A dose-escalation safety and immunogenicity study of a new live attenuated human rotavirus vaccine (Rotavin-M1) in Vietnamese children

Prediction of effectiveness of universal rotavirus vaccination in Southwestern Vietnam based on a dynamic mathematical model

Vaccinating young children against rotavirus (RV) is a promising preventive strategy against rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE). We evaluated the relative risk reduction of RVGE induced by universal vaccination in Vietnam through dynamic model analysis. We developed an age-stratified dynamic Vaccinated-Susceptible-Infectious-Recovered-Susceptible model to analyze RV transmission and assess vaccine effectiveness (VE). We assumed 3 different vaccine efficacies: 55%, 70%, and 85%. For model calibration, we used a database of patients under 5 years of age admitted to Ho Chi Minh No.1 Hospital with RVGE between January 2013 and December 2018. Assuming a vaccination rate of 95%, the number of RVGE hospitalizations after 5 years from universal RV vaccination decreased from 92,502 cases to 45,626 with 85% efficacy, to 54,576 cases with 70% efficacy, and to 63,209 cases with 55% efficacy. Additionally, RVGE hospitalizations after 10 years decreased from 177,950 to 89,517 with 85% efficacy and to 121,832 cases with 55% efficacy. The relative risk reductions of RVGE after 10 years were 49.7% with 85% efficacy, 40.6% with 70% efficacy, and 31.5% with 55% efficacy. The VE was 1.10 times (95% CI, 1.01-1.22) higher in the 4-months to 1-year-old age group than in the other age groups (P = 0.038), when applying 85% efficacy with 95% coverage. In conclusion, despite its relatively lower efficacy compared to high-income countries, RV vaccination remains an effective intervention in Southwestern Vietnam. In particular, implementing universal RV vaccination with higher coverage would result in a decrease in RVGE hospitalizations among Vietnamese children under 5 years of age.

Intussusception and Other Adverse Event Surveillance after Pilot Introduction of Rotavirus Vaccine in Nam Dinh and Thua Thien Hue Provinces-Vietnam, 2017-2021

Rotavin-M1 (POLYVAC) was licensed in Vietnam in 2012. The association of Rotavin-M1 with intussusception, a rare adverse event associated with rotavirus vaccines, and with adverse events following immunization (AEFI) have not been evaluated and monitored under conditions of routine use. From February 2017 to May 2021, we conducted a pilot introduction of Rotavin-M1 into the routine vaccination program in two provinces. Surveillance for intussusception was conducted at six sentinel hospitals. AEFI reports at 30 min and 7 days after vaccination were recorded. Among 443 children <12 months of age admitted for intussusception, most (92.3%) were children ≥ 6 months. Of the 388 children who were age-eligible to receive Rotavin-M1, 116 (29.9%) had received ≥1 dose. No intussusception cases occurred in the 1-21 days after dose 1 and one case occurred on day 21 after dose 2. Among the 45,367 children who received ≥1 dose of Rotavin-M1, 9.5% of children reported at least one AEFI after dose 1 and 7.3% after dose 2. Significantly higher AEFI rates occurred among children given Rotavin-M1 with pentavalent vaccines (Quinvaxem®, ComBE Five®) compared to Rotavin-M1 without pentavalent vaccines. There was no association between intussusception and Rotavin-M1. The vaccine was generally safe when administered alone and when co-administered with other vaccines.

Impact of vaccination with different types of rotavirus vaccines on the incidence of intussusception: a randomized controlled meta-analysis

Background

Intussusception is a prevalent pediatric issue causing acute abdominal pain, with potential links to rotavirus vaccines. The variety of these vaccines has grown in recent years. This meta-analysis study aims to evaluate the impact of various rotavirus vaccines on intussusception incidence.

Methods

We executed a thorough search across databases like PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science, leading to the selection of 15 credible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that encompass various types of rotavirus vaccines. From each study, we extracted essential details such as vaccine types and intussusception occurrences. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool, conducted statistical analysis with R (version 4.2.3), determined relative risk (RR) using a random effects model, and performed a subgroup analysis for vaccines of differing brands and types.

Results

We included 15 randomized controlled studies from various countries. While intussusception incidence differed between vaccinated and control groups, this difference was not statistically significant. The overall risk ratio (RR), calculated using a random effects model, was 0.81, with a 95% confidence interval of [0.53, 1.23]. This crossing 1 shows that vaccination didn't notably change disease risk. Additionally, the 0% group heterogeneity suggests consistency across studies, strengthening our conclusions. Subgroup analysis for different vaccine brands and types (RV1 (Rotarix, Rotavac, RV3-BB), RV3 (LLR3), RV5 (RotasiiL, RotaTeq), and RV6) showed no significant variation in intussusception incidence. Despite variations in RR among subgroups, these differences were not statistically significant (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Our study indicates that rotavirus vaccination does not significantly increase the incidence of intussusception. Despite varying impacts across different vaccine brands and types, these variations are insignificant. Given the substantial benefits outweighing the risks, promoting the use of newly developed rotavirus vaccines remains highly valuable.

Systematic Review Registration

www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, Identifier CRD42023425279.

Established and new rotavirus vaccines: a comprehensive review for healthcare professionals

Robust scientific evidence related to two rotavirus (RV) vaccines available worldwide demonstrates their significant impact on RV disease burden. Improving RV vaccination coverage may result in better RV disease control. To make RV vaccination accessible to all eligible children worldwide and improve vaccine effectiveness in high-mortality settings, research into new RV vaccines continues. Although current and in-development RV vaccines differ in vaccine design, their common goal is the reduction of RV disease risk in children <5 years old for whom disease burden is the most significant. Given the range of RV vaccines available, informed decision-making is essential regarding the choice of vaccine for immunization. This review aims to describe the landscape of current and new RV vaccines, providing context for the assessment of their similarities and differences. As data for new vaccines are limited, future investigations will be required to evaluate their performance/added value in a real-world setting.

Rotavirus Strain Trends in United States, 2009–2016: Results from the National Rotavirus Strain Surveillance System (NRSSS)

Before the introduction of vaccines, group A rotaviruses (RVA) were the leading cause of acute gastroenteritis in children worldwide. The National Rotavirus Strain Surveillance System (NRSSS) was established in 1996 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to perform passive RVA surveillance in the USA. We report the distribution of RVA genotypes collected through NRSSS during the 2009–2016 RVA seasons and retrospectively examine the genotypes detected through the NRSSS since 1996. During the 2009–2016 RVA seasons, 2134 RVA-positive fecal specimens were sent to the CDC for analysis of the VP7 and VP4 genes by RT-PCR genotyping assays and sequencing. During 2009–2011, RVA genotype G3P[8] dominated, while G12P[8] was the dominant genotype during 2012–2016. Vaccine strains were detected in 1.7% of specimens and uncommon/unusual strains, including equine-like G3P[8] strains, were found in 1.9%. Phylogenetic analyses showed limited VP7 and VP4 sequence variation within the common genotypes with 1–3 alleles/lineages identified per genotype. A review of 20 years of NRSSS surveillance showed two changes in genotype dominance, from G1P[8] to G3P[8] and then G3P[8] to G12P[8]. A better understanding of the long-term effects of vaccine use on epidemiological and evolutionary dynamics of circulating RVA strains requires continued surveillance.

Rotaviruses: From Pathogenesis to Disease Control—A Critical Review

Since their first recognition in human cases about four decades ago, rotaviruses have remained the leading cause of acute severe dehydrating diarrhea among infants and young children worldwide. The WHO prequalification of oral rotavirus vaccines (ORV) a decade ago and its introduction in many countries have yielded a significant decline in the global burden of the disease, although not without challenges to achieving global effectiveness. Poised by the unending malady of rotavirus diarrhea and the attributable death cases in developing countries, we provide detailed insights into rotavirus biology, exposure pathways, cellular receptors and pathogenesis, host immune response, epidemiology, and vaccination. Additionally, recent developments on the various host, viral and environmental associated factors impacting ORV performance in low-and middle-income countries (LMIC) are reviewed and their significance assessed. In addition, we review the advances in nonvaccine strategies (probiotics, candidate anti-rotaviral drugs, breastfeeding) to disease prevention and management.

Effect of rotavirus genetic diversity on vaccine impact

Group A rotaviruses (RVAs) are the leading cause of gastroenteritis, causing 0.2 million deaths and several million hospitalisations globally each year. Four rotavirus vaccines (Rotarix^TM , RotaTeq^TM , Rotavac^® and ROTASIIL^® ) have been pre-qualified by the World Health Organization (WHO), but the two newly pre-qualified vaccines (Rotavac^® and ROTASIIL^® ) are currently only in use in Palestine and India, respectively. In 2009, WHO strongly proposed that rotavirus vaccines be included in the routine vaccination schedule of all countries around the world. By the end of 2019, a total of 108 countries had administered rotavirus vaccines, and 10 countries have currently been approved by Gavi for the introduction of rotavirus vaccine in the near future. With 39% of global coverage, rotavirus vaccines have had a substantial effect on diarrhoeal morbidity and mortality in different geographical areas, although efficacy appears to be higher in high income settings. Due to the segmented RNA genome, the pattern of RVA genotypes in the human population is evolving through interspecies transmission and/or reassortment events for which the vaccine might be less effective in the future. However, despite the relative increase in some particular genotypes after rotavirus vaccine use, the overall efficacy of rotavirus mass vaccination worldwide has not been affected. Some of the challenges to improve the effect of current rotavirus vaccines can be solved in the future by new rotavirus vaccines and by vaccines currently in progress.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus is a common cause of diarrhoea, diarrhoea-related hospital admissions, and diarrhoea-related deaths worldwide. Rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include Rotarix (GlaxoSmithKline), RotaTeq (Merck), and, more recently, Rotasiil (Serum Institute of India Ltd.), and Rotavac (Bharat Biotech Ltd.).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 30 November 2020, we searched PubMed, the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Social Science & Humanities. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies, and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in children that compared rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO with either placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risk of bias. One author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analyses by under-five country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 228,233 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed Rotarix, 15 trials RotaTeq (88,934 participants), five trials Rotasiil (11,753 participants), and four trials Rotavac (8432 participants). Rotarix Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In low-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 93% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (14,976 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 52% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (3874 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (31,671 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 36% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (26,479 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 58% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (15,882 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 90% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (18,145 participants, 6 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 51% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (6269 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence).   In medium-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 77% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (28,834 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 26% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (23,317 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (13,768 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (2764 participants, 1 trial; high-certainty evidence). RotaTeq Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 97% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (5442 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (3863 participants, 1 trial; low-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6775 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 96% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (5442 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (3863 participants, 1 trial; low-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 44% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6744 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  We did not identify RotaTeq studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low- or medium-mortality countries. Rotasiil Rotasiil has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low or medium child mortality. Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In high-mortality countries, Rotasiil prevented 48% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and resulted in little to no difference in severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In high-mortality countries, Rotasiil prevented 44% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and resulted in little to no difference in severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Rotavac Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low or medium child mortality.  Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In high-mortality countries, Rotavac prevented 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In high-mortality countries, Rotavac prevented 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence); no Rotavac studies have reported on severe all-cause diarrhoea at two-years follow-up. Safety No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) was detected with Rotarix (103,714 participants, 31 trials; high-certainty evidence), RotaTeq (82,502 participants, 14 trials; moderate to high-certainty evidence), Rotasiil (11,646 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), or Rotavac (8210 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Deaths were infrequent and the analysis had insufficient evidence to show an effect on all-cause mortality. Intussusception was rare.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Rotarix, RotaTeq, Rotasiil, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. The relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, but more episodes are prevented in high-mortality settings as the baseline risk is higher. In high-mortality countries some results suggest lower efficacy in the second year. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events, including intussusception, from any of the prequalified rotavirus vaccines.

The Rotavirus Vaccine Landscape, an Update

Rotavirus is the leading cause of severe acute childhood gastroenteritis, responsible for more than 128,500 deaths per year, mainly in low-income countries. Although the mortality rate has dropped significantly since the introduction of the first vaccines around 2006, an estimated 83,158 deaths are still preventable. The two main vaccines currently deployed, Rotarix and RotaTeq, both live oral vaccines, have been shown to be less effective in developing countries. In addition, they have been associated with a slight risk of intussusception, and the need for cold chain maintenance limits the accessibility of these vaccines to certain areas, leaving 65% of children worldwide unvaccinated and therefore unprotected. Against this backdrop, here we review the main vaccines under development and the state of the art on potential alternatives.

Effectiveness of the oral human attenuated pentavalent rotavirus vaccine (RotaTeq™) postlicensure: a meta-analysis-2006-2020

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus (RV), which causes RV-associated gastroenteritis (RVGE), has accounted for considerable morbidity. We aimed to assess the effectiveness (VE) of the oral pentavalent RV vaccine (RotaTeq™) in real-world settings in children and infants with gastroenteritis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search for peer-reviewed studies published between 1 January 2006 and 1 May 2020 and a meta-analysis to calculate the VE of RotaTeq™ vaccine. The primary outcome was the pooled three-dose vaccine VE. Stratified analysis of the vaccine VEs was performed according to dosages, study design, population age, socioeconomic status (SES), introduction condition, control group types, outcomes of RV disease, and RV strains.

RESULTS

After screening 2359 unique records, 28 studies were included and meta-analyzed. The overall VE estimate was 84% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80-87%). Stratified analyses revealed a nonnegligible impact of factors such as study design and SES. Other factors did not show great impart to VE with no significant differences between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RotaTeq™ is effective against RV infection, especially in high-income countries. Adopting suitable study methods and expansion of RV surveillance in low-income regions is crucial to assess VE in real-life settings and provide feasible vaccine regimens to improve vaccine VE.

The performance of licensed rotavirus vaccines and the development of a new generation of rotavirus vaccines: a review

Rotavirus, which causes acute gastroenteritis and severe diarrhea, has posed a great threat to children worldwide over the last 30 y. Since no specific drugs and therapies against rotavirus are available, vaccination is considered the most effective method of decreasing the morbidity and mortality related to rotavirus-associated gastroenteritis. To date, six rotavirus vaccines have been developed and licensed by local governments. Notably, Rotarix™ and RotaTeq™ have been recommended as universal agents against rotavirus infection by the World Health Organization; however, lower efficacies were found in less-developed and developing regions with medium and high child mortality than well-developed ones with low child mortality. For now, two promising novel vaccines, Rotavac™ and RotaSiil™ were pre-qualified by the World Health Organization in 2018. Other rotavirus vaccines in the pipeline including neonatal strain (RV3-BB) and several non-replicating rotavirus vaccines with a parenteral delivery strategy are currently undergoing investigation, with the potential to improve the performance of, and eliminate the safety concerns associated with, previous live oral rotavirus vaccines. This paper reviews the important developments in rotavirus vaccines in the last 20 y and discusses problems and challenges that require investigation in the future.

Rotavirus genotype trends from 2013 to 2018 and vaccine effectiveness in southern Vietnam

OBJECTIVES

Rotavirus (RV) genotypes vary geographically, and this can affect vaccine effectiveness (VE). This study investigated the genotype distribution of RV and explored VE before introducing the RV vaccine to the national immunization programme in Vietnam.

METHODS

This hospital-based surveillance study was conducted at Children's Hospital 1, Ho Chi Minh City in 2013-2018. Stool samples and relevant data, including vaccination history, were collected from children aged <5 years who were hospitalized with gastroenteritis. RV was detected using enzyme immunoassays and then genotyped. Children aged ≥6 months were included in the VE analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 5176 children were included in this study. RV was detected in 2421 children (46.8%). RV positivity decreased over the study period and was associated with age, seasonality, location and previous vaccination. Among 1105 RV-positive samples, G3P[8] was the most prevalent genotype (43.1%), followed by G8P[8] (19.7%), G1P[8] (12.9%) and G2P[4] (12.9%). Overall VE was 69.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 53.3-80.6%] in fully vaccinated children and 58.6% (95% CI 44.1-69.4%) in children who had received at least one dose of RV vaccine. VE was highest for G3P[8] (95% CI 75.1-84.5%) and lowest for G2P[4] (95% CI 32.4-57.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

RV remains a major cause of acute gastroenteritis requiring hospitalization in southern Vietnam. The RV vaccine is effective, but its effectiveness varies with RV genotype.

Update on rotavirus vaccine underperformance in low- to middle-income countries and next-generation vaccines

In the decade since oral rotavirus vaccines (ORV) were recommended by the World Health Organization for universal inclusion in all national immunization programs, significant yet incomplete progress has been made toward reducing the burden of rotavirus in low- to middle-income countries (LMIC). ORVs continue to demonstrate effectiveness and impact in LMIC, yet numerous factors hinder optimal performance and evaluation of these vaccines. This review will provide an update on ORV performance in LMIC, the increasing body of literature regarding factors that affect ORV response, and the status of newer and next-generation rotavirus vaccines as of early 2020. Fully closing the gap in rotavirus prevention between LMIC and high-income countries will likely require a multifaceted approach accounting for biological and methodological challenges and evaluation and roll-out of newer and next-generation vaccines.

Vaccines against gastroenteritis, current progress and challenges

Enteric viral and bacterial infections continue to be a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in young children in low-income and middle-income countries, the elderly, and immunocompromised individuals. Vaccines are considered an effective and practical preventive approach against the predominantly fecal-to-oral transmitted gastroenteritis particularly in the resource-limited countries or regions where implementation of sanitation systems and supply of safe drinking water are not quickly achievable. While vaccines are available for a few enteric pathogens including rotavirus and cholera, there are no vaccines licensed for many other enteric viral and bacterial pathogens. Challenges in enteric vaccine development include immunological heterogeneity among pathogen strains or isolates, a lack of animal challenge models to evaluate vaccine candidacy, undefined host immune correlates to protection, and a low protective efficacy among young children in endemic regions. In this article, we briefly updated the progress and challenges in vaccines and vaccine development for the leading enteric viral and bacterial pathogens including rotavirus, human calicivirus, Shigella, enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC), cholera, nontyphoidal Salmonella, and Campylobacter, and introduced a novel epitope- and structure-based vaccinology platform known as MEFA (multiepitope fusion antigen) and the application of MEFA for developing broadly protective multivalent vaccines against heterogenous pathogens.

Product review of the rotavirus vaccines ROTASIIL, ROTAVAC, and Rotavin-M1

Rotavirus is the leading cause of severe dehydrating gastroenteritis and death due to diarrhea among children under 5, causing over 180,000 under-5 deaths annually. Safe, effective rotavirus vaccines have been available for over a decade and are used in over 98 countries. In addition to the globally available, WHO-prequalified ROTARIX (GSK) and RotaTeq (Merck), several new rotavirus vaccines have attained national licensure - ROTAVAC (Bharat Biotech) and ROTASIIL (Serum Institute of India), licensed and manufactured in India and now WHO-prequalified, and Rotavin-M1 (PolyVac), licensed and manufactured in Vietnam. In this review, we summarize the available clinical trial and post-introduction evidence for these three new orally administered rotavirus vaccines. All three vaccines have demonstrated safety and efficacy against rotavirus diarrhea, although publicly available preclinical data are limited in some cases. This expanding product landscape presents a range of options to optimize immunization programs, and new presentations of each vaccine are currently under development.

Formulation and preclinical studies with a trivalent rotavirus P2-VP8 subunit vaccine

More effective rotavirus vaccines are essential for preventing extensive diarrheal morbidity and mortality in children under five years of age in low-resource regions. Nonreplicating rotavirus vaccines (NRRV) administered parenterally provide an alternate vaccination method to the current licensed oral vaccine. Live attenuated vaccines and may generate increased efficacy in low-resource settings because the parenteral administration route bypasses some of the challenges associated with oral administration, including differences in intestinal environments. Work described here supports development of a trivalent NRRV vaccine for parenteral administration to avoid complications of the gastrointestinal route. Recombinant VP8* subunit proteins representing some of the most prevalent strains of rotavirus infecting humans - DS-1 (P[4]), 1076 (P[6]), and Wa (P[8]) - were combined with an aluminum adjuvant and the P2 epitope of tetanus toxoid to enhance the immune response to this NRRV antigen. Vaccine formulation development included selection of aluminum hydroxide (Alhydrogel®) as an appropriate adjuvant as well as an optimal buffer to maintain antigen stability and optimize antigen binding to the adjuvant. Characterization assays were used to select the lead vaccine formulation and monitor formulation stability. The NRRV liquid formulation was stable for one year at 2°C to 8°C and four weeks at 37°C. Immunogenicity of the NRRV formulation was evaluated using a guinea pig model, where we demonstrated that the adjuvant provided a 20-fold increase in neutralization titer against a homologous antigen and that the P2-fusion also enhanced the serum neutralizing antibody responses. This vaccine candidate is currently being evaluated in human clinical trials.

Current and new rotavirus vaccines

As of 2019, four rotavirus vaccines have been prequalified by the WHO for use worldwide. This review highlights current knowledge regarding rotavirus vaccines available, and provides a brief summary of the rotavirus vaccine pipeline.

Serial Passaging of the Human Rotavirus CDC-9 Strain in Cell Culture Leads to Attenuation: Characterization from In Vitro and In Vivo Studies

Live oral rotavirus vaccines have been developed by serial passaging in cell culture and found to be safe in infants. However, mechanisms for the adaptation and attenuation of rotavirus vaccines are not fully understood. We prepared a human rotavirus vaccine strain, CDC-9 (G1P[8]), which when grown in MA104 cells to passage 11 or 12 (P11/P12) had no nucleotide or amino acid sequence changes from the original virus in stool. Upon adaptation and passages in Vero cells, the strain underwent five amino acid changes at P28 and one additional change at P44/P45 in the VP4 gene. We performed virologic, immunological, and pathogenic characterization of wild-type CDC-9 virus at P11/P12 and its two mutants at P28 or P44/P45 using in vitro and in vivo model systems. We found that mutants CDC-9 P28 and P44 induced upregulated expression of immunomodulatory cytokines. On the other hand, the two mutant viruses induced lower STAT1 phosphorylation and grew to 2-log-higher titers than wild-type virus in human Caco-2 cells and simian Vero cells. In neonatal rats, CDC-9 P45 showed reduced rotavirus shedding in fecal specimens and did not induce diarrhea compared to wild-type virus and modulated cytokine responses comparably to Rotarix infection. These findings indicate that mutant CDC-9 is attenuated and safe. Our study is the first to provide insight into the possible mechanisms of human rotavirus adaptation and attenuation and supports ongoing efforts to develop CDC-9 as a new generation of rotavirus vaccine for live oral or parenteral administration.IMPORTANCE Mechanisms for in vitro adaptation and in vivo attenuation of human rotavirus vaccines are not known. The present study is the first to comprehensively compare the in vitro growth characteristics, virulence, and host response of a wild-type and an attenuated human rotavirus strain, CDC-9, in Caco-2 cells and neonatal rats. Our study identifies critical sequence changes in the genome that render human rotavirus adapted to growth to high levels in Vero cells and attenuated and safe in neonatal rats; thus, the study supports clinical development of CDC-9 for oral or parenteral vaccination in children.

Rotavirus infection in children in Southeast Asia 2008-2018: disease burden, genotype distribution, seasonality, and vaccination

Background

Rotaviruses (RVs) are recognized as a major cause of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in infants and young children worldwide. Here we summarize the virology, disease burden, prevalence, distribution of genotypes and seasonality of RVs, and the current status of RV vaccination in Southeast Asia (Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam) from 2008 to 2018.

Methods

Rotavirus infection in Children in Southeast Asia countries was assessed using data from Pubmed and Google Scholars. Most countries in Southeast Asia have not yet introduced national RV vaccination programs. We exclude Brunei Darussalam, and Timor Leste because there were no eligible studies identified during that time.

Results

According to the 2008–2018 RV surveillance data for Southeast Asia, 40.78% of all diarrheal disease in children were caused by RV infection, which is still a major cause of morbidity and mortality in children under 5 years old in Southeast Asia. Mortality was inversely related to socioeconomic status. The most predominant genotype distribution of RV changed from G1P[8] and G2P[4] into the rare and unusual genotypes G3P[8], G8P[8], and G9P[8]. Although the predominat strain has changed, but the seasonality of RV infection remains unchanged. One of the best strategies for decreasing the global burden of the disease is the development and implementation of effective vaccines.

Conclusions

The most predominant genotype distribution of RV was changed time by time. Rotavirus vaccine is highly cost effective in Southeast Asian countries because the ratio between cost per disability-adjusted life years (DALY) averted and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita is less than one. These data are important for healthcare practitioners and officials to make appropriate policies and recommendations about RV vaccination.

Uncovering the First Atypical DS-1-like G1P[8] Rotavirus Strains That Circulated during Pre-Rotavirus Vaccine Introduction Era in South Africa

Emergence of DS-1-like G1P[8] group A rotavirus (RVA) strains during post-rotavirus vaccination period has recently been reported in several countries. This study demonstrates, for the first time, rare atypical DS-1-like G1P[8] RVA strains that circulated in 2008 during pre-vaccine era in South Africa. Rotavirus positive samples were subjected to whole-genome sequencing. Two G1P[8] strains (RVA/Human-wt/ZAF/UFS-NGS-MRC-DPRU1971/2008/G1P[8] and RVA/Human-wt/ZAF/UFS-NGS-MRC-DPRU1973/2008/G1P[8]) possessed a DS-1-like genome constellation background (I2-R2-C2-M2-A2-N2-T2-E2-H2). The outer VP4 and VP7 capsid genes of the two South African G1P[8] strains had the highest nucleotide (amino acid) nt (aa) identities of 99.6–99.9% (99.1–100%) with the VP4 and the VP7 genes of a locally circulating South African strain, RVA/Human-wt/ZAF/MRC-DPRU1039/2008/G1P[8]. All the internal backbone genes (VP1–VP3, VP6, and NSP1-NSP5) had the highest nt (aa) identities with cognate internal genes of another locally circulating South African strain, RVA/Human-wt/ZAF/MRC-DPRU2344/2008/G2P[6]. The two study strains emerged through reassortment mechanism involving locally circulating South African strains, as they were distinctly unrelated to other reported atypical G1P[8] strains. The identification of these G1P[8] double-gene reassortants during the pre-vaccination period strongly supports natural RVA evolutionary mechanisms of the RVA genome. There is a need to maintain long-term whole-genome surveillance to monitor such atypical strains.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus results in more diarrhoea-related deaths in children under five years than any other single agent in countries with high childhood mortality. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in countries with low childhood mortality. Rotavirus vaccines that have been prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include a monovalent vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline), a pentavalent vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck), and, more recently, another monovalent vaccine (Rotavac, Bharat Biotech).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO (RV1, RV5, and Rotavac) for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 April 2018 we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, and BIOSIS. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in children comparing rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risks of bias. One review author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analysis by country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 216,480 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed RV1, 15 trials (88,934 participants) RV5, and four trials (8432 participants) Rotavac. RV1 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 84% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.26; 43,779 participants, 7 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 41% of cases of severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.74; 28,051 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 63% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60; 6114 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; 5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.23; 36,002 participants, 9 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 37% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 39,091 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries RV1 probably prevents 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83; 13,768 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96; 2764 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.88 95% CI 0.83 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence). There were 30 cases of intussusception reported in 53,032 children after RV1 vaccination and 28 cases in 44,214 children after placebo or no intervention (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.05; low-certainty evidence). RV5 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV5 probably prevents 92% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.22; 4132 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62; 5916 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.11; 1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; 7318 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 41% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; 5885 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; 5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; moderate to high-certainty evidence). There were 16 cases of intussusception in 43,629 children after RV5 vaccination and 20 cases in 41,866 children after placebo (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.45; low-certainty evidence). Rotavac Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low child mortality. In India, a high-mortality country, Rotavac probably prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60; 6799 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); the trial did not report on severe all-cause diarrhoea at one-year follow-up. Children vaccinated and followed up for two years Rotavac probably prevents 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases in India (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; 6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02; moderate-certainty evidence). There were eight cases of intussusception in 5764 children after Rotavac vaccination and three cases in 2818 children after placebo (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.35 to 5.02; very low-certainty evidence). There was insufficient evidence of an effect on mortality from any rotavirus vaccine (198,381 participants, 44 trials; low- to very low-certainty evidence), as the trials were not powered to detect an effect at this endpoint.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

RV1, RV5, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. Whilst the relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, there is a greater number of episodes prevented in these settings as the baseline risk is much higher. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events. 21 October 2019 Up to date All studies incorporated from most recent search All published trials found in the last search (4 Apr, 2018) were included and 15 ongoing studies are currently awaiting completion (see 'Characteristics of ongoing studies').

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus results in more diarrhoea-related deaths in children under five years than any other single agent in countries with high childhood mortality. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in countries with low childhood mortality. Rotavirus vaccines that have been prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include a monovalent vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline), a pentavalent vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck), and, more recently, another monovalent vaccine (Rotavac, Bharat Biotech).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO (RV1, RV5, and Rotavac) for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 April 2018 we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, and BIOSIS. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in children comparing rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risks of bias. One review author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analysis by country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 216,480 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed RV1, 15 trials (88,934 participants) RV5, and four trials (8432 participants) Rotavac.RV1 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 84% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.26; 43,779 participants, 7 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 41% of cases of severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.74; 28,051 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 63% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60; 6114 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; 5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).Children vaccinated and followed up for two yearsIn low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.23; 36,002 participants, 9 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 37% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 39,091 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries RV1 probably prevents 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83; 13,768 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96; 2764 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence).No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.88 95% CI 0.83 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence). There were 30 cases of intussusception reported in 53,032 children after RV1 vaccination and 28 cases in 44,214 children after placebo or no intervention (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.05; low-certainty evidence).RV5 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV5 probably prevents 92% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.22; 4132 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62; 5916 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.11; 1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).Children vaccinated and followed up for two yearsIn low-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; 7318 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 41% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; 5885 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; 5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; moderate to high-certainty evidence). There were 16 cases of intussusception in 43,629 children after RV5 vaccination and 20 cases in 41,866 children after placebo (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.45; low-certainty evidence).Rotavac Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low child mortality. In India, a high-mortality country, Rotavac probably prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60; 6799 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); the trial did not report on severe all-cause diarrhoea at one-year follow-up.Children vaccinated and followed up for two yearsRotavac probably prevents 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases in India (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; 6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence).No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02; moderate-certainty evidence). There were eight cases of intussusception in 5764 children after Rotavac vaccination and three cases in 2818 children after placebo (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.35 to 5.02; very low-certainty evidence).There was insufficient evidence of an effect on mortality from any rotavirus vaccine (198,381 participants, 44 trials; low- to very low-certainty evidence), as the trials were not powered to detect an effect at this endpoint.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

RV1, RV5, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. Whilst the relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, there is a greater number of episodes prevented in these settings as the baseline risk is much higher. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events.

Therapeutics and Immunoprophylaxis Against Noroviruses and Rotaviruses: The Past, Present, and Future

Background:

Noroviruses and rotaviruses are important viral etiologies of severe gastroenteritis. Noroviruses are the primary cause of nonbacterial diarrheal outbreaks in humans, whilst rotaviruses are a major cause of childhood diarrhea. Although both enteric pathogens substantially impact human health and economies, there are no approved drugs against noroviruses and rotaviruses so far. On the other hand, whilst the currently licensed rotavirus vaccines have been successfully implemented in over 100 countries, the most advanced norovirus vaccine has recently completed phase-I and II trials.

Methods:

We performed a structured search of bibliographic databases for peer-reviewed research litera-ture on advances in the fields of norovirus and rotavirus therapeutics and immunoprophylaxis.

Results:

Technological advances coupled with a proper understanding of viral morphology and replication over the past decade has facilitated pioneering research on therapeutics and immunoprophylaxis against noroviruses and rotaviruses, with promising outcomes in human clinical trials of some of the drugs and vaccines. This review focuses on the various developments in the fields of norovirus and rotavirus thera-peutics and immunoprophylaxis, such as potential antiviral drug molecules, passive immunotherapies (oral human immunoglobulins, egg yolk and bovine colostral antibodies, llama-derived nanobodies, and anti-bodies expressed in probiotics, plants, rice grains and insect larvae), immune system modulators, probiot-ics, phytochemicals and other biological substances such as bovine milk proteins, therapeutic nanoparti-cles, hydrogels and viscogens, conventional viral vaccines (live and inactivated whole virus vaccines), and genetically engineered viral vaccines (reassortant viral particles, virus-like particles (VLPs) and other sub-unit recombinant vaccines including multi-valent viral vaccines, edible plant vaccines, and encapsulated viral particles).

Conclusions:

This review provides important insights into the various approaches to therapeutics and im-munoprophylaxis against noroviruses and rotaviruses..

Rotavirus vaccine efficacy: current status and areas for improvement

The difference noted in Rotavirus vaccine efficiency between high and low income countries correlates with the lack of universal access to clean water and higher standards of hygiene. Overcoming these obstacles will require great investment and also time, therefore more effective vaccines should be developed to meet the needs of those who would benefit the most from them. Increasing our current knowledge of mucosal immunity, response to Rotavirus infection and its modulation by circadian rhythms could point at actionable pathways to improve vaccination efficacy, especially in the case of individuals affected by environmental enteropathy. Also, a better understanding and validation of Rotavirus entry factors as well as the systematic monitoring of dominant strains could assist in tailoring vaccines to individual's needs. Another aspect that could improve vaccine efficiency is targeting to M cells, for which new ligands could potentially be sought. Finally, alternative mucosal adjuvants and vaccine expression, storage and delivery systems could have a positive impact in the outcome of Rotavirus vaccination.

Noninvasive vaccination against infectious diseases

The development of a successful vaccine, which should elicit a combination of humoral and cellular responses to control or prevent infections, is the first step in protecting against infectious diseases. A vaccine may protect against bacterial, fungal, parasitic, or viral infections in animal models, but to be effective in humans there are some issues that should be considered, such as the adjuvant, the route of vaccination, and the antigen-carrier system. While almost all licensed vaccines are injected such that inoculation is by far the most commonly used method, injection has several potential disadvantages, including pain, cross contamination, needlestick injury, under- or overdosing, and increased cost. It is also problematic for patients from rural areas of developing countries, who must travel to a hospital for vaccine administration. Noninvasive immunizations, including oral, intranasal, and transcutaneous administration of vaccines, can reduce or eliminate pain, reduce the cost of vaccinations, and increase their safety. Several preclinical and clinical studies as well as experience with licensed vaccines have demonstrated that noninvasive vaccine immunization activates cellular and humoral immunity, which protect against pathogen infections. Here we review the development of noninvasive immunization with vaccines based on live attenuated virus, recombinant adenovirus, inactivated virus, viral subunits, virus-like particles, DNA, RNA, and antigen expression in rice in preclinical and clinical studies. We predict that noninvasive vaccine administration will be more widely applied in the clinic in the near future.

Improving rotavirus vaccine coverage: Can newer-generation and locally produced vaccines help?

There are two internationally available WHO-prequalified oral rotavirus vaccines (Rotarix and RotaTeq), two rotavirus vaccines licensed in India (Rotavac and Rotasiil), one in China (Lanzhou lamb rotavirus vaccine) and one in Vietnam (Rotavin-M1), and several candidates in development. Rotavirus vaccination has been rolled out in Latin American countries and is beginning to be deployed in sub-Saharan African countries but middle- and low-income Asian countries have lagged behind in rotavirus vaccine introduction. We provide a mini-review of the leading newer-generation rotavirus vaccines and compare them with Rotarix and RotaTeq. We discuss how the development and future availability of newer-generation rotavirus vaccines that address the programmatic needs of poorer countries may help scale-up rotavirus vaccination where it is needed.

Rotavirus Vaccines: a story of success with challenges ahead

Approximately 40 years have passed since the discovery of the rotavirus and 10 years since the introduction and progressive dissemination of rotavirus vaccines worldwide. Currently, 92 countries have introduced rotavirus vaccines into national or subnational programs with evident impact in disease reduction. Two vaccines have been widely used, and four additional vaccines have been licensed and are being used in defined regions. In this context, one main issue that remains unsolved is the lower vaccine efficacy/effectiveness in low-income countries. An additional partially answered issue relates to rotavirus strain circulation in vaccinated populations. These issues are discussed in this review. The most imperative challenge ahead is to fulfill the WHO’s recommendation to introduce rotavirus vaccines in all countries.

The rotavirus vaccine development pipeline

Rotavirus disease is a leading global cause of mortality and morbidity in children under 5 years of age. The effectiveness of the two globally used oral rotavirus vaccines quickly became apparent when introduced into both developed and developing countries, with significant reductions in rotavirus-associated mortality and hospitalizations. However, the effectiveness and impact of the vaccines is reduced in developing country settings, where the burden and mortality is highest.

New rotavirus vaccines, including live oral rotavirus candidates and non-replicating approaches continue to be developed, with the major aim to improve the global supply of rotavirus vaccines and for local implementation, and to improve vaccine effectiveness in developing settings. This review provides an overview of the new rotavirus vaccines in development by developing country manufacturers and provides a rationale why newer candidates continue to be explored. It describes the new live oral rotavirus vaccine candidates as well as the non-replicating rotavirus vaccines that are furthest along in development.

Comparative analysis of the immunogenicity of monovalent and multivalent rotavirus immunogens

The strategies for developing rotavirus (RV) vaccines have always been controversial. At present, both the monovalent RV vaccine and the multivalent RV vaccine have displayed excellent safety and efficacy against RV infection and shown cross-reactive immunity, which laid the question whether the multivalent RV vaccine could be replaced by the monovalent RV vaccine. In this study, we focused on comparing the immunogenicity (serum neutralization activity and protection against homotypic and heterotypic RVs’ challenge) of individual standard RV strains (monovalent RV immunogens) and different combinations of them (multivalent RV immunogens). In result, RV immunogens showed general immunogenicity and heterotypic reaction but the multivalent RV immunogens exhibited greater serum neutralization activity and stronger heterotypic reaction than the monovalent RV immunogens (P<0.05). As to the protection, the multivalent RV immunogens also revealed more rapid and stronger protection against homotypic and heterotypic RVs’ challenge than the monovalent RV immunogens. The results demonstrated that both the monovalent and multivalent RV immunogens exhibited high immunogenicity, but the monovalent RV immunogens could not provide enough neutralization antibodies to protect MA104 cells against the infection with heterotypic RV strains and timely protection against homotypic and heterotypic RVs, so the multivalent RV vaccine could not be replaced by the monovalent RV vaccine.

Molecular epidemiology of Rotavirus A, causing acute gastroenteritis hospitalizations among children in Nha Trang, Vietnam, 2007-2008: Identification of rare G9P[19] and G10P[14] strains

Rotavirus A (RVA) causes acute diarrhea in children as well as animals. As part of a cross-sectional study of children less than 5 years of age hospitalized for acute diarrhea in Vietnam during a 15-month period (2007-2008), 322 (43.5%) of 741 fecal specimens contained RVA with 92% either G1P[8] or G3P[8]. This study was undertaken to further characterize strains that remained untypeable to complete the G and P genotypes of the 322 rotavirus-positive specimens. While 307 (95.3%) strains possessed the common human RVA genotypes: G1P[8] (45.0%), G2P[4] (2.8%), G3P[8] (46.9%), and G9P[8] (0.6%), sequencing of initially untypeable specimens revealed the presence of two unusual strains designated NT0073 and NT0082 possessing G9P[19] and G10P[14], respectively. The genotype constellation of NT0073 (G9-P[19]-I5-R1-C1-M1-A8-N1-T7-E1-H1) and the phylogenetic trees suggested its origin as a porcine RVA strain causing diarrhea in a 24-month-old girl whereas the genotype constellation of NT0082 (G10-P[14]-I2-R2-C2-M2-A3-N2-T6-E2-H3) and the phylogenetic trees suggested its origin as an RVA strain of artiodactyl origin (such as cattle, sheep and goats) causing diarrhea in a 13-month-old boy. This study showed that RVA strains of animal host origin were not necessarily attenuated in humans. A hypothesis may be postulated that P[19] and P[14] VP4 spike proteins helped the virus to replicate in the human intestine but that efficient onward human-to-human spread after crossing the host species barrier may require the virus to obtain some additional features as there was no evidence of widespread transmission with the limited sampling performed over the study period. J. Med. Virol. 89:621-631, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Vaccines for viral and bacterial pathogens causing acute gastroenteritis: Part I: Overview, vaccines for enteric viruses and Vibrio cholerae

Efforts to develop vaccines for prevention of acute diarrhea have been going on for more than 40 y with partial success. The myriad of pathogens, more than 20, that have been identified as a cause of acute diarrhea throughout the years pose a significant challenge for selecting and further developing the most relevant vaccine candidates. Based on pathogen distribution as identified in epidemiological studies performed mostly in low-resource countries, rotavirus, Cryptosporidium, Shigella, diarrheogenic E. coli and V. cholerae are predominant, and thus the main targets for vaccine development and implementation. Vaccination against norovirus is most relevant in middle/high-income countries and possibly in resource-deprived countries, pending a more precise characterization of disease impact. Only a few licensed vaccines are currently available, of which rotavirus vaccines have been the most outstanding in demonstrating a significant impact in a short time period. This is a comprehensive review, divided into 2 articles, of nearly 50 vaccine candidates against the most relevant viral and bacterial pathogens that cause acute gastroenteritis. In order to facilitate reading, sections for each pathogen are organized as follows: i) a discussion of the main epidemiological and pathogenic features; and ii) a discussion of vaccines based on their stage of development, moving from current licensed vaccines to vaccines in advanced stage of development (in phase IIb or III trials) to vaccines in early stages of clinical development (in phase I/II) or preclinical development in animal models. In this first article we discuss rotavirus, norovirus and Vibrio cholerae. In the following article we will discuss Shigella, Salmonella (non-typhoidal), diarrheogenic E. coli (enterotoxigenic and enterohemorragic), and Campylobacter jejuni.

The epidemiology and aetiology of diarrhoeal disease in infancy in southern Vietnam: a birth cohort study

•

The diarrhoeal disease burden in a large, prospective infant cohort in Vietnam is defined.

•

Minimum incidence of clinic-based diarrhoea in infants: 271/1000 infant-years.

•

Rotavirus was most commonly identified, followed by norovirus and bacterial pathogens.

•

Frequent repeat infections with the same pathogen within 1 year.

•

Inclusion of rotavirus in the immunization schedule for Vietnam is warranted.

Objectives

Previous studies indicate a high burden of diarrhoeal disease in Vietnamese children, however longitudinal community-based data on burden and aetiology are limited. The findings from a large, prospective cohort study of diarrhoeal disease in infants in southern Vietnam are presented herein.

Methods

Infants were enrolled at birth in urban Ho Chi Minh City and a semi-rural district in southern Vietnam, and followed for 12 months (n = 6706). Diarrhoeal illness episodes were identified through clinic-based passive surveillance, hospital admissions, and self-reports.

Results

The minimum incidence of diarrhoeal illness in the first year of life was 271/1000 infant-years of observation for the whole cohort. Rotavirus was the most commonly detected pathogen (50% of positive samples), followed by norovirus (24%), Campylobacter (20%), Salmonella (18%), and Shigella (16%). Repeat infections were identified in 9% of infants infected with rotavirus, norovirus, Shigella, or Campylobacter, and 13% of those with Salmonella infections.

Conclusions

The minimum incidence of diarrhoeal disease in infants in both urban and semi-rural settings in southern Vietnam was quantified prospectively. A large proportion of laboratory-diagnosed disease was caused by rotavirus and norovirus. These data highlight the unmet need for a rotavirus vaccine in Vietnam and provide evidence of the previously unrecognized burden of norovirus in infants.

A prospective multi-center observational study of children hospitalized with diarrhea in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

We performed a prospective multicenter study to address the lack of data on the etiology, clinical and demographic features of hospitalized pediatric diarrhea in Ho Chi Minh City (HCMC), Vietnam. Over 2,000 (1,419 symptomatic and 609 non-diarrheal control) children were enrolled in three hospitals over a 1-year period in 2009–2010. Aiming to detect a panel of pathogens, we identified a known diarrheal pathogen in stool samples from 1,067/1,419 (75.2%) children with diarrhea and from 81/609 (13.3%) children without diarrhea. Rotavirus predominated in the symptomatic children (664/1,419; 46.8%), followed by norovirus (293/1,419; 20.6%). The bacterial pathogens Salmonella, Campylobacter, and Shigella were cumulatively isolated from 204/1,419 (14.4%) diarrheal children and exhibited extensive antimicrobial resistance, most notably to fluoroquinolones and third-generation cephalosporins. We suggest renewed efforts in generation and implementation of policies to control the sale and prescription of antimicrobials to curb bacterial resistance and advise consideration of a subsidized rotavirus vaccination policy to limit the morbidity due to diarrheal disease in Vietnam.

Rotavirus vaccines: current status and future considerations

Rotavirus is the leading cause of severe diarrhea among children<5 years worldwide. Currently licensed rotavirus vaccines have been efficacious and effective, with many countries reporting substantial declines in diarrheal and rotavirus-specific morbidity and mortality. However, the full public health impact of these vaccines has not been realized. Most countries, including those with the highest disease burden, have not yet introduced rotavirus vaccines into their national immunization programs. Research activities that may help inform vaccine introduction decisions include (1) establishing effectiveness, impact, and safety for rotavirus vaccines in low-income settings; (2) identifying potential strategies to improve performance of oral rotavirus vaccines in developing countries, such as zinc supplementation; and (3) pursuing alternate approaches to oral vaccines, such as parenteral immunization. Policy- and program-level barriers, such as financial implications of new vaccine introductions, should be addressed to ensure that countries are able to make informed decisions regarding rotavirus vaccine introduction.

Human rotavirus vaccine (RIX4414) efficacy in the first two years of life: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial in China

Rotaviruses (RV) are a major cause of severe gastroenteritis (GE) in children aged<5 y. For the first time in China, we assessed the efficacy of two oral doses of the human rotavirus vaccine (RIX4414) in infants during the first two years of life (113808/NCT01171963). Healthy infants aged 6-16 weeks were randomized (1:1) to receive two oral doses of either the RIX4414 vaccine/placebo according to a 0, 1 month schedule. Vaccine efficacy (VE) against severe RVGE was assessed from two weeks post-Dose 2 up until the end of the second RV season and calculated with its 95% confidence intervals (CI). The primary efficacy objective was met if the lower limit of the 95% CI on VE was ≥10%. Unsolicited symptoms reported during the 31-d post-vaccination follow-up period and serious adverse events (SAEs) reported throughout the study were assessed. Of 3333 enrolled infants, 3148 were included in the according-to-protocol efficacy cohort. Over two consecutive RV seasons, fewer severe RVGE episodes were reported in the RIX4414 group (n=21) vs. the placebo group (n=75). VE against severe RVGE was 72% (95% CI: 54.1-83.6); the lower limit of the 95% CI on VE was >10%. The number of unsolicited symptoms and SAEs reported was similar between both groups. Thirteen deaths (RIX4414=6; placebo=7) occurred during the study. All SAEs and deaths in the RIX4414 group were considered unrelated to vaccination. Two oral doses of RIX4414 vaccine provided a substantial level of protection against severe RVGE in Chinese children during the first two years of life.

Progress with rotavirus vaccines: summary of the Tenth International Rotavirus Symposium

Over 350 scientific, public and private sector experts from 47 countries convened at the Tenth International Rotavirus Symposium in Bangkok, Thailand on 19-21 September 2012 to discuss progress in the prevention and control of rotavirus, the leading cause of diarrhea hospitalizations and deaths among young children worldwide. Participants discussed data on the burden and epidemiology of rotavirus disease, results of trials of rotavirus vaccines, postmarketing data on vaccine impact and safety from countries that have implemented rotavirus vaccination programs, new insights in rotavirus pathogenesis, immunity and strain diversity, and key issues related to vaccine policy and introduction.