Oral polio vaccine stockpile modeling: insights from recent experience

Review of Poliovirus Transmission and Economic Modeling to Support Global Polio Eradication: 2020-2024

Continued investment in the development and application of mathematical models of poliovirus transmission, economics, and risks leads to their use in support of polio endgame strategy development and risk management policies. This study complements an earlier review covering the period 2000-2019 and discusses the evolution of studies published since 2020 by modeling groups supported by the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) partners and others. We systematically review modeling papers published in English in peer-reviewed journals from 2020-2024.25 that focus on poliovirus transmission and health economic analyses. In spite of the long-anticipated end of poliovirus transmission and the GPEI sunset, which would lead to the end of its support for modeling, we find that the number of modeling groups supported by GPEI partners doubled and the rate of their publications increased. Modeling continued to play a role in supporting GPEI and national/regional policies, but changes in polio eradication governance, decentralized management and decision-making, and increased heterogeneity in modeling approaches and findings decreased the overall impact of modeling results. Meanwhile, the failure of the 2016 globally coordinated cessation of type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine use for preventive immunization and the introduction of new poliovirus vaccines and formulation, increased the complexity and uncertainty of poliovirus transmission and economic models and policy recommendations during this time.

Trade-offs of different poliovirus vaccine options for outbreak response in the United States and other countries that only use inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) in routine immunization

Delays in achieving polio eradication have led to ongoing risks of poliovirus importations that may cause outbreaks in polio-free countries. Because of the low, but non-zero risk of paralysis with oral poliovirus vaccines (OPVs), countries that achieve and maintain high national routine immunization coverage have increasingly shifted to exclusive use of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) for all preventive immunizations. However, immunization coverage within countries varies, with under-vaccinated subpopulations potentially able to sustain transmission of imported polioviruses and experience local outbreaks. Due to its cost, ease-of-use, and ability to induce mucosal immunity, using OPV as an outbreak control measure offers a more cost-effective option in countries in which OPV remains in use. However, recent polio outbreaks in IPV-only countries raise questions about whether and when IPV use for outbreak response may fail to stop poliovirus transmission and what consequences may follow from using OPV for outbreak response in these countries. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify modeling studies that explored the use of IPV for outbreak response in IPV-only countries. In addition, applying a model of the 2022 type 2 poliovirus outbreak in New York, we characterized the implications of using different OPV formulations for outbreak response instead of IPV. We also explored the hypothetical scenario of the same outbreak except for type 1 poliovirus instead of type 2. We find that using IPV for outbreak response will likely only stop outbreaks for polioviruses of relatively low transmission potential in countries with very high overall immunization coverage, seasonal transmission dynamics, and only if IPV immunization interventions reach some unvaccinated individuals. Using OPV for outbreak response in IPV-only countries poses substantial risks and challenges that require careful consideration, but may represent an option to consider for some outbreaks in some populations depending on the properties of the available vaccines and coverage attainable.

Evolution of global polio eradication strategies: targets, vaccines, and supplemental immunization activities (SIAs)

BACKGROUND

Despite multiple revisions of targets and timelines in polio eradication plans since 1988, including changes in supplemental immunization activities (SIAs) that increase immunity above routine immunization (RI) coverage, poliovirus transmission continues as of 2024.

METHODS

We reviewed polio eradication plans and Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) annual reports and budgets to characterize key phases of polio eradication, the evolution of poliovirus vaccines, and the role of SIAs. We used polio epidemiology to provide context for successes and failures and updated prior modeling to show the contribution of SIAs in achieving and maintaining low polio incidence compared to expected incidence for the counterfactual of RI only.

RESULTS

We identified multiple phases of polio eradication that included shifts in targets and timelines and the introduction of different poliovirus vaccines, which influenced polio epidemiology. Notable shifts occurred in GPEI investments in SIAs since 2001, particularly since 2016. Modeling results suggest that SIAs play(ed) a key role in increasing (and maintaining) high population immunity to levels required to eradicate poliovirus transmission globally.

CONCLUSIONS

Shifts in polio eradication strategy and poliovirus vaccine usage in SIAs provide important context for understanding polio epidemiology, delayed achievement of polio eradication milestones, and complexity of the polio endgame.