Dataset Information

Comparison of two control groups for estimation of oral cholera vaccine effectiveness using a case-control study design.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Case-control studies to quantify oral cholera vaccine effectiveness (VE) often rely on neighbors without diarrhea as community controls. Test-negative controls can be easily recruited and may minimize bias due to differential health-seeking behavior and recall. We compared VE estimates derived from community and test-negative controls and conducted bias-indicator analyses to assess potential bias with community controls. METHODS:From October 2012 through November 2016, patients with acute watery diarrhea were recruited from cholera treatment centers in rural Haiti. Cholera cases had a positive stool culture. Non-cholera diarrhea cases (test-negative controls and non-cholera diarrhea cases for bias-indicator analyses) had a negative culture and rapid test. Up to four community controls were matched to diarrhea cases by age group, time, and neighborhood. RESULTS:Primary analyses included 181 cholera cases, 157 non-cholera diarrhea cases, 716 VE community controls and 625 bias-indicator community controls. VE for self-reported vaccination with two doses was consistent across the two control groups, with statistically significant VE estimates ranging from 72 to 74%. Sensitivity analyses revealed similar, though somewhat attenuated estimates for self-reported two dose VE. Bias-indicator estimates were consistently less than one, with VE estimates ranging from 19 to 43%, some of which were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS:OCV estimates from case-control analyses using community and test-negative controls were similar. While bias-indicator analyses suggested possible over-estimation of VE estimates using community controls, test-negative analyses suggested this bias, if present, was minimal. Test-negative controls can be a valid low-cost and time-efficient alternative to community controls for OCV effectiveness estimation and may be especially relevant in emergency situations.

SUBMITTER: Franke MF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5661944 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of two control groups for estimation of oral cholera vaccine effectiveness using a case-control study design.

Franke Molly F MF Jerome J Gregory JG Matias Wilfredo R WR Ternier Ralph R Hilaire Isabelle J IJ Harris Jason B JB Ivers Louise C LC

Vaccine 20170912 43

<h4>Background</h4>Case-control studies to quantify oral cholera vaccine effectiveness (VE) often rely on neighbors without diarrhea as community controls. Test-negative controls can be easily recruited and may minimize bias due to differential health-seeking behavior and recall. We compared VE estimates derived from community and test-negative controls and conducted bias-indicator analyses to assess potential bias with community controls.<h4>Methods</h4>From October 2012 through November 2016, ...[more]

PMID: 28916247

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNo study of long-term protection following killed oral cholera vaccination has been done outside of the historically cholera-endemic areas of south Asia, or has examined protection after a single-dose vaccination regimen. To address this, we examined the duration of protection of the standard two-dose regimen and an incomplete regimen of one dose up to 4 years after vaccination in Haiti.MethodsIn the setting of two-dose vaccination campaigns with a killed, bivalent, whole-cell oral cholera vaccination, we did a case-control study from October, 2012 through November, 2016. Eligible participants were required to be resident in the vaccine catchment area (Artibonite Department or Central Department) where they were recruited at the start of the study; and be eligible for the vaccination campaign (ie, aged ≥12 months, not pregnant, and living in the region at the time of the vaccine campaign). Patients with cholera had a positive stool culture and were recruited from cholera treatment centres. Community controls were matched to people with cholera by age group, time, and neighbourhood. We did adjusted matched regression analyses to calculate vaccine effectiveness and examine heterogeneity in effectiveness over time. The primary outcome was the effectiveness of one and two oral cholera doses as compared with zero doses from 2 months to 48 months after vaccination, measured by self reporting.FindingsAmong 178 people assigned to the case group and 706 people assigned to the control group, we found no evidence that two-dose effectiveness decreased during follow-up. In adjusted analyses, the average cumulative 4 year effectiveness for two doses was 76% (95% CI 59-86). In contrast, single-dose effectiveness decreased over time in a log-linear fashion, with a predicted vaccine effectiveness of 79% at the end of 12 months (95% CI 43-93), which declined to zero before the end of the second year.InterpretationIn a setting of epidemic and newly endemic cholera in Haiti, single-dose vaccination with killed, bivalent, whole-cell oral cholera vaccination provided short-term protection; however, vaccination with two doses was required for long-term protection, which lasted up to 4 years after vaccination. These results add to the evidence in support of the use of killed, bivalent, whole-cell oral cholera vaccination as part of comprehensive cholera control plans.FundingUS National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundAfghanistan is one of two countries with endemic wild poliovirus type 1 (WPV1). The oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) is the predominant vaccine used for polio eradication. Although OPV has been administered in routine childhood immunization and during frequent supplementary immunization activities, WPV1 continues to circulate in Afghanistan and case incidence has been increasing since 2017. We estimated the effectiveness of OPV in Afghanistan during 2010-2020.MethodsWe conducted a matched case-control analysis using acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) surveillance data from 29,370 children < 15 years with AFP onset between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2020. We matched children with confirmed WPV1 (cases) with children with non-polio AFP (controls) by age at onset of paralysis (+/- 3 months), date of onset of paralysis (+/- 3 months), and province of residence, and compared their reported OPV vaccination history to estimate the effectiveness of OPV in preventing paralysis by WPV1 using conditional logistic regression. To account for changes in OPV formulations provided over the analysis period, we stratified the analysis based on dates of the global switch from trivalent OPV (tOPV) to bivalent OPV (bOPV) in April 2016.ResultsBetween January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2020, there were 329 WPV1 cases in Afghanistan. The per-dose estimated effectiveness of OPV against WPV1 was 19% (95% CI: 15%-22%) and of ≥ 7 doses was 94% (95% CI: 90%-97%). Before the global switch from tOPV to bOPV, the per-dose estimated effectiveness of OPV was 14% (95% CI: 11%-18%) and of ≥ 7 doses was 92% (95% CI: 85%-96%). After the switch, the per-dose estimated effectiveness of OPV against WPV1 was 32% (24%-39%) and of ≥ 7 doses was 96% (95% CI: 90%-99%).DiscussionOPV is highly effective in preventing paralysis by WPV1; these results indicate that continued WPV1 transmission in Afghanistan is due to failure to vaccinate, not failure of the vaccine. Although difficult to implement in parts of country, improving the administration of OPV in routine immunization and supplementary immunization activities will be critical for achieving polio eradication in Afghanistan.

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.

Dataset Information

Comparison of two control groups for estimation of oral cholera vaccine effectiveness using a case-control study design.

Publications

Comparison of two control groups for estimation of oral cholera vaccine effectiveness using a case-control study design.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets