-
Medecine Tropicale Et Sante... Jun 2021In 2019, the Central African Republic identified foci of circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus 2 (PVDV2c). The objective of this work is to describe the vaccination...
OBJECTIVE
In 2019, the Central African Republic identified foci of circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus 2 (PVDV2c). The objective of this work is to describe the vaccination status of children paralyzed by PVDV2c and their contacts and to assess the circulation of this strain in these contacts.
PATIENTS AND METHOD
The study population of this retrospective survey consists of children with acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) and their contacts. We included paralyzed children whose sequencing results showed the presence of PVDV2c.
RESULTS
A total of 21 children paralyzed by PVDVc and 64 contacts were enrolled in the survey. Fourteen out of 21 children who are paralyzed (66%) received at least one dose of bivalent oral polio vaccine (OPV) compared to 36 out of 64 contacts (57%, non-significant difference). Of the vaccinated patients, 7 had received less than three doses. For the injectable polio vaccine (IPV), vaccination coverage for both patients and contacts was 33%.The proportion of children who received both doses of OPV and IPV was 33% among patients and 25% in contacts. Contacts with VDPV2 were vaccinated with OPV and IPV, respectively 55 and 27%. VDPV2 and Sabin 2 were also found in contact stools, 34% and 9% respectively.
CONCLUSION
The absence or inadequacy of IPV vaccination has a serious impact on children by the occurrence of virus derived from the vaccine responsible for life-old paralysis. Protecting children from poliomyelitis requires a combination of a good cold chain, multiple doses and adherence to the vaccine schedule.
Topics: Central African Republic; Child; Humans; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Poliovirus Vaccines; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35586583
DOI: 10.48327/mtsibulletin.2021.114 -
Vaccine Oct 2021Afghanistan 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....
BACKGROUND
Afghanistan 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.
METHODS
We 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.
RESULTS
Between 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%).
DISCUSSION
OPV 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.
Topics: Afghanistan; Child; Disease Eradication; Humans; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Inactivated; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral
PubMed: 34538696
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.09.020 -
The Journal of Infectious Diseases Oct 2022The polio eradication endgame called for the removal of trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) and introduction of bivalent (types 1 and 3) OPV and inactivated... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
The polio eradication endgame called for the removal of trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) and introduction of bivalent (types 1 and 3) OPV and inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV). However, supply shortages have delayed IPV administration to tens of millions of infants, and immunogenicity data are currently lacking to guide catch-up vaccination policies.
METHODS
We conducted an open-label randomized clinical trial assessing 2 interventions, full or fractional-dose IPV (fIPV, one-fifth of IPV), administered at age 9-13 months with a second dose given 2 months later. Serum was collected at days 0, 60, 67, and 90 to assess seroconversion, priming, and antibody titer. None received IPV or poliovirus type 2-containing vaccines before enrolment.
RESULTS
A single fIPV dose at age 9-13 months yielded 75% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6%-82%) seroconversion against type 2, whereas 2 fIPV doses resulted in 100% seroconversion compared with 94% (95% CI, 89%-97%) after a single full dose (P < .001). Two doses of IPV resulted in 100% seroconversion.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study confirmed increased IPV immunogenicity when administered at an older age, likely due to reduced interference from maternally derived antibodies. Either 1 full dose of IPV or 2 doses of fIPV could be used to vaccinate missed cohorts, 2 fIPV doses being antigen sparing and more immunogenic.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
NCT03890497.
Topics: Aged; Antibodies, Viral; Bangladesh; Humans; Immunization Schedule; Infant; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Inactivated; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Vaccination
PubMed: 35575051
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiac205 -
Medical Decision Making : An... 2023Polio antiviral drugs (PAVDs) may provide a critical tool in the eradication endgame by stopping poliovirus infections in immunodeficient individuals who may not clear...
BACKGROUND
Polio antiviral drugs (PAVDs) may provide a critical tool in the eradication endgame by stopping poliovirus infections in immunodeficient individuals who may not clear the virus without therapeutic intervention. Although prolonged/chronic poliovirus excreters are rare, they represent a source of poliovirus reintroduction into the general population. Prior studies that assumed the successful cessation of all oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) use estimated the potential upper bound of the incremental net benefits (INBs) of resource investments in research and development of PAVDs. However, delays in polio eradication, OPV cessation, and the development of PAVDs necessitate an updated economic analysis to reevaluate the costs and benefits of further investments in PAVDs.
METHODS
Using a global integrated model of polio transmission, immunity, vaccine dynamics, risks, and economics, we explore the risks of reintroduction of polio transmission due to immunodeficiency-related vaccine-derived poliovirus (iVDPV) excreters and reevaluate the upper bound of the INBs of PAVDs.
RESULTS
Under the current conditions, for which the use of OPV will likely continue for the foreseeable future, even with successful eradication of type 1 wild poliovirus by the end of 2023 and continued use of Sabin OPV for outbreak response, we estimate an upper bound INB of 60 million US$2019. With >100 million US$2019 already invested in PAVD development and with the introduction of novel OPVs that are less likely to revert to neurovirulence, our analysis suggests the expected INBs of PAVDs would not offset their costs.
CONCLUSIONS
While PAVDs could play an important role in the polio endgame, their expected economic benefits drop with ongoing OPV use and poliovirus transmissions. However, stakeholders may pursue the development of PAVDs as a desired product regardless of their economic benefits.HighlightsWhile polio antiviral drugs could play an important role in the polio endgame, their expected economic benefits continue to drop with delays in polio eradication and the continued use of oral poliovirus vaccines.The incremental net benefits of investments in polio antiviral drug development and screening for immunodeficiency-related circulating polioviruses are small.Limited global resources are better spent on increasing global population immunity to polioviruses to stop and prevent poliovirus transmission.
Topics: Humans; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Disease Outbreaks; Antiviral Agents
PubMed: 37577803
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X231191127 -
The Journal of Infectious Diseases Aug 2022We conducted a trial in Nigeria to assess the immunogenicity of the new bivalent oral poliovirus vaccine + inactivated poliovirus vaccine (bOPV+IPV) immunization... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
We 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.
METHODS
This 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.
RESULTS
Seroconversion 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).
CONCLUSIONS
This 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.
Topics: Antibodies, Viral; Child; Humans; Immunization Schedule; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Nigeria; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Inactivated; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Vaccines, Combined
PubMed: 33230550
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiaa726 -
Vaccine Mar 2023Inactivated trivalent poliovirus vaccine (IPV) induces humoral immunity, which protects against paralytic poliomyelitis but does not induce sufficient mucosal immunity... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of inactivated poliovirus vaccine with or without E.coli double mutant heat-labile toxin (dmLT) adjuvant in healthy adults; a phase 1 randomized study.
BACKGROUND
Inactivated trivalent poliovirus vaccine (IPV) induces humoral immunity, which protects against paralytic poliomyelitis but does not induce sufficient mucosal immunity to block intestinal infection. We assessed the intestinal immunity in healthy adults in Belgium conferred by a co-formulation of IPV with the mucosal adjuvant double mutant Labile Toxin (dmLT) derived from Escherichia coli.
METHODS
Healthy fully IPV-vaccinated 18-45-year-olds were randomly allocated to three groups: on Day 1 two groups received one full dose of IPV (n = 30) or IPV + dmLT (n = 30) in a blinded manner, and the third received an open-label dose of bivalent live oral polio vaccine (bOPV types 1 and 3, n = 20). All groups received a challenge dose of bOPV on Day 29. Participants reported solicited and unsolicited adverse events (AE) using study diaries. Mucosal immune responses were measured by fecal neutralization and IgA on Days 29 and 43, with fecal shedding of challenge viruses measured for 28 days. Humoral responses were measured by serum neutralizing antibody (NAb).
RESULTS
Solicited and unsolicited AEs were mainly mild-to-moderate and transient in all groups, with no meaningful differences in rates between groups. Fecal shedding of challenge viruses in both IPV groups exceeded that of the bOPV group but was not different between IPV and IPV + dmLT groups. High serum NAb responses were observed in both IPV groups, alongside modest levels of fecal neutralization and IgA.
CONCLUSIONS
Addition of dmLT to IPV administered intramuscularly neither affected humoral nor intestinal immunity nor decreased fecal virus shedding following bOPV challenge. The tolerability of the dose of dmLT used in this study may allow higher doses to be investigated for impact on mucosal immunity. Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov - NCT04232943.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Poliovirus Vaccine, Inactivated; Poliomyelitis; Hot Temperature; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Adjuvants, Immunologic; Antibodies, Neutralizing; Immunoglobulin A
PubMed: 36746739
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.01.048 -
Emerging Infectious Diseases May 2021In 2019, the Public Health Agency of Barcelona, Spain, was notified of a vaccine-derived poliovirus infection. The patient had an underlying common variable...
In 2019, the Public Health Agency of Barcelona, Spain, was notified of a vaccine-derived poliovirus infection. The patient had an underlying common variable immunodeficiency and no signs of acute flaccid paralysis. We describe the ongoing coordinated response to contain the infection, which included compassionate-use treatment with pocapavir.
Topics: Disease Eradication; Humans; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Spain
PubMed: 33900188
DOI: 10.3201/eid2705.204675 -
MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly... Dec 2021As of May 1, 2016, use of oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) type 2 for routine and supplementary immunization activities ceased after a synchronized global switch from...
As of May 1, 2016, use of oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) type 2 for routine and supplementary immunization activities ceased after a synchronized global switch from trivalent OPV (tOPV; containing Sabin strain types 1, 2, and 3) to bivalent OPV (bOPV; containing Sabin strain types 1 and 3) subsequent to the certified eradication of wild type poliovirus (WPV) type 2 in 2015 (1-3). Circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus (cVDPV) outbreaks* occur when transmission of Sabin strain poliovirus is prolonged in underimmunized populations, allowing viral genetic reversion to neurovirulence, resulting in cases of paralytic polio (1-3). Since the switch, monovalent OPV type 2 (mOPV2, containing Sabin strain type 2) has been used for response to cVDPV type 2 (cVDPV2) outbreaks; tOPV is used if cVDPV2 co-circulates with WPV type 1, and bOPV is used for cVDPV type 1 (cVDPV1) or type 3 (cVDPV3) outbreaks (1-4). In November 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) Emergency Use Listing procedure authorized limited use of type 2 novel OPV (nOPV2), a vaccine modified to be more genetically stable than the Sabin strain, for cVDPV2 outbreak response (3,5). In October 2021, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (WHO's principal advisory group) permitted wider use of nOPV2; however, current nOPV2 supply is limited (6). This report updates that of July 2019-February 2020 to describe global cVDPV outbreaks during January 2020-June 2021 (as of November 9, 2021) (3). During this period, there were 44 cVDPV outbreaks of the three serotypes affecting 37 countries. The number of cVDPV2 cases increased from 366 in 2019 to 1,078 in 2020 (7). A goal of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative's (GPEI) 2022-2026 Strategic Plan is to better address the challenges to early CVDPV2 outbreak detection and initiate prompt and high coverage outbreak responses with available type 2 OPV to interrupt transmission by the end of 2023 (8).
Topics: Disease Outbreaks; Global Health; Humans; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Serotyping
PubMed: 34882653
DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7049a1 -
The Journal of Infectious Diseases Jun 2023Serotype 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV2) can revert to regain wild-type neurovirulence and spread to cause emergences of vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV2). After its...
Serotype 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV2) can revert to regain wild-type neurovirulence and spread to cause emergences of vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV2). After its global withdrawal from routine immunization in 2016, outbreak response use has created a cycle of VDPV2 emergences that threaten eradication. We implemented a hierarchical model based on VP1 region genetic divergence, time, and location to attribute emergences to campaigns and identify risk factors. We found that a 10 percentage point increase in population immunity in children younger than 5 years at the campaign time and location corresponds to a 18.0% decrease (95% credible interval [CrI], 6.3%-28%) in per-campaign relative risk, and that campaign size is associated with emergence risk (relative risk scaling with population size to a power of 0.80; 95% CrI, .50-1.10). Our results imply how Sabin OPV2 can be used alongside the genetically stable but supply-limited novel OPV2 (listed for emergency use in November 2020) to minimize emergence risk.
Topics: Child; Humans; Africa; Disease Outbreaks; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Risk Factors; Serogroup
PubMed: 36630295
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiad004 -
Vaccine Apr 2023Delivering inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) with oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) in campaigns has been explored to accelerate the control of type 2 circulating... (Review)
Review
Delivering inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) with oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) in campaigns has been explored to accelerate the control of type 2 circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus (cVDPV) outbreaks. A review of scientific literature suggests that among populations with high prevalence of OPV failure, a booster with IPV after at least two doses of OPV may close remaining humoral and mucosal immunity gaps more effectively than an additional dose of trivalent OPV. However, IPV alone demonstrates minimal advantage on humoral immunity compared with monovalent and bivalent OPV, and cannot provide the intestinal immunity that prevents infection and spread to those individuals not previously exposed to live poliovirus of the same serotype (i.e. type 2 for children born after the switch from trivalent to bivalent OPV in April 2016). A review of operational data from polio campaigns shows that addition of IPV increases the cost and logistic complexity of campaigns. As a result, campaigns in response to an outbreak often target small areas. Large campaigns require a delay to ensure logistics are in place for IPV delivery, and may need implementation in phases that last several weeks. Challenges to delivery of injectable vaccines through house-to-house visits also increases the risk of missing the children who are more likely to benefit from IPV: those with difficult access to routine immunization and other health services. Based upon this information, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts in immunization (SAGE) recommended in October 2020 the following strategies: provision of a second dose of IPV in routine immunization to reduce the risk and number of paralytic cases in countries at risk of importation or new emergences; and use of type 2 OPV in high-quality campaigns to interrupt transmission and avoid seeding new type 2 cVDPV outbreaks.
Topics: Child; Humans; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Inactivated; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Poliomyelitis; Disease Outbreaks
PubMed: 35365341
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.03.027