Oral cholera vaccine development and use in Vietnam.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Anh DD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4151976 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundKilled oral cholera vaccines (OCVs) are available but not used routinely for cholera control except in Vietnam, which produces its own vaccine. In 2007-2008, unprecedented cholera outbreaks occurred in the capital, Hanoi, prompting immunization in two districts. In an outbreak investigation, we assessed the effectiveness of killed OCV use after a cholera outbreak began.Methodology/principal findingsFrom 16 to 28 January 2008, vaccination campaigns with the Vietnamese killed OCV were held in two districts of Hanoi. No cholera cases were detected from 5 February to 4 March 2008, after which cases were again identified. Beginning 8 April 2008, residents of four districts of Hanoi admitted to one of five hospitals for acute diarrhea with onset after 5 March 2008 were recruited for a matched, hospital-based, case-control outbreak investigation. Cases were matched by hospital, admission date, district, gender, and age to controls admitted for non-diarrheal conditions. Subjects from the two vaccinated districts were evaluated to determine vaccine effectiveness. 54 case-control pairs from the vaccinated districts were included in the analysis. There were 8 (15%) and 16 (30%) vaccine recipients among cases and controls, respectively. The vaccine was 76% protective against cholera in this setting (95% CI 5% to 94%, P?=?0.042) after adjusting for intake of dog meat or raw vegetables and not drinking boiled or bottled water most of the time.Conclusions/significanceThis is the first study to explore the effectiveness of the reactive use of killed OCVs during a cholera outbreak. Our findings suggest that killed OCVs may have a role in controlling cholera outbreaks.
| S-EPMC3026769 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cholera is both an endemic and epidemic disease in many low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Strategies for cholera control include improving water, sanitation, and hygiene; providing early and effective treatment; and deploying oral cholera vaccine (OCV). This last strategy is relatively new, and countries considering its introduction are interested in knowing the potential cost not only of the vaccine, but also the cost of introduction. This paper describes the costing of OCV introduction in LMICs using a publicly available Excel-based tool known as the CholTool. It includes estimates of delivery cost categories which cover not only the service delivery costs (e.g. vaccine procurement, handling, storage, and transport; vaccination administration, monitoring supervision, and field support), but also the programmatic costs associated with introducing a new vaccine (i.e. microplanning, communication and training materials development, sensitization/social mobilization, and personnel training) to ensure that a comprehensive estimate is provided with health payer perspective. CholTool takes the user through a structured sequence of interlinked modules containing input parameter cells (assumptions), decision cells (variable selections), and formulas (calculations) to produce customized cost estimates based on standardized methods. The tool provides both financial and economic cost estimates, to ensure that both costs are available for consideration. Four examples of applications of CholTool are presented in three countries- one in Ethiopia, two in Malawi and one in Nepal. The estimates of economic delivery cost per dose (including service delivery and programmatic costs) were (in USD 2016): $2.89 in Ethiopia, $3.04 in Malawi1, $3.35 in Malawi2 and $3.06 in Nepal. A cost projection conducted before the campaign using the tool and a retrospective costing using the tool in Nepal resulted in no significant difference between economic delivery costs per dose.
| S-EPMC8641596 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oral cholera vaccines (OCVs) have been recommended in cholera-endemic settings and preemptively during outbreaks and complex emergencies. However, experience and guidelines for reactive use after an outbreak has started are limited. In 2010, after over a century without epidemic cholera, an outbreak was reported in Haiti after an earthquake. As intensive nonvaccine cholera control measures were initiated, the feasibility of OCV use was considered. We reviewed OCV characteristics and recommendations for their use and assessed global vaccine availability and capacity to implement a vaccination campaign. Real-time modeling was conducted to estimate vaccine impact. Ultimately, cholera vaccination was not implemented because of limited vaccine availability, complex logistical and operational challenges of a multidose regimen, and obstacles to conducting a campaign in a setting with population displacement and civil unrest. Use of OCVs is an option for cholera control; guidelines for their appropriate use in epidemic and emergency settings are urgently needed.
| S-EPMC3310586 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the quality and coverage of the campaign to distribute oral cholera vaccine (OCV) during a cholera outbreak in Hoima, Uganda to guide future campaigns of cholera vaccine.DesignSurvey of communities targeted for vaccination to determine vaccine coverage rates and perceptions of the vaccination campaign, and a separate survey of vaccine staff who carried out the campaign.SettingHoima district, Uganda.ParticipantsRepresentative clusters of households residing in the communities targeted for vaccination and staff members who conducted the vaccine campaign.ResultsAmong 209 households (1274 individuals) included in the coverage survey, 1193 (94%; 95% CI 92% to 95%) reported receiving at least one OCV dose and 998 (78%; 95% CI 76% to 81%) reported receiving two doses. Among vaccinated individuals, minor complaints were reported by 71 persons (5.6%). Individuals with 'some' education (primary school or above) were more knowledgeable regarding the required OCV doses compared with non-educated (p=0.03). Factors negatively associated with campaign implementation included community sensitisation time, staff payment and problems with field transport. Although the campaign was carried out quickly, the outbreak was over before the campaign started. Most staff involved in the campaign (93%) were knowledgeable about cholera control; however, 29% did not clearly understand how to detect and manage adverse events following immunisation.ConclusionThe campaign achieved high OCV coverage, but the surveys provided insights for improvement. To achieve high vaccine coverage, more effort is needed for community sensitisation, and additional resources for staff transportation and timely payment for campaign staff is required. Pretest and post-test assessment of staff training can identify and address knowledge and skill gaps.
| S-EPMC7733212 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vibrio cholerae is a prototypical noninvasive mucosal pathogen, yet infection generates long-lasting protection against subsequent disease. Vibriocidal antibody responses are an imperfect but established correlate of protection against cholera following both infection and vaccination. However, vibriocidal antibody responses are likely a surrogate marker for longer-lasting functional immune responses that target the O-polysaccharide antigen at the mucosal surface. While the current bivalent inactivated oral whole cell vaccine is being increasingly used to prevent cholera in areas where the disease is a threat, the most significant limitation of this vaccine is it offers relatively limited direct protection in young children. Future strategies for cholera vaccination include the development of cholera conjugate vaccines and the further development of live attenuated vaccines. Ultimately, the goal of a multivalent vaccine for cholera and other childhood enteric infections that can be incorporated into a standard immunization schedule should be realized.
| S-EPMC6188552 | biostudies-other
Project description:World Health Organization recommends oral cholera vaccine (OCV) to prevent and control cholera, but requires cost-effectiveness evidence. This review aimed to provide a critical appraisal and summary of global economic evaluation (EE) studies involving OCV to guide future EE study. Full EE studies, published from inception to December 2015, evaluating OCV against cholera disease were included. The included studies were appraised using WHO guide for standardization of EE of immunization programs. Out of 14 included studies, almost all (13/14) were in low- and middle-income countries. Most studies (11/14) evaluated mass vaccination program. Most of the studies (9/14) incorporated herd protective effect. The most common influential parameters were cholera incidence, OCV coverage, herd protection and OCV price. OCV vaccination is likely to be cost-effective when targeted at the population with high-risk of cholera and poor access to health care facilities when herd protection effect is incorporated and OCV price is low.
| S-EPMC5806687 | biostudies-other
Project description:The O1 serogroup of Vibrio cholerae causes pandemic cholera and is divided into the Ogawa and Inaba serotypes. The O-antigen is V. cholerae's immunodominant antigen, and the two serotypes, which differ by the presence or absence of a terminally methylated O-antigen, likely influence development of immunity to cholera and oral cholera vaccines (OCVs). However, there is no consensus regarding the relative immunological potency of each serotype, in part because previous studies relied on genetically heterogeneous strains. Here, we engineered matched serotype variants of a live OCV candidate, HaitiV, and used a germfree mouse model to evaluate the immunogenicity and protective efficacy of each vaccine serotype. By combining vibriocidal antibody quantification with single- and mixed-strain infection assays, we found that all three HaitiV variants-InabaV, OgawaV, and HikoV (bivalent Inaba/Ogawa)-were immunogenic and protective. None of the vaccine serotypes were superior across both of these vaccine metrics, suggesting that the impact of O1-serotype variation in OCV design, although detectable, is subtle. However, all three live vaccines significantly outperformed formalin-killed HikoV, supporting the idea that live OCV usage will bolster current cholera control practices. The potency of OCVs was found to be challenge strain-dependent, emphasizing the importance of appropriate strain selection for cholera challenge studies. Our findings and experimental approaches will be valuable for guiding the development of live OCVs and oral vaccines for additional pathogens.
| S-EPMC7896348 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn June 2015, a cholera outbreak was declared in Juba, South Sudan. In addition to standard outbreak control measures, oral cholera vaccine (OCV) was proposed. As sufficient doses to cover the at-risk population were unavailable, a campaign using half the standard dosing regimen (one-dose) targeted high-risk neighborhoods and groups including neighbors of suspected cases. Here we report the operational details of this first public health use of a single-dose regimen of OCV and illustrate the feasibility of conducting highly targeted vaccination campaigns in an urban area.Methodology/principal findingsNeighborhoods of the city were prioritized for vaccination based on cumulative attack rates, active transmission and local knowledge of known cholera risk factors. OCV was offered to all persons older than 12 months at 20 fixed sites and to select groups, including neighbors of cholera cases after the main campaign ('case-triggered' interventions), through mobile teams. Vaccination coverage was estimated by multi-stage surveys using spatial sampling techniques. 162,377 individuals received a single-dose of OCV in the targeted neighborhoods. In these neighborhoods vaccine coverage was 68.8% (95% Confidence Interval (CI), 64.0-73.7) and was highest among children ages 5-14 years (90.0%, 95% CI 85.7-94.3), with adult men being less likely to be vaccinated than adult women (Relative Risk 0.81, 95% CI: 0.68-0.96). In the case-triggered interventions, each lasting 1-2 days, coverage varied (range: 30-87%) with an average of 51.0% (95% CI 41.7-60.3).Conclusions/significanceVaccine supply constraints and the complex realities where cholera outbreaks occur may warrant the use of flexible alternative vaccination strategies, including highly-targeted vaccination campaigns and single-dose regimens. We showed that such campaigns are feasible. Additional work is needed to understand how and when to use different strategies to best protect populations against epidemic cholera.
| S-EPMC5478158 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn April 2016, an emergency vaccination campaign using one dose of Oral Cholera Vaccine (OCV) was organized in response to a cholera outbreak that started in Lusaka in February 2016. In December 2016, a second round of vaccination was conducted, with the objective of increasing the duration of protection, before the high-risk period for cholera transmission. We assessed vaccination coverage for the first and second rounds of the OCV campaign.MethodsVaccination coverage was estimated after each round from a sample selected from targeted-areas for vaccination using a cross-sectional survey in to establish the vaccination status of the individuals recruited. The study population included all individuals older than 12 months residing in the areas targeted for vaccination. We interviewed 505 randomly selected individuals after the first round and 442 after the second round. Vaccination status was ascertained either by vaccination card or verbal reporting. Households were selected using spatial random sampling.ResultsThe vaccination coverage with two doses was 58.1% (25/43; 95%CI: 42.1-72.9) in children 1-5 years old, 59.5% (69/116; 95%CI: 49.9-68.5) in children 5-15 years old and 19.9% (56/281; 95%CI: 15.4-25.1) in adults above 15 years old. The overall dropout rate was 10.9% (95%CI: 8.1-14.1). Overall, 69.9% (n = 309/442; 95%CI: 65.4-74.1) reported to have received at least one OCV dose.ConclusionsThe areas at highest risk of suffering cholera outbreaks were targeted for vaccination obtaining relatively high vaccine coverage after each round. However, the long delay between doses in areas subject to considerable population movement resulted in many individuals receiving only one OCV dose. Additional vaccination campaigns may be required to sustain protection over time in case of persistence of risk. Further evidence is needed to establish a maximum optimal interval time of a delayed second dose and variations in different settings.
| S-EPMC6716633 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Oral cholera vaccination protects against cholera; however, responses in young children are low and of short duration. The best current correlates of protection against cholera target Vibrio cholerae O-specific polysaccharide (anti-OSP), including vibriocidal responses. A cholera conjugate vaccine has been developed that induces anti-OSP immune responses, including memory B-cell responses. To address whether cholera conjugate vaccine would boost immune responses following oral cholera vaccination, we immunized mice with oral cholera vaccine Inaba CVD 103-HgR or buffer only (placebo) on day 0, followed by parenteral boosting immunizations on days 14, 42, and 70 with cholera conjugate vaccine Inaba OSP: recombinant tetanus toxoid heavy chain fragment or phosphate buffered saline (PBS)/placebo. Compared with responses in mice immunized with oral vaccine alone or intramuscular cholera conjugate vaccine alone, mice receiving combination vaccination developed significantly higher vibriocidal, IgM OSP-specific serum responses and OSP-specific IgM memory B-cell responses. A combined vaccination approach, which includes oral cholera vaccination followed by parenteral cholera conjugate vaccine boosting, results in increased immune responses that have been associated with protection against cholera. These results suggest that such an approach should be evaluated in humans.
| S-EPMC8176512 | biostudies-literature