Looking back at prospective modeling of outbreak response strategies for managing global type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV2) cessation

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.

Tolerability, safety, and immunogenicity of the novel oral polio vaccine type 2 in children aged 6 weeks to 59 months in an outbreak response campaign in The Gambia: an observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Novel oral polio vaccine type 2 (nOPV2) has been used to interrupt circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 outbreaks following its WHO emergency use listing. This study reports data on the safety and immunogenicity of nOPV2 over two rounds of a campaign in The Gambia.

METHODS

This observational cohort study collected baseline symptoms (vomiting, diarrhoea, irritability, reduced feeding, and reduced activity) and axillary temperature from children aged 6 weeks to 59 months in The Gambia before a series of two rounds of a nOPV2 campaign that took place on Nov 20-26, 2021, and March 19-22, 2022. Serum and stool samples were collected from a subset of the participants. The same symptoms were re-assessed during the week following each dose of nOPV2. Stool samples were collected on days 7 and 28, and serum was collected on day 28 following each dose. Adverse events, including adverse events of special interest, were documented for 28 days after each campaign round. Serum neutralising antibodies were measured by microneutralisation assay, and stool poliovirus excretion was measured by real-time RT-PCR.

FINDINGS

Of the 5635 children eligible for the study, 5504 (97·7%) received at least one dose of nOPV2. There was no increase in axillary temperature or in any of the baseline symptoms following either rounds of the campaigns. There were no adverse events of special interest and no other safety signals of concern. Poliovirus type 2 seroconversion rates were 70% (95% CI 62 to 78; 87 of 124 children) following one dose of nOPV2 and 91% (85 to 95; 113 of 124 children) following two doses. Poliovirus excretion on day 7 was lower after the second round (162 of 459 samples; 35·3%, 95% CI 31·1 to 39·8) than after the first round (292 of 658 samples; 44·4%, 40·6 to 48·2) of the campaign (difference -9·1%; 95% CI -14·8 to -3·3), showing the induction of mucosal immunity.

INTERPRETATION

In a campaign in west Africa, nOPV2 was well tolerated and safe. High rates of seroconversion and evidence of mucosal immunity support the licensure and WHO prequalification of this vaccine.

FUNDING

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Safety of the novel oral poliovirus vaccine type 2 (nOPV2) in infants and young children aged 1 to <5 years and lot-to-lot consistency of the immune response to nOPV2 in infants in The Gambia: a phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Novel oral poliovirus vaccine type 2 (nOPV2) has been engineered to improve the genetic stability of Sabin oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) and reduce the emergence of circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses. This trial aimed to provide key safety and immunogenicity data required for nOPV2 licensure and WHO prequalification.

METHODS

This phase 3 trial recruited infants aged 18 to <52 weeks and young children aged 1 to <5 years in The Gambia. Infants randomly assigned to receive one or two doses of one of three lots of nOPV2 or one lot of bivalent OPV (bOPV). Young children were randomised to receive two doses of nOPV2 lot 1 or bOPV. The primary immunogenicity objective was to assess lot-to-lot equivalence of the three nOPV2 lots based on one-dose type 2 poliovirus neutralising antibody seroconversion rates in infants. Equivalence was declared if the 95% CI for the three pairwise rate differences was within the -10% to 10% equivalence margin. Tolerability and safety were assessed based on the rates of solicited adverse events to 7 days, unsolicited adverse events to 28 days, and serious adverse events to 3 months post-dose. Stool poliovirus excretion was examined. The trial was registered as PACTR202010705577776 and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between February and October, 2021, 2345 infants and 600 young children were vaccinated. 2272 (96·9%) were eligible for inclusion in the post-dose one per-protocol population. Seroconversion rates ranged from 48·9% to 49·2% across the three lots. The minimum lower bound of the 95% CIs for the pairwise differences in seroconversion rates between lots was -5·8%. The maximum upper bound was 5·4%. Equivalence was therefore shown. Of those seronegative at baseline, 143 (85·6%) of 167 (95% CI 79·4-90·6) infants and 54 (83·1%) of 65 (71·7-91·2) young children seroconverted over the two-dose nOPV2 schedule. The post-two-dose seroprotection rates, including participants who were both seronegative and seropositive at baseline, were 604 (92·9%) of 650 (95% CI 90·7-94·8) in infants and 276 (95·5%) of 289 (92·4-97·6) in young children. No safety concerns were identified. 7 days post-dose one, 78 (41·7%) of 187 (95% CI 34·6-49·1) infants were excreting the type 2 poliovirus.

INTERPRETATION

nOPV2 was immunogenic and safe in infants and young children in The Gambia. The data support the licensure and WHO prequalification of nOPV2.

FUNDING

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Inactivated Poliovirus Vaccine: Recent Developments and the Tortuous Path to Global Acceptance

Inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV), available since 1955, became the first vaccine to be used to protect against poliomyelitis. While the immunogenicity of IPV to prevent paralytic poliomyelitis continues to be irrefutable, its requirement for strong containment (due to large quantities of live virus used in the manufacturing process), perceived lack of ability to induce intestinal mucosal immunity, high cost and increased complexity to administer compared to oral polio vaccine (OPV), have limited its use in the global efforts to eradicate poliomyelitis. In order to harvest the full potential of IPV, a program of work has been carried out by the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) over the past two decades that has focused on: (1) increasing the scientific knowledge base of IPV; (2) translating new insights and evidence into programmatic action; (3) expanding the IPV manufacturing infrastructure for global demand; and (4) continuing to pursue an ambitious research program to develop more immunogenic and safer-to-produce vaccines. While the knowledge base of IPV continues to expand, further research and product development are necessary to ensure that the program priorities are met (e.g., non-infectious production through virus-like particles, non-transmissible vaccine inducing humoral and intestinal mucosal immunity and new methods for house-to-house administration through micro-needle patches and jet injectors), the discussions have largely moved from whether to how to use this vaccine most effectively. In this review, we summarize recent developments on expanding the science base of IPV and provide insight into policy development and the expansion of IPV manufacturing and production, and finally we provide an update on the current priorities.

Worst-case scenarios: Modeling uncontrolled type 2 polio transmission

In May 2016, the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) coordinated the cessation of all use of type 2 oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV2), except for emergency outbreak response. Since then, paralytic polio cases caused by type 2 vaccine-derived polioviruses now exceed 3,000 cases reported by 39 countries. In 2022 (as of April 25, 2023), 20 countries reported detection of cases and nine other countries reported environmental surveillance detection, but no reported cases. Recent development of a genetically modified novel type 2 OPV (nOPV2) may help curb the generation of neurovirulent vaccine-derived strains; its use since 2021 under Emergency Use Listing is limited to outbreak response activities. Prior modeling studies showed that the expected trajectory for global type 2 viruses does not appear headed toward eradication, even with the best possible properties of nOPV2 assuming current outbreak response performance. Continued persistence of type 2 poliovirus transmission exposes the world to the risks of potentially high-consequence events such as the importation of virus into high-transmission areas of India or Bangladesh. Building on prior polio endgame modeling and assuming current national and GPEI outbreak response performance, we show no probability of successfully eradicating type 2 polioviruses in the near term regardless of vaccine choice. We also demonstrate the possible worst-case scenarios could result in rapid expansion of paralytic cases and preclude the goal of permanently ending all cases of poliomyelitis in the foreseeable future. Avoiding such catastrophic scenarios will depend on the development of strategies that raise population immunity to type 2 polioviruses.

Coordinated global cessation of oral poliovirus vaccine use: Options and potential consequences

Due to the very low, but nonzero, paralysis risks associated with the use of oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV), eradicating poliomyelitis requires ending all OPV use globally. The Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) coordinated cessation of Sabin type 2 OPV (OPV2 cessation) in 2016, except for emergency outbreak response. However, as of early 2023, plans for cessation of bivalent OPV (bOPV, containing types 1 and 3 OPV) remain undefined, and OPV2 use for outbreak response continues due to ongoing transmission of type 2 polioviruses and reported type 2 cases. Recent development and use of a genetically stabilized novel type 2 OPV (nOPV2) leads to additional potential vaccine options and increasing complexity in strategies for the polio endgame. Prior applications of integrated global risk, economic, and poliovirus transmission modeling consistent with GPEI strategic plans that preceded OPV2 cessation explored OPV cessation dynamics and the evaluation of options to support globally coordinated risk management efforts. The 2022-2026 GPEI strategic plan highlighted the need for early bOPV cessation planning. We review the published modeling and explore bOPV cessation immunization options as of 2022, assuming that the GPEI partners will not support restart of the use of any OPV type in routine immunization after a globally coordinated cessation of such use. We model the potential consequences of globally coordinating bOPV cessation in 2027, as anticipated in the 2022-2026 GPEI strategic plan. We do not find any options for bOPV cessation likely to succeed without a strategy of bOPV intensification to increase population immunity prior to cessation.

Health Economic Analysis of Antiviral Drugs in the Global Polio Eradication Endgame

BACKGROUND

Polio antiviral drugs (PAVDs) may provide a critical tool in the eradication endgame by stopping poliovirus infections in immunodeficient individuals who may not clear the virus without therapeutic intervention. Although prolonged/chronic poliovirus excreters are rare, they represent a source of poliovirus reintroduction into the general population. Prior studies that assumed the successful cessation of all oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) use estimated the potential upper bound of the incremental net benefits (INBs) of resource investments in research and development of PAVDs. However, delays in polio eradication, OPV cessation, and the development of PAVDs necessitate an updated economic analysis to reevaluate the costs and benefits of further investments in PAVDs.

METHODS

Using a global integrated model of polio transmission, immunity, vaccine dynamics, risks, and economics, we explore the risks of reintroduction of polio transmission due to immunodeficiency-related vaccine-derived poliovirus (iVDPV) excreters and reevaluate the upper bound of the INBs of PAVDs.

RESULTS

Under the current conditions, for which the use of OPV will likely continue for the foreseeable future, even with successful eradication of type 1 wild poliovirus by the end of 2023 and continued use of Sabin OPV for outbreak response, we estimate an upper bound INB of 60 million US$2019. With >100 million US$2019 already invested in PAVD development and with the introduction of novel OPVs that are less likely to revert to neurovirulence, our analysis suggests the expected INBs of PAVDs would not offset their costs.

CONCLUSIONS

While PAVDs could play an important role in the polio endgame, their expected economic benefits drop with ongoing OPV use and poliovirus transmissions. However, stakeholders may pursue the development of PAVDs as a desired product regardless of their economic benefits.HighlightsWhile polio antiviral drugs could play an important role in the polio endgame, their expected economic benefits continue to drop with delays in polio eradication and the continued use of oral poliovirus vaccines.The incremental net benefits of investments in polio antiviral drug development and screening for immunodeficiency-related circulating polioviruses are small.Limited global resources are better spent on increasing global population immunity to polioviruses to stop and prevent poliovirus transmission.

Outbreak management strategies for cocirculation of multiple poliovirus types

Prior modeling studies showed that current outbreak management strategies are unlikely to stop outbreaks caused by type 1 wild polioviruses (WPV1) or circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses (cVDPVs) in many areas, and suggested increased risks of outbreaks with cocirculation of more than one type of poliovirus. The surge of type 2 poliovirus transmission that began in 2019 and continues to date, in conjunction with decreases in preventive supplemental immunization activities (SIAs) for poliovirus types 1 and 3, has led to the emergence of several countries with cocirculation of more than one type of poliovirus. Response to these emerging cocirculation events is theoretically straightforward, but the different formulations, types, and inventories of oral poliovirus vaccines (OPVs) available for outbreak response present challenging practical questions. In order to demonstrate the implications of using different vaccine options and outbreak campaign strategies, we applied a transmission model to a hypothetical population with conditions similar to populations currently experiencing outbreaks of cVDPVs of both types 1 and 2. Our results suggest prevention of the largest number of paralytic cases occurs when using (1) trivalent OPV (tOPV) (or coadministering OPV formulations for all three types) until one poliovirus outbreak type dies out, followed by (2) using a type-specific OPV until the remaining poliovirus outbreak type also dies out. Using tOPV first offers a lower overall expected cost, but this option may be limited by the willingness to expose populations to type 2 Sabin OPV strains. For strategies that use type 2 novel OPV (nOPV2) concurrently administered with bivalent OPV (bOPV, containing types 1 and 3 OPV) emerges as a leading option, but questions remain about feasibility, logistics, type-specific take rates, and coadministration costs.

Complexity of options related to restarting oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) in national immunization programs after OPV cessation

Background: The polio eradication endgame continues to increase in complexity.  With polio cases caused by wild poliovirus type 1 and circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses of all three types (1, 2 and 3) reported in 2022, the number, formulation, and use of poliovirus vaccines poses challenges for national immunization programs and vaccine suppliers.  Prior poliovirus transmission modeling of globally-coordinated type-specific cessation of oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) assumed creation of Sabin monovalent OPV (mOPV) stockpiles for emergencies and explored the potential need to restart OPV if the world reached a specified cumulative threshold number of cases after OPV cessation. Methods:  We document the actual experience of type 2 OPV (OPV2) cessation and reconsider prior modeling assumptions related to OPV restart.  We develop updated decision trees of national immunization options for poliovirus vaccines considering different possibilities for OPV restart. Results:  While OPV restart represented a hypothetical situation for risk management and contingency planning to support the 2013-2018 Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) Strategic Plan, the actual epidemiological experience since OPV2 cessation raises questions about what, if any, trigger(s) could lead to restarting the use of OPV2 in routine immunization and/or plans for potential future restart of type 1 and 3 OPV after their respective cessation.  The emergency use listing of a genetically stabilized novel type 2 OPV (nOPV2) and continued evaluation of nOPV for types 1 and/or 3 add further complexity by increasing the combinations of possible OPV formulations for OPV restart.  Conclusions: Expanding on a 2019 discussion of the logistical challenges and implications of restarting OPV, we find a complex structure of the many options and many issues related to OPV restart decisions and policies as of early 2023.  We anticipate many challenges for forecasting prospective vaccine supply needs during the polio endgame due to increasing potential combinations of poliovirus vaccine choices.