of 6 cold boxes (50%) transporting vaccines from national to subnational depots, and 8 of 48 vaccine carriers (17%) used in outreach vaccination sites. Temperatures <2°C were detected in 4 of 19 cold boxes (21%) transporting vaccine from subnational depots to health facilities and 14 of 48 vaccine carriers (29%). Conclusions: Bangladesh has substantial cold-chain storage and transportation capacity after inactivated polio vaccine introduction, but temperature fluctuations during vaccine transport could cause vaccine potency loss that could go undetected. Bangladesh and other countries should strive to ensure consistent and sufficient cold-chain storage and monitor the cold chain during vaccine transportation at all levels.
Assuntos
Programas de Imunização , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado , Refrigeração , Bangladesh , Estabilidade de Medicamentos , Humanos , Programas de Imunização/organização & administração , Programas de Imunização/normas , Programas de Imunização/estatística & dados numéricos , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/química , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/provisão & distribuição , Refrigeração/métodos , Refrigeração/normas , Refrigeração/estatística & dados numéricos , Meios de TransporteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) is known to interfere with monovalent rotavirus vaccine (RV1) immunogenicity. The interference caused by bivalent and monovalent OPV formulations, which will be increasingly used globally in coming years, has not been examined. We conducted a post hoc analysis to assess the effect of coadministration of different OPV formulations on RV1 immunogenicity. METHODS: Healthy infants in Matlab, Bangladesh, were randomized to receive 3 doses of monovalent OPV type 1 or bivalent OPV types 1 and 3 at either 6, 8, and 10 or 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age or trivalent OPV at 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age. All infants received 2 doses of RV1 at about 6 and 10 weeks of age. Concomitant administration was defined as RV1 and OPV given on the same day; staggered administration as RV1 and OPV given ≥1 day apart. Rotavirus seroconversion was defined as a 4-fold rise in immunoglobulin A titer from before the first RV1 dose to ≥3 weeks after the second RV1 dose. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline RV1 immunogenicity among the 409 infants included in the final analysis. Infants who received RV1 and OPV concomitantly, regardless of OPV formulation, were less likely to seroconvert (47%; 95% confidence interval, 39%-54%) than those who received both vaccines staggered ≥1 day (63%; 57%-70%; P < .001). For staggered administration, we found no evidence that the interval between RV1 and OPV administration affected RV1 immunogenicity. CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of monovalent, bivalent, or trivalent OPV seems to lower RV1 immunogenicity. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01633216.
Assuntos
Interações Medicamentosas , Vacina Antipólio Oral/administração & dosagem , Vacina Antipólio Oral/imunologia , Vacinas contra Rotavirus/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra Rotavirus/imunologia , Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Bangladesh , Ensaio de Imunoadsorção Enzimática , Humanos , Imunoglobulina A/sangue , Lactente , População Rural , Vacinas Atenuadas/administração & dosagem , Vacinas Atenuadas/imunologiaRESUMO
Healthcare settings can amplify transmission of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), but knowledge gaps about the epidemiology of transmission remain. We conducted a retrospective cohort study among healthcare personnel in hospital units that treated MERS-CoV patients. Participants were interviewed about exposures to MERS-CoV patients, use of personal protective equipment, and signs and symptoms of illness after exposure. Infection status was determined by the presence of antibodies against MERS-CoV. To assess risk factors, we compared infected and uninfected participants. Healthcare personnel caring for MERS-CoV patients were at high risk for infection, but infection most often resulted in a relatively mild illness that might be unrecognized. In the healthcare personnel cohort reported here, infections occurred exclusively among those who had close contact with MERS-CoV patients.
Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Pessoal de Saúde , Coronavírus da Síndrome Respiratória do Oriente Médio , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Coronavírus da Síndrome Respiratória do Oriente Médio/imunologia , Fatores de Risco , Arábia Saudita/epidemiologia , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Wild poliovirus type 2 was declared eradicated in September 2015 (1). In April 2016, India, switched from use of trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (tOPV; containing types 1, 2, and 3 polio vaccine viruses), to bivalent OPV (bOPV; containing types 1 and 3), as part of a globally synchronized initiative to withdraw Sabin poliovirus type 2 vaccine. Concurrently, inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) was introduced into India's routine immunization program to maintain an immunity base that would mitigate the number of paralytic cases in the event of epidemic transmission of poliovirus type 2 (2,3). After cessation of use of type 2 Sabin vaccine, any reported isolation of vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 (VDPV2) would be treated as a public health emergency and might need outbreak response with monovalent type 2 oral vaccine, IPV, or both (4). In response to identification of a VDPV2 isolate from a sewage sample collected in the southern state of Telangana in May 2016, India conducted a mass vaccination campaign in June 2016 using an intradermal fractional dose (0.1 ml) of IPV (fIPV). Because of a global IPV supply shortage, fIPV, which uses one fifth of regular intramuscular (IM) dose administered intradermally, has been recommended as a response strategy for VDPV2 (5). Clinical trials have demonstrated that fIPV is highly immunogenic (6,7). During the 6-day campaign, 311,064 children aged 6 weeks-3 years were vaccinated, achieving an estimated coverage of 94%. With appropriate preparation, an emergency fIPV response can be promptly and successfully implemented. Lessons learned from this campaign can be applied to successful implementation of future outbreak responses using fIPV.
Assuntos
Surtos de Doenças/prevenção & controle , Programas de Imunização/organização & administração , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/administração & dosagem , Pré-Escolar , Humanos , Índia/epidemiologia , Lactente , Poliomielite/epidemiologia , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Esgotos/virologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP) is a rare adverse event associated with oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV). This review summarizes the epidemiology and provides a global burden estimate. METHODS: A literature review was conducted to abstract the epidemiology and calculate the risk of VAPP. A bootstrap method was applied to calculate global VAPP burden estimates. RESULTS: Trends in VAPP epidemiology varied by country income level. In the low-income country, the majority of cases occurred in individuals who had received >3 doses of OPV (63%), whereas in middle and high-income countries, most cases occurred in recipients after their first OPV dose or unvaccinated contacts (81%). Using all risk estimates, VAPP risk was 4.7 cases per million births (range, 2.4-9.7), leading to a global annual burden estimate of 498 cases (range, 255-1018). If the analysis is limited to estimates from countries that currently use OPV, the VAPP risk is 3.8 cases per million births (range, 2.9-4.7) and a burden of 399 cases (range, 306-490). CONCLUSIONS: Because many high-income countries have replaced OPV with inactivated poliovirus vaccine, the VAPP burden is concentrated in lower-income countries. The planned universal introduction of inactivated poliovirus vaccine is likely to substantially decrease the global VAPP burden by 80%-90%.
Assuntos
Poliomielite/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra Poliovirus/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra Poliovirus/efeitos adversos , Adolescente , Adulto , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Países Desenvolvidos , Países em Desenvolvimento , Feminino , Saúde Global , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Prevalência , Medição de Risco , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) has recommended introduction of at least 1 dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) at ≥14 weeks of age through the routine immunization program in countries currently not using IPV. METHODS: We analyzed all available unrestricted data obtained from the Demographic and Health Surveys since 2005 in sub-Saharan Africa (31 countries) and in South and Southeast Asia (9 countries) to determine coverage of the following injectable vaccines delivered through the routine immunization schedule: diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine dose 1 (DTP1), DTP2, DTP3, and measles vaccine. Coverage with these vaccines was used as a proxy measure of likely 1- and 2-dose IPV coverage. RESULTS: Coverage with 1 dose of IPV is expected to be lowest when offered with DTP3 (median coverage, 73%) and highest when offered with DTP1 (median coverage, 90%). The median DTP1-DTP3 drop-out rate was 14%, which equates to an additional 12 million children not receiving IPV if IPV is offered with DTP3, rather than with DTP1. An increased geographical clustering of children who have not received IPV is expected in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia if IPV is offered with DTP3, rather than with DTP1. Coverage with 2 doses of IPV is expected to be lowest if IPV is administered with DTP3 and measles vaccine (69%) and highest if administered with DTP1 and DTP2 (84%). CONCLUSIONS: Coverage with 1 dose of IPV is expected to be lowest if it is administered at the DTP3 visit. At present, there is insufficient evidence to determine whether the SAGE-recommended IPV schedule for the polio endgame would maximize population immunity to type 2 poliovirus.
Assuntos
Erradicação de Doenças/métodos , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/administração & dosagem , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , África Subsaariana , Sudeste Asiático , Demografia , Feminino , Humanos , Esquemas de Imunização , Lactente , Masculino , Poliomielite/imunologia , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/imunologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Moradabad district in Uttar Pradesh reported the highest number of paralytic polio cases in India during 2001-2007. We conducted a study in Moradabad in 2007 to assess seroprevalence against poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 in children 6-12 and 36-59 months of age to guide future strategies to interrupt wild poliovirus transmission in high-risk areas. METHODS: Children attending 10 health facilities for minor illnesses who met criteria for study inclusion were eligible for enrollment. We recorded vaccination history, weight, and length and tested sera for neutralizing antibodies to poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3. RESULTS: Poliovirus type 1, 2, and 3 seroprevalences were 88% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84%-91%), 70% (95% CI, 66%-75%), and 75% (95% CI, 71%-79%), respectively, among 467 in the younger age group (n=467), compared with 100% (95% CI, 99%-100%), 97% (95% CI, 95%-98%), and 93% (91%-95%), respectively, among 447 children in the older age group (P<.001 for all serotypes). CONCLUSIONS: This seroprevalence study provided extremely useful information that was used by the program in India to guide immunization policies, such as optimizing the use of different OPV formulations in vaccination campaigns and strengthening routine immunization services. Similar surveys in populations at risk should be performed at regular intervals in countries where the risk of persistence or spread of indigenous or imported wild poliovirus is high.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Poliomielite/epidemiologia , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Vacina Antipólio Oral/imunologia , Anticorpos Neutralizantes/sangue , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Índia/epidemiologia , Lactente , Masculino , Vacina Antipólio Oral/administração & dosagem , Estudos SoroepidemiológicosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The objectives of this survey were to assess the seroprevalence of antibodies to poliovirus types 1 and 3 and the impact of bivalent (types 1 and 3) oral poliovirus vaccine (bOPV) use in immunization campaigns in northern India. METHODS: In August 2010, a 2-stage stratified cluster sampling method identified infants aged 6-7 months in high-risk blocks for wild poliovirus infection. Vaccination history, weight and length, and serum were collected to test for neutralizing antibodies to poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3. RESULTS: Seroprevalences of antibodies to poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 were 98% (95% confidence interval [CI], 97%-99%), 66% (95% CI, 62%-69%), and 77% (95% CI, 75%-79%), respectively, among 664 infants from Bihar and 616 infants from Uttar Pradesh. Infants had received a median of 3 bOPV doses and 2 monovalent type 1 OPV (mOPV1) doses through campaigns and 3 trivalent OPV (tOPV) doses through routine immunization. Among subjects with 0 tOPV doses, the seroprevalences of antibodies to type 3 were 50%, 77%, and 82% after 2, 3, and 4 bOPV doses, respectively. In multivariable analysis, malnutrition was associated with a lower seroprevalence of type 3 antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed that replacing mOPV1 with bOPV in campaigns was successful in maintaining very high population immunity to type 1 poliovirus and substantially decreasing the immunity gap to type 3 poliovirus.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Poliomielite/epidemiologia , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Poliovirus/imunologia , Anticorpos Neutralizantes/sangue , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Índia/epidemiologia , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Vacinas contra Poliovirus/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra Poliovirus/imunologia , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos , Vacinação/métodosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Early detection and control of vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV) emergences are essential to secure the gains of polio eradication. METHODS: Serial sewage samples were collected in 4 towns of Mexico before, throughout, and after the May 2010 oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) mass immunization campaign. Isolation and molecular analysis of polioviruses from sewage specimens monitored the duration of vaccine-related strains in the environment and emergence of vaccine-derived polioviruses in a population partially immunized with inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV). RESULTS: Sabin strains were identified up to 5-8 weeks after the campaign in all towns; in Aguascalientes, 1 Sabin 3 was isolated 16 weeks after the campaign, following 7 weeks with no Sabin strains detected. In Tuxtla Gutiérrez, type 2 VDPV was isolated from 4 samples collected before and during the campaign, and type 1 VDPV from 1 sample collected 19 weeks afterward. During 2009-2010, coverage in 4 OPV campaigns conducted averaged only 57% and surveillance for acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) was suboptimal (AFP rate<1 per 100,000 population<15 years of age) in Tuxtla Gutierrez. CONCLUSIONS: VDPVs may emerge and spread in settings with inadequate coverage with IPV/OPV vaccination. Environmental surveillance can facilitate early detection in these settings.
Assuntos
Monitoramento Ambiental , Vacina Antipólio Oral/administração & dosagem , Poliovirus/isolamento & purificação , Esgotos/virologia , Adolescente , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , México , Poliovirus/classificação , Poliovirus/genética , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
Since the launch of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) in 1988, circulation of indigenous wild poliovirus (WPV) has continued without interruption in only three countries: Afghanistan, Nigeria, and Pakistan. During April-December 2013, a polio outbreak caused by WPV type 1 (WPV1) of Nigerian origin resulted in 217 cases in or near the Horn of Africa, including 194 cases in Somalia, 14 cases in Kenya, and nine cases in Ethiopia (all cases were reported as of March 10, 2014). During December 14-18, 2013, Kenya conducted the first-ever campaign providing inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) together with oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) as part of its outbreak response. The campaign targeted 126,000 children aged ≤59 months who resided in Somali refugee camps and surrounding communities near the Kenya-Somalia border, where most WPV1 cases had been reported, with the aim of increasing population immunity levels to ensure interruption of any residual WPV transmission and prevent spread from potential new importations. A campaign evaluation and vaccination coverage survey demonstrated that combined administration of IPV and OPV in a mass campaign is feasible and can achieve coverage >90%, although combined IPV and OPV campaigns come at a higher cost than OPV-only campaigns and require particular attention to vaccinator training and supervision. Future operational studies could assess the impact on population immunity and the cost-effectiveness of combined IPV and OPV campaigns to accelerate interruption of poliovirus transmission during polio outbreaks and in certain areas in which WPV circulation is endemic.
Assuntos
Promoção da Saúde/organização & administração , Programas de Imunização , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/uso terapêutico , Vacina Antipólio Oral/uso terapêutico , Refugiados , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Pré-Escolar , Pesquisas sobre Atenção à Saúde , Promoção da Saúde/economia , Humanos , Lactente , Quênia , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Refugiados/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
In 2022, global poliovirus modeling suggested that coordinated cessation of bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (bOPV, containing Sabin-strain types 1 and 3) in 2027 would likely increase the risks of outbreaks and expected paralytic cases caused by circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses (cVDPVs), particularly type 1. The analysis did not include the implementation of planned, preventive supplemental immunization activities (pSIAs) with bOPV to achieve and maintain higher population immunity for types 1 and 3 prior to bOPV cessation. We reviewed prior published OPV cessation modeling studies to support bOPV cessation planning. We applied an integrated global poliovirus transmission and OPV evolution model after updating assumptions to reflect the epidemiology, immunization, and polio eradication plans through the end of 2023. We explored the effects of bOPV cessation in 2027 with and without additional bOPV pSIAs prior to 2027. Increasing population immunity for types 1 and 3 with bOPV pSIAs (i.e., intensification) could substantially reduce the expected global risks of experiencing cVDPV outbreaks and the number of expected polio cases both before and after bOPV cessation. We identified the need for substantial increases in overall bOPV coverage prior to bOPV cessation to achieve a high probability of successful bOPV cessation.
RESUMO
In 2012, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) recommended introduction of at least one inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) dose in essential immunization programs. We evaluated systemic humoral and intestinal mucosal immunity of a sequential IPV-bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (bOPV) schedule compared with a co-administration IPV + bOPV schedule in an open-label, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority, inequality trial in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Healthy infants aged 6 weeks were randomized to either: (A) IPV and bOPV at 6 and bOPV at 10 and 14 weeks (IPV + bOPV-bOPV-bOPV); or (B) IPV at 6 and bOPV at 10 and 14 weeks (IPV-bOPV-bOPV). Of 456 participants enrolled and randomly assigned during May-August 2015, 428 (94%) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (arm A: 211, arm B: 217). Humoral immune responses did not differ at 18 weeks between study arms: type 1 (98% versus 96%; p = 0.42), type 2 (37% versus 39%; p = 0.77), and type 3 (97% versus 93%; p = 0.07). Virus shedding one week after the bOPV challenge dose in arm B was non-inferior to arm A (type 1 difference = -3% [90% confidence interval: -6 - 0.4%]; type 3 difference: -3% [-6 to -0.2%]). Twenty-six adverse events including seven serious adverse events were reported among 25 participants including one death; none were attributed to study vaccines. An IPV-bOPV-bOPV sequential schedule induced comparable systemic humoral immunity to all poliovirus types and types 1 and 3 intestinal mucosal immunity as an IPV + bOPV-bOPV-bOPV co-administration schedule.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais , Imunidade Humoral , Imunidade nas Mucosas , Esquemas de Imunização , Poliomielite , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado , Vacina Antipólio Oral , Humanos , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/imunologia , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/administração & dosagem , Vacina Antipólio de Vírus Inativado/efeitos adversos , Vacina Antipólio Oral/administração & dosagem , Vacina Antipólio Oral/imunologia , Vacina Antipólio Oral/efeitos adversos , Bangladesh , Masculino , Feminino , Lactente , Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Anticorpos Antivirais/imunologia , Poliomielite/prevenção & controle , Poliomielite/imunologia , Poliovirus/imunologia , Mucosa Intestinal/imunologiaRESUMO
Delivering inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) with oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) in campaigns has been explored to accelerate the control of type 2 circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus (cVDPV) outbreaks. A review of scientific literature suggests that among populations with high prevalence of OPV failure, a booster with IPV after at least two doses of OPV may close remaining humoral and mucosal immunity gaps more effectively than an additional dose of trivalent OPV. However, IPV alone demonstrates minimal advantage on humoral immunity compared with monovalent and bivalent OPV, and cannot provide the intestinal immunity that prevents infection and spread to those individuals not previously exposed to live poliovirus of the same serotype (i.e. type 2 for children born after the switch from trivalent to bivalent OPV in April 2016). A review of operational data from polio campaigns shows that addition of IPV increases the cost and logistic complexity of campaigns. As a result, campaigns in response to an outbreak often target small areas. Large campaigns require a delay to ensure logistics are in place for IPV delivery, and may need implementation in phases that last several weeks. Challenges to delivery of injectable vaccines through house-to-house visits also increases the risk of missing the children who are more likely to benefit from IPV: those with difficult access to routine immunization and other health services. Based upon this information, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts in immunization (SAGE) recommended in October 2020 the following strategies: provision of a second dose of IPV in routine immunization to reduce the risk and number of paralytic cases in countries at risk of importation or new emergences; and use of type 2 OPV in high-quality campaigns to interrupt transmission and avoid seeding new type 2 cVDPV outbreaks.