1
|
Malembaka EB, Bugeme PM, Hutchins C, Xu H, Hulse JD, Demby MN, Gallandat K, Saidi JM, Rumedeka BB, Itongwa M, Tshiwedi-Tsilabia E, Kitoga F, Bodisa-Matamu T, Kavunga-Membo H, Bengehya J, Kulondwa JC, Debes AK, Taty N, Lee EC, Lunguya O, Lessler J, Leung DT, Cumming O, Okitayemba PW, Mukadi-Bamuleka D, Knee J, Azman AS. Effectiveness of one dose of killed oral cholera vaccine in an endemic community in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: a matched case-control study. THE LANCET. INFECTIOUS DISEASES 2024; 24:514-522. [PMID: 38246191 PMCID: PMC11043051 DOI: 10.1016/s1473-3099(23)00742-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2023] [Revised: 11/07/2023] [Accepted: 11/21/2023] [Indexed: 01/23/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A global shortage of cholera vaccines has increased the use of single-dose regimens, rather than the standard two-dose regimen. There is sparse evidence on single-dose protection, particularly in children. In 2020, a mass vaccination campaign was conducted in Uvira, an endemic urban setting in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, resulting in largely single-dose coverage. We examined the effectiveness of a single-dose of the oral cholera vaccine Euvichol-Plus in this high-burden setting. METHODS In this matched case-control study, we recruited individuals with medically attended confirmed cholera in the two cholera treatment facilities in the city of Uvira. The control group consisted of age-matched, sex-matched, and neighbourhood-matched community individuals. We recruited across two distinct periods: Oct 14, 2021, to March 10, 2022 (12-17 months after vaccination), and Nov 21, 2022, to Oct 18, 2023 (24-36 months after vaccination). Study staff administered structured questionnaires to all participants to capture demographics, household conditions, potential confounding variables, and vaccination status. The odds of vaccination for the case and control groups were contrasted in conditional logistic regression models to estimate unadjusted and adjusted vaccine effectiveness. FINDINGS We enrolled 658 individuals with confirmed cholera and 2274 matched individuals for the control group. 99 (15·1%) individuals in the case group were younger than 5 years at the time of vaccination. The adjusted single-dose vaccine effectiveness was 52·7% (95% CI 31·4 to 67·4) 12-17 months after vaccination and 44·7% (24·8 to 59·4) 24-36 months after vaccination. Although protection in the first 12-17 months after vaccination was similar for children aged 1-4 years and older individuals, the estimate of protection in children aged 1-4 years appeared to wane during the third year after vaccination (adjusted vaccine effectiveness 32·9%, 95% CI -30·7 to 65·5), with CIs spanning the null. INTERPRETATION A single dose of Euvichol-Plus provided substantial protection against medically attended cholera for at least 36 months after vaccination in this cholera-endemic setting. Although the evidence provides support for similar levels of protection in young children and others in the short term, protection among children younger than 5 years might wane significantly during the third year after vaccination. FUNDING Wellcome Trust and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Espoir Bwenge Malembaka
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA; Centre for Tropical Diseases and Global Health (CTDGH), Université Catholique de Bukavu, Bukavu, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Patrick Musole Bugeme
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA; Centre for Tropical Diseases and Global Health (CTDGH), Université Catholique de Bukavu, Bukavu, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Chloe Hutchins
- Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Hanmeng Xu
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Juan Dent Hulse
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Maya N Demby
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Karin Gallandat
- Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Jaime Mufitini Saidi
- Ministère de la Santé Publique, Hygiène et Prévention, Zone de Santé d'Uvira, Uvira, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | | | | | | | - Faida Kitoga
- Rodolphe Merieux INRB-Goma Laboratory, Goma, North Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Tavia Bodisa-Matamu
- Rodolphe Merieux INRB-Goma Laboratory, Goma, North Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Hugo Kavunga-Membo
- Rodolphe Merieux INRB-Goma Laboratory, Goma, North Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo; Institut National de Recherche Biomédicale, INRB, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Justin Bengehya
- Ministère de la Santé Publique, Hygiène et Prévention, Division Provinciale de la Sante' Publique du Sud-Kivu, Bukavu, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Jean-Claude Kulondwa
- Ministère de la Santé Publique, Hygiène et Prévention, Division Provinciale de la Sante' Publique du Sud-Kivu, Bukavu, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Amanda K Debes
- Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Nagède Taty
- PNECHOL-MD, Community IMCI, Ministry of Health, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Elizabeth C Lee
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Octavie Lunguya
- Institut National de Recherche Biomédicale, INRB, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo; Service of Microbiology, Department of Medical Biology, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Justin Lessler
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA; University of North Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Daniel T Leung
- Division of Infectious Diseases and Division of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Oliver Cumming
- Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | | | - Daniel Mukadi-Bamuleka
- Rodolphe Merieux INRB-Goma Laboratory, Goma, North Kivu, Democratic Republic of the Congo; Institut National de Recherche Biomédicale, INRB, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo; Service of Microbiology, Department of Medical Biology, University of Kinshasa, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Jackie Knee
- Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Andrew S Azman
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA; Geneva Centre for Emerging Viral Diseases and Division of Tropical and Humanitarian Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Matias WR, Guillaume Y, Cene Augustin G, Vissieres K, Ternier R, Slater DM, Harris JB, Franke MF, Ivers LC. Effectiveness of the Euvichol® oral cholera vaccine at 2 years: A case-control and bias-indicator study in Haiti. Int J Infect Dis 2024; 139:153-158. [PMID: 38000510 PMCID: PMC10784151 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2023.11.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2023] [Revised: 10/21/2023] [Accepted: 11/19/2023] [Indexed: 11/26/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The World Health Organization recommends the use of oral cholera vaccine (OCV) in cholera control efforts. Euvichol®, pre-qualified in 2015, is the leading component of the Global OCV stockpile, but data on its field effectiveness are limited. To evaluate Euvichol® vaccine effectiveness (VE), we conducted a case-control study between September 2018 to March 2020 following an OCV campaign in November 2017 in Haiti. METHODS Cases were individuals with acute watery diarrhea. Stool samples were tested by culture and real-time polymerase chain reaction of the Vibrio cholerae ctxA gene. Cases were matched to four community controls without diarrhea by residence, enrollment time, age, and gender, and interviewed for sociodemographics, risk factors, and self-reported vaccination. Cholera cases were analyzed by conditional logistic regression in the VE study. Non-cholera diarrhea cases were analyzed in a bias-indicator study. RESULTS We enrolled 15 cholera cases matched to 60 controls, and 63 non-cholera diarrhea cases matched to 249 controls. In the VE analysis, eight (53%) cases reported vaccination with any number of doses compared to 43 (72%) controls. Adjusted two-dose OCV VE was 69% (95% CI -71 to 94%). CONCLUSIONS Between 10-27 months after vaccination, Euvichol® was effective and similar to Shanchol™, suggesting that it can serve as one component of multi-sectoral comprehensive cholera control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wilfredo R Matias
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA; Division of Infectious Diseases, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, USA; Center for Global Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | - Damien M Slater
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - Jason B Harris
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - Molly F Franke
- Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| | - Louise C Ivers
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA; Center for Global Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, USA; Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA; Harvard Global Health Institute, Cambridge, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wiens KE, Xu H, Zou K, Mwaba J, Lessler J, Malembaka EB, Demby MN, Bwire G, Qadri F, Lee EC, Azman AS. Estimating the proportion of clinically suspected cholera cases that are true Vibrio cholerae infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med 2023; 20:e1004286. [PMID: 37708235 PMCID: PMC10538743 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004286] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2022] [Revised: 09/28/2023] [Accepted: 08/25/2023] [Indexed: 09/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cholera surveillance relies on clinical diagnosis of acute watery diarrhea. Suspected cholera case definitions have high sensitivity but low specificity, challenging our ability to characterize cholera burden and epidemiology. Our objective was to estimate the proportion of clinically suspected cholera that are true Vibrio cholerae infections and identify factors that explain variation in positivity. METHODS AND FINDINGS We conducted a systematic review of studies that tested ≥10 suspected cholera cases for V. cholerae O1/O139 using culture, PCR, and/or a rapid diagnostic test. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar for studies that sampled at least one suspected case between January 1, 2000 and April 19, 2023, to reflect contemporary patterns in V. cholerae positivity. We estimated diagnostic test sensitivity and specificity using a latent class meta-analysis. We estimated V. cholerae positivity using a random-effects meta-analysis, adjusting for test performance. We included 119 studies from 30 countries. V. cholerae positivity was lower in studies with representative sampling and in studies that set minimum ages in suspected case definitions. After adjusting for test performance, on average, 52% (95% credible interval (CrI): 24%, 80%) of suspected cases represented true V. cholerae infections. After adjusting for test performance and study methodology, the odds of a suspected case having a true infection were 5.71 (odds ratio 95% CrI: 1.53, 15.43) times higher when surveillance was initiated in response to an outbreak than in non-outbreak settings. Variation across studies was high, and a limitation of our approach was that we were unable to explain all the heterogeneity with study-level attributes, including diagnostic test used, setting, and case definitions. CONCLUSIONS In this study, we found that burden estimates based on suspected cases alone may overestimate the incidence of medically attended cholera by 2-fold. However, accounting for cases missed by traditional clinical surveillance is key to unbiased cholera burden estimates. Given the substantial variability in positivity between settings, extrapolations from suspected to confirmed cases, which is necessary to estimate cholera incidence rates without exhaustive testing, should be based on local data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kirsten E. Wiens
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| | - Hanmeng Xu
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
| | - Kaiyue Zou
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
| | - John Mwaba
- Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Zambia (CIDRZ), Lusaka, Zambia
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, School of Health Sciences, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia
- Department of Pathology and Microbiology, University Teaching Hospital, Lusaka, Zambia
| | - Justin Lessler
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
- Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America
| | - Espoir Bwenge Malembaka
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
- Center for Tropical Diseases and Global Health (CTDGH), Université Catholique de Bukavu, Bukavu, Democratic Republic of the Congo
| | - Maya N. Demby
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
| | - Godfrey Bwire
- Division of Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response, Ministry of Health, Kampala, Uganda
| | - Firdausi Qadri
- Infectious Diseases Division, International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research Bangladesh (icddr,b), Dhaka, Bangladesh
| | - Elizabeth C. Lee
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
| | - Andrew S. Azman
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America
- Geneva Centre for Emerging Viral Diseases, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
- Division of Tropical and Humanitarian Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|