Immunogenicity and lot-to-lot consistency of booster shot with Sabin inactivated poliomyelitis vaccine in Chinese children aged 18-24 Months: A phase â £ clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: There has been no data on the immunogenicity and safety of the 4th booster dose of the sIPV immunization in 18-24 months old children in post-marketing studies of large cohort providing with robust results. METHOD: In a phase Ⅳ randomized, double-blinded clinical trial, 1200 participants aged 2 months were immunized with three consecutive doses of sIPV at 2, 3, and 4 months old to complete primary immunization. Out of the 1200 participants, 1129 received the 4th dose of sIPV as booster immunization. Immunogenicity was evaluated in 1100 participants. RESULTS: Seropositive rates of the anti-poliovirus type 1, 2, and 3 neutralizing antibodies were 99.9 %, 98.0 %, 98.2 %, respectively, with GMTs of 557.0, 146.1, 362.0 one year after primary vaccination. After booster vaccination between 18 and 24 months old, the seropositive rates for 3 types all reached 100.0 %, with GMTs of 8343.6, 5039.6, 5492.0, respectively. Particularly for the anti-poliovirus type 2 antibody, the GMT was 230.4 after primary immunization, maintained to 146.1 one year after primary immunization, and increased to as high as 5039.6 after booster vaccination. The GMT ratios between each batch groups after booster immunization were between 0.67 and 1.50, meeting the immunological equivalence criteria. The incidence rate of adverse reaction was 23.0 %, which was comparable to those in the phase Ⅲ trial but had a lower incidence. Furthermore, no SUSAR was reported in this study. INTERPRETATION: In conclusion, as the anti-poliovirus antibodies gradually waned one year post sIPV primary vaccination, especially the type 2 antibody waned to a very low level, suggesting the importance of the booster immunization for children at the age of 18-24 months old. The booster shot can greatly enhance the antibody level and protect children from the potential risk of infection with WPV and VDPV by supplementing the anti-poliovirus type 2 immunity gap in the current real world. Clinic Trial Registration. NCT04224519.

Use of Inactivated Polio Vaccine Among U.S. Adults: Updated Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2023.

Poliovirus can cause poliomyelitis and lifelong paralysis. Although wild poliovirus types 2 and 3 have been eradicated, wild poliovirus type 1 and vaccine-derived polioviruses are still circulating in multiple countries worldwide. In 2022, a case of paralytic polio caused by vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 was identified in an unvaccinated young adult in New York. This case and subsequent detection of community transmission underscored the ongoing risk for importation of poliovirus into the United States and risk for poliomyelitis among unvaccinated persons. However, previous Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommendations for adult polio vaccination were limited to adults known to be at increased risk for exposure. During October 2022-June 2023, the ACIP Polio Vaccine Work Group reviewed data on poliovirus surveillance and epidemiology, safety and effectiveness of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV), and other considerations outlined in the ACIP Evidence to Recommendations Framework. On June 21, 2023, ACIP voted to recommend that all U.S. adults aged ≥18 years who are known or suspected to be unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated against polio complete a primary polio vaccination series with IPV. This report summarizes evidence considered for this recommendation and provides clinical guidance for the use of IPV in adults.

Persistence of immunity following a single dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine: a phase 4, open label, non-randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The polio eradication endgame required the withdrawal of Sabin type 2 from the oral poliovirus vaccine and introduction of one or more dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) into routine immunisation schedules. However, the duration of single-dose IPV immunity is unknown. We aimed to address this deficiency. METHODS: In this phase 4, open-label, non-randomised clinical trial, we assessed single-dose IPV immunity. Two groups of infants or children were screened: the first group had previously received IPV at 14 weeks of age or older (previous IPV group; age >2 years); the second had not previously received IPV (no previous IPV group; age 7-12 months). At enrolment, all participants received an IPV dose. Children in the no previous IPV group received a second IPV dose at day 30. Blood was collected three times in each group: on days 0, 7, and 30 in the previous IPV group and on days 0, 30, and 37 in the no previous IPV group. Poliovirus antibody was measured by microneutralisation assay. Immunity was defined as the presence of a detectable antibody or a rapid anamnestic response (ie, priming). We used the χ2 to compare proportions and the Mann-Whitney U test to assess continuous variables. To assess safety, vaccinees were observed for 30 min, caregivers for each participating child reported adverse events after each follow-up visit and were questioned during each follow-up visit regarding any adverse events during the intervening period. Adverse events were recorded and graded according to the severity of clinical symptoms. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03723837. FINDINGS: From Nov 18, 2018, to July 31, 2019, 502 participants enrolled in the study, 458 (255 [65%] boys and 203 [44%] girls) were included in the per protocol analysis: 234 (93%) in the previous IPV group and 224 (90%) in the no previous IPV group. In the previous IPV group, 28 months after one IPV dose 233 (>99%) of 234 children had persistence of poliovirus type 2 immunity (100 [43%] of 234 children were seropositive; 133 [99%] of 134 were seronegative and primed). In the no previous IPV group, 30 days after one IPV dose all 224 (100%) children who were type 2 poliovirus naive had seroconverted (223 [>99%] children) or were primed (one [<1%]). No adverse events were deemed attributable to study interventions. INTERPRETATION: A single IPV dose administered at 14 weeks of age or older is highly immunogenic and induces nearly universal type 2 immunity (seroconversion and priming), with immunity persisting for at least 28 months. The polio eradication initiative should prioritise first IPV dose administration to mitigate the paralytic burden caused by poliovirus type 2. FUNDING: WHO and Rotary International.

Poliovirus type 1 systemic humoral and intestinal mucosal immunity induced by monovalent oral poliovirus vaccine, fractional inactivated poliovirus vaccine, and bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To inform response strategies, we examined type 1 humoral and intestinal immunity induced by 1) one fractional inactivated poliovirus vaccine (fIPV) dose given with monovalent oral poliovirus vaccine (mOPV1), and 2) mOPV1 versus bivalent OPV (bOPV). METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled, open-label trial in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Healthy infants aged 5 weeks were block randomized to one of four arms: mOPV1 at age 6-10-14 weeks/fIPV at 6 weeks (A); mOPV1 at 6-10-14 weeks/fIPV at 10 weeks (B); mOPV1 at 6-10-14 weeks (C); and bOPV at 6-10-14 weeks (D). Immune response at 10 weeks and cumulative response at 14 weeks was assessed among the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as seroconversion from seronegative (<1:8 titers) to seropositive (≥1:8) or a four-fold titer rise among seropositive participants sustained to age 18 weeks. We examined virus shedding after two doses of mOPV1 with and without fIPV, and after the first mOPV1 or bOPV dose. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03722004). FINDINGS: During 18 December 2018 - 23 November 2019, 1,192 infants were enrolled (arms A:301; B:295; C:298; D:298). Immune responses at 14 weeks did not differ after two mOPV1 doses alone (94% [95% CI: 91-97%]) versus two mOPV1 doses with fIPV at 6 weeks (96% [93-98%]) or 10 weeks (96% [93-98%]). Participants who received mOPV1 and fIPV at 10 weeks had significantly lower shedding (p < 0·001) one- and two-weeks later compared with mOPV1 alone. Response to one mOPV1 dose was significantly higher than one bOPV dose (79% versus 67%; p < 0·001) and shedding two-weeks later was significantly higher after mOPV1 (76% versus 56%; p < 0·001) indicating improved vaccine replication. Ninety-nine adverse events were reported, 29 serious including two deaths; none were attributed to study vaccines. INTERPRETATION: Given with the second mOPV1 dose, fIPV improved intestinal immunity but not humoral immunity. One mOPV1 dose induced higher humoral and intestinal immunity than bOPV. FUNDING: U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Postmarketing Safety Surveillance of a Hexavalent Vaccine in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

We assessed the safety of hexavalent vaccine diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis, inactivated poliovirus, hepatitis b, and haemophilus influenzae b conjugate vaccine in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. Five hundred-one reports of adverse events (AEs) were identified; 21 (4.2%) were serious. Most frequently reported AEs were fever (10.2%) and injection site erythema (5.4%). AEs reported were consistent with findings from prelicensure studies.

Effect of maternal immunisation with multivalent vaccines containing inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) on infant IPV immune response: A phase 4, multi-centre randomised trial.

Multivalent diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis and inactivated poliovirus vaccine (DTaP/IPV) has been offered to pregnant women in the United Kingdom since 2012. To assess the impact of maternal DTaP/IPV immunisation on the infant immune response to IPV, we measured poliovirus-specific neutralising antibodies at 2, 5 and 13 months of age in a randomised, phase 4 study of Repevax or Boostrix/IPV in pregnancy and in a non-randomised group born to women not given DTaP/IPV in pregnancy. Infants whose mothers received DTaP/IPV were less likely to seroconvert after three IPV doses than those whose mothers did not receive DTaP/IPV. At 13 months of age, 63/110 (57.2 %), 46/108 (42.6 %) and 40/108 (37.0 %) were seropositive to types 1 to 3, compared with 20/22 (90.9 %), 20/22 (90.9 %) and 14/20 (70.0 %) (p-values 0.003, <0.001 and 0.012). UK infants whose mothers are given DTaP/IPV in pregnancy may be insufficiently protected against poliomyelitis until their pre-school booster.

Safety, immunogenicity, and lot-to-lot consistency of a multidose Sabin strain-based inactivated polio vaccine: a phase III, randomized, blinded, positive-control clinical trial in infants aged 2 months.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety, immunogenicity, and lot-to-lot consistency of Sabin strain-based inactivated polio vaccine (sIPV) in a five-dose vial presentation. METHODS: Stage I was an open-label safety observation, in which 72 healthy subjects (including 24 adults, children, and infants each) were given one or three doses of the five-dose vial sIPV; stage II was a randomized, blinded, and positive-control study, in which 1500 infants were randomized at the ratio of 1: 1: 1: 1: 1 into five groups to receive either three doses of the five-dose sIPV three lots, a conventional inactivated poliovirus vaccine, or a single-dose sIPV as controls, for primary immunization. Safety, immunogenicity, and lot-to-lot consistency were assessed. RESULTS: Among 1456 subjects who completed the primary immunization, the geometric mean titer ratios of types 1, 2, and 3 of each pair of lots were all within the equivalence criteria margin (0.67-1.50). The seroconversion rates of types 1, 2, and 3 in the combined test group were 98.02%, 94.07%, and 98.77%, respectively, which were noninferior to both control groups. The overall incidence of adverse reactions was 29.68% and erythema was the most common adverse reaction with incidences of 10.47%,9.33%, and 9.73% in the combined test group and control groups (P >0.05). CONCLUSION: The five-dose sIPV demonstrated good safety, immunogenicity, and lot-to-lot consistency.

Immunogenicity and safety of concomitant administration of the chinese inactivated poliovirus vaccine with the diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine in children: A multicenter, randomized, non-inferiority, controlled trial.

Key point: Considering that vaccination with the sIPV and DTaP overlap at the ages of 3 and 4 months in China, to reduce the burden of treatment on parents and increase vaccination coverage rates, we designed a postmarket clinical study of co-administration. Background: The Sabin-strain-based inactivated poliovirus vaccine (sIPV) and the diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis vaccine (DTaP) have been licensed in China for many years. To conduct a clinical study on the safety and immunogenicity of the sIPV when administered concomitantly with the DTaP. Methods: The study population was divided into three groups: group 1 was the sIPV+ DTaP concomitant administration group, group 2 was the sIPV inoculation group, and group 3 was the DTaP inoculation group. Blood samples were collected prevaccination and 30 days postvaccination, and serum antibody levels were detected. Results: This study showed that the seropositive and seroconversion rates of type 1, 2 and 3 poliovirus in group 1 were higher than those in group 2, with no statistically significant difference after vaccination (P>0.05). Groups 1 and 3 also showed similar responses for all vaccine antigens except anti-FHA (97.65 (94.09-99.36) vs. 100 (97.89-100)). The geometric mean titers (GMTs) for the DTaP and sIPV among the groups were comparable, and the non-inferiority t test result was P<0.001. The number of local adverse events (AEs) reported in group 1 (29.91%) were larger than those in group 2 (12.39%) and group 3 (21.93%), among which the most common was redness. Similarly, the most common systemic AE was fever. All 5 severe AE (SAE) cases were determined by experts to be unrelated to the vaccines during the study. Conclusions: The evidence of similar seroconversion and safety with co-administered DTaP and sIPV supports the co-administration supports the introduction of a strategy of simultaneous administration of both vaccines into routine infant immunization, and it could increase vaccination coverage and protect more infants from morbidity and mortality from these related diseases. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04054882?term=NCT04054882&cntry=CN&draw=2&rank=1, identifier NCT04054882.

A combined DTaP-IPV vaccine (Tetraxim®/Tetravac®) used as school-entry booster: a review of more than 20 years of clinical and post-marketing experience.

INTRODUCTION: Routine infant primary series and toddler booster vaccination are associated with waning of antibody levels over time, which can lead to an increased incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases. A diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) booster vaccination at school-entry (aged 4-7 years) allows continued protection against these diseases and is included in many national immunization programs. AREAS COVERED: The available immunogenicity and safety data from 6 clinical studies of a diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis-inactivated poliovirus vaccine (DTaP-IPV [Tetraxim®]) used as a school-entry booster vaccination were identified using a PubMed search or on file at Sanofi. The studies spanned a 15-year period (1995-2010) and were performed in different populations using different study designs, so all data were reviewed descriptively (no meta-analyses were conducted). Additionally, post-marketing experience was reviewed. EXPERT OPINION: Each vaccine antigen is highly immunogenic, and the safety profile of the vaccine is satisfactory. Post-marketing evaluations have shown the effectiveness of a school-age booster, particularly against increased pertussis disease incidence around the time of school entry and the associated risk of spreading the disease through contact with younger vulnerable infants. School-entry provides an ideal opportunity to implement DTaP-IPV vaccination to close the gap between waning immunity from the previous infant/toddler vaccination and future adolescent vaccination.

Severe immune thrombocytopenia following diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio vaccination in a 36-year-old Caucasian woman: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is a rare autoimmune disorder characterized by low platelet counts and increased bleeding risk. The disease may be induced by other disorders, including malignancies, autoimmune diseases, infectious agents or drugs. However, ITP has also been described following vaccinations, such as the measles-mumps-rubella vaccination. In rare cases, ITP may occur in children who received a DTaP-IP (diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis vaccine and inactivated poliovirus) vaccine. Hereinafter, we report the first well-documented cases of ITP in an adult patient in the temporal context of a DTaP-IP vaccination. CASE PRESENTATION: This case report attempts to capture the life-threatening picture of a 36-year-old otherwise healthy Caucasian woman with newly diagnosed severe immune thrombocytopenia in the temporal context of a DTaP-IP vaccination. Four days after receiving the vaccine, the women presented to her primary care physician with malaise, fever and recurrent epistaxis. Clinical examination revealed oral petechiae, ecchymoses, and non-palpable petechiae on both legs. The patient was immediately referred to a local hematology unit where she developed hematuria and an intestinal bleeding (WHO Bleeding Grade III) requiring multiple transfusions. After receiving oral corticosteroids and intravenous immunoglobulins, her platelets gradually recovered. Common causes of secondary ITP were ruled out by laboratory investigations, bone marrow and peripheral blood examinations. This raises the possibility of a (secondary) vaccination-associated thrombocytopenia. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first well-documented case of a DTaP-IP vaccination-related ITP in an adult patient in the English literature. CONCLUSION: Although a causal connection between both entities may not be established, we would like to raise awareness in clinicians that ITP following DTaP-IP vaccinations is potentially not limited to children, but may also occur in adults. Users of DTaP-IP booster vaccines should be alert of the possibility of such adverse reactions.

Effects of maternal antibodies in infants on the immunogenicity and safety of inactivated polio vaccine in infants.

The presence of maternal poliovirus antibodies may interfere with the immune response to inactivated polio vaccine (IPV), and its influence on the safety of vaccination is not yet understood. A total of 1146 eligible infants were randomly assigned (1:1) to the IPV and Sabin IPV (SIPV) groups to compare and analyze the efficacy of the two vaccines in preventing poliovirus infection. We pooled the SIPV and IPV groups and reclassified them into the maternal poliovirus antibody-positive group (MAPG; ≥1: 8) and the maternal poliovirus antibody-negative group (MANG; <1: 8). We evaluated the impact of maternal poliovirus antibodies by comparing the geometric mean titer (GMT), seroconversion rate, and geometric mean increase (GMI) of types I-III poliovirus neutralizing antibodies post-vaccination, and incidence rates of adverse reactions following vaccination between the MAPG and MANG. Respective seroconversion rates in the MAPG and MANG were 94% and 100%, 79.27% and 100%, and 93.26% and 100% (all serotypes, P < .01) for types I-III poliovirus, respectively. The GMT of all types of poliovirus antibodies in the MAPG (1319.13, 219.91, 764.11, respectively) were significantly lower than those in the MANG (1584.92, 286.73, 899.59, respectively) (P < .05). The GMI in the MAPG was significantly lower than that in the MANG (P < .05). No statistically significant difference in the incidence of local and systemic adverse reactions was observed between the MAPG and MANG. Thus, the presence of maternal poliovirus antibodies does not affect the safety of IPV but can negatively impact the immune responses in infants after IPV vaccination.

Surveillance on the adverse events following immunization with the pentavalent vaccine in Zhejiang, China.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to describe the reporting rate of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) with pentavalent vaccine: diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus-poliomyelitis-Haemophilus influenzae type b (DPT-IPV/Hib), and to determine whether the reporting rate of AEFI following DPT-IPV/Hib was higher than the average level of the other vaccines. METHODS: Review and describe the AEFI reported to national adverse event following immunization surveillance system (NAEFISS) in Zhejiang province from 2015 to 2020. Reporting rates of AEFI were calculated by age, city, severity of AEFI, categories of AEFI, and reaction categories. The data mining algorithm used in this study was reporting odds ratio (ROR). A value of ROR­1.96SE >1 (standard error [SE]) was considered as positive signal. RESULTS: NAEFISS received 5726 AEFI reports following DTP-IPV/Hib, with a reporting rate of 20.01/10000 doses. Of the reported AEFI, 202 were serious vaccine product-related reactions, including two cases of anaphylactic shock, five cases of Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS) and two cases of acute disseminated encephalomyelitis. The reporting rate of fever/redness/induration was the highest among all the clinical diagnosis (14.97/10000 doses). The positive signals were obtained for allergic rash (ROR-1.96SE: 1.36), febrile convulsion (ROR-1.96SE: 1.32) and GBS (ROR-1.96SE: 1.16). CONCLUSION: The present findings bolstered that the DTP-IPV/Hib administered as the four-dose schedule was generally well tolerated in Chinese infants as we did not identify any new/unexpected safety concern from the NAEFISS during a six-year timespan.

Safety evaluation of the DTaP5-IPV-Hib-HepB vaccine: a review.

INTRODUCTION: The DTaP5-IPV-Hib-HepB vaccine is the most recently approved combination hexavalent vaccine. In Europe, it is licensed since 2016 for primary and booster vaccination in infants and toddlers above the age of 6 weeks to provide active immunization against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, poliomyelitis, invasive diseases caused by Haemophilus influenzae type b and hepatitis B. In the US, DTaP5-IPV-Hib-HepB is approved since 2018 in children 6 weeks through 4 years of age. Its safety profile has been extensively documented in infants and children born at term, and also data in preterm infants are made available. AREAS COVERED: In this article, we conducted a safety evaluation of the DTaP5-IPV-Hib-HepB vaccine in infants and toddlers considering evidence from clinical trials and post-marketing use, also with regard to data on special populations e.g. preterm infants. EXPERT OPINION: Based on the available data, the DTaP5-IPV-Hib-HepB vaccine has demonstrated a good safety profile, similar to that of other approved penta- and hexavalent vaccines. Rather, post-marketing data are limited and are frequently reported in combination with other hexavalent vaccines or are not adjusted for shares of vaccines use. Neither relevant interferences with other co-administered pediatric vaccines nor safety issues in premature infants have been shown.

Risk factors for the spread of vaccine-derived type 2 polioviruses after global withdrawal of trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine and the effects of outbreak responses with monovalent vaccine: a retrospective analysis of surveillance data for 51 countries in Africa.

BACKGROUND: Expanding outbreaks of circulating vaccine-derived type 2 poliovirus (cVDPV2) across Africa after the global withdrawal of trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) in 2016 are delaying global polio eradication. We aimed to assess the effect of outbreak response campaigns with monovalent type 2 OPV (mOPV2) and the addition of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) to routine immunisation. METHODS: We used vaccination history data from children under 5 years old with non-polio acute flaccid paralysis from a routine surveillance database (the Polio Information System) and setting-specific OPV immunogenicity data from the literature to estimate OPV-induced and IPV-induced population immunity against type 2 poliomyelitis between Jan 1, 2015, and June 30, 2020, for 51 countries in Africa. We investigated risk factors for reported cVDPV2 poliomyelitis including population immunity, outbreak response activities, and correlates of poliovirus transmission using logistic regression. We used the model to estimate cVDPV2 risk for each 6-month period between Jan 1, 2016, and June 30, 2020, with different numbers of mOPV2 campaigns and compared the timing and location of actual mOPV2 campaigns and the number of mOPV2 campaigns required to reduce cVDPV2 risk to low levels. FINDINGS: Type 2 OPV immunity among children under 5 years declined from a median of 87% (IQR 81-93) in January-June, 2016 to 14% (9-37) in January-June, 2020. Type 2 immunity from IPV among children under 5 years increased from 3% (<1-6%) in January-June, 2016 to 35% (24-47) in January-June, 2020. The probability of cVDPV2 poliomyelitis among children under 5 years was negatively correlated with OPV-induced and IPV-induced immunity and mOPV2 campaigns (adjusted odds ratio: OPV 0·68 [95% CrI 0·60-0·76], IPV 0·82 [0·68-0·99] per 10% absolute increase in estimated population immunity, mOPV2 0·30 [0·20-0·44] per campaign). Vaccination campaigns in response to cVDPV2 outbreaks have been smaller and slower than our model shows would be necessary to reduce risk to low levels, covering only 11% of children under 5 years who are predicted to be at risk within 6 months and only 56% within 12 months. INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that as mucosal immunity declines, larger or faster responses with vaccination campaigns using type 2-containing OPV will be required to stop cVDPV2 transmission. IPV-induced immunity also has an important role in reducing the burden of cVDPV2 poliomyelitis in Africa. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Medical Research Council Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, and WHO. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Safety and Immunogenicity of a New Inactivated Polio Vaccine Made From Sabin Strains: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Active-Controlled, Phase 2/3 Seamless Study.

BACKGROUND: A new inactivated polio vaccine made from Sabin strains (sIPV) was developed as part of the global polio eradication initiative. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 2/3 seamless study was conducted in 2 stages. Healthy infants aged 6 weeks were randomly assigned to receive 3 doses of 1 of 4 study vaccines at 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age (336 received low-, middle-, or high-dose sIPV, or conventional IPV [cIPV] in stage I, and 1086 received lot A, B, or C of the selected sIPV dose, or cIPV in stage II). The primary outcome was the seroconversion rate 4 weeks after the third vaccination. RESULTS: In stage I, low-dose sIPV was selected as the optimal dose. In stage II, consistency among the 3 manufacturing lots of sIPV was demonstrated. The seroconversion rates for Sabin and wild strains of the 3 serotypes after the 3-dose primary series were 95.8% to 99.2% in the lot-combined sIPV group and 94.8% to 100% in the cIPV group, proving the noninferiority of sIPV compared to cIPV. No notable safety risks associated with sIPV were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose sIPV administered as a 3-dose vaccination was safe and immunogenic compared to cIPV. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03169725.

Adverse events following immunization with bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine in Jiangsu, China.

AIMS: The bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (bOPV; Sabin types 1 and 3) replaced the trivalent OPV (Sabin types 1, 2 and 3) globally in April 2016. A routine schedule of 1 dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine and 3 subsequent doses of bOPV was implemented in Jiangsu simultaneously. The schedule was changed to 2 inactivated poliovirus vaccines + 2 bOPV on 1 September 2019. Although OPV type 2 has been removed, challenges persist because of adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) with bOPV. Therefore, we analysed and evaluated the safety profile of bOPV administered in children based on passive postmarketing AEFI surveillance. METHODS: We collected all bOPV-related AEFI reports in Jiangsu from the Chinese National AEFI Information System (CNAEFIS) between May 2016 and April 2020. We obtained the administered doses of bOPV from the Jiangsu Provincial Electronic Immunization Registries System. A descriptive analysis was performed. RESULTS: In total, 2084 bOPV-related AEFIs were retrieved from the CNAEFIS. The overall reporting rate was 24.16 per 100 000 doses. Most AEFIs were nonserious. The most frequently reported symptoms were fever, rash and gastrointestinal disorders. Only 1.34% of AEFIs were serious, which thrombocytopenic purpura accounted for the largest category. Seventeen serious adverse events, including 2 vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP) cases, were considered to be related to bOPV vaccination. The rate of VAPP was 0.2 per million doses. CONCLUSION: AEFI analysis showed that bOPV was well tolerated. The events most frequently reported were nonserious. However, bOPV can still cause VAPP. Attention should be given to risks related to bOPV.

Immunogenicity and safety of sabin-strain based inactivated poliovirus vaccine replacing salk-strain based inactivated poliovirus vaccine: An innovative application of different strain-IPVs replacement.

BACKGROUND: A domestic Sabin strain-based inactivated poliovirus vaccine (Sabin IPV) was approved by China Food and Drug Administration in 2017 as a replacement for the Salk strain-based inactivated poliovirus vaccine (Salk IPV) that has been in use in China for over 10 years. The present post-marketing trial was implemented in China to assess the immunogenicity and safety of replacing the Salk IPV with the Sabin IPV in the last two immunizations of the standard three-dose schedule. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, controlled clinical trial with two groups that received three doses of IPVs at the age of 2, 3, and 4 months: the Salk-Sabin-Sabin group and the Salk-Salk-Salk group. Blood samples were collected before vaccination and 30-40 days after the third dose of vaccination. The seroconversion rates and antibody geometric mean titers (GMTs) were calculated and analyzed to evaluate immunogenicity. The safety of both immunization schedules was also monitored and analyzed. RESULTS: Of 360 recruited healthy infants, all three IPV doses were administered and blood collection was completed in 330 infants. All participants (100%) in both groups were seropositive for all three poliovirus types after the last vaccination. There were significant differences between the two groups (P < 0.001) in the GMTs for antibodies against poliovirus types 1 and 2, but no significant difference was observed for antibodies against type 3 (P = 0.009). A non-inferiority t-test showed that the post-immunization GMTs for all three types in the Salk-Sabin-Sabin group were not inferior to those in the Salk-Salk-Salk group (P < 0.001). Safety assessment indicated that there was no significant difference in the incidence of all adverse events between the two groups (P = 0.806). CONCLUSIONS: The Salk-Sabin-Sabin IPV immunization schedule is not inferior to the Salk-Salk-Salk IPV schedule in terms of both immunogenicity and safety. Clinical trial number: NCT04051736.

Hexavalent vaccines in infants: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of the solicited local and systemic adverse reactions of two hexavalent vaccines.

Introduction: The hexavalent vaccine DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib (Infanrix hexa, GSK) was first licensed in Europe in 2000. DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib (Hexyon/Hexacima/Hexaxim, Sanofi Pasteur), and DT5aP-HBV-IPV-Hib (Vaxelis, MCM Vaccine Company) were licensed in the EU in 2013 and 2016, respectively, based largely on studies demonstrating non-inferiority to DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib for immunogenicity and comparable reactogenicity profiles.Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review looking for direct head-to-head trials comparing DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib and DT5aP-HBV-IPV-Hib with DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib. The incidence of solicited local and systemic reactions following primary series administration of DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib or DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib were meta-analyzed.Results: A total of 317 unique records were retrieved from the search; nine met the predefined inclusion criteria; seven reported studies comparing DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib and DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib. Six trials assessing outcomes of the primary vaccination series were identified. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (OR; 95%CI) were computed for DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib, using DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib as reference, for redness (0.72; 0.63-0.83), pain (0.74; 0.62-0.89), swelling (0.86; 0.74-0.99) at injection site, fever (0.67; 0.54-0.83), persistent crying (0.72; 0.61-0.84), drowsiness (0.82; 0.71-0.94), irritability (0.82; 0.69-0.98), anorexia (0.83; 0.72-0.95), and vomiting (0.96; 0.83-1.11).Conclusion: ORs of analyzed local and systemic solicited adverse reactions after primary vaccination with DT3aP-HBV-IPV-Hib appear to be slightly lower than with DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib.