-
Cancer Nov 2018
Topics: Animals; Brain Neoplasms; Cancer Vaccines; Clinical Trials, Phase I as Topic; Drug Repositioning; Humans; Mice; Poliovirus Vaccines; Survival Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30500082
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31828 -
Siriraj Hospital Gazette Mar 1963
Topics: Humans; Poliovirus Vaccines; Vaccines
PubMed: 14136024
DOI: No ID Found -
The Journal of Infectious Diseases Sep 2021Both inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) and oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) have contributed to the rapid disappearance of paralytic poliomyelitis from developed...
Both inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) and oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) have contributed to the rapid disappearance of paralytic poliomyelitis from developed countries despite possessing different vaccine properties. Due to cost, ease of use, and other properties, the Expanded Programme on Immunization added OPV to the routine infant immunization schedule for low-income countries in 1974, but variable vaccine uptake and impaired immune responses due to poor sanitation limited the impact. Following launch of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative in 1988, poliomyelitis incidence has been reduced by >99% and types 2 and 3 wild polioviruses are now eradicated, but progress against type 1 polioviruses which are now confined to Afghanistan and Pakistan has slowed due to insecurity, poor access, and other problems. A strategic, globally coordinated replacement of trivalent OPV with bivalent 1, 3 OPV in 2016 reduced the incidence of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP) but allowed the escape of type 2 vaccine-derived polioviruses (VDPV2) in areas with low immunization rates and use of monovalent OPV2 in response seeded new VDPV2 outbreaks and reestablishment of type 2 endemicity. A novel, more genetically stable type 2 OPV vaccine is undergoing clinical evaluation and may soon be deployed prevent or reduce VDPV2 emergences.
Topics: Disease Eradication; Global Health; Humans; Immunization Programs; Immunization Schedule; Infant; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Inactivated; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Poliovirus Vaccines; Vaccination
PubMed: 34590135
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiaa622 -
Pediatric Clinics of North America Apr 2000Poliomyelitis prevention in the United States has relied virtually exclusively on OPV during the past 30 years. Starting in 1997, a major change in the poliomyelitis... (Review)
Review
Poliomyelitis prevention in the United States has relied virtually exclusively on OPV during the past 30 years. Starting in 1997, a major change in the poliomyelitis vaccination policy occurred, facilitated by substantial progress toward worldwide poliomyelitis eradication. A sequential schedule of IPV followed by OPV became the preferred means to prevent poliomyelitis, although an all-OPV and an all-IPV schedule were considered acceptable alternatives. In 1999, two doses of IPV were recommended to start the primary series, followed by two doses of either poliovirus vaccine. As of January 2000, an all-IPV schedule is currently being implemented in the United States for routine childhood vaccination. Several unusual features are associated with the major public health policy change from an all-OPV to a sequential schedule, including (1) the process of involving a neutral party (i.e., the IOM); (2) the perceived concerns expressed before the change in policy with regard to provider and parent compliance, which could affect the hard-earned gains in raising immunization coverage rates; (3) the ethical issues surrounding the change (e.g., societal versus individual protection) and the influence that a single case of VAPP may have on national policy; (4) the relative lack of importance of cost-effectiveness data; and (5) the weight of progress in the global polio eradication initiative spurring the change in the United States and, increasingly, in other industrialized countries. The IOM assisted in the evaluation of the national poliomyelitis vaccination policy in 1977 and again in 1988. The 1988 review recommended that a sequential IPV-OPV schedule be considered at such time that a combination vaccine becomes available. Also, the IOM raised several important questions. Extensive research to address the questions raised by the IOM had been conducted so that, in 1996, more data were available for the decision-making process. The primary reasons for the change in vaccination policy were (1) the continued occurrence of VAPP in the absence of indigenously acquired wildtype poliovirus-associated paralytic disease, (2) the reduced risk for importation and spread of wild-type poliovirus caused by the progress of the global polio eradication initiative, (3) evidence from vaccine trials that combined IPV-OPV schedules are safe and immunogenic, and (4) maintenance of high levels of population immunity to poliovirus. The global effect of a national change in poliomyelitis vaccination policy was also considered in this policy-making process. Some members of the public health and medical communities raised objections that an increased reliance on IPV in the United States could lead other countries, especially developing countries, to inappropriately abandon OPV and increase reliance on IPV for routine vaccination. Experience from the global smallpox eradication campaign indicated that this scenario was unlikely. The United States ceased vaccinating against smallpox in 1971, 6 years before smallpox was eliminated from the world, without jeopardizing the global smallpox campaign. Subsequently, the effect on the global eradication initiative has been negligible. This article illustrates the potential discrepancy between expressed theoretic concerns about the number of injections and the actual practice once vaccination policy recommendations become the standard of care and that appropriate training and education can overcome these initial concerns. The authors found that compliance with the recommended use of IPV for the first and second doses as part of the sequential schedule was high, independent of socioeconomic status and ethnicity. The need for additional injections did not present a barrier to completion of the recommended childhood immunization schedule. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)
Topics: Child; Global Health; Health Policy; Humans; Immunization Programs; Immunization Schedule; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus Vaccine, Inactivated; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; United States
PubMed: 10761505
DOI: 10.1016/s0031-3955(05)70208-x -
Journal of the National Cancer Institute Apr 2003Early poliovirus vaccines were accidentally contaminated with simian virus 40 (SV40). In Denmark, poliovirus vaccine was administered to most children from 1955 through...
BACKGROUND
Early poliovirus vaccines were accidentally contaminated with simian virus 40 (SV40). In Denmark, poliovirus vaccine was administered to most children from 1955 through 1961. SV40 DNA sequences have been detected in several human malignancies, including mesothelioma, ependymoma, choroid plexus tumors, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. To clarify whether SV40 infection increases risk of these cancers or of cancers arising in children, we examined cancer incidence in three Danish birth cohorts.
METHODS
Population-based cancer incidence data from 1943 through 1997 were obtained from the Danish Cancer Registry. The relationship between exposure to SV40-contaminated vaccine and cancer incidence was evaluated by examining incidence in birth cohorts that differed in exposure to SV40-contaminated vaccine. In addition, cancer incidence was examined in children who were 0-4 years of age before, during, and after the period of vaccine contamination. Incidence was compared using Poisson regression, adjusting for age differences. All statistical tests were two-sided.
RESULTS
After 69.5 million person-years of follow-up, individuals exposed to SV40-contaminated poliovirus vaccine as infants (i.e., born 1955-1961) or children (i.e., born 1946-1952) had lower overall cancer risk (age-adjusted relative risk [RR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.81 to 0.91 and RR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.75 to 0.84, respectively; P<.001 for both) than unexposed individuals (i.e., born 1964-1970, after the vaccine was cleared of SV40 contamination). Specifically, SV40 exposure was not associated with increased incidence of mesothelioma, ependymoma, choroid plexus tumor, or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. After 19.5 million person-years of follow-up, incidence of all cancers combined, of intracranial tumors, and of leukemia among children aged 0-4 years was also not associated with SV40 exposure. Ependymoma incidence was higher during the exposed period than during the unexposed period (RR = 2.59, 95%CI = 1.36 to 4.92; P =.004 versus the period before contamination); however, incidence peaked in 1969, after the vaccine was cleared of SV40.
CONCLUSION
Exposure to SV40-contaminated poliovirus vaccine in Denmark was not associated with increased cancer incidence.
Topics: Child, Preschool; Cohort Studies; Confidence Intervals; Denmark; Drug Contamination; Female; Humans; Incidence; Infant; Male; Neoplasms; Poisson Distribution; Poliovirus Vaccines; Registries; Risk; Simian virus 40
PubMed: 12671021
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/95.7.532 -
Human Vaccines May 2011This randomized, comparative, phase-IIIb study conducted in France aimed to demonstrate whether seroprotection against diphtheria, tetanus and poliomyelitis 1 month... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
Immunogenicity and safety of combined adsorbed low-dose diphtheria, tetanus and inactivated poliovirus vaccine (REVAXIS (®)) versus combined diphtheria, tetanus and inactivated poliovirus vaccine (DT Polio (®)) given as a booster dose at 6 years of age.
This randomized, comparative, phase-IIIb study conducted in France aimed to demonstrate whether seroprotection against diphtheria, tetanus and poliomyelitis 1 month after a single dose of REVAXIS (low-dose diphtheria) is non-inferior to seroprotection 1 month after a single dose of DT Polio (standard-dose diphtheria), both vaccines being given as a second booster to healthy children at 6 years of age. Children were randomly assigned to receive a single intramuscular dose of REVAXIS or DT Polio. Primary endpoints were the 1-month post-booster seroprotection rates for diphtheria, tetanus and poliovirus type-1, -2 and -3 antigens. Secondary endpoints were immunogenicity and safety observations. Of 788 children screened, 760 were randomized: REVAXIS group, 384 children; DT Polio group, 376 children. No relevant difference in demographic characteristics at baseline was observed between REVAXIS and DT Polio groups. Non-inferiority of REVAXIS compared with DT Polio for seroprotection was demonstrated against diphtheria (respectively 98.6% and 99.3%), tetanus (respectively 99.6% and 100%), and poliovirus antigens (100% for each types in both groups). No allergic reactions to REVAXIS were reported. A benefit/risk ratio in favor of REVAXIS was suggested by the trend towards a better tolerability of REVAXIS compared with DT Polio regarding the rate of severe solicited injection-site reactions. The results support the use of REVAXIS as a booster at 6 years of age in infants who previously received a three-dose primary series within the first 6 months of life and a first booster including diphtheria, tetanus and poliovirus vaccine(s) given before 2 years of age.
Topics: Child; Diphtheria; Diphtheria Toxoid; Female; France; Humans; Hypersensitivity; Immunization, Secondary; Incidence; Injections, Intramuscular; Male; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus Vaccines; Skin Diseases; Tetanus; Tetanus Toxoid; Vaccines, Combined
PubMed: 21441781
DOI: 10.4161/hv.7.5.14982 -
PloS One 2008Eight outbreaks of paralytic polio attributable to circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus (cVDPV) have highlighted the risks associated with oral poliovirus vaccine...
BACKGROUND
Eight outbreaks of paralytic polio attributable to circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus (cVDPV) have highlighted the risks associated with oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) use in areas of low vaccination coverage and poor hygiene. As the Polio Eradication Initiative enters its final stages, it is important to consider the extent to which these viruses spread under different conditions, so that appropriate strategies can be devised to prevent or respond to future cVDPV outbreaks.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
This paper examines epidemiological (temporal, geographic, age, vaccine history, social group, ascertainment), and virological (type, genetic diversity, virulence) parameters in order to infer the numbers of individuals likely to have been infected in each of these cVDPV outbreaks, and in association with single acute flaccid paralysis (AFP) cases attributable to VDPVs. Although only 114 virologically-confirmed paralytic cases were identified in the eight cVDPV outbreaks, it is likely that a minimum of hundreds of thousands, and more likely several million individuals were infected during these events, and that many thousands more have been infected by VDPV lineages within outbreaks which have escaped detection.
CONCLUSIONS
Our estimates of the extent of cVDPV circulation suggest widespread transmission in some countries, as might be expected from endemic wild poliovirus transmission in these same settings. These methods for inferring extent of infection will be useful in the context of identifying future surveillance needs, planning for OPV cessation and preparing outbreak response plans.
Topics: Adolescent; Age Distribution; Child; Child, Preschool; Disease Outbreaks; Dominican Republic; Egypt; Genetic Variation; Haiti; Humans; Indonesia; Infant; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccines; Population Surveillance; Social Class
PubMed: 18958288
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003433 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Nov 2010In this study, the serological status of the southern Greek population in the 1–10-year, 11–20-year, 21–30-year and 31–40-year age groups with regard to Sabin...
In this study, the serological status of the southern Greek population in the 1–10-year, 11–20-year, 21–30-year and 31–40-year age groups with regard to Sabin vaccine strains and a collection of 15 recombinant and four non-recombinant poliovirus vaccine strains was determined. For all three poliovirus types, the highest neutralization test (NT) titres were observed in the 1–10- year age group, indicating a good response to vaccination. In general, the serological status of the population of southern Greece with regard to poliovirus is better for types 1 and 2 than for type 3. The presence of the lowest NT titre in the 21– 30-year age group against poliovirus type 3 suggests the need for a booster dose of monovalent Sabin3 vaccine to ensure personal and herd immunity.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Antibodies, Viral; Child; Child, Preschool; Greece; Humans; Immunization Schedule; Immunization, Secondary; Infant; Neutralization Tests; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Poliovirus Vaccines; Seroepidemiologic Studies; Vaccination; Vaccines, Attenuated; Vaccines, Synthetic
PubMed: 20148919
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2010.03188.x -
Pediatric Annals Jun 1997Until worldwide eradication of poliomyelitis is achieved, vaccination with poliovirus vaccines is the only means for providing population and individual immunity to... (Review)
Review
Until worldwide eradication of poliomyelitis is achieved, vaccination with poliovirus vaccines is the only means for providing population and individual immunity to polioviruses. The ACIP, AAP, and AAFP support the global poliomyelitis eradication initiative, and have recommended a transition policy that will increase use of IPV and decrease use of OPV during the next 3 to 5 years.
Topics: Humans; Immunization Schedule; Infant; Poliomyelitis; Poliovirus Vaccine, Inactivated; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; United States
PubMed: 9188130
DOI: 10.3928/0090-4481-19970601-09 -
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 1963
Topics: Humans; Poliovirus; Poliovirus Vaccine, Oral; Poliovirus Vaccines
PubMed: 14060197
DOI: 10.1002/cpt196345573