Effect of Inactivated Poliovirus Vaccine Campaigns, Pakistan, 2014-2017.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Grassly NC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6200014 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:In 2014, inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) campaigns were implemented in Nigeria and Pakistan after clinical trials showed that IPV boosts intestinal immunity in children previously given oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV). We estimated the effect of these campaigns by using surveillance data collected during January 2014-April 2016. In Nigeria, campaigns with IPV and trivalent OPV (tOPV) substantially reduced the incidence of poliomyelitis caused by circulating serotype-2 vaccine-derived poliovirus (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.17 for 90 days after vs. 90 days before campaigns, 95% CI 0.04-0.78) and the prevalence of virus in environmental samples (prevalence ratio [PR] 0.16, 95% CI 0.02-1.33). Campaigns with tOPV alone resulted in similar reductions (IRR 0.59, 95% CI 0.18-1.97; PR 0.45, 95% CI 0.21-0.95). In Pakistan, the effect of IPV+tOPV campaigns on wild-type poliovirus was not significant. Results suggest that administration of IPV alongside OPV can decrease poliovirus transmission if high vaccine coverage is achieved.
| S-EPMC5324799 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFractional dose (one-fifth of full intramuscular dose) of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (fIPV) administered intradermally is used as IPV dose-sparing strategy. We compared the rate of decline of poliovirus antibodies (PVA) in recipients of 2 doses of fIPV or IPV.MethodsA community-based randomized controlled trial was conducted in Karachi, Pakistan. Children aged 14 weeks were randomized into fIPV or full IPV (study arms A, B) and received 1 vaccine dose at age 14 weeks and 1 at age 9 months. PVAs were measured at age 14, 18 weeks and 10, 21 months.ResultsSeroprevalence of poliovirus type 2 antibodies in 170/250 (68%) children after 2 IPV or fIPV doses at age 10 months in A and B reached 100% vs 99% (P = .339), and at 21 months, 86% vs 67% (P = .004). Between age 10 and 21 months antibody log2 titers dropped from ≥ 10.5 to 6.8 in A and from 9.2 to 3.7 in B.ConclusionsThere was a significant decline in antibody titers 12 months following the second IPV dose. The slope of decline was similar for full IPV and fIPV recipients. The results provide further evidence that fIPV is a viable option for IPV dose-sparing.Clinical trials registrationNCT03286803.
| S-EPMC8030725 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The eradication of poliovirus from the majority of the world has been achieved through the use of two vaccines: the inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) and the live-attenuated oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV). Both vaccines are effective at preventing paralytic poliomyelitis, however, they also have significant differences. Most importantly for this work is the risk of revertant virus from OPV, the greater cost of IPV, and the low mucosal immunity induced by IPV. We and others have previously described the use of an alphavirus-based adjuvant that can induce a mucosal immune response to a co-administered antigen even when delivered at a non-mucosal site. In this report, we describe the use of an alphavirus-based adjuvant (GVI3000) with IPV. The IPV-GVI3000 vaccine significantly increased systemic IgG, mucosal IgG and mucosal IgA antibody responses to all three poliovirus serotypes in mice even when administered intramuscularly. Furthermore, GVI3000 significantly increased the potency of IPV in rat potency tests as measured by poliovirus neutralizing antibodies in serum. Thus, an IPV-GVI3000 vaccine would reduce the dose of IPV needed and provide significantly improved mucosal immunity. This vaccine could be an effective tool to use in the poliovirus eradication campaign without risking the re-introduction of revertant poliovirus derived from OPV.
| S-EPMC3967568 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe conducted a trial in Nigeria to assess the immunogenicity of the new bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine + inactivated poliovirus vaccine (bOPV+IPV) immunization schedule and gains in type 2 immunity with addition of second dose of IPV. The trial was conducted in August 2016-March 2017, well past the trivalent OPV-bOPV switch in April 2016.MethodsThis was an open-label, 2-arm, noninferiority, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. We enrolled 572 infants aged ≤14 days and randomized them into 2 arms. Arm A received bOPV at birth, 6, and 10 weeks, bOPV+IPV at week 14, and IPV at week 18. Arm B received IPV each at 6, 10, and 14 weeks and bOPV at 18 weeks of age.ResultsSeroconversion rates for poliovirus types 1 and 3, respectively, were 98.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 96.7-99.8) and 98.1% (95% CI, 88.2-94.8) in Arm A and 89.6% (95% CI, 85.4-93.0) and 98.5% (95% CI, 96.3-99.6) in Arm B. Type 2 seroconversion with 1 dose IPV in Arm A was 72.0% (95% CI, 66.2-77.3), which increased significantly with addition of second dose to 95.9% (95% CI, 92.8-97.9).ConclusionsThis first trial on the new Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) schedule in a sub-Saharan African country demonstrated excellent immunogenicity against poliovirus types 1 and 3 and substantial/enhanced immunogenicity against poliovirus type 2 after 1 to 2 doses of IPV, respectively.
| S-EPMC9189759 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Intradermal delivery of vaccines has been shown to result in dose sparing. We tested the ability of fractional doses of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) delivered intradermally to induce levels of serum poliovirus-neutralizing antibodies similar to immunization through the intramuscular route. Immunogenicity of fractional doses of IPV was studied by comparing intramuscular and intradermal immunization of Wistar rats using NanoPass MicronJet600 microneedles. Intradermal delivery of partial vaccine doses induced antibodies at titers comparable to those after immunization with full human dose delivered intramuscularly. The results suggest that intradermal delivery of IPV may lead to dose-sparing effect and reduction of the vaccination cost.
| S-EPMC4462654 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) is efficacious against paralytic disease, but its effect on mucosal immunity is debated. We assessed the efficacy of IPV in boosting mucosal immunity. Participants received IPV, bivalent 1 and 3 oral poliovirus vaccine (bOPV), or no vaccine. A bOPV challenge was administered 4 weeks later, and excretion was assessed 3, 7, and 14 days later. Nine hundred and fifty-four participants completed the study. Any fecal shedding of poliovirus type 1 was 8.8, 9.1, and 13.5% in the IPV group and 14.4, 24.1, and 52.4% in the control group by 6- to 11-month, 5-year, and 10-year groups, respectively (IPV versus control: Fisher's exact test P < 0.001). IPV reduced excretion for poliovirus types 1 and 3 between 38.9 and 74.2% and 52.8 and 75.7%, respectively. Thus, IPV in OPV-vaccinated individuals boosts intestinal mucosal immunity.
| S-EPMC10389671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Administration of 1/5th dose of Inactivated poliovirus vaccine intradermally (fIPV) provides similar immune response as full-dose intramuscular IPV, however, fIPV administration with BCG needle and syringe (BCG NS) is technically difficult. We compared immune response after one fIPV dose administered with BCG NS to administration with intradermal devices, referred to as Device A and B; and assessed feasibility of conducting a door-to-door vaccination campaign with fIPV. In Phase I, 452 children 6-12months old from Karachi were randomized to receive one fIPV dose either with BCG NS, Device A or Device B in a health facility. Immune response was defined as seroconversion or fourfold rise in polio neutralizing antibody titer 28days after fIPV among children whose baseline titer ≤362. In Phase II, fIPV was administered during one-day door-to-door campaign to assess programmatic feasibility by evaluating vaccinators' experience. For all three poliovirus (PV) serotypes, the immune response after BCG NS and Device A was similar, however it was lower with Device B (34/44 (77%), 31/45 (69%), 16/30 (53%) respectively for PV1; 53/78 (68%), 61/83 (74%), 42/80 (53%) for PV2; and; 58/76 (76%), 56/80 (70%), 43/77 (56%) for PV3; p<0.05 for all three serotypes). Vaccinators reported problems filling Device B in both Phases; no other operational challenges were reported during Phase II. Use of fIPV offers a dose-saving alternative to full-dose IPV.
| S-EPMC5457301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) boosts mucosal immunity in persons previously vaccinated with oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV). We assessed whether fractional-dose IPV (fIPV, 1/5th of full dose) administered intradermally also boosts mucosal immunity.MethodsChildren 10-12 years old were enrolled in Sri Lanka and randomized to receive one dose IPV, fIPV, or no IPV vaccine. One month later, they received OPV challenge. Blood was collected at enrolment and before challenge; stool was collected at 3, 7, and 14 days post-challenge. Sera were analysed for presence of poliovirus neutralizing antibodies; stool was analysed for poliovirus.ResultsWe analysed 304/309 (98%) enrolled subjects. There were 16/97 (16%), 9/99 (9%), and 72/95 (76%) subjects excreting poliovirus after challenge in the IPV, fIPV and "No IPV Vaccine" study arms, respectively (P < .001 for comparison of IPV [or fIPV] vs "No IPV Vaccine"; P = .1 for comparisons of fIPV vs IPV). Relative decrease in excretion prevalence was 80% and 88% to IPV and fIPV, respectively, compared with the "No IPV Vaccine" control arm.ConclusionsSingle fIPV dose boosted mucosal immunity to a similar degree as single full dose of IPV. This finding provides further evidence in support of fIPV for poliovirus outbreak response at the time of IPV global supply shortage.Clinical trials registrationAustralia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12616000124437p.
| S-EPMC9161111 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPakistan and Afghanistan are two of the three remaining countries yet to interrupt wild-type poliovirus transmission. The increasing incidence of poliomyelitis in these countries during 2010-11 led the Executive Board of WHO in January, 2012, to declare polio eradication a "programmatic emergency for global public health". We aimed to establish why incidence is rising in these countries despite programme innovations including the introduction of new vaccines.MethodsWe did a matched case-control analysis based on a database of 46,977 children aged 0-14 years with onset of acute flaccid paralysis between Jan 1, 2001, and Dec 31, 2011. The vaccination history of children with poliomyelitis was compared with that of children with acute flaccid paralysis due to other causes to estimate the clinical effectiveness of oral poliovirus vaccines (OPVs) in Afghanistan and Pakistan by conditional logistic regression. We estimated vaccine coverage and serotype-specific vaccine-induced population immunity in children aged 0-2 years and assessed their association with the incidence of poliomyelitis over time in seven regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan.FindingsBetween Jan 1, 2001, and Dec 31, 2011, there were 883 cases of serotype 1 poliomyelitis (710 in Pakistan and 173 in Afghanistan) and 272 cases of poliomyelitis serotype 3 (216 in Pakistan and 56 in Afghanistan). The estimated clinical effectiveness of a dose of trivalent OPV against serotype 1 poliomyelitis was 12·5% (95% CI 5·6-18·8) compared with 34·5% (16·1-48·9) for monovalent OPV (p=0·007) and 23·4% (10·4-34·6) for bivalent OPV (p=0·067). Bivalent OPV was non-inferior compared with monovalent OPV (p=0·21). Vaccination coverage decreased during 2006-11 in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), Balochistan, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in Pakistan and in southern Afghanistan. Although partially mitigated by the use of more effective vaccines, these decreases in coverage resulted in lower vaccine-induced population immunity to poliovirus serotype 1 in FATA and Balochistan and associated increases in the incidence of poliomyelitis.InterpretationThe effectiveness of bivalent OPV is comparable with monovalent OPV and can therefore be used in eradicating serotype 1 poliomyelitis whilst minimising the risks of serotype 3 outbreaks. However, decreases in vaccination coverage in parts of Pakistan and southern Afghanistan have severely limited the effect of this vaccine.FundingPoliovirus Research subcommittee of WHO, Royal Society, and Medical Research Council.
| S-EPMC3418593 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: After stopping serotype 2-containing oral poliovirus vaccine use, serotype 2 poliovirus outbreaks may still occur and require outbreak response supplemental immunization activities (oSIAs). Current oSIA plans include the use of both serotype 2 monovalent oral poliovirus vaccine (mOPV2) and inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV). Methods: We used an existing model to compare the effectiveness of mOPV2 oSIAs with or without IPV in response to a hypothetical postcessation serotype 2 outbreak in northwest Nigeria. We considered strategies that co-administer IPV with mOPV2, use IPV only for older age groups, or use only IPV during at least one oSIA. We considered the cost and supply implications and estimated from a societal perspective the incremental cost-effectiveness and incremental net benefits of adding IPV to oSIAs in the context of this hypothetical outbreak in 2017. Results: Adding IPV to the first or second oSIA resulted in a 4% to 6% reduction in expected polio cases compared to exclusive mOPV2 oSIAs. We found the greatest benefit of IPV use if added preemptively as a ring around the initial oSIA target population, and negligible benefit if added to later oSIAs or older age groups. We saw an increase in expected polio cases if IPV replaced mOPV2 during an oSIA. None of the oSIA strategies that included IPV for this outbreak represented a cost-effective or net beneficial intervention compared to reliance on mOPV2 only. Conclusions: While adding IPV to oSIAs results in marginal improvements in performance, the poor cost-effectiveness and current limited IPV supply make it economically unattractive for high-risk settings in which IPV does not significantly affect transmission.
| S-EPMC6124926 | biostudies-literature