Noninterference of Rotavirus Vaccine With Measles-Rubella Vaccine at 9 Months of Age and Improvements in Antirotavirus Immunity: A Randomized Trial

Evaluation of ROTARIX® Booster Dose Vaccination at 9 Months for Safety and Enhanced Anti-Rotavirus Immunity in Zambian Children: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Oral rotavirus vaccines show diminished immunogenicity in low-resource settings where rotavirus burden is highest. This study assessed the safety and immune boosting effect of a third dose of oral ROTARIX^® (GlaxoSmithKline) vaccine administered at 9 months of age. A total of 214 infants aged 6 to 12 weeks were randomised to receive two doses of ROTARIX^® as per standard schedule with other routine vaccinations or an additional third dose of ROTARIX^® administered at 9 months old concomitantly with measles/rubella vaccination. Plasma collected pre-vaccination, 1 month after first- and second-dose vaccination, at 9 months old before receipt of third ROTARIX^® dose and/or measles/rubella vaccination, and at 12 months old were assayed for rotavirus-specific IgA (RV-IgA). Geometric mean RV-IgA at 12 months of age and the incidence of clinical adverse events 1 month following administration of the third dose of ROTARIX^® among infants in the intervention arm were compared between infants in the two arms. We found no significant difference in RV-IgA titres at 12 months between the two arms. Our findings showed that rotavirus vaccines are immunogenic in Zambian infants but with modest vaccine seroconversion rates in low-income settings. Importantly, however, a third dose of oral ROTARIX^® vaccine was shown to be safe when administered concomitantly with measles/rubella vaccine at 9 months of age in Zambia. This speaks to opportunities for enhancing rotavirus vaccine immunity within feasible schedules in the national immunization program.

Systematic review of the effect of additional doses of oral rotavirus vaccine on immunogenicity and reduction in diarrhoeal disease among young children

Background

Oral rotavirus vaccines have lower effectiveness in high child mortality settings. We evaluated the impact of additional dose(s) schedules of rotavirus vaccine on vaccine immunogenicity and reduction in episodes of gastroenteritis.

Methods

We searched Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials from 1973 to February 2022, evaluating the immunological and clinical impact of additional dose vs standard dose oral rotavirus vaccine schedules. We extracted immunogenicity - proportion of children with evidence of anti-rotavirus IgA seroresponse, and clinical - proportion of children with at least one episode of severe rotavirus gastroenteritis, outcome data and used random effects meta-analysis where appropriate. We assessed the methodological quality of the studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021261058).

Findings

We screened 536 items and included 7 clinical trials. Our results suggest moderate to high level evidence that an additional dose rotavirus vaccine schedule improves IgA vaccine immune response, including additional doses administered as a booster dose schedule >6 months old; IgA vaccine seroresponse 74·3% additional dose schedule vs 56·1% standard dose schedule RR 1·3 (95%CI, 1·15 - 1·48), and when administered to children who were seronegative at baseline; IgA vaccine seroresponse 48.2% additional dose schedule vs 29.6% standard dose schedule RR 1.86 (95%CI 1.27 to 2.72). Only one study evaluated reduction in gastroenteritis episodes and found little benefit in first year of life, 1·8% vs 2·0% RR 0·88 (95% CI, 0·52 to 1·48), or second year of life, 1·7% vs 2·9% RR 0·62 (95%CI, 0·31 - 1·23).

Interpretation

Administering an additional dose of oral rotavirus vaccines is likely to result in an improved vaccine immune response, including when administered as a booster dose to older children. Evidence of an impact on diarrhoeal disease is needed before additional dose rotavirus vaccine schedules can be recommended as vaccine policy.

Funding

BM was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Royal Australasian College of Physicians Paediatrics and Child Health Division, and the Australian Academy of Science.

Immunogenicity of a Third Scheduled Dose of Rotarix in Australian Indigenous Infants: A Phase IV, Double-blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Rotarix (GlaxoSmithKline) oral rotavirus vaccine is licensed as 2 doses in the first 6 months of life. In settings with high child mortality rates, clinical protection conferred by 2 doses of Rotarix is reduced. We assessed vaccine immune response when an additional dose of Rotarix was given to Australian Aboriginal children 6 to <12 months old.

METHODS

ORVAC is a 2-stage, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Australian Aboriginal children 6 to <12 months old who had received 1 or 2 prior doses of Rotarix rotavirus vaccine were randomized 1:1 to receive an additional dose of Rotarix or matched placebo. The primary immunological end point was seroresponse defined as an anti-rotavirus immunoglobulin A level ≥20 AU/mL, 28-56 days after the additional dose of Rotarix or placebo.

RESULTS

Between March 2018 and August 2020, a total of 253 infants were enrolled. Of these, 178 infants (70%) had analyzable serological results after follow-up; 89 were randomized to receive Rotarix, and 89 to receive placebo. The proportion with seroresponse was 85% after Rotarix compared with 72% after placebo. There were no occurrences of intussusception or any serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

An additional dose of Rotarix administered to Australian Aboriginal infants 6 to <12 months old increased the proportion with a vaccine seroresponse.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT02941107.

Understanding Rotavirus Vaccine Efficacy and Effectiveness in Countries with High Child Mortality

Rotavirus claims thousands of lives of children globally every year with a disproportionately high burden in low- and lower-middle income countries where access to health care is limited. Oral, live-attenuated rotavirus vaccines have been evaluated in multiple settings in both low- and high-income populations and have been shown to be safe and efficacious. However, the vaccine efficacy observed in low-income settings with high rotavirus and diarrheal mortality was significantly lower than that seen in high-income populations where rotavirus mortality is less common. Rotavirus vaccines have been introduced and rolled out in more than 112 countries, providing the opportunity to assess effectiveness of the vaccines in these different settings. We provide an overview of the efficacy, effectiveness, and impact of rotavirus vaccines, focusing on high-mortality settings and identify the knowledge gaps for future research. Despite lower efficacy, rotavirus vaccines substantially reduce diarrheal disease and mortality and are cost-effective in countries with high burden. Continued evaluation of the effectiveness, impact, and cost-benefit of rotavirus vaccines, especially the new candidates that have been recently approved for global use, is a key factor for new vaccine introductions in countries, or for a switch of vaccine product in countries with limited resources.

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.

Development of a Measles and Rubella Multiplex Bead Serological Assay for Assessing Population Immunity

Serosurveys are important tools for estimating population immunity and providing immunization activity guidance. The measles and rubella multiplex bead assay (MBA) offers multiple advantages over standard serological assays and was validated by comparison with the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and the measles plaque reduction neutralization (PRN) assay. Results from a laboratory-produced purified measles virus whole-virus antigen MBA (MeV WVAL) correlated better with ELISA and PRN than results from the baculovirus-expressed measles nucleoprotein (N) MBA. Therefore, a commercially produced whole-virus antigen (MeV WVAC) was evaluated. Serum IgG antibody concentrations correlated significantly with a strong linear relationship between the MeV WVAC and MeV WVAL MBAs (R = 0.962 and R2 = 0.926). IgG concentrations from the MeV WVAC MBA showed strong correlation with PRN titers (R = 0.846), with a linear relationship comparable to values obtained with the MeV WVAL MBA and PRN assay (R2 = 0.716 and R2 = 0.768, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis of the MeV WVAC using PRN titer as the comparator resulted in a seroprotection cutoff of 153 mIU/ml, similar to the established correlate of protection of 120 mIU/ml, with a sensitivity of 98% and a specificity of 83%. IgG concentrations correlated strongly between the rubella WVA MBA and ELISA (R = 0.959 and R2 = 0.919). ROC analysis of the rubella MBA using ELISA as the comparator yielded a cutoff of 9.36 IU/ml, similar to the accepted cutoff of 10 IU/ml for seroprotection, with a sensitivity of 99% and a specificity of 100%. These results support use of the MBA for multiantigen serosurveys assessing measles and rubella population immunity.

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.

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.

Real-world effectiveness of rotavirus vaccines, 2006-19: a literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Since licensure in 2006, rotavirus vaccines have been introduced in more than 100 countries. The efficacy of rotavirus vaccines is variable in settings with different child mortality levels. We did an updated review of the published literature to assess the real-world effectiveness of rotavirus vaccines in a range of settings.

METHODS

In this literature review and meta-analysis, we included observational, post-licensure studies of rotavirus vaccines, published from Jan 1, 2006, to Dec 31, 2019, in English, with laboratory-confirmed rotavirus as the endpoint. In addition to product-specific results for Rotarix (GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium) or RotaTeq (Merck, West Point, PA, USA), we included Rotarix and RotaTeq mixed series, and non-product-specific vaccine effectiveness estimates from countries where Rotarix and RotaTeq are both available. Studies of other infant rotavirus vaccines were excluded because little or no post-licensure data were available. We fitted random-effects regression models to estimate vaccine effectiveness among children younger than 12 months and aged 12-23 months. On the basis of 2017 UNICEF mortality estimates for children younger than 5 years, countries were stratified as having low (lowest quartile), medium (second quartile), or high mortality (third and fourth quartiles).

FINDINGS

We identified and screened 1703 articles, of which 60 studies from 32 countries were included. 31 studies were from countries with low child mortality, eight were from medium-mortality countries, and 21 were from high-mortality countries. Rotarix vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed rotavirus among children younger than 12 months old was 86% (95% CI 81-90) in low-mortality countries, 77% (66-85) in medium-mortality countries, and 63% (54-70) in high-mortality countries. Rotarix vaccine effectiveness among children aged 12-23 months was 86% (81-90) in low-mortality countries, 54% (23-73) in medium-mortality countries, and 58% (38-72) in high-mortality countries. RotaTeq vaccine effectiveness among children younger than 12 months was 86% (76-92) in low-mortality countries and 66% (51-76) in high-mortality countries. RotaTeq vaccine effectiveness among children aged 12-23 months was 84% (79-89) in low-mortality countries. There was no substantial heterogeneity (I² range: 0-36%). Median vaccine effectiveness in low-mortality countries was similar for Rotarix (83%; IQR 78-91), RotaTeq (85%; 81-92), mixed series (86%; 70-91), and non-product-specific (89%; 75-91) vaccination.

INTERPRETATION

Rotavirus vaccines were effective in preventing rotavirus diarrhoea, with higher performance in countries with lower child mortality.

FUNDING

None.

Evaluating strategies to improve rotavirus vaccine impact during the second year of life in Malawi

Rotavirus vaccination has substantially reduced the incidence of rotavirus-associated gastroenteritis (RVGE) in high-income countries, but vaccine impact and estimated effectiveness are lower in low-income countries for reasons that are poorly understood. We used mathematical modeling to quantify rotavirus vaccine impact and investigate reduced vaccine effectiveness, particularly during the second year of life, in Malawi, where vaccination was introduced in October 2012 with doses at 6 and 10 weeks. We fitted models to 12 years of prevaccination data and validated the models against postvaccination data to evaluate the magnitude and duration of vaccine protection. The observed rollout of vaccination in Malawi was predicted to lead to a 26 to 77% decrease in the overall incidence of moderate-to-severe RVGE in 2016, depending on assumptions about waning of vaccine-induced immunity and heterogeneity in vaccine response. Vaccine effectiveness estimates were predicted to be higher among 4- to 11-month-olds than 12- to 23-month-olds, even when vaccine-induced immunity did not wane, due to differences in the rate at which vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals acquire immunity from natural infection. We found that vaccine effectiveness during the first and second years of life could potentially be improved by increasing the proportion of infants who respond to vaccination or by lowering the rotavirus transmission rate. An additional dose of rotavirus vaccine at 9 months of age was predicted to lead to higher estimated vaccine effectiveness but to only modest (5 to 16%) reductions in RVGE incidence over the first 3 years after introduction, regardless of assumptions about waning of vaccine-induced immunity.

Overview of the Development, Impacts, and Challenges of Live-Attenuated Oral Rotavirus Vaccines

Safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness are paramount to vaccine development. Following the isolation of rotavirus particles in 1969 and its evidence as an aetiology of severe dehydrating diarrhoea in infants and young children worldwide, the quest to find not only an acceptable and reliable but cost-effective vaccine has continued until now. Four live-attenuated oral rotavirus vaccines (LAORoVs) (Rotarix^®, RotaTeq^®, Rotavac^®, and RotaSIIL^®) have been developed and licensed to be used against all forms of rotavirus-associated infection. The efficacy of these vaccines is more obvious in the high-income countries (HIC) compared with the low- to middle-income countries (LMICs); however, the impact is far exceeding in the low-income countries (LICs). Despite the rotavirus vaccine efficacy and effectiveness, more than 90 countries (mostly Asia, America, and Europe) are yet to implement any of these vaccines. Implementation of these vaccines has continued to suffer a setback in these countries due to the vaccine cost, policy, discharging of strategic preventive measures, and infrastructures. This review reappraises the impacts and effectiveness of the current live-attenuated oral rotavirus vaccines from many representative countries of the globe. It examines the problems associated with the low efficacy of these vaccines and the way forward. Lastly, forefront efforts put forward to develop initial procedures for oral rotavirus vaccines were examined and re-connected to today vaccines.

Modeling of rotavirus transmission dynamics and impact of vaccination in Ghana

Background:

Rotavirus incidence remains relatively high in low-income countries (LICs) compared to high-income countries (HICs) after vaccine introduction. Ghana introduced monovalent rotavirus vaccine in April 2012 and despite the high coverage, vaccine performance has been modest compared to developed countries. The predictors of low vaccine effectiveness in LICs are poorly understood, and the drivers of subnational heterogeneity in rotavirus vaccine impact are unknown.

Methods:

We used mathematical models to investigate variations in rotavirus incidence in children <5 years old in Ghana. We fit models to surveillance and case-control data from three different hospitals: Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital in Accra, Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital in Kumasi, and War Memorial Hospital in Navrongo. The models were fitted to both pre- and post-vaccine data to estimate parameters describing the transmission rate, waning of maternal immunity, and vaccine response rate.

Results:

The seasonal pattern and age distribution of rotavirus cases varied among the three study sites in Ghana. Our model was able to capture the spatio-temporal variations in rotavirus incidence across the three sites and showed good agreement with the age distribution of observed cases. The rotavirus transmission rate was highest in Accra and lowest in Navrongo, while the estimated duration of maternal immunity was longer (∼5 months) in Accra and Kumasi and shorter (∼3 months) in Navrongo. The proportion of infants who responded to the vaccine was estimated to be high in Accra and Kumasi and low in Navrongo.

Conclusions:

Rotavirus vaccine impact varies within Ghana. A low vaccine response rate was estimated for Navrongo, where rotavirus is highly seasonal and incidence limited to a few months of the year. Our findings highlight the need to further explore the relationship between rotavirus seasonality, maternal immunity, and vaccine response rate to determine how they influence vaccine effectiveness and to develop strategies to improve vaccine impact.

Mortality reduction benefits and intussusception risks of rotavirus vaccination in 135 low-income and middle-income countries: a modelling analysis of current and alternative schedules

Background

Infant rotavirus vaccines have led to substantial reductions in hospital admissions and deaths due to gastroenteritis, but some studies have reported an elevated risk of intussusception, a rare bowel disorder. This analysis aimed to provide evidence on the potential mortality reduction benefits and intussusception risks of current rotavirus vaccination schedules, and to explore whether alternative schedules could have advantages.

Methods

All 135 low-income and middle-income countries, defined by gross national income per capita of less than US$12 236 in the 2018 fiscal year, were included in the model. Mortality reduction benefits and intussusception risks of rotavirus vaccination were modelled by use of an Excel-based static cohort model with a finely disaggregated age structure. Numbers of rotavirus gastroenteritis deaths and intussusception deaths in each week of age were calculated for all infants born in the year 2015 between birth and age 5·0 years, with and without restrictions on age at administration. Benefit–risk ratios (rotavirus gastroenteritis deaths prevented per excess intussusception death) and other indicators were calculated for two vaccination schedules currently recommended by WHO and 16 alternative schedules. Of these schedules, it was assumed that between one and three doses would be given; the first dose of the rotavirus vaccine would be co-administered with either BCG or diphtheria–tetanus–pertussis (DTP)1; and the second or third dose would be co-administered with either DTP1, DTP2, DTP3, or measles (Meas)1.

Findings

A three-dose schedule co-administered with DTP (without age restrictions) could prevent about 74 000 (95% uncertainty interval 59 000–100 000) rotavirus gastroenteritis deaths (38% reduction) and could lead to 201 (77–550) excess intussusception deaths (1·4% increase) compared with no vaccination, resulting in a benefit–risk ratio of 369:1 (160:1–895:1). The benefit–risk ratio was most favourable when the relative risk of intussusception was assumed to decline with the national under-5 mortality rate (2386:1) and least favourable with pessimistic assumptions about access to hospital for intussusception treatment (168:1). Schedules that involve giving the first dose with BCG and the second with DTP1 had the fewest excess intussusception deaths and most favourable benefit–risk ratios.

Interpretation

Rotavirus vaccines have a favourable benefit–risk profile in LMICs. Neonatal schedules have the potential to prevent more rotavirus gastroenteritis deaths and cause fewer excess intussusception deaths than the schedules currently recommended by WHO, but more efficacious rotavirus vaccines would be needed to achieve more substantial mortality reduction benefits.

Funding

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The control of diarrhea, the case of a rotavirus vaccine

[No disponible]

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').

The effect of increased inoculum on oral rotavirus vaccine take among infants in Dhaka, Bangladesh: A double-blind, parallel group, randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Oral, live-attenuated rotavirus vaccines suffer from impaired immunogenicity and efficacy in low-income countries. Increasing the inoculum of vaccine might improve vaccine response, but this approach has been inadequately explored in low-income countries.

METHODS

We performed a double-blind, parallel group, randomized controlled trial from June 2017 through June 2018 in the urban Mirpur slum of Dhaka, Bangladesh to compare vaccine take (primary outcome) among healthy infants randomized to receive either the standard dose or double the standard dose of oral Rotarix (GlaxoSmithKline) vaccine at 6 and 10 weeks of life. Infants with congenital malformations, birth or enrollment weight <2000 gm, known immunocompromising condition, enrollment in another vaccine trial, or other household member enrolled in the study were excluded. Infants were randomized using random permuted blocks. Vaccine take was defined as detection of post-vaccination fecal vaccine shedding by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction with sequence confirmation or plasma rotavirus-specific immunoglobulin A (RV-IgA) seroconversion 4 weeks following the second dose.

RESULTS

220 infants were enrolled and randomized (110 per group). 97 standard-dose and 92 high-dose infants completed the study per-protocol. For the primary outcome, no significant difference was observed between groups: vaccine take occurred in 62 (67%) high-dose infants versus 69 (71%) standard-dose infants (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.67-1.24). However, in post-hoc analysis, children with confirmed vaccine replication had significantly increased RV-IgA responses, independent of the intervention. No significant adverse events related to study participation were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of double the standard dose of an oral, live-attenuated rotavirus vaccine (Rotarix) did not improve vaccine take among infants in urban Dhaka, Bangladesh. However, improved immunogenicity in children with vaccine replication irrespective of initial inoculum provides further evidence for the need to promote in-host replication and improved gut health to improve oral vaccine response in low-income settings. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02992197.

Evaluation of a Booster Dose of Pentavalent Rotavirus Vaccine Coadministered With Measles, Yellow Fever, and Meningitis A Vaccines in 9-Month-Old Malian Infants

Background

Rotavirus vaccines given to infants are safe and efficacious. A booster dose of rotavirus vaccine could extend protection into the second year of life in low-resource countries.

Methods

We conducted an open-label, individual-randomized trial in Bamako, Mali. We assigned 600 infants aged 9–11 months to receive measles vaccine (MV), yellow fever vaccine (YFV), and meningococcal A conjugate vaccine (MenAV) with or without pentavalent rotavirus vaccine (PRV). We assessed the noninferiority (defined as a difference of ≤10%) of seroconversion and seroresponse rates to MV, YFV, and MenAV. We compared the seroresponse to PRV.

Results

Seroconversion to MV occurred in 255 of 261 PRV recipients (97.7%) and 246 of 252 control infants (97.6%; difference, 0.1% [95% confidence interval {CI}, −4.0%–4.2%]). Seroresponse to YFV occurred in 48.1% of PRV recipients (141 of 293), compared with 52.2% of controls (153 of 293; difference, −4.1% [95% CI, −12.2%–4.0%]). A 4-fold rise in meningococcus A bactericidal titer was observed in 273 of 292 PRV recipients (93.5%) and 276 of 293 controls (94.2%; difference, −0.7% [95% CI, −5.2%–3.8%]). Rises in geometric mean concentrations of immunoglobulin A and immunoglobulin G antibodies to rotavirus were higher among PRV recipients (118 [95% CI, 91–154] and 364 [95% CI, 294–450], respectively), compared with controls (68 [95% CI, 50–92] and 153 [95% CI, 114–207], respectively).

Conclusions

PRV did not interfere with MV and MenAV; this study could not rule out interference with YFV. PRV increased serum rotavirus antibody levels.

Clinical Trials Registration

NCT02286895.

Quantifying the Impact of Natural Immunity on Rotavirus Vaccine Efficacy Estimates: A Clinical Trial in Dhaka, Bangladesh (PROVIDE) and a Simulation Study

Background

The low efficacy of rotavirus vaccines in clinical trials performed in low-resource settings may be partially explained by acquired immunity from natural exposure, especially in settings with high disease incidence.

Methods

In a clinical trial of monovalent rotavirus vaccine in Bangladesh, we compared the original per-protocol efficacy estimate to efficacy derived from a recurrent events survival model in which children were considered naturally exposed and potentially immune after their first rotavirus diarrhea (RVD) episode. We then simulated trial cohorts to estimate the expected impact of prior exposure on efficacy estimates for varying rotavirus incidence rates and vaccine efficacies.

Results

Accounting for natural immunity increased the per-protocol vaccine efficacy estimate against severe RVD from 63.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 33.0%-79.7%) to 70.2% (95% CI, 44.5%-84.0%) in the postvaccination period, and original year 2 efficacy was underestimated by 14%. The simulations demonstrated that this expected impact increases linearly with RVD incidence, will be greatest for vaccine efficacies near 50%, and can reach 20% in settings with high incidence and low efficacy.

Conclusions

High rotavirus incidence leads to predictably lower vaccine efficacy estimates due to the acquisition of natural immunity in unvaccinated children, and this phenomenon should be considered when comparing efficacy estimates across settings.

Clinical Trials Registration

NCT01375647.

Impact of Rotavirus Vaccine Introduction and Postintroduction Etiology of Diarrhea Requiring Hospital Admission in Haydom, Tanzania, a Rural African Setting

Background

No data are available on the etiology of diarrhea requiring hospitalization after rotavirus vaccine introduction in Africa. The monovalent rotavirus vaccine was introduced in Tanzania on 1 January 2013. We performed a vaccine impact and effectiveness study as well as a quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR)–based etiology study at a rural Tanzanian hospital.

Methods

We obtained data on admissions among children <5 years to Haydom Lutheran Hospital between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2015 and estimated the impact of vaccine introduction on all-cause diarrhea admissions. We then performed a vaccine effectiveness study using the test-negative design. Finally, we tested diarrheal specimens during 2015 by qPCR for a broad range of enteropathogens and calculated pathogen-specific attributable fractions (AFs).

Results

Vaccine introduction was associated with a 44.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.6%–97.4%) reduction in diarrhea admissions in 2015, as well as delay of the rotavirus season. The effectiveness of 2 doses of vaccine was 74.8% (95% CI, –8.2% to 94.1%) using an enzyme immunoassay–based case definition and 85.1% (95% CI, 26.5%–97.0%) using a qPCR-based case definition. Among 146 children enrolled in 2015, rotavirus remained the leading etiology of diarrhea requiring hospitalization (AF, 25.8% [95% CI, 24.4%–26.7%]), followed by heat-stable enterotoxin-producing Escherichia coli (AF, 18.4% [95% CI, 12.9%–21.9%]), Shigella/enteroinvasive E. coli (AF, 14.5% [95% CI, 10.2%–22.8%]), and Cryptosporidium (AF, 7.9% [95% CI, 6.2%–9.3%]).

Conclusions

Despite the clear impact of vaccine introduction in this setting, rotavirus remained the leading etiology of diarrhea requiring hospitalization. Further efforts to maximize vaccine coverage and improve vaccine performance in these settings are warranted.

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.

Experiences with rotavirus vaccines: can we improve rotavirus vaccine impact in developing countries?

Rotavirus vaccines have been introduced into over 95 countries globally and demonstrate substantial impact in reducing diarrheal mortality and diarrheal hospitalizations in young children. The vaccines are also considered by WHO as "very cost effective" interventions for young children, particularly in countries with high diarrheal disease burden. Yet the full potential impact of rotavirus immunization is yet to be realized. Large countries with big birth cohorts and where disease burden is high in Africa and Asia have not yet implemented rotavirus vaccines at all or at scale. Significant advances have been made demonstrating the impact of the vaccines in low- and lower-middle income countries, yet the modest effectiveness of the vaccines in these settings is challenging. Current research highlights these challenges and considers alternative strategies to overcome them, including alternative immunization schedules and host factors that may inform us of new opportunities.

Interventions to improve oral vaccine performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Oral vaccines underperform in low-income and middle-income countries compared with in high-income countries. Whether interventions can improve oral vaccine performance is uncertain.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions designed to increase oral vaccine efficacy or immunogenicity. We searched Ovid-MEDLINE and Embase for trials published until Oct 23, 2017. Inclusion criteria for meta-analysis were two or more studies per intervention category and available seroconversion data. We did random-effects meta-analyses to produce summary relative risk (RR) estimates. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017060608).

FINDINGS

Of 2843 studies identified, 87 were eligible for qualitative synthesis and 66 for meta-analysis. 22 different interventions were assessed for oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV), oral rotavirus vaccine (RVV), oral cholera vaccine (OCV), and oral typhoid vaccines. There was generally high heterogeneity. Seroconversion to RVV was significantly increased by delaying the first RVV dose by 4 weeks (RR 1·37, 95% CI 1·16-1·62) and OPV seroconversion was increased with monovalent or bivalent OPV compared with trivalent OPV (RR 1·51, 95% CI 1·20-1·91). There was some evidence that separating RVV and OPV increased RVV seroconversion (RR 1·21, 95% CI 1·00-1·47) and that higher vaccine inoculum improved OCV seroconversion (RR 1·12, 95% CI 1·00-1·26). There was no evidence of effect for anthelmintics, antibiotics, probiotics, zinc, vitamin A, withholding breastfeeding, extra doses, or vaccine buffering.

INTERPRETATION

Most strategies did not improve oral vaccine performance. Delaying RVV and reducing OPV valence should be considered within immunisation programmes to reduce global enteric disease. New strategies to address the gap in oral vaccine efficacy are urgently required.

FUNDING

Wellcome Trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, and WHO Polio Research Committee.

Lack of immune interference between inactivated polio vaccine and inactivated rotavirus vaccine co-administered by intramuscular injection in two animal species

A parenteral inactivated rotavirus vaccine (IRV) in development could address three problems with current live oral rotavirus vaccines (ORV): their lower efficacy in low and middle-income countries (LMICs), lingering concerns about their association with intussusception, and their requirement for a separate supply chain with large volume cold storage. Adding a new parenteral IRV to the current schedule of childhood immunizations would be more acceptable if it could be combined with another injectable vaccine such as inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). Current plans for polio eradication call for phasing out oral polio vaccine (OPV) and transitioning to IPV, initially in LMICs as a single dose booster after two doses of OPV and ultimately as a two dose schedule. Today in many LMICs, IPV is administered as a standalone vaccine, which involves a separate cold chain and is relatively costly. We therefore tested in two animal models formulations of IPV with IRV to determine whether co-administration might interfere with the immune response to each product and spare antigen dose for both vaccines. Our results demonstrate that IRV when adjuvanted with alum and administered alone or in combination with IPV did not impair the immune responses to either rotavirus or poliovirus serotypes 1, 2 and 3. Similarly, IPV when formulated and administered alone or together with IRV induced comparable levels of neutralizing antibody to poliovirus type 1, 2 and 3. Furthermore, comparable antibody titers were observed in animals vaccinated with low, middle or high dose of IPV or IRV in combination. This dose sparing and the lack of interference between IPV and IRV administered together represent another step to support the further development of this novel combination vaccine for children.

A Novel Vaccine Strategy Employing Serologically Different Chimpanzee Adenoviral Vectors for the Prevention of HIV-1 and HCV Coinfection

Background: Nearly 3 million people worldwide are coinfected with HIV and HCV. Affordable strategies for prevention are needed. We developed a novel vaccination regimen involving replication-defective and serologically distinct chimpanzee adenovirus (ChAd3, ChAd63) vector priming followed by modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA) boosts, for simultaneous delivery of HCV non-structural (NSmut) and HIV-1 conserved (HIVconsv) region immunogens.

Methods: We conducted a phase I trial in which 33 healthy volunteers were sequentially enrolled and vaccinated via the intramuscular route as follows: 9 received ChAd3-NSmut [2.5 × 10¹⁰ vp] and MVA-NSmut [2 × 10⁸ pfu] at weeks 0 and 8, respectively; 8 received ChAdV63.HIVconsv [5 × 10¹⁰ vp] and MVA.HIVconsv [2 × 10⁸ pfu] at the same interval; 16 were co-primed with ChAd3-NSmut [2.5 × 10¹⁰ vp] and ChAdV63.HIVconsv [5 × 10¹⁰ vp] followed at week 8 by MVA-NSmut and MVA.HIVconsv [both 1 × 10⁸ pfu]. Immunogenicity was assessed using peptide pools in ex vivo ELISpot and intracellular cytokine assays. Vaccine-induced whole blood transcriptome changes were assessed by microarray analysis.

Results: All vaccines were well tolerated and no vaccine-related serious adverse events occurred. Co-administration of the prime-boost vaccine regimens induced high magnitude and broad T cell responses that were similar to those observed following immunization with either regimen alone. Median (interquartile range, IQR) peak responses to NSmut were 3,480 (2,728–4,464) and 3,405 (2,307–7,804) spot-forming cells (SFC)/10⁶ PBMC for single and combined HCV vaccinations, respectively (p = 0.8). Median (IQR) peak responses to HIVconsv were 1,305 (1,095–4,967) and 1,005 (169–2,482) SFC/10⁶ PBMC for single and combined HIV-1 vaccinations, respectively (p = 0.5). Responses were maintained above baseline to 34 weeks post-vaccination. Intracellular cytokine analysis indicated that the responding populations comprised polyfunctional CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells. Canonical pathway analysis showed that in the single and combined vaccination groups, pathways associated with antiviral and innate immune responses were enriched for upregulated interferon-stimulated genes 24 h after priming and boosting vaccinations.

Conclusions: Serologically distinct adenoviral vectors encoding HCV and HIV-1 immunogens can be safely co-administered without reducing the immunogenicity of either vaccine. This provides a novel strategy for targeting these viruses simultaneously and for other pathogens that affect the same populations.

Clinical trial registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT02362217

Timing of Rotavirus Vaccine Doses and Severe Rotavirus Gastroenteritis Among Vaccinated Infants in Low- and Middle-income Countries

BACKGROUND

Altering rotavirus vaccine schedules may improve vaccine performance in low- and middle-income countries. We analyzed data from clinical trials of the monovalent (RV1) and pentavalent (RV5) rotavirus vaccines in low- and middle-income countries to understand the association between vaccine dose timing and severe rotavirus gastroenteritis incidence.

METHODS

We assessed the association between variations in rotavirus vaccine administration schedules and severe rotavirus gastroenteritis risk. We used the complement of the Kaplan-Meier survival estimator to estimate risk differences for different schedules. To adjust risk differences (RDs) for confounding, we calibrated estimates in the vaccinated arm using estimates from the placebo arm.

RESULTS

There were 3,114 and 7,341 children included from the RV1 and RV5 trials, respectively. The 18-month adjusted severe rotavirus gastroenteritis risk was 4.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1, 7.1) higher for those receiving their first RV5 dose at <6 versus ≥6 weeks. For RV1, there was a 4.0% (95% CI = 0.0, 8.2) increase in 12-month adjusted risk for a 4- versus 6-week interval between doses. Further analysis revealed those receiving their first RV5 dose at 3-4 and 5-7 weeks had 2.9% (95% CI = 0.8, 5.3) and 1.3% (95% CI = -0.3, 3.0), respectively, higher risk compared with those at 9-12 weeks. Those receiving their first dose at 8 weeks had the lowest risk (RD: -2.6% [95% CI = -5.4, -0.1]) compared with those at 9-12 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

A modest delay in rotavirus vaccination start and increase in interval between doses may be associated with lower severe rotavirus gastroenteritis risk in low- and middle-income countries.

Non-interference of Bovine-Human reassortant pentavalent rotavirus vaccine ROTASIIL® with the immunogenicity of infant vaccines in comparison with a licensed rotavirus vaccine

Background

A newly developed bovine-human reassortant pentavalent vaccine (BRV-PV, ROTASIIL®) was tested for its potential effect on the immunogenicity of concomitantly administered EPI vaccines in infants in a randomized controlled study in India.

Methods

In this Phase III, multicenter, open label, randomized, controlled study, three doses of BRV-PV or two doses of Rotarix® and one dose of placebo were given to healthy infants at 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age. Subjects also received three doses of DTwP-HepB-Hib (diphtheria, tetanus, whole-cell pertussis, hepatitis B, and haemophilus influenzae type b conjugate – pentavalent vaccine) and oral polio vaccine concomitantly at 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age and a single dose of inactivated polio vaccine at 14 weeks of age. Blood samples were collected four weeks after the final vaccination to assess immune responses to all the vaccines administered. For diphtheria, tetanus, hepatitis B, Hib, polio type 1, and polio type 3 antibodies, non-interference was to be supported if the lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) for the seroprotection rate difference for the BRV-PV group minus the Rotarix® group was >10.0%. For pertussis antibodies, non-interference was to be supported if the lower limit of the two-sided 90% CI for the ratio of geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) was >0.5.

Results

A total of 1500 infants were randomized to either BRV-PV (1125 infants) or Rotarix® (375 infants), of which 1341 completed the study as per the protocol. More than 97% of subjects achieved seroprotective antibody titres against diphtheria, tetanus, hepatitis B, Hib, polio type 1, and polio type 3 in both groups. The difference in seroprotection rates between the BRV-PV group and the Rotarix® group for all these antibodies was less than 1%. The ratio of GMCs of anti-pertussis IgG concentrations for the BRV-PV group versus Rotarix® was 1.04 [90% CI: 0.90; 1.19].

Conclusion

BRV-PV does not interfere with the immunogenicity of concomitantly administered routine infants vaccines.

Rotavirus Vaccines: Effectiveness, Safety, and Future Directions

Rotavirus is the leading cause of diarrheal death among children < 5 years old worldwide, estimated to have caused ~ 215,000 deaths in 2013. Prior to rotavirus vaccine implementation, > 65% of children had at least one rotavirus diarrhea illness by 5 years of age and rotavirus accounted for > 40% of all-cause diarrhea hospitalizations globally. Two live, oral rotavirus vaccines have been implemented nationally in > 100 countries since 2006 and their use has substantially reduced the burden of severe diarrheal illness in all settings. Vaccine efficacy and effectiveness estimates suggest there is a gradient in vaccine performance between low child-mortality countries (> 90%) and medium and high child-mortality countries (57-75%). Additionally, an increased risk of intussusception (~ 1-6 per 100,000 vaccinated infants) following vaccination has been documented in some countries, but this is outweighed by the large benefits of vaccination. Two additional live, oral rotavirus vaccines were recently licensed and these have improved on some programmatic limitations of earlier vaccines, such as heat stability, cost, and cold-chain footprint. Non-replicating rotavirus vaccines that are parenterally administered are in clinical testing, and these have the potential to reduce the performance differential and safety concerns associated with live oral rotavirus vaccines.

Decreased performance of live attenuated, oral rotavirus vaccines in low-income settings: causes and contributing factors

INTRODUCTION

Numerous studies have shown that the oral rotavirus vaccines are less effective in infants born in low income countries compared to those born in developed countries. Identifying the specific factors in developing countries that decrease and/or compromise the protection that rotavirus vaccines offer, could lead to a path for designing new strategies for the vaccines' improvement.

AREAS COVERED

We accessed PubMed to identify rotavirus vaccine performance studies (i.e., efficacy, effectiveness and immunogenicity) and correlated performance with several risk factors. Here, we review the factors that might contribute to the low vaccine efficacy, including passive transfer of maternal rotavirus antibodies, rotavirus seasonality, oral polio vaccine (OPV) administered concurrently, microbiome composition and concomitant enteric pathogens, malnutrition, environmental enteropathy, HIV, and histo blood group antigens.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

We highlight two major factors that compromise rotavirus vaccines' efficacy: the passive transfer of rotavirus IgG antibodies to infants and the  co-administration of rotavirus vaccines with OPV. We also identify other potential risk factors that require further research because the data about their interference with the efficacy of rotavirus vaccines are inconclusive and at times conflicting.

Potential for a booster dose of rotavirus vaccine to further reduce diarrhea mortality

Concern has grown that children vaccinated against rotavirus in developing countries may be vulnerable to rotavirus diarrhea in the second year of life due to waning immunity. Adding a booster dose of rotavirus vaccine at 9 or 12 months of age with measles vaccine has been suggested as a strategy to address this. We evaluated the hypothetical potential benefits of a booster dose on reduction of rotavirus mortality. The projected number of deaths averted were calculated using national level full series vaccination coverage, estimated national rotavirus deaths by week of age, and VE at <12 months of age and ≥12 months of age derived from the published literature. We assumed three functional forms of waning based on the VE estimates: stepwise, linear, and logarithmic. We modeled three potential boosting scenarios: (a) reduced VE waning in the second year of life by 50%, (b) reestablished second year of life VE to the levels in the first year of life, and (c) boosted first year VE by 50% of the difference between VE in the first and second years. To express uncertainty resulting from the parameters, each of the nine models were run 1000 times using a random sample of input values. Across all WHO regions, with the stepwise models we estimated a median of 9800 (95%CI: 9400, 10,200), 19,600 (95%CI: 18,800, 20,400), and 29,400 (95%CI: 28,200, 30,700) additional rotavirus deaths averted in the reduced VE waning, reestablished VE, and boosted VE scenarios. These estimates were highly sensitive to the assumed functional form of waning with approximately 65-80% fewer deaths averted if immunity waned in a linear or logarithmic fashion compared to the stepwise model. While these projections will benefit from improved input data points, our resultsinform consideration of booster doses of rotavirus vaccine.

Impact of maternal antibodies and infant gut microbiota on the immunogenicity of rotavirus vaccines in African, Indian and European infants: protocol for a prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Gastroenteritis is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality among young children living in resource-poor settings, majority of which is attributed to rotavirus. Rotavirus vaccination can therefore have a significant impact on infant mortality. However, rotavirus vaccine efficacy in Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia is significantly lower than in high-income countries. Maternally derived antibodies, infant gut microbiota and concomitant oral polio vaccination have been proposed as potential reasons for poor vaccine performance in low-income settings. The overall aim of this study is to compare the role of maternally derived antibodies and infant gut microbiota in determining immune response to rotavirus vaccine in high-income and low-income settings, using the same vaccine and a similar study protocol.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study is an observational cohort in three countries-Malawi, India and UK. Mothers will be enrolled in third trimester of pregnancy and followed up, along with infants after delivery, until the infant completes two doses of oral rotavirus vaccine (along with routine immunisation). The levels of prevaccination maternally derived rotavirus-specific antibodies (IgG) will be correlated with infant seroconversion and antibody titres, 4 weeks after the second dose of rotavirus vaccine. Both within-country and between-country comparisons of gut microbiome will be carried out between children who seroconvert and those who do not. The impact of oral polio vaccine coadministration on rotavirus vaccine response will be studied in Indian infants.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approvals have been obtained from Integrated Research Application System (IRAS, NHS ethics) in UK, College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC) in Malawi and Institutional Review Board (IRB), Christian Medical College, Vellore in India. Participant recruitment and follow-up is ongoing at all three sites. Analysis of data, followed by publication of the results, is expected in 2018.

Contribution of Maternal Immunity to Decreased Rotavirus Vaccine Performance in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

The role of maternal immunity, received by infants either transplacentally or orally from breast milk, in rotavirus vaccine (RV) performance is evaluated here. Breastfeeding withholding has no effect on vaccine responses, but higher levels of transplacental rotavirus-specific IgG antibody contribute to reduced vaccine seroconversion. The gaps in knowledge on the factors associated with low RV efficacy in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) remain, and further research is needed to shed more light on these issues.

Estimating the burden of rubella virus infection and congenital rubella syndrome through a rubella immunity assessment among pregnant women in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Potential impact on vaccination policy

BACKGROUND

Rubella-containing vaccines (RCV) are not yet part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo's (DRC) vaccination program; however RCV introduction is planned before 2020. Because documentation of DRC's historical burden of rubella virus infection and congenital rubella syndrome (CRS) has been minimal, estimates of the burden of rubella virus infection and of CRS would help inform the country's strategy for RCV introduction.

METHODS

A rubella antibody seroprevalence assessment was conducted using serum collected during 2008-2009 from 1605 pregnant women aged 15-46years attending 7 antenatal care sites in 3 of DRC's provinces. Estimates of age- and site-specific rubella antibody seroprevalence, population, and fertility rates were used in catalytic models to estimate the incidence of CRS per 100,000 live births and the number of CRS cases born in 2013 in DRC.

RESULTS

Overall 84% (95% CI 82, 86) of the women tested were estimated to be rubella antibody seropositive. The association between age and estimated antibody seroprevalence, adjusting for study site, was not significant (p=0.10). Differences in overall estimated seroprevalence by study site were observed indicating variation by geographical area (p⩽0.03 for all). Estimated seroprevalence was similar for women declaring residence in urban (84%) versus rural (83%) settings (p=0.67). In 2013 for DRC nationally, the estimated incidence of CRS was 69/100,000 live births (95% CI 0, 186), corresponding to 2886 infants (95% CI 342, 6395) born with CRS.

CONCLUSIONS

In the 3 provinces, rubella virus transmission is endemic, and most viral exposure and seroconversion occurs before age 15years. However, approximately 10-20% of the women were susceptible to rubella virus infection and thus at risk for having an infant with CRS. This analysis can guide plans for introduction of RCV in DRC. Per World Health Organization recommendations, introduction of RCV should be accompanied by a campaign targeting all children 9months to 14years of age as well as vaccination of women of child bearing age through routine services.

Rotavirus vaccines: current global impact and future perspectives

As of May 2016, 81 countries have introduced Rotarix or RotaTeq rotavirus vaccines into their national immunization program. Despite initially slow uptake in some countries and differences in vaccine effectiveness (VE) between high-, low- and middle-income countries, impact of the vaccines has been swift and striking in all settings, with good VE against vaccine-type and nonvaccine-type strains. Newly published research indicates poor nutrition is associated with decreased VE and breastfeeding at the time of vaccination does not affect vaccine response. Vaccines in development and proposed alternate schedules also promise to address limitations of the current vaccines and optimize rotavirus disease prevention.

Potential safety issues and other factors that may affect the introduction and uptake of rotavirus vaccines

Rotavirus vaccines have demonstrated significant impact in reducing the burden of morbidity and mortality from childhood diarrhoea in countries that have implemented routine vaccination to date. Despite this success, in many countries, rotavirus vaccine coverage remains lower than that of other routine childhood vaccines. Several issues may potentially affect vaccine uptake, namely safety concerns related to intussusception with consequent age restrictions on rotavirus vaccination, contamination with porcine circovirus, vaccine-derived reassortant strains and hospitalization in newborn nurseries at time of administration of live oral rotavirus vaccine. In addition to these safety concerns, other factors may also affect uptake, including lower vaccine efficacy in the developing world, potential emergence of strains escaping from vaccine protection resulting in lower overall impact of a vaccination programme and sustainable vaccine financing. Although further work is needed to address some of these concerns, global policy bodies have reaffirmed that the benefits of rotavirus vaccination outweigh the risks, and vaccine use is recommended globally.