Immunogenicity and safety of a novel monovalent high-dose inactivated poliovirus type 2 vaccine in infants: a comparative, observer-blind, randomised, controlled trial
Summary Background Following the proposed worldwide switch from trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (tOPV) to bivalent types 1 and 3 OPV (bOPV) in 2016, inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) will be the only source of protection against poliovirus type 2. With most countries opting for one dose of IPV...
Saved in:
Published in: | The Lancet infectious diseases Vol. 16; no. 3; pp. 321 - 330 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
United States
Elsevier Ltd
01-03-2016
Elsevier Limited |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Summary Background Following the proposed worldwide switch from trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (tOPV) to bivalent types 1 and 3 OPV (bOPV) in 2016, inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) will be the only source of protection against poliovirus type 2. With most countries opting for one dose of IPV in routine immunisation schedules during this transition because of cost and manufacturing constraints, optimisation of protection against all poliovirus types will be a priority of the global eradication programme. We assessed the immunogenicity and safety of a novel monovalent high-dose inactivated poliovirus type 2 vaccine (mIPV2HD) in infants. Methods This observer-blind, comparative, randomised controlled trial was done in a single centre in Panama. We enrolled healthy infants who had not received any previous vaccination against poliovirus. Infants were randomly assigned (1:1) by computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive a single dose of either mIPV2HD or standard trivalent IPV given concurrently with a third dose of bOPV at 14 weeks of age. At 18 weeks, all infants were challenged with one dose of monovalent type 2 OPV (mOPV2). Primary endpoints were seroconversion and median antibody titres to type 2 poliovirus 4 weeks after vaccination with mIPV2HD or IPV; and safety (as determined by the proportion and nature of serious adverse events and important medical events for 8 weeks after vaccination). The primary immunogenicity analyses included all participants for whom a post-vaccination blood sample was available. All randomised participants were included in the safety analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02111135. Findings Between April 14 and May 9, 2014, 233 children were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive mIPV2HD (117 infants) or IPV (116 infants). 4 weeks after vaccination with mIPV2HD or IPV, seroconversion to poliovirus type 2 was recorded in 107 (93·0%, 95% CI 86·8–96·9) of 115 infants in the mIPV2HD group compared with 86 (74·8%, 65·8–82·4) of 115 infants in the IPV group (difference between groups 18·3%, 95% CI 5·0–31·1; p<0·0001), and median antibody titres against poliovirus type 2 were 181 (95% CI 72·0–362·0) in the mIPV2HD group and 36 (18·0–113·8) in the IPV group (difference between groups 98·8, 95% CI 60·7–136·9; p<0·0001). Serious adverse events were reported for six (5%) of 117 infants in the mIPV2HD group and seven (6%) of 116 infants in the IPV group during the 8-week period after vaccination; none were related to vaccination. No important medical events were reported. Interpretation Our findings lend support to the use of mIPV2HD as an option for stockpiling for outbreak response or primary protection in selected areas at risk for emergence of poliovirus type 2 during the next phase of the polio eradication plan. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 All authors reviewed and approved the manuscript. XS-L was the principal investigator of the study. ASB and RC participated in the development of the study design, interpretation of the data, and reviewed the study report. JJ and NM participated in the study design, study conduct, and reviewed the study report. SACC provided important input into the study design and logistical aspects of the trial. WCW and MSO supervised the laboratory analyses and interpreted the laboratory data. GL-R was the principal investigator of the phase 1 study assessing the mIPV2HD vaccine and provided support in the preparation of the manuscript. Contributors |
ISSN: | 1473-3099 1474-4457 |
DOI: | 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00488-0 |