Protocol for Pertussis Immunisation and Food Allergy (PIFA): a case-control study of the association between pertussis vaccination in infancy and the risk of IgE-mediated food allergy among Australian children

Pertussis immunisation in infancy and atopic outcomes: A protocol for a population-based cohort study using linked administrative data

INTRODUCTION

The burden of IgE-mediated food allergy in Australian born children is reported to be among the highest globally. This illness shares risk factors and frequently coexists with asthma, one of the most common noncommunicable diseases of childhood. Findings from a case-control study suggest that compared to immunisation with acellular pertussis vaccine, early priming of infants with whole-cell pertussis vaccine may be associated with a lower risk of subsequent IgE-mediated food allergy. If whole-cell vaccination is protective of food allergy and other atopic diseases, especially if protective against childhood asthma, the population-level effects could justify its preferential recommendation. However, the potential beneficial effects of whole-cell pertussis vaccination for the prevention of atopic diseases at a population-scale are yet to be investigated.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Analyses of population-based record linkage data will be undertaken to compare the rates of admissions to hospital for asthma in children aged between 5 and 15 years old, who were born in Western Australia (WA) or New South Wales (NSW) between 1997 and 1999 (329,831) when pertussis immunisation in Australia transitioned from whole-cell to acellular only schedules. In the primary analysis we will estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the time-to-first-event (hospital admissions as above) using Cox proportional hazard models in recipients of a first dose of whole-cell versus acellular pertussis-containing vaccine before 112 days old (~4 months of age). Similarly, we will also fit time-to-recurrent events analyses using Andersen-Gill models, and robust variance estimates to account for potential within-child dependence. Hospitalisations for all-cause anaphylaxis, food anaphylaxis, venom, all-cause urticaria and atopic dermatitis will also be examined in children who received at least one dose of pertussis-containing vaccine by the time of the cohort entry, using analogous statistical methods. Presentations to the emergency departments will be assessed separately using the same statistical approach.

Whole-cell pertussis vaccine in early infancy for the prevention of allergy in children

BACKGROUND

Atopic diseases are the most common chronic conditions of childhood. The apparent rise in food anaphylaxis in young children over the past three decades is of particular concern, owing to the lack of proven prevention strategies other than the timely introduction of peanut and egg. Due to reported in vitro differences in the immune response of young infants primed with whole-cell pertussis (wP) versus acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine, we systematically appraised and synthesised evidence on the safety and the potential allergy preventive benefits of wP, to inform recommendation for future practice and research.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of wP vaccinations in comparison to aP vaccinations in early infancy for the prevention of atopic diseases in children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and grey literature. The date of the search was 7 September 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) that reported the occurrence of atopic diseases, and RCTs only to assess safety outcomes. To be included studies had to have at least six months follow-up, and involve children under 18 years old, who received a first dose of either wP (experimental intervention) or aP (comparator) before six months of age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted the data, and assessed risk of bias using standard Cochrane methods. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Our primary outcomes were diagnosis of IgE-mediated food allergy and all-cause serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes included: diagnosis of not vaccine-associated anaphylaxis or urticaria, diagnosis of asthma, diagnosis of allergic rhinitis, diagnosis of atopic dermatitis and diagnosis of encephalopathy. Due to paucity of RCTs reporting on the atopic outcomes of interest, we assessed a broader outcome domain (cumulative incidence of atopic disease) as specified in our protocol. We summarised effect estimates as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate, we pooled safety data in meta-analyses using fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel methods, without zero-cell corrections for dichotomous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four eligible studies reporting on atopic outcomes, representing 7333 children. Based on a single trial, there was uncertain evidence on whether wP vaccines affected the risk of overall atopic disease (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.17) or asthma only (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.82; 497 children) by 2.5 years old.Three NRSIs were judged to be at serious or critical risk of bias due to confounding, missing data, or both, and were ineligible for inclusion in a narrative synthesis.  We identified 21 eligible studies (137,281 children) that reported the safety outcomes of interest. We judged seven studies to be at high risk of bias and those remaining, at unclear risk.  The pooled RR was 0.94 for all-cause SAEs (95% CI 0.78 to 1.15; I² = 0%; 15 studies, 38,072 children). For every 1000 children primed with a first dose of wP, 11 had an SAE. The corresponding risk with aP was 12 children (95% CI 9 to 13). The 95% CI around the risk difference ranged from three fewer to two more events per 1000 children, and the certainty of the evidence was judged as moderate (downgraded one level for imprecision). No diagnoses of encephalopathy following vaccination were reported (95% CI around the risk difference - 5 to 12 per 100,000 children; seven primary series studies; 115,271 children). The certainty of the evidence was judged as low, since this is a serious condition, and we could not exclude a clinically meaningful difference.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very low-certainty evidence that a first dose of wP given early in infancy, compared to a first dose of aP, affects the risk of atopic diseases in children. The incidence of all-cause SAEs in wP and aP vaccinees was low, and no cases of encephalopathy were reported. The certainty of the evidence was judged as moderate for all-cause SAEs, and low for encephalopathy. Future studies should use sensitive and specific endpoints of clinical relevance, and should be conducted in settings with high prevalence of IgE-mediated food allergy. Safety endpoints should prioritise common vaccine reactions, parental acceptability, SAEs and their potential relatedness to the dose administered.

Whole-Cell Pertussis Vaccination and Decreased Risk of IgE-Mediated Food Allergy: A Nested Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

Rates of food allergy have increased markedly in Australia and other high- income countries in recent years. On the basis of ecological observations, and the known immunologic characteristics of whole-cell pertussis (wP) compared with acellular pertussis (aP) vaccines, we hypothesized that wP vaccination in infancy protects against the development of food allergy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether infants who receive wP in infancy were less likely to develop IgE-mediated food allergy than those who received aP.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort-nested case-control study of Australian children born in the period 1997 to 1999, the period of transition from using wP-containing to aP-containing vaccines. Children diagnosed with IgE-mediated food allergy were individually matched to 10 controls by date of birth, socioeconomic decile, and jurisdiction of birth. The odds ratio of vaccination with wP versus aP among cases and matched controls was calculated using conditional logistic regression.

RESULTS

The odds ratio of receiving the first dose as wP (rather than aP) among cases of food allergy compared with controls was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.62-0.95). The results of secondary analyses (any dose as wP vs aP-only, and wP-only vs aP-only) were broadly similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Australian infants who received wP vaccines were less likely to be diagnosed with food allergy in childhood than contemporaneous children who received aP vaccines. If a protective effect is confirmed in a randomized controlled trial, wP or mixed wP and aP vaccination schedules could form part of an effective strategy for combating the rise in food allergies.