-
Avicenna Journal of Medical... 2020() is the highly contagious causative agent of a broad range of diseases in animals as well as an occasional human pathogen. Economically significant infections caused... (Review)
Review
() is the highly contagious causative agent of a broad range of diseases in animals as well as an occasional human pathogen. Economically significant infections caused by include avian fowl cholera, rabbit snuffles, and hemorrhagic septicemia in cattle, goats and pigs. Chemotherapy of pasteurellosis infections has some limitations, such as high cost of treatment, low efficacy, and the possibility of therapy failure due to antibiotic resistance. Prophylactic immunization offers a safe and effective preventive measure in case of zoonotic diseases. Bacterins, live attenuated and some old traditional vaccines against pasteurellosis remain in use today, beside their limitations. However, the past few years have seen significant progress in research to identify modern, effective vaccine candidates, but there is no new vaccine produced by new strategies. While scientists should struggle with a lot of aspects to design vaccine producing strategies, this review shows how pasteurellosis vaccine evolved and the limitations in its application which need to be overcome.
PubMed: 32695276
DOI: No ID Found -
Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi =... Jul 2020To assess the effectiveness of 1 dose varicella attenuated live vaccine (VarV) for healthy children aged 1-12 years in China and explore the application of the Grades... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
To assess the effectiveness of 1 dose varicella attenuated live vaccine (VarV) for healthy children aged 1-12 years in China and explore the application of the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework in observational studies of vaccine effectiveness (VE). We searched studies about the VE of 1-dose VarV for children aged 1-12 years in China which published before 2019 and evaluated the quality of the studies by the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) table. We used Meta-analysis models to obtain the pooled 1-dose VE and that in subgroups by study design, outbreak or not, study quality and age of subjects. The evidences of VEs were rated by means of the GRADE system. Thirty-two studies were included and the pooled 1-dose VE was 75% [95% confidence interval (): 68%-80%]. The VE of outbreak studies [VE=66% (95: 57%-73%)] was lower than non-outbreak studies [VE=85% (95: 78%-89%)], and the VE in <6 years old children [VE=84% (95:77%-89%)] was higher than that in ≥6 years old children [VE=60% (95: 51%-68%)]. There was no significant difference in VE among studies with different design and quality. The quality of the evidences of pooled 1-dose VE was"very low", which was downgraded in bias risk and inconsistency and not downgraded in indirectness, imprecision and publication bias. The 1-dose VarV can provide medium level protection for 1-12 years old children in China, but it will decrease significantly for ≥6 years old children, so it is suggested to implement the strategies of two-dose vaccination of VarV in children <6 years old. The GRADE framework can be used in the observational studies of VE and it is suggested that the technical guidelines of observational study should be worked out to improve the overall quality of evidence.
Topics: Chickenpox; Chickenpox Vaccine; Child; Child, Preschool; China; Disease Outbreaks; Dose-Response Relationship, Immunologic; Humans; Infant; Vaccines, Attenuated
PubMed: 32741184
DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112338-20191025-00762 -
Canada Communicable Disease Report =... Sep 2020Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all individuals six months of age and older, including those with HIV infection. Prior to this statement, the National...
BACKGROUND
Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all individuals six months of age and older, including those with HIV infection. Prior to this statement, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) stated that live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) was contraindicated for all individuals with HIV infection. The objective of this article is to update NACI's guidance on the use of LAIV for HIV-infected individuals.
METHODS
A systematic literature review of the use of LAIV in individuals with HIV was undertaken. The Canadian Adverse Events Following Immunization Surveillance System was searched for reports of adverse events following vaccination with LAIV in HIV-infected individuals. NACI approved the revised recommendations.
RESULTS
NACI concluded that LAIV is immunogenic in children with HIV, and available data suggest that it is safe, although data were insufficient to detect possible uncommon adverse effects. LAIV may be considered as an option for vaccination of children 2-17 years old who meet the following criteria: 1) receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy for at least four months; 2) CD4 count of 500/µL or greater if age 2-5 years, or of 200/µL or greater if age 6-17 years; and 3) HIV plasma RNA less than 10,000 copies/mL. LAIV remains contraindicated for adults with HIV because of insufficient data. Intramuscular influenza vaccination is considered the standard for children living with HIV by NACI and the Canadian Paediatric & Perinatal HIV/AIDS Research Group, particularly for those without HIV viral load suppression (i.e. plasma HIV RNA is 40 copies/mL or greater). However, if intramuscular (IM) vaccination is not accepted by the patient or substitute decision-maker, LAIV would be reasonable for children meeting the criteria listed above.
CONCLUSION
LAIV may be considered as an option for annual vaccination of selected children with HIV.
PubMed: 33104088
DOI: 10.14745/ccdr.v46i09a08 -
Vaccine Dec 2012The true level of influenza vaccine efficacy is controversial and many factors may influence its estimation. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
The true level of influenza vaccine efficacy is controversial and many factors may influence its estimation.
OBJECTIVES
To estimate the efficacy of vaccination of children and non-elderly adults for the prevention of influenza and to explore the impact of type of vaccine, age, degree of strain matching, influenza type and case ascertainment methods on vaccine efficacy estimates.
DATA SOURCES
Medline and EmBase databases until October 2011. References of relevant articles were also reviewed.
STUDY SELECTION
Controlled trials evaluating seasonal influenza vaccines and presenting incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza illness were eligible. Studies exploring efficacy after experimental challenge, presenting duplicate data, employing group randomization, or focusing on special populations were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION
The vaccine effect on influenza prevention was evaluated by calculating Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RR) and using random-effects models. Vaccine efficacies were calculated for each comparison as (1-RR)×100.
RESULTS
Thirty studies were included in one or more of a total of 101 analyses, comprising 88.468 study participants. There was evidence of heterogeneity in 49% of the analyses. Summary vaccine efficacy was 65% against any strain, 78% against matched strains and 55% against not-matched strains. Both live-attenuated and inactivated vaccines showed similar levels of protection against not-matched strains (60% and 55%, respectively). Live-attenuated vaccines performed better than inactivated vaccines in children (80% versus 48%), whereas inactivated vaccines performed better than live-attenuated vaccines in adults (59% versus 39%). There was a large difference (20%) in efficacy against influenza A (69%) and influenza B (49%) types for not-matched strains. Summary estimates of vaccine efficacy were highest when ascertainment was based on culture confirmation.
CONCLUSION
Influenza vaccines are efficacious, but efficacy estimates depend on many variables including type of vaccine and age of vaccinees, degree of matching of the circulating strains to the vaccine, influenza type, and methods of case ascertainment.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Child; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Female; Humans; Influenza Vaccines; Influenza, Human; Male; Middle Aged; Young Adult
PubMed: 23142300
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.10.084 -
The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal Apr 2014Live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) is effective in children but contraindicated in children <2 years of age. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) is effective in children but contraindicated in children <2 years of age.
METHODS
We searched Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycInfo and CINAHL through February 2013 for existing systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (for safety). We included studies enrolling healthy children <2 years of age who received LAIV, compared with placebo or inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV). Data were extracted independently by 2 investigators. The relative risk (RR) was pooled across studies using the random effects model.
RESULTS
We found 7 eligible randomized controlled trials and 2 observational studies. Randomized controlled trials included 6281 children and were at low to moderate risk of bias. LAIV reduced the incidence of influenza compared with placebo (relative risk = 0.36, 95% confidence interval: 0.23-0.58, P < 0.05) with a number needed to vaccinate of 17. LAIV increased the incidence of minor side effects (fever and rhinorrhea). LAIV had a similar effect in preventing influenza (relative risk = 0.76, 95% confidence interval: 0.45-1.30, P > 0.05) compared with inactivated influenza vaccine. There was an increase of hospitalization rate (post hoc analysis) and medical attended wheezing with LAIV.
CONCLUSIONS
LAIV is highly effective in children <2 years of age compared with placebo and is as effective to inactivated influenza vaccine. The safety profile of LAIV is reasonable although evidence is sparse. LAIV may be considered as an option in this age group particularly during seasons with vaccine shortage.
Topics: Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Influenza Vaccines; Influenza, Human; Vaccines, Attenuated
PubMed: 24632668
DOI: 10.1097/INF.0000000000000200 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2017The common cold is a spontaneously remitting infection of the upper respiratory tract, characterised by a runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing, cough, malaise, sore... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The common cold is a spontaneously remitting infection of the upper respiratory tract, characterised by a runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing, cough, malaise, sore throat, and fever (usually < 37.8º C). The widespread morbidity caused by the common cold worldwide is related to its ubiquitousness rather than its severity. The development of vaccines for the common cold has been difficult because of antigenic variability of the common cold virus and the indistinguishable multiple other viruses and even bacteria acting as infective agents. There is uncertainty regarding the efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing the common cold in healthy people. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011 and previously updated in 2013.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (September 2016), MEDLINE (1948 to September 2016), Embase (1974 to September 2016), CINAHL (1981 to September 2016), and LILACS (1982 to September 2016). We also searched three trials registers for ongoing studies and four websites for additional trials (February 2017). We included no language or date restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any virus vaccines compared with placebo to prevent the common cold in healthy people.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted trial data. We resolved disagreements by discussion or by consulting a third review author.
MAIN RESULTS
We found no additional RCTs for inclusion in this update. This review includes one RCT dating from the 1960s with an overall high risk of bias. The RCT included 2307 healthy participants, all of whom were included in analyses. This trial compared the effect of an adenovirus vaccine against placebo. No statistically significant difference in common cold incidence was found: there were 13 (1.14%) events in 1139 participants in the vaccines group and 14 (1.19%) events in 1168 participants in the placebo group (risk ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 2.02; P = 0.90). No adverse events related to the live vaccine were reported. The quality of the evidence was low due to limitations in methodological quality and a wide 95% confidence interval.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This Cochrane Review was based on one study with low-quality evidence. We found no conclusive results to support the use of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people compared with placebo. We identified a need for well-designed, adequately powered RCTs to investigate vaccines for the common cold in healthy people. Any future trials on medical treatments for preventing the common cold should assess a variety of virus vaccines for this condition. Outcome measures should include common cold incidence, vaccine safety, and mortality related to the vaccine.
Topics: Adenovirus Vaccines; Common Cold; Health Status; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vaccines, Attenuated
PubMed: 28516442
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002190.pub5 -
EClinicalMedicine Apr 2022Influenza is one of the most common respiratory viral infections worldwide. Numerous vaccines are used to prevent influenza. Their selection should be informed by the...
BACKGROUND
Influenza is one of the most common respiratory viral infections worldwide. Numerous vaccines are used to prevent influenza. Their selection should be informed by the best available evidence. We aimed to estimate the comparative efficacy and safety of seasonal influenza vaccines in children, adults and the elderly.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). We searched the Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, and websites of regulatory agencies, through December 15th, 2020. We included placebo- or no vaccination-controlled, and head-to-head randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Pairs of reviewers independently screened the studies, abstracted the data, and appraised the risk of bias in accordance to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The primary outcome was laboratory-confirmed influenza. We also synthesized data for hospitalization, mortality, influenza-like illness (ILI), pneumonia or lower respiratory-tract disease, systemic and local adverse events (AEs). We estimated summary risk ratios (RR) using pairwise and NMA with random effects. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42018091895.
FINDINGS
We identified 13,439 citations. A total of 231 RCTs were included after screening: 11 studies did not provide useful data for the analysis; 220 RCTs [100,677 children (< 18 years) and 329,127 adults (18-60 years) and elderly (≥ 61 years)] were included in the NMA. In adults and the elderly, all vaccines, except the trivalent inactivated intradermal vaccine (3-IIV ID), were more effective than placebo in reducing the risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza, with a RR between 0.33 (95% credible interval [CrI] 0.21-0.55) for trivalent inactivated high-dose (3-IIV HD) and 0.56 (95% CrI 0.41-0.74) for trivalent live-attenuated vaccine (3-LAIV). In adults and the elderly, compared with trivalent inactivated vaccine (3-IIV), no significant differences were found for any, except 3-LAIV, which was less efficacious [RR 1.41 (95% CrI 1.04-1.88)]. In children, compared with placebo, RR ranged between 0.13 (95% CrI 0.03-0.51) for trivalent inactivated vaccine adjuvanted with MF59/AS03 and 0.55 (95% CrI 0.36-0.83) for trivalent inactivated vaccine. Compared with 3-IIV, 3-LAIV and trivalent inactivated adjuvanted with MF59/AS03 were more efficacious [RR 0.52 (95% CrI 0.32-0.82) and RR 0.23 (95% CrI 0.06-0.87)] in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza. With regard to safety, higher systemic AEs rates after vaccination with 3-IIV, 3-IIV HD, 3-IIV ID, 3-IIV MF59/AS03-adj, quadrivalent inactivated (4-IIV), quadrivalent adjuvanted (4-IIV MF59/AS03-adj), quadrivalent recombinant (4-RIV), 3-LAIV or quadrivalent live attenuated (4-LAIV) vaccines were noted in adults and the elderly [RR 1.5 (95% CrI 1.18-1.89) to 1.15 (95% CrI 1.06-1.23)] compared with placebo. In children, the systemic AEs rate after vaccination was not significantly higher than placebo.
INTERPRETATION
All vaccines cumulatively achieved major reductions in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza in children, adults, and the elderly. While the live-attenuated was more efficacious than the inactivated vaccine in children, many vaccine types can be used in adults and the elderly.
FUNDING
The directorate general of welfare, Lombardy region.
PubMed: 35360146
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101331 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2009Anthrax is a bacterial zoonosis that occasionally causes human disease and is potentially fatal. Anthrax vaccines include a live-attenuated vaccine, an alum-precipitated... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Anthrax is a bacterial zoonosis that occasionally causes human disease and is potentially fatal. Anthrax vaccines include a live-attenuated vaccine, an alum-precipitated cell-free filtrate vaccine, and a recombinant protein vaccine.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness, immunogenicity, and safety of vaccines for preventing anthrax.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the following databases (November 2008): Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register; CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 4); MEDLINE; EMBASE; LILACS; and mRCT. We also searched reference lists.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of individuals and cluster-RCTs comparing anthrax vaccine with placebo, other (non-anthrax) vaccines, or no intervention; or comparing administration routes or treatment regimens of anthrax vaccine.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently considered trial eligibility, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. We presented cases of anthrax and seroconversion rates using risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We summarized immunoglobulin G (IgG) concentrations using geometric means. We carried out a sensitivity analysis to investigate the effect of clustering on the results from one cluster-RCT. No meta-analysis was undertaken.
MAIN RESULTS
One cluster-RCT (with 157,259 participants) and four RCTs of individuals (1917 participants) met the inclusion criteria. The cluster-RCT from the former USSR showed that, compared with no vaccine, a live-attenuated vaccine (called STI) protected against clinical anthrax whether given by a needleless device (RR 0.16; 102,737 participants, 154 clusters) or the scarification method (RR 0.25; 104,496 participants, 151 clusters). Confidence intervals were statistically significant in unadjusted calculations, but when a small amount of association within clusters was assumed, the differences were not statistically significant. The four RCTs (of individuals) of inactivated vaccines (anthrax vaccine absorbed and recombinant protective antigen) showed a dose response relationship for the anti-protective antigen IgG antibody titre. Intramuscular administration was associated with fewer injection site reactions than subcutaneous injection, and injection site reaction rates were lower when the dosage interval was longer.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
One cluster-RCT provides limited evidence that a live-attenuated vaccine is effective in preventing cutaneous anthrax. Vaccines based on anthrax antigens are immunogenic in most vaccinees with few adverse events or reactions. Ongoing randomized controlled trials are investigating the immunogenicity and safety of anthrax vaccines.
Topics: Anthrax; Anthrax Vaccines; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vaccines, Attenuated
PubMed: 19370633
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006403.pub2 -
Vaccine May 2016Measles is one of the most contagious human diseases. Administration of the live attenuated measles vaccine has substantially reduced childhood mortality and morbidity... (Review)
Review
Measles is one of the most contagious human diseases. Administration of the live attenuated measles vaccine has substantially reduced childhood mortality and morbidity since its licensure in 1963. The live but attenuated form of the vaccine describes a virus poorly adapted to replicating in human tissue, but with a replication yield sufficient to elicit an immune response for long-term protection. Given the high transmissibility of the wild-type virus and that transmission of other live vaccine viruses has been documented, we conducted a systematic review to establish if there is any evidence of human-to-human transmission of the live attenuated measles vaccine virus. We reviewed 773 articles for genotypic confirmation of a vaccine virus transmitted from a recently vaccinated individual to a susceptible close contact. No evidence of human-to-human transmission of the measles vaccine virus has been reported amongst the thousands of clinical samples genotyped during outbreaks or endemic transmission and individual case studies worldwide.
Topics: Genotype; Humans; Measles; Measles Vaccine; Measles virus; Vaccines, Attenuated
PubMed: 27083423
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.03.092 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2000Plague is endemic in China, Mongolia, Burma, Vietnam, Indonesia, India, large parts of Southern Africa, the United States and South America. There are three types of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Plague is endemic in China, Mongolia, Burma, Vietnam, Indonesia, India, large parts of Southern Africa, the United States and South America. There are three types of vaccines (live attenuated, killed and F1 fraction) with varying means of administration.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to assess the effects of vaccines to prevent plague.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and reference lists of articles. We handsearched the journal 'Vaccine' and contacted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials comparing live and killed plague vaccines against no intervention, placebo, other plague vaccines or vaccines against other disease (control vaccines).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three reviewers assessed the eligibility of trials.
MAIN RESULTS
No trials were included.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
There is not enough evidence to evaluate the effectiveness of any plague vaccine, or the relative effectiveness between vaccines and their tolerability. Circumstantial data from observational studies suggest that killed types may be more effective and have fewer adverse effects than attenuated types of vaccine. No evidence appears to exist on the long-term effects of any plague vaccine.
Topics: Humans; Plague; Plague Vaccine; Vaccines, Attenuated; Vaccines, Inactivated
PubMed: 10796565
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000976