Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 24(3): 275-284, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38109921

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The novel oral poliovirus vaccine type 2 (nOPV2) is now authorised by a WHO emergency use listing and widely distributed to interrupt outbreaks of circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2. As protection of vulnerable populations, particularly young infants, could be facilitated by shorter intervals between the two recommended doses, we aimed to assess safety and non-inferiority of immunogenicity of nOPV2 in 1-week, 2-week, and 4-week schedules. METHODS: In this phase 3, open-label, randomised trial, healthy, full-term, infants aged 6-8 weeks from a hospital or a clinic in the Dominican Republic were randomly allocated (1:1:1 ratio) using a pre-prepared, computer-generated randomisation schedule to three groups to receive two doses of nOPV2 immunisations with a 1-week interval (group A), 2-week interval (group B), or 4-week interval (group C). The nOPV2 vaccine was given at a 0·1 mL dose and contained at least 105 50% cell culture infective dose. Neutralising antibodies against poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 were measured before each immunisation and 4 weeks after the second dose. The primary outcome was the type 2 seroconversion rate 28 days after the second dose, and the non-inferiority margin was defined as a lower bound 95% CI of greater than -10%. Safety and reactogenicity were assessed through diary cards completed by the parent or guardian. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05033561. FINDINGS: We enrolled 905 infants between Dec 16, 2021, and March 28, 2022. 872 infants were included in the per-protocol analyses: 289 in group A, 293 in group B, and 290 in group C. Type 2 seroconversion rates were 87·5% (95% CI 83·2 to 91·1) in group A (253 of 289 participants), 91·8% (88·1 to 94·7) in group B (269 of 293 participants), and 95·5% (92·5 to 97·6) in group C (277 of 290 participants). Non-inferiority was shown for group B compared with group C (difference in rates -3·7; 95% CI -7·9 to 0·3), but not for group A compared with group C (-8·0; -12·7 to -3·6). 4 weeks after the second nOPV2 dose, type 2 neutralising antibodies increased in all three groups such that over 95% of each group was seroprotected against polio type 2, although final geometric mean titres tended to be highest with longer intervals between doses. Immunisation with nOPV2 was well tolerated with no causal association to vaccination of any severe or serious adverse event; one death from septic shock during the study was unrelated to the vaccine. INTERPRETATION: Two nOPV2 doses administered 1 week or 2 weeks apart from age 6 weeks to 8 weeks were safe and immunogenic. Immune responses after a 2-week interval were non-inferior to those after the standard 4-week interval, but marked responses after a 1-week interval suggest that schedules with an over 1-week interval can be used to provide flexibility to campaigns to improve coverage and hasten protection during circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 outbreaks. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.


Subject(s)
Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral , Poliovirus , Infant , Humans , Dominican Republic , Immunization Schedule , Poliovirus Vaccine, Inactivated , Antibodies, Neutralizing , Immunogenicity, Vaccine , Antibodies, Viral
2.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; 11: None, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35865654

ABSTRACT

Background: In January 2018, Ecuador changed its routine immunization schedule by replacing one full dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) administered intramuscularly at 2 months of age with two doses of fractional IPV (1/5th of full dose, fIPV) administered intradermally at 2 and 4 months of age; and bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (serotypes 1 and 3, bOPV) continues to be used. We compared seroprevalence and titres of polio antibodies achieved by the past and the current immunization schedules. Methods: This was a cross-sectional serological survey in children in Ecuador who received bOPV and either one IPV dose in 2017 or two fIPV doses in 2018. One blood sample was collected between October 2020 and March 2021 and analysed for presence of poliovirus neutralizing antibodies at CDC, Atlanta by microneutralization assay. Findings: We obtained 321 analysable samples from 329 (97·6%) enrolled children (160 received IPV and 161 fIPV). For serotype 2, seroprevalence was 50·0% (CI95%= 44·2-55·8%) for IPV and 83·2% (CI95%=78·5-87·1%) for fIPV recipients (p<0·001). Median antibody titers for serotype 2 were significantly lower for IPV than for fIPV recipients (3·0, CI95%= 3 - 3·5 vs. 4·8, CI95%= 4·5 - 5·2, p<0·001). Seroprevalence for serotypes 1 and 3 was above 90% and was not significantly different between IPV and fIPV recipients. Interpretation: Ecuador achieved significantly better poliovirus serotype 2 immunogenicity with two fIPV doses than with one IPV dose, while preserving vaccine supply and reducing costs. Our data provide further evidence that fIPV is a beneficial and potentially a cost-effective option in polio immunization. Funding: WHO obtained funds for the study from Rotary International.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL