The Route of Administration of Rabies Vaccines: Comparing the Data

• Published in: Viruses Vol. 13; no. 7; p. 1252
• Main Authors: Briggs, Deborah J, Moore, Susan M
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 27-06-2021; MDPI
• Subjects: Animals; Antibodies; Antibodies, Viral - blood; Cell culture; Clinical trials; Decision making; Disease prevention; Humans; Immune response; Immune system; Immunization Schedule; Immunization, Secondary; Immunogenicity; Immunogenicity, Vaccine; Immunologic Memory; Injections, Intradermal; Injections, Intramuscular; Laboratories; Patients; PEP; Post-Exposure Prophylaxis; Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis; pre-exposure vaccination; PreP; Prophylaxis; Public health; Rabies; Rabies - immunology; Rabies - prevention & control; Rabies Vaccines - administration & dosage; Rabies Vaccines - immunology; Rabies virus - immunology; Review; Vaccination - methods; Vaccine Efficacy; Vaccines; anamnestic response; pre-exposure vaccination; rabies; PEP; PreP; post-exposure prophylaxis; efficacy; immunogenicity
• ISSN: 1999-4915; 1999-4915
• DOI: 10.3390/v13071252

Cell culture rabies vaccines were initially licensed in the 1980s and are essential in the prevention of human rabies. The first post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) vaccination regimen recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) was administered intramuscularly over a lengthy three-month period. In efforts to reduce the cost of PEP without impinging on safety, additional research on two strategies was encouraged by the WHO including the development of less expensive production methods for CCVs and the administration of reduced volumes of CCVs via the intradermal (ID) route. Numerous clinical trials have provided sufficient data to support a reduction in the number of doses, a shorter timeline required for PEP, and the approval of the intradermal route of administration for PEP and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PreP). However, the plethora of data that have been published since the development of CCVs can be overwhelming for public health officials wishing to review and make a decision as to the most appropriate PEP and PreP regimen for their region. In this review, we examine three critical benchmarks that can serve as guidance for health officials when reviewing data to implement new PEP and PreP regimens for their region including: evidence of immunogenicity after vaccination; proof of efficacy against development of disease; and confirmation that the regimen being considered elicits a rapid anamnestic response after booster vaccination.