Dataset Information

Immunogenicity of full and fractional dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine for use in routine immunisation and outbreak response: an open-label, randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Intradermal administration of fractional inactivated poliovirus vaccine (fIPV) is a dose-sparing alternative to the intramuscular full dose. We aimed to compare the immunogenicity of two fIPV doses versus one IPV dose for routine immunisation, and also assessed the immunogenicity of an fIPV booster dose for an outbreak response. METHODS:We did an open-label, randomised, controlled, inequality, non-inferiority trial in two clinics in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Healthy infants were randomly assigned at 6 weeks to one of four groups: group A received IPV at age 14 weeks and IPV booster at age 22 weeks; group B received IPV at age 14 weeks and fIPV booster at age 22 weeks; group C received IPV at age 6 weeks and fIPV booster at age 22 weeks; and group D received fIPV at 6 weeks and 14 weeks and fIPV booster at age 22 weeks. IPV was administered by needle-syringe as an intramuscular full dose (0·5 mL), and fIPV was administered intradermally (0·1 mL of the IPV formulation was administered using the 0·1 mL HelmJect auto-disable syringe with a Helms intradermal adapter). Both IPV and fIPV were administered on the outer, upper right thigh of infants. The primary outcome was vaccine response to poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 at age 22 weeks (routine immunisation) and age 26 weeks (outbreak response). Vaccine response was defined as seroconversion from seronegative (<1:8) at baseline to seropositive (?1:8) or four-fold increase in reciprocal antibody titres adjusted for maternal antibody decay and was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (infants who received polio vaccines per group assignment and polio antibody titre results to serotypes 1, 2, and 3 at 6, 22, 23, and 26 weeks of age). The non-inferiority margin was 12·5%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02847026. FINDINGS:Between Sept 1, 2016 and May 2, 2017, 1076 participants were randomly assigned and included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 271 in Group A, 267 in group B, 268 in group C, and 270 in group D. Vaccine response at 22 weeks to two doses of fIPV (group D) was significantly higher (p<0·0001) than to one dose of IPV (groups A and B) for all three poliovirus serotypes: the type 1 response comprised 212 (79% [95% CI 73-83]) versus 305 (57% [53-61]) participants, the type 2 response comprised 173 (64% [58-70]) versus 249 (46% [42-51]) participants, and the type 3 response comprised 196 (73% [67-78]) versus 196 (36% [33-41]) participants. At 26 weeks, the fIPV booster was non-inferior to IPV (group B vs group A) for serotype 1 (-1·12% [90% CI -2·18 to -0·06]), serotype 2 (0·40%, [-2·22 to 1·42]), and serotype 3 (1·51% [-3·23 to -0·21]). Of 129 adverse events, 21 were classified as serious including one death; none were attributed to IPV or fIPV. INTERPRETATION:fIPV appears to be an effective dose-sparing strategy for routine immunisation and outbreak responses. FUNDING:US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

SUBMITTER: Snider CJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7069654 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Immunogenicity of full and fractional dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine for use in routine immunisation and outbreak response: an open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Snider Cynthia J CJ Zaman Khalequ K Estivariz Concepcion F CF Yunus Mohammad M Weldon William C WC Wannemuehler Kathleen A KA Oberste M Steven MS Pallansch Mark A MA Wassilak Steven Gf SG Bari Tajul Islam A TIA Anand Abhijeet A

Lancet (London, England) 20190516 10191

<h4>Background</h4>Intradermal administration of fractional inactivated poliovirus vaccine (fIPV) is a dose-sparing alternative to the intramuscular full dose. We aimed to compare the immunogenicity of two fIPV doses versus one IPV dose for routine immunisation, and also assessed the immunogenicity of an fIPV booster dose for an outbreak response.<h4>Methods</h4>We did an open-label, randomised, controlled, inequality, non-inferiority trial in two clinics in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Healthy infants we ...[more]

PMID: 31104832

Similar Datasets

Project description:The live-attenuated oral polio vaccine (OPV) will be no longer used when wild poliovirus (WPV) eliminating in worldwide, according to GPEI (the Global Polio Eradication Initiative) Reports. It is planning to replace OPV by Sabin-based inactivated poliovirus vaccine (sIPV) in developing countries, with purpose of reducing of the economic burden and maintaining of the appropriate antibody levels in population. It studied serial fractional doses immunized by intradermal injection (ID) in rats, to reduce consume of antigen and financial burden, maintaining sufficient immunogenicity; Methods: Study groups were divided in 4 groups of dose gradient, which were one-tenth (1/10), one-fifth (1/5), one-third (1/3) and one-full dose (1/1), according to the volume of distribution taken from the same batch of vaccine (sIPV). Wistar rats were injected intradermally with the needle and syringe sing the mantoux technique taken once month for 3 times. It was used as positive control that intramuscular inoculation (IM) was injected with one-full dose (1/1) with same batch of sIPV. PBS was used as negative control. Blood samples were collected via tail vein. After 30 d with 3 round of immunization, it analyzed the changes of neutralization antibody titers in the each group by each immunization program end; Results: The results of seroconversion had positive correlation with different doses in ID groups. The higher concentration of D-antigen (D-Ag) could conduct higher seroconversion. Furthermore, different types of viruses had different seroconversion trend. It showed that the geometric mean titers (GMTs) of each fractional-dose ID groups increased by higher concentration of D-Ag, and it got significant lower than the full-dose IM group. At 90th days of immunization, the GMTs for each poliovirus subtypes of fractional doses were almost higher than 1:8, implied that it could be meaning positive seroprotection titer for polio vaccine types, according to WHO suggestion; Conclusions: The fractional dose with one-fifth (1/5) could be used by intradermal injection to prevent poliovirus infection, if there were more human clinical detail research consistent with this findings in rats.

Project description:BackgroundA rapid increase in circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 outbreaks, and the need to reserve inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) for routine immunisation, has increased the value of fractional dose IPV (fIPV) as a measure to prevent acute flaccid paralysis. However, the intradermal route of administration has been viewed as prohibitive to outbreak response campaigns. We aimed to establish the immunogenicity and safety of administering intradermal fIPV with a disposable syringe jet injector (DSJI) or an intradermal adaptor (IDA) compared with standard administration with a BCG needle and syringe (N&S).MethodsThis pragmatic, non-inferiority trial was undertaken in a campaign setting in communities in The Gambia. Children aged 4-59 months without contraindication to vaccination were eligible. Children were not individually randomly assigned; instead, the vaccination teams were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to one of three administration methods. Parents and the field team were not masked, but laboratory personnel were masked. Baseline demographic and anthropometric data were collected from the participants. Public health officers experienced at intradermal immunisation, and nurses without experience, had 2 h of training on each of the administration methods before the campaign. Participants were vaccinated using the administration method in use by the vaccination team in their community. Poliovirus serum neutralising antibodies (SNA) were measured in children aged 24-59 months before and 4 weeks after vaccination. Adverse events and data on injection quality were collected from all participants. The primary outcome was the type 2 immune response rate (seroconversion in seronegative [SNA titre <8] children plus a 4-fold titre rise in seropositive children). Adjusted differences in the immune response between the DSJI or IDA group versus the N&S group were calculated with 97·5% CIs. A margin of -10% was used to define the non-inferiority of DSJI or IDA compared to N&S. Immunogenicity analysis was done per protocol. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.govNCT02967783 and has been completed.FindingsBetween Oct 28 and Dec 29, 2016, 3189 children aged 4-59 months were recruited, of whom 3170 were eligible. Over 3 days, 2720 children were vaccinated (N&S, 917; IDA, 874; and DSJI, 929). Among 992 children aged 25-59 months with a baseline SNA available, 90·1% (95% CI 86·1-92·9; 281/312) of those vaccinated using the DSJI had an immune response to type 2 compared with 93·8% (90·6-95·8; 331/353) of those vaccinated with N&S and 96·6% (94·0-98·0; 316/327) of those vaccinated with IDA. All (53/53) type 2 seronegative children seroconverted. For polio type 2, non-inferiority was shown for both the IDA (adjusted difference 0·7% [97·5% CI -3·3 to 4·7], unadjusted difference 2·9% [-0·9 to 6·8]) and DSJI (adjusted difference -3·3% [-8·3 to 1·5], unadjusted difference -3·7% [-8·7 to 1·1]) compared with N&S. Non-inferiority was shown for type 1 and 3 for the IDA and DSJI. Neither injection quality nor the training and experience of the vaccinators had an effect on immune response. No safety concerns were reported.InterpretationIn a campaign, intradermal fIPV is safe and generates consistent immune responses that are not dependent on vaccinator experience or injection quality when administered using an N&S, DSJI, or IDA. Countries facing vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 outbreaks should consider fIPV campaigns to boost population immunity and prevent cases of acute flaccid paralysis.FundingWorld Health Organization and the Medical Research Council.

Project description:BackgroundWe assessed immunogenicity of three-dose and two-dose immunization schedules with a Sabin-strain inactivated poliovirus vaccine (sIPV) produced by one Chinese vaccine manufacturer.MethodsThis was an open label, randomized, controlled trial conducted in 16 vaccination clinics in Shandong province. Infants were allocated randomly to either a 3-dose study arm (sIPV administered at 2, 3, and 4 months of age) or a 2-dose arm (sIPV administered at 4 and 8-11 months of age). Poliovirus neutralizing antibodies were measured in sera collected prior to the first sIPV dose and one month after the last dose.FindingsWe enrolled 560 infants; 536 (95.7%) completed the study. Final seropositivity rates were >98% for all three serotypes in both study arms. There were no statistically significant differences in seropositivity between the 2-dose and the 3-dose schedule. Final median reciprocal titres of polio antibodies were high overall (>1:768 for all serotypes) and statistically significantly higher in 2-dose recipients compared with 3-dose recipients (p < 0.001).InterpretationThis study offers evidence that two doses of sIPV administered at 4 and 8-11 months of age and three doses of sIPV administered at 2, 3, and 4 months of age both provide serological protection against poliomyelitis. Median reciprocal titres of polio antibodies were high overall, and were more related to the interval between doses than the number of doses, with the longer interval of the 2-dose schedule producing higher reciprocal titres than the shorter-interval 3-dose schedule. The protection provided by the 3-dose schedule is achieved earlier in life than the protection with the 2-dose schedule. Countries planning to use an IPV-only schedule in the post-eradication era can consider this 2-dose sIPV option as an immunogenic and dose-sparing strategy.FundingWorld Health Organization (from a grant from International PolioPlus Committee, Rotary International, Evanston, IL, USA).

Project description:BackgroundNovel oral poliovirus vaccine type 2 (nOPV2) was developed by modifying the Sabin strain to increase genetic stability and reduce risk of seeding new circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 outbreaks. Bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (bOPV; containing Sabin types 1 and 3) is the vaccine of choice for type 1 and type 3 outbreak responses. We aimed to assess immunological interference between nOPV2 and bOPV when administered concomitantly.MethodsWe conducted an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised, controlled trial at two clinical trial sites in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Healthy infants aged 6 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1:1) using block randomisation, stratified by site, to receive nOPV2 only, nOPV2 plus bOPV, or bOPV only, at the ages of 6 weeks, 10 weeks, and 14 weeks. Eligibility criteria included singleton and full term (≥37 weeks' gestation) birth and parents intending to remain in the study area for the duration of study follow-up activities. Poliovirus neutralising antibody titres were measured at the ages of 6 weeks, 10 weeks, 14 weeks, and 18 weeks. The primary outcome was cumulative immune response for all three poliovirus types at the age of 14 weeks (after two doses) and was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which was restricted to participants with adequate blood specimens from all study visits. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study product. A non-inferiority margin of 10% was used to compare single and concomitant administration. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04579510.FindingsBetween Feb 8 and Sept 26, 2021, 736 participants (244 in the nOPV2 only group, 246 in the nOPV2 plus bOPV group, and 246 in the bOPV only group) were enrolled and included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. After two doses, 209 (86%; 95% CI 81-90) participants in the nOPV2 only group and 159 (65%; 58-70) participants in the nOPV2 plus bOPV group had a type 2 poliovirus immune response; 227 (92%; 88-95) participants in the nOPV2 plus bOPV group and 229 (93%; 89-96) participants in the bOPV only group had a type 1 response; and 216 (88%; 83-91) participants in the nOPV2 plus bOPV group and 212 (86%; 81-90) participants in the bOPV only group had a type 3 response. Co-administration was non-inferior to single administration for types 1 and 3, but not for type 2. There were 15 serious adverse events (including three deaths, one in each group, all attributable to sudden infant death syndrome); none were attributed to vaccination.InterpretationCo-administration of nOPV2 and bOPV interfered with immunogenicity for poliovirus type 2, but not for types 1 and 3. The blunted nOPV2 immunogenicity we observed would be a major drawback of using co-administration as a vaccination strategy.FundingThe US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Project description:Delays in achieving polio eradication have led to ongoing risks of poliovirus importations that may cause outbreaks in polio-free countries. Because of the low, but non-zero risk of paralysis with oral poliovirus vaccines (OPVs), countries that achieve and maintain high national routine immunization coverage have increasingly shifted to exclusive use of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) for all preventive immunizations. However, immunization coverage within countries varies, with under-vaccinated subpopulations potentially able to sustain transmission of imported polioviruses and experience local outbreaks. Due to its cost, ease-of-use, and ability to induce mucosal immunity, using OPV as an outbreak control measure offers a more cost-effective option in countries in which OPV remains in use. However, recent polio outbreaks in IPV-only countries raise questions about whether and when IPV use for outbreak response may fail to stop poliovirus transmission and what consequences may follow from using OPV for outbreak response in these countries. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify modeling studies that explored the use of IPV for outbreak response in IPV-only countries. In addition, applying a model of the 2022 type 2 poliovirus outbreak in New York, we characterized the implications of using different OPV formulations for outbreak response instead of IPV. We also explored the hypothetical scenario of the same outbreak except for type 1 poliovirus instead of type 2. We find that using IPV for outbreak response will likely only stop outbreaks for polioviruses of relatively low transmission potential in countries with very high overall immunization coverage, seasonal transmission dynamics, and only if IPV immunization interventions reach some unvaccinated individuals. Using OPV for outbreak response in IPV-only countries poses substantial risks and challenges that require careful consideration, but may represent an option to consider for some outbreaks in some populations depending on the properties of the available vaccines and coverage attainable.

Dataset Information

Immunogenicity of full and fractional dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine for use in routine immunisation and outbreak response: an open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Immunogenicity of full and fractional dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine for use in routine immunisation and outbreak response: an open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets