Cholera and COVID-19 pandemic prevention in multiple hotspot districts of Uganda: vaccine coverage, adverse events following immunization and WASH conditions survey.

BACKGROUND: Between March, 2020 and December, 2021 due to cholera and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemics, there were 1,534 cholera cases with 14 deaths and 136,065 COVID-19 cases with 3,285 deaths reported respectively in Uganda. This study investigated mass vaccination campaigns for the prevention of the two pandemics namely: oral cholera vaccine (OCV) and COVID-19 vaccine coverage; adverse events following immunization (AEFI); barriers and enablers for the vaccine uptake and assessed water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) conditions in the six cholera and COVID-19 hotspot districts of Uganda. METHODS: A household survey was conducted between January and February, 2022 in the six cholera hotspot districts of Uganda which had recently conducted OCV mass vaccination campaigns and had ongoing COVID-19 mass vaccination campaigns. The survey randomly enrolled 900 households with 4,315 persons of whom 2,085 were above 18 years. Data were collected using a data entry application designed in KoBoToolbox and analysed using STATA version 14. Frequencies, percentages, odds ratios, means, confidence intervals and maps were generated and interpreted. RESULTS: The OCV coverage for dose one and two were 85% (95% CI: 84.2-86.4) and 67% (95% CI: 65.6-68.4) respectively. Among the 4,315 OCV recipients, 2% reported mild AEFI, 0.16% reported moderate AEFI and none reported severe AEFI. The COVID-19 vaccination coverage for dose one and two were 69.8% (95% CI: 67.8-71.8) and 18.8% (95% CI: 17.1-20.5) respectively. Approximately, 23% (478/2,085) of COVID-19 vaccine recipient reported AEFI; most 94% were mild, 0.6% were moderate and 2 cases were severe. The commonest reason for missing COVID-19 vaccine was fear of the side effects. For most districts (5/6), sanitation (latrine/toilet) coverage were low at 7.4%-37.4%. CONCLUSION: There is high OCV coverage but low COVID-19 vaccine and sanitation coverage with high number of moderate cases of AEFI recorded due to COVID-19 vaccines. The low COVID-19 vaccine coverage could indicate vaccine hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccines. Furthermore, incorporation of WASH conditions assessment in the OCV coverage surveys is recommended for similar settings to generate data for better planning. However, more studies are required on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Cholera Infection Risks and Cholera Vaccine Safety in Pregnancy.

Introduction: Discuss the impact of cholera infection on pregnant women, fetus, and neonates and review the safety of cholera vaccines in pregnancy. Methods: This study was carried out as a narrative review during November 2022. A thorough literature review was conducted on the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, SciELO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect. The following parameters were assessed from the included studies: type of cholera vaccine, cholera symptoms, cholera treatment, effect of cholera on pregnancy, effect of cholera treatment on pregnancy, effect of cholera vaccine on pregnancy, risk factors for fetuses and neonates, and prevention of cholera. The authors independently extracted data from the 24 included studies. Results: Cholera infection is a serious threat on pregnancy as it could lead to increased stillbirths and neonatal death. Fetal death was shown to occur mainly in the third trimester as most of the pregnant women infected with cholera had spontaneous abortions even after controlling for other confounding variables such as maternal age, dehydration level, and vomiting. Neonatal death was attributed mainly to congenital malformations and low Apgar scores with no improvements. Besides, cholera vaccines have shown to be safe in pregnancy and have proven to lower fetal and neonatal malformations among vaccinated compared to nonvaccinated pregnant women. Conclusion: This narrative summarizes the different complications due to cholera infection in pregnancy. It also reviews the safety of cholera vaccine administration in pregnant women.

Correlates of Protection for Cholera.

A correlate of protection (CoP) is a measured adaptive immune response to vaccination or infection that is associated with protection against disease. However, the degree to which a CoP can serve as a surrogate end point for vaccine efficacy should depend on the robustness of this association. While cholera toxin is a dominant target of the human antibody response to Vibrio cholerae infection, antitoxin responses are not associated with long-term immunity, and are not effective CoPs for cholera. Instead, protection appears to be mediated by functional antibodies that target the O-polysaccharide coated V. cholerae outer membrane. Vibriocidal antibodies, which are complement-dependent bactericidal antibodies, remain the most accepted CoP for cholera and are used as surrogate end points in some vaccine studies. However, the association between vibriocidal antibody titers and immunity is not absolute, and they are unlikely to reflect a mechanistic correlate of protection against cholera.

"It depends how one understands it:" a qualitative study on differential uptake of oral cholera vaccine in three compounds in Lusaka, Zambia.

BACKGROUND: The Zambian Ministry of Health implemented a reactive one-dose Oral Cholera Vaccine (OCV) campaign in April 2016 in three Lusaka compounds, followed by a pre-emptive second-round in December. Understanding uptake of this first-ever two-dose OCV campaign is critical to design effective OCV campaigns and for delivery of oral vaccines in the country and the region. METHODS: We conducted 12 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with men and women who self-reported taking no OCV doses and six with those self-reporting taking both doses. Simple descriptive analysis was conducted on socio-demographic and cholera-related data collected using a short questionnaire. We analyzed transcribed FGDs using the framework of dose, gender and geographic location. RESULTS: No differences were found by gender and location. All participants thought cholera to be severe and the reactive OCV campaign as relevant if efficacious. Most reported not receiving information on OCV side-effects and duration of protection. Those who took both doses listed more risk factors (including 'wind') and felt personally susceptible to cholera and protected by OCV. Some described OCV side-effects, mostly diarrhoea, vomiting and dizziness, as the expulsion of causative agents. Those who did not take OCV felt protected by their good personal hygiene practices or, thought of themselves and OCV as powerless against the multiple causes of cholera including poor living conditions, water, wind, and curse. Most of those who did not take OCV feared side-effects reported by others. Some interpreted side-effects as 'western' malevolence. Though > 80% discussants reported not knowing duration of protection, some who did not vaccinate, suggested that rather than rely on OCV which could lose potency, collective action should be taken to change the physical and economic environment to prevent cholera. CONCLUSIONS: Due to incomplete information, individual decision-making was complex, rooted in theories of disease causation, perceived susceptibility, circulating narratives, colonial past, and observable outcomes of vaccination. To increase coverage, future OCV campaigns may benefit from better communication on eligibility and susceptibility, expected side effects, mechanism of action, and duration of protection. Governmental improvements in the physical and economic environment may increase confidence in OCV and other public health interventions among residents in Lusaka compounds.

Safety of a bivalent, killed, whole-cell oral cholera vaccine in pregnant women in Bangladesh: evidence from a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cholera increases the risk of harmful effects on foetuses. We prospectively followed pregnant women unaware of their pregnancy status who received a study agent in a clinical trial evaluating the association between exposure to an oral cholera vaccine (OCV) and foetal survival. METHODS: Study participants were selected from a randomized placebo-controlled trial conducted in Dhaka, Bangladesh. The vaccination campaign was conducted between January 10 and February 4, 2014. We enrolled women who were exposed to an OCV or placebo during pregnancy (Cohort 1) and women who were pregnant after the vaccination was completed (Cohort 2). Our primary endpoint was pregnancy loss (spontaneous miscarriage or stillbirth), and the secondary endpoints were preterm delivery and low birth weight. We employed a log-binomial regression to calculate the relative risk of having adverse outcomes among OCV recipients compared to that among placebo recipients. RESULT: There were 231 OCV and 234 placebo recipients in Cohort 1 and 277 OCV and 299 placebo recipients in Cohort 2. In Cohort 1, the incidence of pregnancy loss was 113/1000 and 115/1000 among OCV and placebo recipients, respectively. The adjusted relative risk for pregnancy loss was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.58-1.61; p = 0.91) in Cohort 1. We did not observe any variation in the risk of pregnancy loss between the two cohorts. The risks for preterm delivery and low birth weight were not significantly different between the groups in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides additional evidence that exposure to an OCV during pregnancy does not increase the risk of pregnancy loss, preterm delivery, or low birth weight, suggesting that pregnant women in cholera-affected regions should not be excluded in a mass vaccination campaign. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered at ( http://clinicaltrials.gov ). Identifier: NCT02027207 .

[Study on the immunogenicity and safety of recombinant B-subunit/whole cell cholera vaccine infused with antacids in healthy population at ages of 2-6 years].

Objective: To assess the immunogenicity and safety of recombinant B-subunit/whole cell cholera vaccine (rBS/WC) oral cholera vaccine (Ora Vacs) infused with antacids in healthy population at ages of 2-6 years. Methods: Between December 2009 and January 2010, we recruited 900 volunteers aged 2-6 years od through giving out recruitment notice for the eligible children's parents from different vaccination clinics of Chongzuo city in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, and subjects were randomly (2∶1) assigned to receive Cholera vaccine infused with antacids or placebo, and observed for safety. Serum samples of 300 subjects in immunogenicity subgroups (200 for vaccine groups, 100 for control groups) before the 1st dose and 49 d (±3 d) after immunization were collected, and determined for antibody levels against the cholera toxin (anti-CT) and cholera vibriocidal (anti-Vab) with Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA), based on which the GMT was calculated. There were 266 cases paired with the serum samples before and after immunization (177 for vaccine groups, 89 for control groups). The comparison of subjects' age at enrollment and the level of GMT before and after immunization between groups were analyzed by t test. The superiority test for the difference between seroconversion rates of vaccine groups and control groups were analyzed by χ(2) test. Results: Of 900 subjects enrolled, the number of males and females were 503 and 397 respectively (vaccine groups 335 vs. 265, control groups 168 vs. 132), the average ages of vaccine groups and control groups at enrollment were (4.8±1.2) years and (4.9±1.2) years respectively. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of gender and age (χ(2)=0.00, P=1.000; t=0.55, P=0.585). The 2 times increase rates of anti-CT and anti-Vab in vaccine groups after inoculation were 90.96% and 57.63% respectively, which were superiority to those of control groups (15.73% and 29.21%), and significant differences were observed between groups (χ(2)=15.89, χ(2)=3.85, P<0.001). There were significant differences between vaccine groups and control groups after inoculation in terms of GMTs of anti-CT (1∶647.56 vs. 1∶99.49) and anti-Vab antibodies (1∶16.19 vs. 1∶11.27) (t values were 15.82 and 3.43, respetively; both P values were<0.05), significant differences were observed in the growth rates when compared the GMTs of anti-CT (6.63 vs. 1.11) and anti-Vab antibodies (1.64 vs. 1.16) before inoculation between vaccine groups and control groups (t'=17.85 and 4.96, P<0.001). In terms of safety, the adverse reaction rates in vaccine groups and control groups were 37.67% (226/600) and 36.67% (110/300), respectively,the common adverse reaction including fever, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhea, headache, fatigue, allergies, rash, etc; and the severity degree were mainly for level 1. Conclusion: Ora Vacs infused with antacids could produce an positive effect on immune response and safety.

Single-dose Live Oral Cholera Vaccine CVD 103-HgR Protects Against Human Experimental Infection With Vibrio cholerae O1 El Tor.

BACKGROUND: No licensed cholera vaccine is presently available in the United States. Cholera vaccines available in other countries require 2 spaced doses. A single-dose cholera vaccine that can rapidly protect short-notice travelers to high-risk areas and help control explosive outbreaks where logistics render 2-dose immunization regimens impractical would be a major advance.PXVX0200, based on live attenuated Vibrio cholerae O1 classical Inaba vaccine strain CVD 103-HgR, elicits seroconversion of vibriocidal antibodies (a correlate of protection) within 10 days of a single oral dose. We investigated the protection conferred by this vaccine in a human cholera challenge model. METHODS: Consenting healthy adult volunteers, 18-45 years old, were randomly allocated 1:1 to receive 1 oral dose of vaccine (approximately 5 × 10(8) colony-forming units [CFU]) or placebo in double-blind fashion. Volunteers ingested approximately 1 × 10(5) CFU of wild-type V. cholerae O1 El Tor Inaba strain N16961 10 days or 3 months after vaccination and were observed on an inpatient research ward for stool output measurement and management of hydration. RESULTS: The vaccine was well tolerated, with no difference in adverse event frequency among 95 vaccinees vs 102 placebo recipients. The primary endpoint, moderate (≥3.0 L) to severe (≥5.0 L) diarrheal purge, occurred in 39 of 66 (59.1%) placebo controls but only 2 of 35 (5.7%) vaccinees at 10 days (vaccine efficacy, 90.3%; P < .0001) and 4 of 33 (12.1%) vaccinees at 3 months (vaccine efficacy, 79.5%; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The significant vaccine efficacy documented 10 days and 3 months after 1 oral dose of PXVX0200 supports further development as a single-dose cholera vaccine. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01895855.

Oral Cholera Vaccine Coverage, Barriers to Vaccination, and Adverse Events following Vaccination, Haiti, 2013.

In 2013, the first government-led oral cholera vaccination (OCV) campaign in Haiti was implemented in Petite Anse and Cerca Carvajal. To evaluate vaccination coverage, barriers to vaccination, and adverse events following vaccination, we conducted a cluster survey. We enrolled 1,121 persons from Petite Anse and 809 persons from Cerca Carvajal, categorized by 3 age groups (1-4, 5-14, >15 years). Two-dose OCV coverage was 62.5% in Petite Anse and 76.8% in Cerca Carvajal. Two-dose coverage was lowest among persons >15 years of age. In Cerca Carvajal, coverage was significantly lower for male than female respondents (69% vs. 85%; p<0.001). No major adverse events were reported. The main reason for nonvaccination was absence during the campaign. Vaccination coverage after this campaign was acceptable and comparable to that resulting from campaigns implemented by nongovernmental organizations. Future campaigns should be tailored to reach adults who are not available during daytime hours.

Safety and immunogenicity assessment of an oral cholera vaccine through phase I clinical trial in Korea.

The safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of an oral cholera vaccine (OCV) was assessed in adult Korean male through an open-label, non-comparative clinical study. Two doses of vaccine with an interval of 2 weeks were given to 20 healthy subjects. A total of 7 adverse events occurred in 6 subjects. However, no clinically significant change was observed in electrocardiograms, vital signs, physical examinations, and clinical laboratory tests. The immunogenicity of OCV was evaluated by serum vibriocidal assay where anti-Vibrio cholerae O1 and O139 antibodies were measured at day 0, 14, and 28 of vaccine administration. The antibody titers ranged from < 2.5-5,120 for V. cholerae O1 Inaba, < 2.5-10,240 for V. cholerae O1 Ogawa and < 2.5-480 for V. cholerae O139. In addition, the fold increase in antibody titers ranged from 1-4,096 for O1 Inaba, 1-8,192 for O1 Ogawa, and 1-384 for O139. The seroconversion rate was 95% and 45% for O1 and O139 antibodies, respectively. Our study clearly shows that administration of two doses of OCV at a 2 week-interval increases an appropriate level of antibody titer in the serum of healthy Korean adult males (Clinical Trial Number, NCT01707537).

Repeated dose toxicity study of Vibrio cholerae-loaded gastro-resistant microparticles.

CONTEXT: Microencapsulation of antigens has been extensively studied over the last decades aiming at improving the immunogenicity of vaccine candidates. OBJECTIVE: Addressing microparticles (MPs) toxicity in rats. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Spray-dried Eudragit® L 30 D-55 MPs and Eudragit® L 30 D-55 alginate MPs were elaborated and characterized. MPs obtained were administered to rats, three groups were defined: G1, control group; G2, administered with Vibrio cholerae (VC)-loaded MPs; G3, receiving VC-loaded alginate MPs. Animals received three vaccine doses. Body weight, food and water intake were controlled during the study. Haematological parameters, vibriocidal titres, organ weight and histology in necropsy were also analyzed. RESULTS: All animals grew healthy. Body weight gain, food and water intake and haematological parameters remained within physiological values, showing no treatment-related differences. Moreover, organ weight changes were not detected and animals developed protective vibriocidal titres. CONCLUSION: VC-loaded MPs and VC-loaded alginate MPs have proved to be safe and effective in the assessed conditions.

Safety and immunogenicity of the Euvichol-S oral cholera vaccine for prevention of Vibrio cholerae O1 infection in Nepal: an observer-blind, active-controlled, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In October, 2017, WHO launched a strategy to eliminate cholera by 2030. A primary challenge in meeting this goal is the limited global supply capacity of oral cholera vaccine and the worsening of cholera outbreaks since 2021. To help address the current shortage of oral cholera vaccine, a WHO prequalified oral cholera vaccine, Euvichol-Plus was reformulated by reducing the number of components and inactivation methods. We aimed to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of Euvichol-S (EuBiologics, Seoul, South Korea) compared with an active control vaccine, Shanchol (Sanofi Healthcare India, Telangana, India) in participants of various ages in Nepal. METHODS: We did an observer-blind, active-controlled, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial at four hospitals in Nepal. Eligible participants were healthy individuals aged 1-40 years without a history of cholera vaccination. Individuals with a history of hypersensitivity reactions to other preventive vaccines, severe chronic disease, previous cholera vaccination, receipt of blood or blood-derived products in the past 3 months or other vaccine within 4 weeks before enrolment, and pregnant or lactating women were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) by block randomisation (block sizes of two, four, six, or eight) to one of four groups (groups A-D); groups C and D were stratified by age (1-5, 6-17, and 18-40 years). Participants in groups A-C were assigned to receive two 1·5 mL doses of Euvichol-S (three different lots) and participants in group D were assigned to receive the active control vaccine, Shanchol. All participants and site staff (with the exception of those who prepared and administered the study vaccines) were masked to group assignment. The primary immunogenicity endpoint was non-inferiority of immunogenicity of Euvichol-S (group C) versus Shanchol (group D) at 2 weeks after the second vaccine dose, measured by the seroconversion rate, defined as the proportion of participants who had achieved seroconversion (defined as ≥four-fold increase in V cholerae O1 Inaba and Ogawa titres compared with baseline). The primary immunogenicity endpoint was assessed in the per-protocol analysis set, which included all participants who received all their planned vaccine administrations, had no important protocol deviations, and who provided blood samples for all immunogenicity assessments. The primary safety endpoint was the number of solicited adverse events, unsolicited adverse events, and serious adverse events after each vaccine dose in all ages and each age stratum, assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of the Euvichol-S or Shanchol. Non-inferiority of Euvichol-S compared with Shanchol was shown if the lower limit of the 95% CI for the difference between the seroconversion rates in Euvichol-S group C versus Shanchol group D was above the predefined non-inferiority margin of -10%. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04760236. FINDINGS: Between Oct 6, 2021, and Jan 19, 2022, 2529 healthy participants (1261 [49·9%] males; 1268 [50·1%] females), were randomly assigned to group A (n=330; Euvichol-S lot number ES-2002), group B (n=331; Euvichol-S ES-2003), group C (n=934; Euvichol-S ES-2004]), or group D (n=934; Shanchol). Non-inferiority of Euvichol-S versus Shanchol in seroconversion rate for both serotypes at 2 weeks after the second dose was confirmed in all ages (difference in seroconversion rate for V cholerae O1 Inaba -0·00 [95% CI -1·86 to 1·86]; for V cholerae O1 Ogawa -1·62 [-4·80 to 1·56]). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 244 (9·7%) of 2529 participants in the safety analysis set, with a total of 403 events; 247 events were reported among 151 (9·5%) of 1595 Euvichol-S recipients and 156 events among 93 (10·0%) of 934 Shanchol recipients. Pyrexia was the most common adverse event in both groups (57 events among 56 [3·5%] of 1595 Euvichol-S recipients and 37 events among 35 [3·7%] of 934 Shanchol recipients). No serious adverse events were deemed to be vaccine-related. INTERPRETATION: A two-dose regimen of Euvichol-S vaccine was non-inferior to the active control vaccine, Shanchol, in terms of seroconversion rates 2 weeks after the second dose. The simplified formulation and production requirements of the Euvichol-S vaccine have the potential to increase the supply of oral cholera vaccine and reduce the gap between the current oral cholera vaccine supply and demand. FUNDING: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. TRANSLATION: For the Nepali translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Vaccines for preventing enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) diarrhoea.

BACKGROUND: Infection with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) bacteria is a common cause of diarrhoea in adults and children in developing countries and is a major cause of 'travellers' diarrhoea' in people visiting or returning from endemic regions. A killed whole cell vaccine (Dukoral®), primarily designed and licensed to prevent cholera, has been recommended by some groups to prevent travellers' diarrhoea in people visiting endemic regions. This vaccine contains a recombinant B subunit of the cholera toxin that is antigenically similar to the heat labile toxin of ETEC. This review aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of this vaccine and other vaccines designed specifically to protect people against diarrhoea caused by ETEC infection. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of vaccines for preventing ETEC diarrhoea. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Infectious Disease Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and http://clinicaltrials.gov up to December 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing use of vaccines to prevent ETEC with use of no intervention, a control vaccine (either an inert vaccine or a vaccine normally given to prevent an unrelated infection), an alternative ETEC vaccine, or a different dose or schedule of the same ETEC vaccine in healthy adults and children living in endemic regions, intending to travel to endemic regions, or volunteering to receive an artificial challenge of ETEC bacteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed each trial for eligibility and risk of bias. Two independent reviewers extracted data from the included studies and analyzed the data using Review Manager (RevMan) software. We reported outcomes as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-four RCTs, including 53,247 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Four studies assessed the protective efficacy of oral cholera vaccines when used to prevent diarrhoea due to ETEC and seven studies assessed the protective efficacy of ETEC-specific vaccines. Of these 11 studies, seven studies presented efficacy data from field trials and four studies presented efficacy data from artificial challenge studies. An additional 13 trials contributed safety and immunological data only. Cholera vaccinesThe currently available, oral cholera killed whole cell vaccine (Dukoral®) was evaluated for protection of people against 'travellers' diarrhoea' in a single RCT in people arriving in Mexico from the USA. We did not identify any statistically significant effects on ETEC diarrhoea or all-cause diarrhoea (one trial, 502 participants, low quality evidence).Two earlier trials, one undertaken in an endemic population in Bangladesh and one undertaken in people travelling from Finland to Morocco, evaluated a precursor of this vaccine containing purified cholera toxin B subunit rather than the recombinant subunit in Dukoral®. Short term protective efficacy against ETEC diarrhoea was demonstrated, lasting for around three months (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.71; two trials, 50,227 participants). This vaccine is no longer available. ETEC vaccinesAn ETEC-specific, killed whole cell vaccine, which also contains the recombinant cholera toxin B-subunit, was evaluated in people travelling from the USA to Mexico or Guatemala, and from Austria to Latin America, Africa, or Asia. We did not identify any statistically significant differences in ETEC-specific diarrhoea or all-cause diarrhoea (two trials, 799 participants), and the vaccine was associated with increased vomiting (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.16 to 3.45; nine trials, 1528 participants). The other ETEC-specific vaccines in development have not yet demonstrated clinically important benefits. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently insufficient evidence from RCTs to support the use of the oral cholera vaccine Dukoral® for protecting travellers against ETEC diarrhoea. Further research is needed to develop safe and effective vaccines to provide both short and long-term protection against ETEC diarrhoea.

Oral vaccines for preventing cholera.

BACKGROUND: Cholera is a cause of acute watery diarrhoea which can cause dehydration and death if not adequately treated. It usually occurs in epidemics, and is associated with poverty and poor sanitation. Effective, cheap, and easy to administer vaccines could help prevent epidemics. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of oral cholera vaccines in preventing cases of cholera and deaths from cholera. SEARCH STRATEGY: In October 2010, we searched the Cochrane Infectious Disease Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; LILACS; the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT), and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) for relevant published and ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of oral cholera vaccines in healthy adults and children. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Each trial was assessed for eligibility and risk of bias by two authors working independently. Data was extracted by two independent reviewers and analysed using the Review Manager 5 software. Outcomes are reported as vaccine protective efficacy (VE) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). MAIN RESULTS: Seven large efficacy trials, four small artificial challenge studies, and twenty-nine safety trials contributed data to this review.Five variations of a killed whole cell vaccine have been evaluated in large scale efficacy trials (four trials, 249935 participants). The overall vaccine efficacy during the first year was 52% (95% CI 35% to 65%), and during the second year was 62% (95% CI 51% to 62%). Protective efficacy was lower in children aged less than 5 years; 38% (95% CI 20% to 53%) compared to older children and adults; 66% (95% CI 57% to 73%).One trial of a killed whole cell vaccine amongst military recruits demonstrated 86% protective efficacy (95% CI 37% to 97%) in a small epidemic occurring within 4 weeks of the 2-dose schedule (one trial, 1426 participants). Efficacy data is not available beyond two years for the currently available vaccine formulations, but based on data from older trials is unlikely to last beyond three years.The safety data available on killed whole cell vaccines have not demonstrated any clinically significant increase in adverse events compared to placebo.Only one live attenuated vaccine has reached Phase III clinical evaluation and was not effective (one trial, 67508 participants). Two new candidate live attenuated vaccines have demonstrated clinical effectiveness in small artificial challenge studies, but are still in development. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The currently available oral killed whole cell vaccines can prevent 50 to 60% of cholera episodes during the first two years after the primary vaccination schedule. The impact and cost-effectiveness of adopting oral cholera vaccines into the routine vaccination schedule of endemic countries will depend on the prevalence of cholera, the frequency of epidemics, and access to basic services providing rapid rehydration therapy.

Efficacy and safety of a modified killed-whole-cell oral cholera vaccine in India: an interim analysis of a cluster-randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral cholera vaccines consisting of killed whole cells have been available for many years, but they have not been used extensively in populations with endemic disease. An inexpensive, locally produced oral killed-whole-cell vaccine has been used in high-risk areas in Vietnam. To expand the use of this vaccine, it was modified to comply with WHO standards. We assessed the efficacy and safety of this modified vaccine in a population with endemic cholera. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, 107 774 non-pregnant residents of Kolkata, India, aged 1 year or older, were cluster-randomised by dwelling to receive two doses of either modified killed-whole-cell cholera vaccine (n=52 212; 1966 clusters) or heat-killed Escherichia coli K12 placebo (n=55 562; 1967 clusters), both delivered orally. Randomisation was done by computer-generated sequence in blocks of four. The primary endpoint was prevention of episodes of culture-confirmed Vibrio cholerae O1 diarrhoea severe enough for the patient to seek treatment in a health-care facility. We undertook an interim, per-protocol analysis at 2 years of follow-up that included individuals who received two completely ingested doses of vaccine or placebo. We assessed first episodes of cholera that occurred between 14 days and 730 days after receipt of the second dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00289224. FINDINGS: 31 932 participants assigned to vaccine (1721 clusters) and 34 968 assigned to placebo (1757 clusters) received two doses of study treatment. There were 20 episodes of cholera in the vaccine group and 68 episodes in the placebo group (protective efficacy 67%; one-tailed 99% CI, lower bound 35%, p<0.0001). The vaccine protected individuals in age-groups 1.0-4.9 years, 5.0-14.9 years, and 15 years and older, and protective efficacy did not differ significantly between age-groups (p=0.28). We recorded no vaccine-related serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: This modified killed-whole-cell oral vaccine, compliant with WHO standards, is safe, provides protection against clinically significant cholera in an endemic setting, and can be used in children aged 1.0-4.9 years, who are at highest risk of developing cholera in endemic settings. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Governments of South Korea, Sweden, and Kuwait.

Vaccines for preventing cholera: killed whole cell or other subunit vaccines (injected).

BACKGROUND: Injected cholera vaccines are rarely used today, although they may have some benefit. It is valuable to summarize the evidence for effectiveness of injected cholera vaccines for comparison with newer oral vaccines (subject of a separate Cochrane Review). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate killed whole cell (KWC) cholera vaccines and other inactive subunit vaccines (administered by injection) for preventing cholera and death, and to evaluate the adverse effects. SEARCH STRATEGY: In September 2008, we searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 3), EMBASE, and LILACS. We also searched reference lists and handsearched the journal Vaccine up to 1997. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing injected cholera vaccines (KWC or other inactive subunit) with placebo, control vaccines, or no intervention in adults and children irrespective of immune status or special risk category. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted data and assessed trial methodological quality independently. Dichotomous data were reported using the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Vaccine efficacies were also calculated (% vaccine efficacy = (1-RR) x 100%). MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen trials, involving over one million adults, children and infants, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Twenty-four comparisons reported on vaccine efficacy (cholera cases and/or deaths) and 11 comparisons considered adverse effects (nine reported on both). Compared to placebo, vaccinees had a reduced risk of death from cholera (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.93; 837,442 participants) and a reduced risk of contracting cholera at 12 months (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.65, random-effects model; 1,512,573 participants). This translates to an efficacy of 48%, 95% confidence interval 35% to 58%. Significant protection lasted for two years, even after only a single dose, and for three years with an annual booster. Children over five years and adults were protected for up to three years, while children under five years were protected for up to a year. Injected cholera vaccines were associated with more systemic and local adverse effects compared to placebo, but these were not severe or life-threatening. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Injected cholera vaccines appear to be safe and relatively more effective than usually realized. Protection against cholera persists for up to two years following a single dose of vaccine, and for three years with an annual booster. However, they have been superseded by oral vaccines.

[Analysis of safety and effects on the oral whole cell/recombinant B subunit cholera vaccine in university students and workers].

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, immunogenicity and protective efficiency of the oral whole cell/recombinant B subunit cholera vaccine in Beijing Olympic volunteers and workers. METHOD: Analyzing the incidence rate of adverse reaction and Protective Rate (PR) after taking the vaccine in Olympic volunteers in 6 universities in Beijing; comparing the anti-cholera toxin (CT) detected with ELISA prior and after taking the vaccine in Olympic workers. RESULTS: The total rate of adverse reaction of Olympic volunteers was 0.38%; the main side effects were gastrointestinal symptoms, such as bellyache and diarrhea which were mild and temple; the acute diarrhea incidence rate of Olympic volunteers after taking the vaccine was significantly lower than those not taking it, the PR was 76.27%; the positive rate of anti-CT of Olympic workers after taking the vaccine was significantly higher than those before taking it, the levels of anti-CT titers declined after 6 months since they had taken the vaccine. CONCLUSION: The results from above two observed population indicate that the oral rBS-WC cholera vaccine is efficient and safe.

Safety and Immunogenicity of Live Oral Cholera Vaccine CVD 103-HgR in Children Aged 2-5 Years in the United States.

In a phase 4, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter study, to assess the safety and immunogenicity of live, attenuated cholera vaccine PXVX0200 in children aged 2-5 years in the United States, 172 volunteers were randomized 6:1 to receive a single dose of 1 × 109 colony forming units (CFU) of PXVX0200 or placebo. Immunogenicity endpoints included serum vibriocidal antibody (SVA) levels on days 1, 11, and 29. Safety was assessed by comparing solicited signs and symptoms on days 1-8, unsolicited adverse events through day 29, and serious adverse events (SAEs) through day 181. The SVA seroconversion rates 10 days after immunization were 98.1% and 0% in vaccine and placebo recipients, respectively, and the vaccine seroconversion rate was non-inferior to the 93.5% rate seen in the bridging population of adults aged 18-45 years from a lot consistency study. Most reactogenicity was mild to moderate, and there were no study-related SAEs. PXVX0200 appears safe and immunogenic in children aged 2-5 years.

Safety and Immunogenicity of Live Oral Cholera Vaccine CVD 103-HgR in Children and Adolescents Aged 6-17 Years.

The attenuated recombinant Vibrio cholerae O1 vaccine strain CVD 103-HgR, redeveloped as PXVX0200, elicits a rapid serum vibriocidal antibody (SVA) response and protects against cholera-induced diarrhea in adult volunteer challenge trials but has not been studied in children in developed countries. We performed a phase 4, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter study to assess the safety, immunogenicity, and tolerability of a single, oral dose of PXVX0200 in children and adolescents aged 6-17 years in the United States and bridged immunogenicity to adults aged 18-45 years from a separate lot consistency study. Volunteers were randomized to receive a single dose of 1 × 109 colony forming units (CFU) of PXVX0200 or placebo. Immunogenicity endpoints included SVA levels on days 1, 11, and 29 in volunteers aged 6-17 years and also on days 91 and 181 in volunteers aged 12-17 years. Safety was assessed by comparing solicited signs and symptoms on days 1-8, unsolicited adverse events (AEs) through day 29, and serious AEs through day 181. A total of 374 participants were enrolled, comprising 321 vaccine and 53 placebo recipients. The SVA seroconversion rates 10 days after immunization were 98.6% and 2.1% in vaccine and placebo recipients, respectively, and the vaccine seroconversion rate was non-inferior to the 93.5% rate seen in adults aged 18-45 years. Most reactogenicity was mild to moderate, and there were no vaccine-related serious AEs. The complete dose was consumed in 95.3% and 98.1% of vaccine and placebo recipients, respectively. PXVX0200 appears safe, immunogenic, and well tolerated in children and adolescents aged 6-17 years.

Stemming cholera tides in Zimbabwe through mass vaccination.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, Zimbabwe declared another major cholera outbreak a decade after recording one of the worst cholera outbreaks in Africa. METHODS: A mathematical model for cholera was used to estimate the magnitude of the cholera outbreak and vaccination coverage using cholera cases reported data. A Markov chain Monte Carlo method based on a Bayesian framework was used to fit the model in order to estimate the basic reproductive number and required vaccination coverage for cholera control. RESULTS: The results showed that the outbreak had a basic reproductive number of 1.82 (95% credible interval [CrI] 1.53-2.11) and required vaccination coverage of at least 58% (95% Crl 45-68%) to be contained using an oral cholera vaccine of 78% efficacy. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that a vaccine with at least 55% efficacy was sufficient to contain the outbreak but at higher coverage of 75% (95% Crl 58-88%). However, high-efficacy vaccines would greatly reduce the required coverage, with 100% efficacy vaccine reducing coverage to 45% (95% Crl 35-53%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings reinforce the crucial need for oral cholera vaccines to control cholera in Zimbabwe, considering that the decay of water reticulation and sewerage infrastructure is unlikely to be effectively addressed in the coming years.