Dataset Information

Intradermal administration of fractional doses of the inactivated poliovirus vaccine in a campaign: a pragmatic, open-label, non-inferiority trial in The Gambia.

ABSTRACT:

Background

A 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).

Methods

This 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.

Findings

Between 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.

Interpretation

In 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.

Funding

World Health Organization and the Medical Research Council.

SUBMITTER: Bashorun AO

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8786671 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

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:BackgroundIntradermal 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.MethodsWe 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.FindingsBetween 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.InterpretationfIPV appears to be an effective dose-sparing strategy for routine immunisation and outbreak responses.FundingUS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Project description:BackgroundThe provision of several doses of monovalent type 1 oral poliovirus vaccine (mOPV1) and bivalent OPV1 and 3 (bOPV) vaccines through campaigns is essential to stop the circulation of remaining wild polioviruses. Our study aimed to assess the shortening of intervals between campaigns with bOPV and mOPV1 and to assess the immunogenicity of bOPV in routine immunisation schedules.MethodsWe did an open-label, non-inferiority, five-arm, randomised controlled trial in Bangladesh. We recruited healthy infants aged 6 weeks at 42 immunisation clinics and randomly assigned them (with blocks of 15, three per group) to receive a short three-dose schedule of bOPV (bOPV short) or mOPV1 (mOPV1 short) with the first dose given at age 6 weeks, the second at age 8 weeks, and the third at age 10 weeks; or to a standard three-dose schedule of bOPV (bOPV standard) or mOPV1 (mOPV1 standard) or trivalent OPV (tOPV standard) with the first dose given at age 6 weeks, the second at 10 weeks, and the third at age 14 weeks. The primary outcome was the proportion of infants with antibody seroconversion for type 1, type 2, and type 3 polioviruses. The primary, modified intention-to-treat analysis included all patients who had testable serum samples before and after receiving at least one OPV dose. We used a 10% margin to establish non-inferiority for bOPV groups versus mOPV1 groups in seroconversion for type 1 poliovirus, and for bOPV1 short versus bOPV1 standard for types 1 and 3. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01633216, and is closed to new participants.FindingsBetween May 13, 2012, and Jan 21, 2013, we randomly assigned 1000 infants to our study groups. 927 completed all study visits and were included in the primary analysis. Seroconversion for type-1 poliovirus was recorded in 183 (98%, 95% CI 95-100) of 186 infants given bOPV short, 179 (97%, 94-99) of 184 given bOPV standard, 180 (96%, 92-98) of 188 given mOPV short, 178 (99%, 97-100) of 179 given mOPV1 standard, and 175 (92%, 87-96) of 190 given tOPV standard. Seroconversion for type 2 was noted in 16 infants (9%, 5-14) on bOPV short, 29 (16%, 11-22) on bOPV standard, 19 (10%, 7-15) on mOPV short, 33 (18%, 13-25) on mOPV1 standard, and 182 (96%, 92-98) on tOPV standard. Seroconversion for type 3 was noted in 175 infants (94%, 90-97) on bOPV short, 176 (96%, 92-98) on bOPV standard, 18 (10%, 6-15) on mOPV short, 25 (14%, 10-20) on mOPV1 standard, and 167 (88%, 83-92) on tOPV standard. The short schedules for mOPV1 and bOPV elicited a non-inferior antibody response compared with the bOPV standard schedule. 104 adverse events were reported in 100 infants during follow up. 36 of these events needed admission to hospital (32 were pneumonia, two were vomiting or feeding disorders, one was septicaemia, and one was diarrhoea with severe malnutrition). One of the infants admitted to hospital for pneumonia died 5 days after admission. No adverse event was attributed to the vaccines.InterpretationOur trial showed that three doses of mOPV1 or bOPV with a short schedule of 2 week intervals between doses induces an immune response similar to that obtained with the standard schedule of giving doses at 4 week intervals. These findings support the use of these vaccines in campaigns done at short intervals to rapidly increase population immunity against polioviruses to control outbreaks or prevent transmission in high-risk areas.FundingCenters for Disease Control and Prevention and UNICEF.

Project description:BackgroundStocks of yellow fever vaccine are insufficient to cover exceptional demands for outbreak response. Fractional dosing has shown efficacy, but evidence is limited to the 17DD substrain vaccine. We assessed the immunogenicity and safety of one-fifth fractional dose compared with standard dose of four WHO-prequalified yellow fever vaccines produced from three substrains.MethodsWe did this randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial at research centres in Mbarara, Uganda, and Kilifi, Kenya. Eligible participants were aged 18-59 years, had no contraindications for vaccination, were not pregnant or lactating, had no history of yellow fever vaccination or infection, and did not require yellow fever vaccination for travel. Eligible participants were recruited from communities and randomly assigned to one of eight groups, corresponding to the four vaccines at standard or fractional dose. The vaccine was administered subcutaneously by nurses who were not masked to treatment, but participants and other study personnel were masked to vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was proportion of participants with seroconversion 28 days after vaccination. Seroconversion was defined as post-vaccination neutralising antibody titres at least 4 times pre-vaccination measurement measured by 50% plaque reduction neutralisation test (PRNT50). We defined non-inferiority as less than 10% decrease in seroconversion in fractional compared with standard dose groups 28 days after vaccination. The primary outcome was measured in the per-protocol population, and safety analyses included all vaccinated participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02991495.FindingsBetween Nov 6, 2017, and Feb 21, 2018, 1029 participants were assessed for inclusion. 69 people were ineligible, and 960 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to vaccine manufacturer and dose (120 to Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz standard dose, 120 to Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz fractional dose, 120 to Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides standard dose, 120 to Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides fractional dose, 120 to Institut Pasteur Dakar standard dose, 120 to Institut Pasteur Dakar fractional dose, 120 to Sanofi Pasteur standard dose, and 120 to Sanofi Pasteur fractional dose). 49 participants had detectable PRNT50 at baseline and 11 had missing PRNT50 results at baseline or 28 days. 900 were included in the per-protocol analysis. 959 participants were included in the safety analysis. The absolute difference in seroconversion between fractional and standard doses by vaccine was 1·71% (95% CI -2·60 to 5·28) for Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz, -0·90% (-4·24 to 3·13) for Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides, 1·82% (-2·75 to 5·39) for Institut Pasteur Dakar, and 0·0% (-3·32 to 3·29) for Sanofi Pasteur. Fractional doses from all four vaccines met the non-inferiority criterion. The most common treatment-related adverse events were headache (22·2%), fatigue (13·7%), myalgia (13·3%) and self-reported fever (9·0%). There were no study-vaccine related serious adverse events.InterpretationFractional doses of all WHO-prequalified yellow fever vaccines were non-inferior to the standard dose in inducing seroconversion 28 days after vaccination, with no major safety concerns. These results support the use of fractional dosage in the general adult population for outbreak response in situations of vaccine shortage.FundingThe study was funded by Médecins Sans Frontières Foundation, Wellcome Trust (grant no. 092654), and the UK Department for International Development. Vaccines were donated in kind.