-
Vaccine Apr 2012Recently, two rotavirus vaccines have been recommended for routine immunization of infants worldwide. These vaccines proved efficacious during clinical trials and field... (Review)
Review
Systematic review of regional and temporal trends in global rotavirus strain diversity in the pre rotavirus vaccine era: insights for understanding the impact of rotavirus vaccination programs.
Recently, two rotavirus vaccines have been recommended for routine immunization of infants worldwide. These vaccines proved efficacious during clinical trials and field use in both developing and developed countries, and appear to provide good protection against a range of rotavirus genotypes, including some that are not included in the vaccines. However, since conclusive data that the vaccines will protect against a wide variety of rotavirus strains are still lacking and since vaccines may exert some selection pressure, a detailed picture of global strain prevalence from the pre-rotavirus vaccine era is important to evaluate any potential changes in circulating strains observed after widespread introduction of rotavirus vaccines. Thus, we systematically reviewed rotavirus genotyping studies spanning a 12-year period from 1996 to 2007. In total, ~110,000 strains were genotyped from 100 reporting countries. Five genotypes (G1-G4, and G9) accounted for 88% of all strains, although extensive geographic and temporal differences were observed. For example, the prevalence of G1 strains declined from 2000 onward, while G3 strains re-emerged, and G9 and G12 strains emerged during the same period. When crude strain prevalence data were weighted by region based on the region's contribution to global rotavirus mortality, the importance of genotypes G1 and G9 strains that were more prevalent in regions with low mortality was reduced and conversely the importance of G8 strains that were more prevalent in African settings with greater contribution to global rotavirus mortality was increased. This study provides the most comprehensive, up-to-date information on rotavirus strain surveillance in the pre-rotavirus vaccine era and will provide useful background to examine the impact of rotavirus vaccine introduction on future strain prevalence.
Topics: Genetic Variation; Global Health; Humans; Molecular Epidemiology; Prevalence; Rotavirus; Rotavirus Infections; Rotavirus Vaccines; Vaccination
PubMed: 22520121
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.09.111 -
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics 2018We performed a systematic review to evaluate factors affecting uptake of rotavirus vaccine amongst physicians, parents and health system. We identified 15 studies that...
We performed a systematic review to evaluate factors affecting uptake of rotavirus vaccine amongst physicians, parents and health system. We identified 15 studies that met the inclusion criteria from 790 screened studies published between Jan 2005 to Jan 2016. Perceived severity of rotavirus disease, efficacy of vaccine and recommendation by health authorities positively influenced uptake of vaccine amongst health care providers. Routine and timely vaccination with routine vaccines and availability of rotavirus vaccine in public health programme facilitated uptake. Family income, parental education and employment status positively influenced the decision to vaccinate by parents. Concerns about safety, high cost, additional workload and logistic problems in acquiring vaccine stocks were perceived as barriers. Improved awareness regarding the rotavirus vaccination amongst public and scientific community and strengthening of public health system for better and timely immunisation coverage are important factors to maximize uptake of rotavirus vaccine in India.
PubMed: 29913110
DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2018.1489190 -
Vaccine Jul 2021Older children and adults are susceptible to rotavirus, but the extent to which rotavirus affects this population is not fully understood, hindering accuracy of global... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Older children and adults are susceptible to rotavirus, but the extent to which rotavirus affects this population is not fully understood, hindering accuracy of global rotavirus estimations.
OBJECTIVE
To determine what proportion of diarrhea cases are due to rotavirus among persons ≥ 5 years old and to estimate this proportion by age strata.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using the PRISMA guidelines. We included studies that reported on conditional rotavirus prevalence (i.e., percent of diarrhea due to rotavirus) in persons ≥ 5 years old who were symptomatic with diarrhea/gastroenteritis and had laboratory confirmation for rotavirus infection. Studies on nosocomial infections and outbreak investigations were excluded. We collected age group-specific conditional rotavirus prevalence and other variables, such as study geography, study setting, and study type. We calculated pooled conditional rotavirus prevalence, corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), heterogeneity (I) estimates, and prediction intervals (PI).
RESULTS
Sixty-six studies from 32 countries met the inclusion criteria. Conditional rotavirus prevalence ranged from 0% to 30% across the studies. The total pooled prevalence of rotavirus among persons ≥ 5 years old with diarrhea was 7.6% (95% CI: 6.2-9.2%, I = 99.6%, PI: 0-24%). The pooled prevalence of rotavirus among older children and adolescents was 8.7% (95% CI: 6.2-11.7%, I = 96%, PI:0-27%), among younger adults was 5.4% (95% CI: 1.4-11.8%, I = 96%, PI:0-31%), and among older adults was 4.7% (95% CI: 2.8-7.0%, I = 96%, PI:0-16%). Pooled conditional rotavirus prevalences did not differ by other variables.
CONCLUSION
In this systematic review and meta-analysis of rotavirus among persons ≥ 5 years old with diarrhea, we found relatively low pooled conditional rotavirus prevalence compared to what is typically reported for children < 5 years; however, results should be interpreted with caution as the wide prediction intervals suggest large heterogeneity.
Topics: Adolescent; Aged; Child; Child, Preschool; Diarrhea; Feces; Gastroenteritis; Humans; Infant; Prevalence; Rotavirus; Rotavirus Infections
PubMed: 34244008
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.06.073 -
Infectious Diseases of Poverty Aug 2016Rotavirus was the leading cause of childhood diarrhoea-related hospitalisations and death before the introduction of rotavirus vaccines. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Rotavirus was the leading cause of childhood diarrhoea-related hospitalisations and death before the introduction of rotavirus vaccines.
METHODS
We describe the effectiveness of rotavirus vaccines to prevent rotavirus infections and hospitalizations and the main rotavirus strains circulating before and after vaccine introduction through a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published between 1990 and 2014. 203 studies were included to estimate the proportion of infections due to rotavirus and 10 to assess the impact of the vaccines. 41 of 46 studies in the post-vaccination period were used for meta-analysis of genotypes, 20 to calculate VE against infection, eight for VE against hospitalisation and seven for VE against severe rotavirus-diarrhoea.
RESULTS
24.3 % (95 % CI 22.1-26.5) and 16.1 % (95 % CI 13.2-19.3) of cases of diarrhoea were due to rotavirus before and after vaccine introduction, respectively. The most prevalent G types after vaccine introduction were G2 (51.6 %, 95 % CI 38-65), G9 (14.5 %, 95 % CI 7-23) and G1 (14.2 %, 95 % CI 7-23); while the most prevalent P types were P[4] (54.1 %, 95 % CI 41-67) and P[8] (33 %, 95 % CI 22-46). G2P[4] was the most frequent genotype combination after vaccine introduction. Effectiveness was 53 % (95 % CI 46-60) against infection, 73 % (95 % CI, 66-78) against hospitalisation and 74 % (95 % CI, 68.0-78.0) against severe diarrhoea. Reductions in hospitalisations and mortality due to diarrhoea were observed in countries that adopted universal rotavirus vaccination.
CONCLUSIONS
Rotavirus vaccines are effective in preventing rotavirus-diarrhoea in children in Latin America. The vaccines were associated with changes in genotype distribution.
Topics: Child, Preschool; Diarrhea; Genotype; Hospitalization; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Latin America; Prevalence; Rotavirus; Rotavirus Infections; Rotavirus Vaccines
PubMed: 27514855
DOI: 10.1186/s40249-016-0173-2 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2022Rotavirus vaccination has been proven to effectively protect against rotavirus gastroenteritis. However, there are concerns about the relationship between rotavirus...
BACKGROUND
Rotavirus vaccination has been proven to effectively protect against rotavirus gastroenteritis. However, there are concerns about the relationship between rotavirus vaccination and the risk of autoimmune disorders. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to comprehensively assess the association between rotavirus vaccination and type 1 diabetes (T1D) or celiac disease (CD) risk.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate the type 1 diabetes or celiac disease associated with rotavirus vaccination. The following journal databases were searched to identify potential studies for inclusion: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases.
RESULTS
Seven articles involving more than 5,793,055 children were included. Our results showed that rotavirus vaccination does not alter the subsequent risk of T1D (RR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.82-1.09) or CD (RR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.64-1.17) after vaccination. Furthermore, the risk of T1D was not increased or decreased for children fully exposed to rotavirus vaccination (RR 0.86, 95% CI, 0.54-1.36) and for children partially exposed to rotavirus vaccination (RR 1.05, 95% CI, 0.87-1.26). However, younger (<5 years) vaccinated children at the end of study (RR 0.84, 95% CI = 0.75-0.95) may be at a lower risk for T1D than older (≥5 years) vaccinated children (RR 0.93, 95% CI, 0.81-1.07).
CONCLUSION
The findings of this study suggest that rotavirus vaccination does not appear to be associated with T1D or CD in children. The protective effect of rotavirus vaccination on T1D may be presented by time dependent.
PubMed: 36090563
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2022.951127 -
PharmacoEconomics May 2023Economic evaluations of vaccines should accurately represent all relevant economic and health consequences of vaccination, including losses due to adverse events...
Accounting for Adverse Events Following Immunization in Economic Evaluation: Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Pediatric Vaccines Against Pneumococcus, Rotavirus, Human Papillomavirus, Meningococcus and Measles-Mumps-Rubella-Varicella.
OBJECTIVES
Economic evaluations of vaccines should accurately represent all relevant economic and health consequences of vaccination, including losses due to adverse events following immunization (AEFI). We investigated to what extent economic evaluations of pediatric vaccines account for AEFI, which methods are used to do so and whether inclusion of AEFI is associated with study characteristics and the vaccine's safety profile.
METHODS
A systematic literature search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Systematic Reviews and Trials, Database of the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination of the University of York, EconPapers, Paediatric Economic Database Evaluation, Tufts New England Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, Tufts New England Global Health CEA, International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment Database) was performed for economic evaluations published between 2014 and 29 April 2021 (date of search) pertaining to the five groups of pediatric vaccines licensed in Europe and the United States since 1998: the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, the meningococcal vaccines (MCV), the measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) combination vaccines, the pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) and the rotavirus vaccines (RV). Rates of accounting for AEFI were calculated, stratified by study characteristics (e.g., region, publication year, journal impact factor, level of industry involvement) and triangulated with the vaccine's safety profile (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP] recommendations and information on safety-related product label changes). The studies accounting for AEFI were analyzed in terms of the methods used to account for both cost and effect implications of AEFI.
RESULTS
We identified 112 economic evaluations, of which 28 (25%) accounted for AEFI. This proportion was significantly higher for MMRV (80%, four out of five evaluations), MCV (61%, 11 out of 18 evaluations) and RV (60%, nine out of 15 evaluations) compared to HPV (6%, three out of 53 evaluations) and PCV (5%, one out of 21 evaluations). No other study characteristics were associated with a study's likelihood of accounting for AEFI. Vaccines for which AEFI were more frequently accounted for also had a higher frequency of label changes and a higher level of attention to AEFI in ACIP recommendations. Nine studies accounted for both the cost and health implications of AEFI, 18 studies considered only costs and one only health outcomes. While the cost impact was usually estimated based on routine billing data, the adverse health impact of AEFI was usually estimated based on assumptions.
DISCUSSION
Although (mild) AEFI were demonstrated for all five studied vaccines, only a quarter of reviewed studies accounted for these, mostly in an incomplete and inaccurate manner. We provide guidance on which methods to use to better quantify the impact of AEFI on both costs and health outcomes. Policymakers should be aware that the impact of AEFI on cost-effectiveness is likely to be underestimated in the majority of economic evaluations.
Topics: Child; Humans; Chickenpox; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Streptococcus pneumoniae; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; Rotavirus; Neisseria meningitidis; Mumps; Papillomavirus Infections; Vaccination; Immunization; Measles; Rotavirus Vaccines; Rubella
PubMed: 36809673
DOI: 10.1007/s40273-023-01252-z -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases Feb 2019Oral vaccines underperform in low-income and middle-income countries compared with in high-income countries. Whether interventions can improve oral vaccine performance... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Oral vaccines underperform in low-income and middle-income countries compared with in high-income countries. Whether interventions can improve oral vaccine performance is uncertain.
METHODS
We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions designed to increase oral vaccine efficacy or immunogenicity. We searched Ovid-MEDLINE and Embase for trials published until Oct 23, 2017. Inclusion criteria for meta-analysis were two or more studies per intervention category and available seroconversion data. We did random-effects meta-analyses to produce summary relative risk (RR) estimates. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017060608).
FINDINGS
Of 2843 studies identified, 87 were eligible for qualitative synthesis and 66 for meta-analysis. 22 different interventions were assessed for oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV), oral rotavirus vaccine (RVV), oral cholera vaccine (OCV), and oral typhoid vaccines. There was generally high heterogeneity. Seroconversion to RVV was significantly increased by delaying the first RVV dose by 4 weeks (RR 1·37, 95% CI 1·16-1·62) and OPV seroconversion was increased with monovalent or bivalent OPV compared with trivalent OPV (RR 1·51, 95% CI 1·20-1·91). There was some evidence that separating RVV and OPV increased RVV seroconversion (RR 1·21, 95% CI 1·00-1·47) and that higher vaccine inoculum improved OCV seroconversion (RR 1·12, 95% CI 1·00-1·26). There was no evidence of effect for anthelmintics, antibiotics, probiotics, zinc, vitamin A, withholding breastfeeding, extra doses, or vaccine buffering.
INTERPRETATION
Most strategies did not improve oral vaccine performance. Delaying RVV and reducing OPV valence should be considered within immunisation programmes to reduce global enteric disease. New strategies to address the gap in oral vaccine efficacy are urgently required.
FUNDING
Wellcome Trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, and WHO Polio Research Committee.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Cholera; Cholera Vaccines; Female; Humans; Immunogenicity, Vaccine; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Male; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Rotavirus; Rotavirus Infections; Rotavirus Vaccines; Salmonella typhi; Seroconversion; Treatment Outcome; Typhoid Fever; Typhoid-Paratyphoid Vaccines; Vaccination; Vibrio cholerae; Young Adult
PubMed: 30712836
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30602-9 -
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics Nov 2020This study is aimed to review the published evidence on safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of rotavirus vaccines when co-administered with meningococcal vaccines in...
This study is aimed to review the published evidence on safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of rotavirus vaccines when co-administered with meningococcal vaccines in infants. A systematic literature search was performed in four databases containing peer-reviewed articles and conference abstracts. In total, twelve articles were included in the review; 11 provided information on safety and five on the immunogenicity of rotavirus vaccines following co-administration. No paper was found on efficacy. Additional routine vaccines were administered in all studies. The safety analysis was mainly focused on fever, vomiting, diarrhea, intussusception, and changes in eating habits. Overall, safety profiles and immune responses associated with rotavirus vaccination were comparable between infants co-administered with rotavirus and meningococcal vaccines and infants receiving rotavirus vaccines without meningococcal vaccines. Although data are limited, co-administration of rotavirus and meningococcal vaccines does not appear to interfere with the safety or immunogenicity of rotavirus vaccines.
Topics: Antibodies, Bacterial; Humans; Infant; Meningococcal Vaccines; Rotavirus Vaccines; Vaccination
PubMed: 32298219
DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2020.1739485 -
Vaccine Aug 2023This systematic review presents cost-effectiveness studies of rotavirus vaccination in high-income settings based on dynamic transmission modelling to inform policy... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
This systematic review presents cost-effectiveness studies of rotavirus vaccination in high-income settings based on dynamic transmission modelling to inform policy decisions about implementing rotavirus vaccination programmes.
METHODS
We searched CEA Registry, MEDLINE, Embase, Health Technology Assessment Database, Scopus, and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database for studies published since 2002. Full economic evaluation studies based on dynamic transmission models, focusing on high-income countries, live oral rotavirus vaccine and children ≤ 5 years of age were eligible for inclusion. Included studies were appraised for quality and risk of bias using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) list and the Philips checklist. The review protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020208406).
RESULTS
A total of four economic evaluations were identified. Study settings included England and Wales, France, Norway, and the United States. All studies compared either pentavalent or monovalent rotavirus vaccines to no intervention. All studies were cost-utility analyses that reported incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Included studies consistently concluded that rotavirus vaccination is cost-effective compared with no vaccination relative to the respective country's willingness to pay threshold when herd protection benefits are incorporated in the modelling framework.
CONCLUSIONS
Rotavirus vaccination was found to be cost-effective in all identified studies that used dynamic transmission models in high-income settings where child mortality rates due to rotavirus gastroenteritis are close to zero. Previous systematic reviews of economic evaluations considered mostly static models and had less conclusive findings than the current study. This review suggests that modelling choices influence cost-effectiveness results for rotavirus vaccination. Specifically, the review suggests that dynamic transmission models are more likely to account for the full impact of rotavirus vaccination than static models in cost-effectiveness analyses.
Topics: Child; Humans; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Rotavirus; State Medicine; Vaccination; Rotavirus Infections; Rotavirus Vaccines
PubMed: 37479614
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.06.064 -
Reviews in Medical Virology Mar 2011The efficacy of licensed rotavirus vaccines has only been shown against certain rotavirus group A (RV-A) types. It is critical to understand the burden of rotavirus... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The efficacy of licensed rotavirus vaccines has only been shown against certain rotavirus group A (RV-A) types. It is critical to understand the burden of rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE) and its prevalent types to assess the potential impact of these vaccines in Latin America and the Caribbean (LA&C). We performed a systematic review and meta-analyses of all the available evidence reported from 1990 to 2009 on the burden of rotavirus disease and strains circulating in LA&C. Eligible studies--185 country-level reports, 174 951 faecal samples--were selected from MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, LILACS, regional Ministries of Health, PAHO, regional proceedings, doctoral theses, reference lists of included studies and consulting experts. Arc-sine transformations and DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model were used for meta-analyses. The proportion of gastroenteritis cases due to rotavirus was 24.3% (95%CI 22.3-26.4) and the incidence of RVGE was 170 per 1000 children-years (95%CI 130-210). We estimated a global annual mortality for 22 countries of 88.2 (95%CI 79.3-97.1) deaths per 100 000 under 5 years (47 000 deaths).The most common G type detected was G1 (34.2%), followed by G9 (14.6%), and G2 (14.4%). The most common P types detected were P[8] (56.2%), P[4] (22.1%) and P[1] 5.4%, and the most prevalent P-G type associations were P[8]G1 17.9%, P[4]G2 9.1% and P[8]G9 8.8%. In the last 10 years, G9 circulation increased remarkably and G5 almost disappeared. More recently, G12 appeared and P[4]G2 re-emerged. To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis of rotavirus infection and burden of disease in LA&C.
Topics: Caribbean Region; Disease Outbreaks; Gastroenteritis; Genotype; Humans; Incidence; Latin America; Prevalence; Rotavirus; Rotavirus Infections; Rotavirus Vaccines; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 21384462
DOI: 10.1002/rmv.682