Serological response and poliovirus excretion following different combined oral and inactivated poliovirus vaccines immunization schedules

A controlled study was conducted in Karachi, Pakistan to compare humoral and mucosal immune responses against polioviruses in infants who received oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) at birth and at 6, 10, and 14 weeks according to the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) with infants who received either three doses of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) at 6, 10, and 14 weeks together with OPV or one additional dose of IPV at 14 weeks together, with the last dose of OPV. A total of 1429 infants were enrolled; 24-week serum specimens were available for 898 infants (63%). They all received a challenge dose of OPV type 3 at 24 weeks of age. The addition of three doses of IPV to three doses of OPV induced a significantly higher percentage of seropositive children at 24 weeks of age for polio 1 (97% versus 89%, P<0.001) and polio 3 (98% versus 92%) compared to the EPI schedule. However, the one supplemental dose of IPV at 14 weeks did not increase the serological response at 24 weeks. Intestinal immunity against the challenge dose was similar in the three groups. Combined schedules of OPV and IPV in the form of diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus-IPV vaccine (DPT-IPV) may be useful to accelerate eradication of polio in developing countries.     

Immune response to an intercalated enhanced inactivated polio vaccine/oral polio vaccine programme in Israel: impact on the control of poliomyelitis

A combined enhanced inactivated polio vaccine (EIPV) and oral polio vaccine (OPV) programme was introduced in Israel in 1990, with the purpose of providing a solution to the persistent polio morbidity in spite of a 30 year long OPV programme. The schedule comprised two doses of EIPV administered at the age of 2 and 4 months, intercalated with two doses of OPV at 4 and 6 months, followed by a reinforcing dose with the two vaccines simulltaneously administered at 12 months. The 5-year evaluation of the programme included: the assessment of clinical suspicions of polio, early immune response in successive cohorts administered the new schedule, dynamics of the immune profile in a cohort followed up to the age of 5, and monitoring of wild poliovirus excretion in sewage specimens collected in 25 permanent sites throughout Israel as well as from the Palestinian Authority. No paralytic polio cases associated with a wild or vaccinal poliovirus strain were detected since the introduction of the programme. At the age of 4 months, one week after administration of the second EIPV and first OPV dose, 100% seropositivity and high geometric mean titres (GMTs) of neutralizing antibody (NA) to the three vaccinal and to the wild poliovirus type 1, responsible for the 1988 polio outbreak, were observed. No change in percent of seropositivity occurred between the age of 6 and 12 months. Thirty days after the IPV and OPV reinforcing doses, GMTs to each of the four poliovirus strains were ≥3037. Up to the age of 5, the seropositivity was unchanged. After a 2.5–10-fold decline in the first year following the completion of the programme, GMTs to the three vaccinal and the wild poliovirus strain levelled off at rather high values, considered protective. Between 1990 and 1995, 16 wild poliovirus type 1 strains were isolated in three separate episodes in Gaza Strip sewage and once only in one Israeli site very close to Gaza City. The rapidly established, high and persistent NA titre to the vaccinal and wild poliovirus strains and the presence of immunological memory are indicative of high individual protection throughout the first 5 years of life. The only one-time introduction, without circulation, of a wild poliovirus strain in a single Israeli settlement suggests community protection. The intercalated programme offers a contribution to polio eradication by providing a solution to the primary and secondary failure associated with POV, as well as to the control of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis.     

Primary and booster vaccination with an inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) is immunogenic and well-tolerated in infants and toddlers in China

IntroductionReplacing live-attenuated oral poliovirus vaccines (OPV) with inactivated poliovirus vaccines (IPV) is part of the global strategy to eradicate poliomyelitis. China was declared polio-free in 2000 but continues to record cases of vaccine-associated-poliomyelitis and vaccine-derived-poliovirus outbreaks. Two pilot safety studies and two larger immunogenicity trials evaluated the non-inferiority of IPV (Poliorix™, GSK Vaccines, Belgium) versus OPV in infants and booster vaccination in toddlers primed with either IPV or OPV in China.MethodsIn pilot safety studies, 25 infants received 3-dose IPV primary vaccination (Study A, www.clinicaltrial.gov NCT00937404) and 25 received an IPV booster after priming with three OPV doses (Study B, NCT01021293). In the randomised, controlled immunogenicity and safety trial (Study C, NCT00920439), infants received 3-dose primary vaccination with IPV (N = 541) or OPV (N = 535) at 2,3,4 months of age, and a booster IPV dose at 18-24 months (N = 470, Study D, NCT01323647: extension of study C). Blood samples were collected before and one month post-dose-3 and booster. Reactogenicity was assessed using diary cards. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were captured throughout each study.ResultsStudy A and B showed that IPV priming and IPV boosting (after OPV) was safe. Study C: One month post-dose-3, all IPV and ≥98.3% OPV recipients had seroprotective antibody titres towards each poliovirus type. The immune response elicited by IPV was non-inferior to Chinese OPV. Seroprotective antibody titres persisted in ≥94.7% IPV and ≥96.1% OPV recipients at 18–24 months (Study D). IPV had a clinically acceptable safety profile in all studies. Grade 3 local and systemic reactions were uncommon. No SAEs were related to IPV administration.ConclusionTrivalent IPV is non-inferior to OPV in terms of seroprotection (in the Chinese vaccination schedule) in infant and toddlers, with a clinically acceptable safety profile.     

Combined immunization of infants with oral and inactivated poliovirus vaccines: results of a randomized trial in The Gambia, Oman, and Thailand. WHO Collaborative Study Group on Oral and Inactivated Poliovirus Vaccines.

To assess an immunization schedule combining oral (OPV) and inactivated poliovirus vaccines (IPV), we conducted a clinical trial in the Gambia, Oman, and Thailand. Children were randomized to receive one of the following schedules: OPV at birth, 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age; OPV at birth followed by both OPV and IPV at 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age: or placebo at birth followed by IPV at 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age. A total of 1685 infants were enrolled; 24-week serum specimens were available for 1291 infants (77%). Across the study sites at 24 weeks of age, the proportion of seropositive children in the combined schedule group was 95-99% for type 1, 99-100% for type 2, and 97-100% for type 3. In the Gambia and Oman, the combined schedule performed significantly better than OPV for type 1 (95-97% versus 88-90%) and type 3 (97-99% versus 72-73%). In the Gambia and Oman, seroprevalences in the IPV group were lower for type 1 (significantly lower in the Gambia); significantly lower for type 2; and significantly higher for type 3, compared with the OPV group. In Thailand, the IPV group had significantly lower proportions of children who were seropositive for each of the three types, compared with the OPV group. The responses to OPV in the Gambia, Oman, and Thailand were consistent with previous studies from these countries. IPV given at 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age provided inadequate serological protection against poliovirus, especially type 1. The combined schedule provided the highest levels of serum antibody response, with mucosal immunity equivalent to that produced by OPV alone.     

Lower immunity to poliomyelitis viruses in Australian young adults not eligible for inactivated polio vaccine

There are limited long-term data on seroprevalence of neutralising antibody (nAb) to the three poliovirus serotypes following the switch from oral polio vaccine (OPV) to inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). In Australia, combination vaccines containing IPV replaced OPV in late 2005. Using serum and plasma specimens collected during 2012 and 2013, we compared prevalence of nAb to poliovirus type 1 (PV1), type 2 (PV2) and type 3 (PV3) in birth cohorts with differing IPV and OPV eligibility from an Australian population-based sample. In the total sample of 1673 persons aged 12 months to 99 years, 85% had nAb against PV1, 83% PV2 and 67% PV3. In the cohort 12 to <18 years (eligible for 4 OPV doses, last dose 8–14 years prior), a significantly lower proportion had nAb than in the 7 to <12 year cohort (eligible for 3 OPV doses and an IPV booster, last dose 3–8 years prior) for all poliovirus types: [PV1: 87.1% vs. 95.9% (P = 0.01), PV2: 80.4% vs. 92.9% (P = 0.003) and PV3: 38.1% vs. 84.0% (P < 0.0001)]. These data suggest individual-level immunity may be better maintained when an OPV primary schedule is boosted by IPV, and support inclusion of an IPV booster in travel recommendations for young adults who previously received only OPV.     

Evaluation of vaccine derived poliovirus type 2 outbreak response options: A randomized controlled trial,Karachi, Pakistan

BackgroundOutbreaks of circulating vaccine derived polioviruses type 2 (cVDPV2) remain a risk to poliovirus eradication in an era without live poliovirus vaccine containing type 2 in routine immunization. We evaluated existing outbreak response strategies recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) for control of cVDPV2 outbreaks.MethodsSeronegative children for poliovirus type 2 (PV2) at 22 weeks of life were assigned to one of four study groups and received respectively (1) one dose of trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine (tOPV); (2) monovalent OPV 2 (mOPV2); (3) tOPV together with a dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV); or (4) mOPV2 with monovalent high-potency IPV type 2. Stool and blood samples were collected and assessed for presence of PV2 (stool) and anti-polio antibodies (sera).ResultsWe analyzed data from 265 children seronegative for PV2. Seroconversion to PV2 was achieved in 48, 76, 98 and 100% in Groups 1–4 respectively. mOPV2 was more immunogenic than tOPV alone (p < 0.001); and OPV in combination with IPV was more immunogenic than OPV alone (p < 0.001). There were 33%, 67%, 20% and 43% PV2 excretors in Groups 1–4 respectively. mOPV2 resulted in more prevalent shedding of PV2 than when tOPV was used (p < 0.001); and tOPV together with IPV resulted in lower excretion of PV2 than tOPV alone (p = 0.046).ConclusionmOPV2 was a more potent vaccine than tOPV. Adding IPV to OPV improved immunological response; adding IPV also seemed to have shortened the duration of PV2 shedding. mIPV2 did not provide measurable improvement of immune response when compared to conventional IPV. WHO recommendation to use mOPV2 as a vaccine of first choice in cVDPV2 outbreak response was supported by our findings.Clinical Trial registry number: NCT02189811.     

Oral and fecal polio vaccine excretion following bOPV vaccination among Israeli infants

IntroductionInactivated polio virus (IPV) vaccinations are a mainstay of immunization schedules in developed countries, while oral polio vaccine (OPV) is administered in developing countries and is the main vaccine in outbreaks. Due to circulating wild poliovirus (WPV1) detection in Israel (2013), oral bivalent polio vaccination (bOPV) was administered to IPV primed children and incorporated into the vaccination regimen.ObjectivesWe aimed to determine the extent and timeframe of fecal and salivary polio vaccine virus (Sabin strains) shedding following bOPV vaccination among IPV primed children.MethodsFecal samples were collected from a convenience sample of infants and toddlers attending 11 Israeli daycare centers. Salivary samples were collected from infants and toddlers following bOPV vaccination.Results398 fecal samples were collected from 251 children (ages: 6–32 months), 168 received bOPV vaccination 4–55 days prior to sample collection. Fecal excretion continued among 80 %, 50 %, and 20 %, 2, 3, and 7 weeks following vaccination. There were no significant differences in the rate and duration of positive samples among children immunized with 3 or 4 IPV doses. Boys were 2.3-fold more likely to excrete the virus (p = 0.006). Salivary shedding of Sabin strains occurred in 1/47 (2 %) and 1/49 (2 %) samples 4, and 6 days following vaccination respectively.ConclusionsFecal detection of Sabin strains among IPV-primed children continues for 7 weeks; additional doses of IPV do not augment intestinal immunity; limited salivary shedding occurs for up to a week. This data can enhance understanding of intestinal immunity achieved by different vaccination schedules and guide recommendations for contact precautions of children following bOPV vaccination.     

Introduction of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) into the routine immunization schedule of South Africa

South Africa is currently the only country on the African continent using inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) for routine immunization in a sequential schedule in combination with oral polio vaccine (OPV). IPV is a component of an injectable pentavalent vaccine introduced nationwide in April 2009 and administered according to EPI schedule at 6, 10 and 14 weeks with a booster dose at 18 months. OPV is administered at birth and together with the first IPV dose at 6 weeks, which stimulates gut immune system producing a memory IgA response (OPV), followed by IPV to minimize the risk of vaccine associated paralytic polio (VAPP). OPV is also given to all children under 5 years of age as part of regular mass immunizations campaigns. The decision to incorporate IPV into the routine schedule was not based on cost-effectiveness, which it is not. Other factors were taken into account: Firstly, the sequence benefits from the initial mucosal contact with live(vaccine) virus which promotes the IgA response from subsequent IPV, as well as herd immunity from OPV, together with the safety of IPV. Secondly, given the widespread and increasing use of IPV in the developed world, public acceptance of vaccination in general is enhanced in South Africa which is classified as an upper middle income developing country. Thirdly, to address equity concerns because of the growing use of IPV in the private sector. Fourthly, the advent of combination vaccines facilitated the incorporation of IPV into the EPI schedule.     

The cost-effectiveness of alternative polio immunization policies in South Africa

AIMS: To assess the cost-effectiveness of switching from oral polio vaccine (OPV) to inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV), or to cease polio vaccination in routine immunization services in South Africa at the time of OPV cessation globally following polio eradication. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of nine different polio immunization alternatives were evaluated. The costs of introducing IPV in a separate vial as well as in different combination vaccines were estimated, and IPV schedules with 2, 3 and 4 doses were compared with the current 6-dose OPV schedule. Assumptions about IPV prices were based on indications from vaccine manufacturers. The health impact of OPV cessation was measured in terms of vaccine associated paralytic paralysis (VAPP) cases and disability adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. CONCLUSIONS: The use of OPV in routine immunization services is predicted to result in 2.96 VAPP cases in the 2005 cohort. The cost-effectiveness of the different IPV alternatives varies between US$ 740,000 and US$ 7.2 million per VAPP case averted. The costs per discounted DALY averted amount to between US$ 61,000 and US$ 594,000. Among the IPV strategies evaluated, the 2-dose schedule in a 10-dose vial is the most cost-effective option. At the assumed vaccine prices, all IPV options do not appear to be cost-effective in the South African situation. OPV cessation without IPV replacement would result in cost savings of US$ 1.6 million per year compared to the current situation. This is approximately a 9% decrease in the budget for vaccine delivery in South Africa. However, with this option there is a risk (albeit small) of vaccine-derived poliovirus circulating in a progressively susceptible population. For IPV in a single dose vial, the break-even price, at which the costs of IPV delivery equal the current OPV delivery costs, is US$ 0.39.     

Effect of substituting IPV for tOPV on immunity to poliovirus in Bangladeshi infants: An open-label randomized controlled trial

BackgroundThe Polio Endgame strategy includes phased withdrawal of oral poliovirus vaccines (OPV) coordinated with introduction of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) to ensure population immunity. The impact of IPV introduction into a primary OPV series of immunizations in a developing country is uncertain.MethodsBetween May 2011 and November 2012, we enrolled 700 Bangladeshi infant-mother dyads from Dhaka slums into an open-label randomized controlled trial to test whether substituting an injected IPV dose for the standard Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) fourth tOPV dose at infant age 39 weeks would reduce fecal shedding and enhance systemic immunity. The primary endpoint was mucosal immunity to poliovirus at age one year, measured by fecal excretion of any Sabin virus at five time points up to 25 days post-52 week tOPV challenge, analyzed by the intention to treat principle.FindingsWe randomized 350 families to the tOPV and IPV vaccination arms. Neither study arm resulted in superior intestinal protection at 52 weeks measured by the prevalence of infants shedding any of three poliovirus serotypes, but the IPV dose induced significantly higher seroprevalence and seroconversion rates. This result was identical for poliovirus detection by cell culture or RT-qPCR. The non-significant estimated culture-based shedding risk difference was −3% favoring IPV, and the two vaccination schedules were inferred to be equivalent within a 95% confidence margin of −10% to +4%. Results for shedding analyses stratified by poliovirus type were similar.ConclusionsNeither of the vaccination regimens is superior to the other in enhancing intestinal immunity as measured by poliovirus shedding at 52 weeks of age and the IPV regimen provides similar intestinal immunity to the four tOPV series, although the IPV regimen strongly enhances humoral immunity. The IPV-modified regimen may be considered for vaccination programs without loss of intestinal protection.     

Immune responses after fractional doses of inactivated poliovirus vaccine using newly developed intradermal jet injectors: A randomized controlled trial in Cuba

IntroductionThe World Health Organization recommends that, as part of the new polio endgame, a dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) be introduced by the end of 2015 in all countries using only oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV). Administration of fractional dose (1/5th of full dose) IPV (fIPV) intradermally may reduce costs, but its administration is cumbersome with BCG needle and syringe. We evaluated performance of two newly developed intradermal-only jet injectors and compared the immune response induced by fIPV with that induced by full-dose IPV.MethodsChildren between 12 and 20 months of age, who had previously received two doses of OPV, were enrolled in Camaguey, Cuba. Subjects received a single dose of IPV (either full-dose IPV intramuscularly with needle and syringe or fIPV intradermally administered with one of two new injectors or with BCG needle or a conventional needle-free injector). Serum was tested for presence of poliovirus neutralizing antibodies on day 0 (pre-IPV) and on days 3, 7 and 21 (post-vaccination).ResultsComplete data were available from 74.2% (728/981) subjects. Baseline median antibody titers were 713, 284, and 113 for poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Seroprevalence at study end were similar across the intervention groups (≥94.8%). The immune response induced with one new injector was similar to BCG needle and to the conventional injector; and superior to the other new injector. fIPV induced significantly lower boosting response compared to full-dose IPV. No safety concerns were identified.InterpretationOne of the two new injectors demonstrated its ability to streamline intradermal fIPV administration, however, further investigations are needed to assess the potential contribution of fIPV in the polio endgame plan.     

A mucosal adjuvant for the inactivated poliovirus vaccine

The eradication of poliovirus from the majority of the world has been achieved through the use of two vaccines: the inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) and the live-attenuated oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV). Both vaccines are effective at preventing paralytic poliomyelitis, however, they also have significant differences. Most importantly for this work is the risk of revertant virus from OPV, the greater cost of IPV, and the low mucosal immunity induced by IPV. We and others have previously described the use of an alphavirus-based adjuvant that can induce a mucosal immune response to a co-administered antigen even when delivered at a non-mucosal site. In this report, we describe the use of an alphavirus-based adjuvant (GVI3000) with IPV. The IPV-GVI3000 vaccine significantly increased systemic IgG, mucosal IgG and mucosal IgA antibody responses to all three poliovirus serotypes in mice even when administered intramuscularly. Furthermore, GVI3000 significantly increased the potency of IPV in rat potency tests as measured by poliovirus neutralizing antibodies in serum. Thus, an IPV-GVI3000 vaccine would reduce the dose of IPV needed and provide significantly improved mucosal immunity. This vaccine could be an effective tool to use in the poliovirus eradication campaign without risking the re-introduction of revertant poliovirus derived from OPV.     

Immunogenicity of four doses of oral poliovirus vaccine when co-administered with the human neonatal rotavirus vaccine (RV3-BB)

BackgroundThe RV3-BB human neonatal rotavirus vaccine was developed to provide protection from severe rotavirus disease from birth. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential for mutual interference in the immunogenicity of oral polio vaccine (OPV) and RV3-BB.MethodsA randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving 1649 participants was conducted from January 2013 to July 2016 in Central Java and Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Participants received three doses of oral RV3-BB, with the first dose given at 0–5 days (neonatal schedule) or ~8 weeks (infant schedule), or placebo. Two sub-studies assessed the immunogenicity of RV3-BB when co-administered with either trivalent OPV (OPV group, n = 282) or inactivated polio vaccine (IPV group, n = 333). Serum samples were tested for antibodies to poliovirus strains 1, 2 and 3 by neutralization assays following doses 1 and 4 of OPV.ResultsSero-protective rates to poliovirus type 1, 2 or 3 were similar (range 0.96–1.00) after four doses of OPV co-administered with RV3-BB compared with placebo. Serum IgA responses to RV3-BB were similar when co-administered with either OPV or IPV (difference in proportions OPV vs IPV: sIgA responses; neonatal schedule 0.01, 95% CI −0.12 to 0.14; p = 0.847; infant schedule −0.10, 95% CI −0.21 to −0.001; p = 0.046: sIgA GMT ratio: neonatal schedule 1.23, 95% CI 0.71–2.14, p = 0.463 or infant schedule 1.20, 95% CI 0.74–1.96, p = 0.448).ConclusionsThe co-administration of OPV with RV3-BB rotavirus vaccine in a birth dose strategy did not reduce the immunogenicity of either vaccine. These findings support the use of a neonatal RV3-BB vaccine where either OPV or IPV is used in the routine vaccination schedule.     

Co-administration study in South African infants of a live-attenuated oral human rotavirus vaccine (RIX4414) and poliovirus vaccines

A double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial (e-Track 444563-014/NCT00346892) was conducted in South Africa to evaluate the co-administration of RIX4414 (live-attenuated human G1P[8] rotavirus vaccine) and oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) administered simultaneously. Healthy infants (n=450) were randomized into three groups (RIX4414+OPV, RIX4414+IPV or Placebo+OPV) to receive two oral doses of RIX4414/placebo with OPV or IPV using two vaccination schedules (6-10 weeks and 10-14 weeks). Serum anti-rotavirus IgA antibodies (ELISA) and neutralizing antibodies (micro-neutralization assay) to poliovirus serotypes 1, 2 and 3 were measured. Co-administration of RIX4414 with OPV did not result in a decrease in the high sero-protection rates against poliovirus serotypes 1, 2 and 3 detected after the third OPV dose (98-100%). The anti-rotavirus IgA antibody sero-conversion rates were higher for the 10-14 weeks schedule (55-61%) compared to the 6-10 weeks schedule (36-43%). Solicited symptoms were reported at similar rates between RIX4414 and placebo groups and no serious adverse events related to RIX4414 were reported. This study provided evidence that RIX4414 can be co-administered with routine EPI immunizations including OPV and that two doses of RIX4414 were well tolerated and immunogenic in South African infants.     

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.     

Immunogenicity and persistence from different 3-dose schedules of live and inactivated polio vaccines in Chinese infants

BackgroundOPV is the only poliovirus vaccine used in the China EPI system, although IPV is available in the private market. We compared immunigencity and persistence among different schedules of IPV and OPV.Methods536 Chinese infants were enrolled into 4 groups receiving different schedules administered at 2, 3, and 4 months of age: IPV–OPV–OPV, IPV–IPV–OPV, IPV–IPV–IPV, and OPV–OPV–OPV. The I–I–I group received an 18-month IPV booster dose. Blood samples were collected before the first dose, after the third dose, and at 18 months for all groups, and also after the booster dose for the I–I–I group. Polio neutralizing antibody titers were assessed, and seroprotection rates were calculated after primary immunization and at 18 months of age.ResultsBefore the first dose, GMTs of the 4 groups ranged from 2.96 to 6.89, and seroprotection rates ranged from 17.6% to 54.3%. After 3 doses, the GMT of the I–O–O and I–I–O groups ranged from 901.09 to 1,110.12, and the GMT of the I–I–I group range was 212.02 to 537.52, significantly lower than for the 2 sequential schedules (P < 0.001). Seroprotection rates were 98.1% to 100%, with no significant differences among groups. At 18 months of age, the GMTs declined to a range of 527.00 to 683.44 in the I–O–O and I–I–O groups, and declined to 150.04 to 239.89 in the I–I–I group, significantly lower than for the other 3 groups (P < 0.001).ConclusionsThe sequential schedules achieved high GMTs and seroprotection. The IPV-only schedule achieved high seroprotection but with lower GMTs. Sequential schedules are suitable for China. With the 2 sequential schedules, GMTs remained high at 18 months of age and were not inferior to the OPV-only schedule. Thus, with a sequential schedule, the booster dose could be given at 4 years of age, the same age as the current OPV booster dose.     

Failure to detect infection by oral polio vaccine virus following natural exposure among inactivated polio vaccine recipients

While oral polio vaccine (OPV) has been shown to be safe and effective, it has been observed that it can circulate within a susceptible population and revert to a virulent form. Inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) confers protection from paralytic disease, but provides limited protection against infection. It is possible, then, that an IPV-immunized population, when exposed to OPV, could sustain undetected circulation of vaccine-derived poliovirus. This study examines the possibility of polio vaccine virus circulating within the United States (highly IPV-immunized) population that borders Mexico (OPV-immunized). A total of 653 stool and 20 sewage samples collected on the US side of the border were tested for the presence of poliovirus. All samples were found to be negative. These results suggest that the risk of circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus is low in fully immunized IPV-using populations in developed countries that border OPV-using populations.     

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of rhesus rotavirus vaccine given in combination with oral or inactivated poliovirus vaccines and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of the oral rhesus rotavirus vaccine (RRV) were assessed among 72 infants (6 weeks old) in Lahore, Pakistan, from August to December 1985. Special emphasis was placed on the possible interaction or interference caused by giving RRV at the time infants received their first polio immunization. RRV was given to the infants at the same time as diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP), oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV), or inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV). The immune response to RRV was assessed by plaque-reduction neutralization 3 weeks after immunization and serum immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgA antibody levels to poliovirus type 1 were tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) after polio immunizations. Of the infants in the group given RRV with OPV, 50% had a two- to four-fold rise in neutralization titre against rotavirus, compared with 22% in the group given RRV with DTP and 20% in the group given RRV and IPV (P less than 0.05). Interference by live oral polio vaccination in the response to RRV seems unlikely. We observed no significant difference in rates of seroconversion of IgG antibodies to poliovirus type 1 among infants aged 18 and 21 weeks who received RRV and OPV (81%), RRV with delayed OPV (67%), or RRV and IPV (59%). Administration of RRV was safe and was not associated with adverse reactions in the 6 weeks old infants. The low rate of seroconversion to rotavirus suggests that a more antigen-rich vaccine or multiple doses of the same vaccine might produce a better immune response.     

CpG oligodeoxynucleotides are a potent adjuvant for an inactivated polio vaccine produced from Sabin strains of poliovirus

Poliovirus transmission is controlled globally through world-wide use of a live attenuated oral polio vaccine (OPV). However, the imminence of global poliovirus eradication calls for a switch to the inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). Given the limited manufacturing capacity and high cost of IPV, this switch is unlikely in most developing and undeveloped countries. Adjuvantation is an effective strategy for antigen sparing. In this study, we evaluated the adjuvanticity of CpG oligodeoxynucleotides (CpG-ODN) for an experimental IPV produced from Sabin strains of poliovirus. Our results showed that CpG-ODN, alone or in combination with alum, can significantly enhance both the humoral and cellular immune responses to IPV in mice, and, consequently, the antigen dose could be reduced substantially. Therefore, our study suggests that the global use of IPV could be facilitated by using CpG-ODN or other feasible adjuvants.