-
Risk Analysis : An Official Publication... Jul 2016Serological tests provide information about individual immunity from historical infection or immunization. Cross-sectional serological studies provide data about the... (Review)
Review
Serological tests provide information about individual immunity from historical infection or immunization. Cross-sectional serological studies provide data about the age- and sex-specific immunity levels for individuals in the studied population, and these data can provide a point of comparison for the results of transmission models. In the context of developing an integrated model for measles and rubella transmission, we reviewed the existing measles and rubella literature to identify the results of national serological studies that provided cross-sectional estimates of population immunity at the time of data collection. We systematically searched PubMed, the Science Citation Index, and references we identified from relevant articles published in English. We extracted serological data for comparison to transmission model outputs. For rubella, serological studies of women of child-bearing age provide information about the potential risks of infants born with congenital rubella syndrome. Serological studies also document the loss of maternal antibodies, which occurs at different rates for the different viruses and according to the nature of the induced immunity (i.e., infection or vaccine). The serological evidence remains limited for some areas, with studies from developed countries representing a disproportionate part of the evidence. The collection and review of serological evidence can help program managers identify immunity gaps in the population, which may help them better understand the characteristics of individuals within their populations who may participate in transmission and manage risks.
Topics: Antibodies, Viral; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Humans; Male; Measles; Rubella; Seroepidemiologic Studies; Vaccination
PubMed: 26077609
DOI: 10.1111/risa.12430 -
Clinical Infectious Diseases : An... Aug 2019The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends an additional dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected children receiving...
BACKGROUND
The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends an additional dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected children receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy following immune reconstitution. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize available evidence regarding measles seroprevalence and measles vaccine immunogenicity, efficacy, and safety in HIV-infected adolescents and adults to provide the evidence base for recommendations on the need for measles vaccination.
METHODS
We conducted searches of 8 databases through 26 September 2017. Identified studies were screened independently by 2 reviewers.
RESULTS
The search identified 30 studies meeting inclusion criteria. Across studies, measles seroprevalence among HIV-infected adolescents and adults was high (median, 92%; 27 studies), with no significant difference compared to HIV-uninfected participants (10 studies). In 6 studies that evaluated the immunogenicity of MCVs among seronegative HIV-infected adults, measles seropositivity at end of follow-up ranged from 0% to 56% (median, 39%). No severe adverse events were reported following measles vaccination in HIV-infected patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on similar measles seroprevalence between HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected adolescents and adults, and the low response to vaccination, these studies do not support the need for an additional dose of MCV in HIV-infected adolescents and adults. These findings support WHO guidelines that measles vaccine be administered to potentially susceptible, asymptomatic HIV-infected adults, and may be considered for those with symptomatic HIV infection if not severely immunosuppressed. Measles-susceptible adolescents and adults, regardless of HIV status, may require targeted vaccination efforts to reach critical vaccination thresholds and achieve regional elimination goals.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Antibodies, Viral; Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active; HIV Infections; Humans; Immunogenicity, Vaccine; Measles; Measles Vaccine; Seroepidemiologic Studies
PubMed: 30452621
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciy980 -
Medicine Nov 2015A combined measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) vaccine is expected to facilitate universal immunization against these 4 diseases. This study was undertaken to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
A combined measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) vaccine is expected to facilitate universal immunization against these 4 diseases. This study was undertaken to synthesize current research findings of the immunogenicity and safety of MMRV in healthy children.We searched PubMed, Embase, BIOSIS Previews, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and other databases through September 9, 2014. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected and collected independently by 2 reviewers. Meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 12.0 and RevMan 5.3.Twenty-four RCTs were included in qualitative synthesis. Nineteen RCTs compared single MMRV dose with measles-mumps-rubella vaccine with or without varicella vaccine (MMR + V/MMR). Similar seroconversion rates of these 4 viruses were found between comparison groups. There were comparable geometric mean titers (GMTs) against mumps and varicella viruses between MMRV group and MMR + V/MMR group. MMRV group achieved enhanced immune response to measles component, with GMT ratio of 1.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48, 1.86; P < 0.001) for MMRV versus MMR and 1.62 (95% CI 1.51, 1.70; P < 0.001) for MMRV versus MMR + V. Meanwhile, immune response to rubella component in MMRV group was slightly reduced, GMT ratios were 0.81 (95% CI 0.78, 0.85; P < 0.001) and 0.79 (95% CI 0.76, 0.83; P < 0.001), respectively. Well tolerated safety profiles were demonstrated except higher incidence of fever (relative risks 1.12-1.60) and measles/rubella-like rash (relative risks 1.44-1.45) in MMRV groups.MMRV had comparable immunogenicity and overall safety profiles to MMR + V/MMR in healthy children based on current evidence.
Topics: Chickenpox; Chickenpox Vaccine; Child; Humans; Measles; Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine; Rubella; Vaccination; Vaccines, Combined
PubMed: 26554769
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001721 -
Risk Analysis : An Official Publication... Jul 2016Economic analyses for vaccine-preventable diseases provide important insights about the value of prevention. We reviewed the literature to identify all of the... (Review)
Review
Economic analyses for vaccine-preventable diseases provide important insights about the value of prevention. We reviewed the literature to identify all of the peer-reviewed, published economic analyses of interventions related to measles and rubella immunization options to assess the different types of analyses performed and characterize key insights. We searched PubMed, the Science Citation Index, and references from relevant articles for studies in English and found 67 analyses that reported primary data and quantitative estimates of benefit-cost or cost-effectiveness analyses for measles and/or rubella immunization interventions. We removed studies that we characterized as cost-minimization analyses from this sample because they generally provide insights that focused on more optimal strategies to achieve the same health outcome. The 67 analyses we included demonstrate the large economic benefits associated with preventing measles and rubella infections using vaccines and the benefit of combining measles and rubella antigens into a formulation that saves the costs associated with injecting the vaccines separately. Despite the importance of population immunity and dynamic viral transmission, most of the analyses used static models to estimate cases prevented and characterize benefits, although the use of dynamic models continues to increase. Many of the analyses focused on characterizing the most significant adverse outcomes (e.g., mortality for measles, congenital rubella syndrome for rubella) and/or only direct costs, and the most complete analyses present data from high-income countries.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Measles; Measles Vaccine; Rubella; Rubella Vaccine; Vaccination
PubMed: 25545778
DOI: 10.1111/risa.12331 -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases Dec 2021Migrant populations are one of several underimmunised groups in the EU or European Economic Area (EU/EEA), yet little is known about their involvement in outbreaks of...
Migrant populations are one of several underimmunised groups in the EU or European Economic Area (EU/EEA), yet little is known about their involvement in outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases. This information is vital to develop targeted strategies to improve the health of diverse migrant communities. We did a systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42019157473; Jan 1, 2000, to May 22, 2020) adhering to PRISMA guidelines, to identify studies on vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks (measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, polio, hepatitis A, varicella, Neisseria meningitidis, and Haemophilus influenzae) involving migrants residing in the EU/EEA and Switzerland. We identified 45 studies, reporting on 47 distinct vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks across 13 countries. Most reported outbreaks involving migrants were of measles (n=24; 6496 cases), followed by varicella (n=11; 505 cases), hepatitis A (n=7; 1356 cases), rubella (n=3; 487 cases), and mumps (n=2; 293 cases). 19 (40%) outbreaks, predominantly varicella and measles, were reported in temporary refugee camps or shelters. Of 11 varicella outbreaks, nine (82%) were associated with adult migrants. Half of measles outbreaks (n=11) were associated with migrants from eastern European countries. In conclusion, migrants are involved in vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks in Europe, with adult and child refugees residing in shelters or temporary camps at particular risk, alongside specific nationality groups. Vulnerability varies by disease, setting, and demographics, highlighting the importance of tailoring catch-up vaccination interventions to specific groups in order to meet regional and global vaccination targets as recommended by the new Immunisation Agenda 2030 framework for action. A better understanding of vaccine access and intent in migrant groups and a greater focus on co-designing interventions is urgently needed, with direct implications for COVID-19 vaccine delivery.
Topics: Adult; Child; Disease Outbreaks; Europe; Humans; Immunization Programs; Refugee Camps; Refugees; Transients and Migrants; Vaccination; Vaccine-Preventable Diseases
PubMed: 34626552
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00193-6 -
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases Jan 2023Recent insights supporting the safety of live-attenuated vaccines and novel studies on the immunogenicity of vaccinations in the era of biological disease-modifying...
OBJECTIVES
Recent insights supporting the safety of live-attenuated vaccines and novel studies on the immunogenicity of vaccinations in the era of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in paediatric patients with autoimmune/inflammatory rheumatic diseases (pedAIIRD) necessitated updating the EULAR recommendations.
METHODS
Recommendations were developed using the EULAR standard operating procedures. Two international expert committees were formed to update the vaccination recommendations for both paediatric and adult patients with AIIRD. After a systematic literature review, separate recommendations were formulated for paediatric and adult patients. For pedAIIRD, six overarching principles and seven recommendations were formulated and provided with the level of evidence, strength of recommendation and Task Force level of agreement.
RESULTS
In general, the National Immunisation Programmes (NIP) should be followed and assessed yearly by the treating specialist. If possible, vaccinations should be administered prior to immunosuppressive drugs, but necessary treatment should never be postponed. Non-live vaccines can be safely given to immunosuppressed pedAIIRD patients. Mainly, seroprotection is preserved in patients receiving vaccinations on immunosuppression, except for high-dose glucocorticoids and B-cell depleting therapies. Live-attenuated vaccines should be avoided in immunosuppressed patients. However, it is safe to administer the measles-mumps-rubella booster and varicella zoster virus vaccine to immunosuppressed patients under specific conditions. In addition to the NIP, the non-live seasonal influenza vaccination should be strongly considered for immunosuppressed pedAIIRD patients.
CONCLUSIONS
These recommendations are intended for paediatricians, paediatric rheumatologists, national immunisation agencies, general practitioners, patients and national rheumatology societies to attain safe and effective vaccination and optimal infection prevention in immunocompromised pedAIIRD patients.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Vaccines, Attenuated; Rheumatic Diseases; Vaccination; Immunosuppressive Agents; Antirheumatic Agents; Autoimmune Diseases
PubMed: 35725297
DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2022-222574 -
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 -
Environment International Feb 2023Epidemiologic studies of serum per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and antibody response to vaccines have suggested an adverse association, but the consistency... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Epidemiologic studies of serum per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and antibody response to vaccines have suggested an adverse association, but the consistency and magnitude of this association remain unclear.
OBJECTIVE
The goal of this systematic review was to determine the size of the association between a doubling in perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) serum concentration and difference in log antibody concentration following a vaccine, with a focus on five PFAS: perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), and perfluorodecanoic acid (PFDA).
DATA SOURCE
We conducted online searches of PubMed and Web of Science through May 17, 2022 and identified 14 eligible reports published from 2012 to 2022.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS
We included studies conducted in humans, including mother-child pairs, which examined serum PFAS concentration in relation to serum concentration of antibody to a specific antigen following a vaccine.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
We used the risk of bias assessment for non-randomized studies of exposure and certainty assessment method proposed by Morgan et al. (2019). Using a multilevel meta-regression model, we quantitatively synthesized the data.
RESULTS
The 14 reports represented 13 unique groups of subjects; the frequency of studies of a given antibody was Tetanus (n = 7); followed by Diphtheria (6); Measles (4); Rubella (3); Haemophilus influenzae type b and Influenza A H1N1 (2 each); and Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, Influenza A H2N3, Influenza B, and Mumps (1 each). There were approximately 4,830 unique participants included in the analyses across the 14 reports. The models of coefficients between antibody concentration and the five principal PFAS showed homogeneity of associations across antibody types for each principal PFAS. In the models with all antibodies treated as one type, evidence of effect modification by life stage was present for PFOA and PFOS, and for consistency, all associations were evaluated for all ages and for children. The summary associations (coefficients for difference in log[antibody concentration] per doubling of serum PFAS) with 95% confidence intervals that excluded zero ("statistical support"), and certainty of evidence ratings were as follows: for PFOA and all antibodies treated as one type in all ages, -0.06 (-0.10, -0.01; moderate) and in children, -0.10 (-0.16, -0.03; moderate); for Diphtheria in children, -0.12 (-0.23, -0.00; high); for Rubella in all ages, -0.09 (-0.17, -0.01; moderate), and for Tetanus in children, -0.12 (-0.24, -0.00; moderate). For PFOS the summary associations were, for all antibodies treated as one type in all ages, -0.06 (-0.11, -0.01; moderate) and in children, -0.10 (-0.18, -0.03; moderate); for Rubella in all ages, -0.09 (-0.15, -0.03; high) and in children, -0.12 (-0.20, -0.04; high). For PFHxS the summary associations were, for all antibodies treated as one type in all ages, -0.03 (-0.06, -0.00; moderate) and in children, -0.05 (-0.09, -0.00; low); and for Rubella in children, -0.07 (-0.11, -0.02; high). Summary associations for PFNA and PFDA did not have statistical support, but all PFAS studied tended to have an inverse association with antibody concentrations.
LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Epidemiologic data on immunosuppression and five principal PFAS suggest an association, with support across antibodies against multiple types of antigens. Data on Diphtheria, Rubella, and Tetanus were more supportive of an association than for other antibodies, and support was greater for associations with PFOA, PFOS, and PFHxS, than for PFNA or PFDA. The data on any specific antibody were scarce. Confounding factors that might account for the relation were not identified. Nearly all studies evaluated were judged to have a low or moderate risk of bias.
Topics: Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infant; Environmental Pollutants; Tetanus; Diphtheria; Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype; Influenza, Human; Fluorocarbons; Vaccines; Alkanesulfonic Acids; Alkanesulfonates; Rubella
PubMed: 36764183
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.107734 -
Journal of Epidemiology and Global... Mar 2020Europe has experienced a major resurgence of measles in recent years, despite the availability and free access to a safe, effective, and affordable vaccination measles,...
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Europe has experienced a major resurgence of measles in recent years, despite the availability and free access to a safe, effective, and affordable vaccination measles, mumps and rubella vaccine (MMR). The main driver for this is suboptimal vaccine coverage. The three objectives of this study are to synthesize and critically assess parental attitudes and beliefs toward MMR uptake, to develop strategies and policy recommendations to effectively improve MMR vaccine uptake accordingly, and ultimately to identify areas for further research.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted using primary studies from PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Scopus published between 2011 and April 2019. Inclusion criteria comprised primary studies in English conducted in Europe and studying parental attitudes and behavior regarding MMR uptake. Data were extracted using an inductive grounded theory approach.
RESULTS
In all, 20 high-quality studies were identified. Vaccine hesitancy or refusal were mainly due to concerns about vaccine safety, effectiveness, perception of measles risk and burden, mistrust in experts, and accessibility. Factors for MMR uptake included a sense of responsibility toward child and community health, peer judgement, trust in experts and vaccine, and measles severity. Anthroposophical and Gypsy, Roma, and Traveler populations presented unique barriers such as accessibility.
CONCLUSION
A multi-interventional, evidence-based approach is vital to improve confidence, competence, and convenience of measles vaccination uptake. Healthcare professionals need an understanding of individual contextual attitudes and barriers to MMR uptake to tailor effective communication. Effective surveillance is needed to identify under-vaccinated populations for vaccination outreach programs to improve accessibility and uptake.
Topics: Europe; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Humans; Measles; Measles Vaccine; Parents; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Qualitative Research; Vaccination
PubMed: 32175710
DOI: 10.2991/jegh.k.191117.001 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Mar 2020The objectives of this review were to evaluate the effect of age at administration of the first dose of a measles-containing vaccine (MCV1) on protection against measles... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The objectives of this review were to evaluate the effect of age at administration of the first dose of a measles-containing vaccine (MCV1) on protection against measles and on antibody response after one- and two-dose measles vaccinations.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane databases (1964-2017) to identify observational studies estimating vaccine effectiveness and/or measles attack rates by age at first vaccination as well as experimental studies comparing seroconversion by age at first vaccination. Random effect models were used to pool measles risk ratios (RR), measles odds ratios (OR) and seroconversion RR of MCV1 administered at < 9, 9-11 or ≥ 15 months compared with 12 or 12-14 months of age.
RESULTS
We included 41 and 67 studies in the measles protection and immunogenicity analyses. Older age at MCV1, from 6 to ≥15 months, improved antibody response and measles protection among one-dose recipients. Pooled measles RR ranged from 3.56 (95%CI: 1.28, 9.88) for MCV1 at < 9 months to 0.48 (95%CI: 0.36, 0.63) for MCV1 at ≥15 months, both compared to 12-14 months. Pooled seroconversion RR ranged from 0.93 (95%CI: 0.90, 0.96) for MCV1 at 9-11 months to 1.03 (95%CI: 1.00, 1.06) for MCV1 at ≥15 months, both compared to 12 months. After a second dose, serological studies reported high seropositivity regardless of age at administration of MCV1 while epidemiological data based on few studies suggested lower protection with earlier age at MCV1.
CONCLUSIONS
Earlier age at MCV1 decreases measles protection and immunogenicity after one dose and might still have an impact on vaccine failures after two doses of measles vaccine. While two-dose vaccination coverage is most critical to interrupt measles transmission, older age at first vaccination may be necessary to keep the high level of population immunity needed to maintain it.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Humans; Immunization Schedule; Infant; Measles; Measles Vaccine; Observational Studies as Topic; Odds Ratio
PubMed: 32223757
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-020-4870-x