Inactivated polio vaccine development for technology transfer using attenuated Sabin poliovirus strains to shift from Salk-IPV to Sabin-IPV

Industrial-scale inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) production dates back to the 1960s when at the Rijks Instituut voor de Volksgezondheid (RIV) in Bilthoven a process was developed based on micro-carrier technology and primary monkey kidney cells. This technology was freely shared with several pharmaceutical companies and institutes worldwide. In this contribution, the history of one of the first cell-culture based large-scale biological production processes is summarized. Also, recent developments and the anticipated upcoming shift from regular IPV to Sabin-IPV are presented. Responding to a call by the World Health Organization (WHO) for new polio vaccines, the development of Sabin-IPV was continued, after demonstrating proof of principle in the 1990s, at the Netherlands Vaccine Institute (NVI). Development of Sabin-IPV plays an important role in the WHO polio eradication strategy as biocontainment will be critical in the post-OPV cessation period. The use of attenuated Sabin strains instead of wild-type Salk polio strains will provide additional safety during vaccine production. Initially, the Sabin-IPV production process will be based on the scale-down model of the current, and well-established, Salk-IPV process. In parallel to clinical trial material production, process development, optimization and formulation research is being carried out to further optimize the process and reduce cost per dose. Also, results will be shown from large-scale (to prepare for future technology transfer) generation of Master- and Working virus seedlots, and clinical trial material (for phase I studies) production. Finally, the planned technology transfer to vaccine manufacturers in low and middle-income countries is discussed.     

Increased potency of an inactivated trivalent polio vaccine with oil-in-water emulsions

The use of inactivated poliovirus vaccines (IPV) will be required to achieve, world-wide eradication of polio. The current expense of IPV is however prohibitive for, some countries, and therefore efforts to decrease the costs of the vaccine are a high, priority. Our results show that the addition of oil-in-water emulsion adjuvants to an, inactivated trivalent poliovirus vaccine are dose-sparing and are capable of enhancing, neutralizing antibody titers in the rat potency model.     

Global polio eradication: Where are we in Europe and what next?

The world was never so close to reach the polio eradication: only 37 cases notified in 2016 in only three countries, but the game is not yet at the end. The risk of polio outbreaks in the EU is smaller than it has ever been in the past, but it is not so small that we can ignore it. The EU MS must remain alert and plan and prepare for managing polio events or outbreaks because of the possible dire consequences. The IPV only vaccination schedule universally applied in EU has achieved satisfactory coverage, but constantly leaving small accumulating pockets of susceptible individuals. Moreover the IPV only schedule is not an absolute barrier against poliovirus silent transmission as demonstrated in the recent Israel outbreak. The availability of annually revised S.O.P. from WHO GPEI on the identification and response of a polio event, without local poliovirus transmission or a polio outbreak with sustained transmission, helps and challenge EU countries to update their polio national preparedness plans. The EU/EEA area, in fact, is a peculiar area regarding the polio risk both for its vaccination policy, the large polio vaccines manufactures and the constant immigration from areas at polio high risk, but also EU include cultural and financial potentials crucial to sustain the polio end game strategy and reach the benefit of a world without polio risk. Poliovirus eradication will continue to be challenged as long as there is the worldwide presence of polioviruses in laboratories and vaccine production plants. Most of the world’s OPV vaccines are produced in the EU and many laboratories and research centers store and handle polio viruses. EU Member States are engaged actively in implementing the poliovirus biocontainment plans that are part of the polio eradication strategy and to certify the destruction of poliovirus strains and potentially contaminated biological materials.     

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.     

PER.C6 cells as a serum-free suspension cell platform for the production of high titer poliovirus: A potential low cost of goods option for world supply of inactivated poliovirus vaccine

There are two highly efficacious poliovirus vaccines: Sabin's live-attenuated oral polio vaccine (OPV) and Salk's inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). OPV can be made at low costs per dose and is easily administrated. However, the major drawback is the frequent reversion of the OPV vaccine strains to virulent poliovirus strains which can result in Vaccine Associated Paralytic Poliomyelitis (VAPP) in vaccinees. Furthermore, some OPV revertants with high transmissibility can circulate in the population as circulating Vaccine Derived Polioviruses (cVDPVs). IPV does not convey VAPP and cVDPVs but the high costs per dose and insufficient supply have rendered IPV an unfavorable option for low and middle-income countries.     

Economics of polio vaccination in the post-eradication era: should OPV-using countries adopt IPV?

The continued use of oral polio vaccine (OPV) poses a threat to polio virus eradication. Stopping all polio vaccination in the post-certification era is no longer considered to be a practical option. Policy makers agree that OPV use must stop immediately after certification. Therefore, the pragmatic alternative is for the OPV-using countries to switch to IPV. This study estimates the cost of switching to IPV, and the cost-effectiveness of this switch. Using data on the number of polio cases and the number of unvaccinated children in different countries of the world, the risks of polio and polio outbreaks have been calculated. The current cost of routine and intensive OPV immunisation is about US $2143 million in the 148 OPV-using countries. Routine use of IPV in these countries should cost US $1246 million. If the current costs of routine and intensive polio immunisation are considered, adopting IPV to replace OPV will not increase the total global cost. Even if the cost of intensive polio immunisation is ignored, cost-effectiveness ratio of adopting IPV remains less than the average GNI per capita of OPV-using countries. The incremental cost of adopting IPV to replace OPV is relatively low, about US $1 per child per year, and most countries should be able to afford this additional cost.     

Polio endgame: Lessons for the global rotavirus vaccination program

Poliovirus and rotavirus share notable similarities. Although rotavirus is not amenable to eradication because of animal reservoirs, live, attenuated oral vaccines have been the bedrock of both prevention and control programs, providing intestinal and humoral immunity. Both programs have also encountered safety concerns and suboptimal immune responses to oral vaccines in low-income settings that have been challenges, prompting the search for alternative solutions. In this paper, we review the progress made by polio prevention and eradication efforts over the past six decades. Specifically, we discuss the roles of the oral polio vaccine (OPV) and the inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) in achieving polio eradication, and explore potential application of these lessons to rotavirus. Recent scientific evidence has confirmed that a combined schedule of IPV and OPV adds synergistic value that may give the polio eradication effort the tools to end all poliovirus circulation worldwide. For rotavirus, oral vaccine is the only currently licensed and recommended vaccine for use in all children worldwide, providing heterologous protection against a broad range of strains. However, parenteral rotavirus vaccines are in the pre-clinical and clinical trial stage and insight from polio provides strong justification for accelerating the development of these vaccines. While challenges for parenteral rotavirus vaccines will need to be addressed, such as achieving protection against a broad range of strains, the principle of combined use of oral and parenteral rotavirus vaccines may provide the necessary humoral and intestinal immunity necessary to close the efficacy gaps between developing and developed countries, therefore controlling rotavirus worldwide. This strategy may also potentially reduce risk of intussusception.     

Cost analysis of post-polio certification immunization policies

OBJECTIVE: An analysis was conducted to estimate the costs of different potential post-polio certification immunization policies currently under consideration, with the objective of providing this information to policy-makers. METHODS: We analyzed three global policy options: continued use of oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV); OPV cessation with optional inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV); and OPV cessation with universal IPV. Assumptions were made on future immunization policy decisions taken by low-, middle-, and high-income countries. We estimated the financial costs of each immunization policy, the number of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP) cases, and the global costs of maintaining an outbreak response capacity. The financial costs of each immunization policy were based on estimates of the cost of polio vaccine, its administration, and coverage projections. The costs of maintaining outbreak response capacity include those associated with developing and maintaining a vaccine stockpile in addition to laboratory and epidemiological surveillance. We used the period 2005-20 as the time frame for the analysis. FINDINGS: OPV cessation with optional IPV, at an estimated cost of US$ 20,412 million, was the least costly option. The global cost of outbreak response capacity was estimated to be US$ 1320 million during 2005-20. The policy option continued use of OPV resulted in the highest number of VAPP cases. OPV cessation with universal IPV had the highest financial costs, but it also had the least number of VAPP cases. Sensitivity analyses showed that global costs were sensitive to assumptions on the cost of the vaccine. Analysis also showed that if the price per dose of IPV was reduced to US$ 0.50 for low-income countries, the cost of OPV cessation with universal IPV would be the same as the costs of continued use of OPV. CONCLUSION: Projections on the vaccine price per dose and future coverage rates were major drivers of the global costs of post-certification polio immunization. The break-even price of switching to IPV compared with continuing with OPV immunizations is US$ 0.50 per dose of IPV. However, this doses not account for the cost of vaccine-derived poliovirus cases resulting from the continued use of OPV. In addition to financial costs, risk assessments related to the re-emergence of polio will be major determinants of policy decisions.     

Development and introduction of inactivated poliovirus vaccines derived from Sabin strains in Japan

During the endgame of global polio eradication, the universal introduction of inactivated poliovirus vaccines is urgently required to reduce the risk of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis and polio outbreaks due to wild and vaccine-derived polioviruses. In particular, the development of inactivated poliovirus vaccines (IPVs) derived from the attenuated Sabin strains is considered to be a highly favorable option for the production of novel IPV that reduce the risk of facility-acquired transmission of poliovirus to the communities. In Japan, Sabin-derived IPVs (sIPVs) have been developed and introduced for routine immunization in November 2012. They are the first licensed sIPVs in the world. Consequently, trivalent oral poliovirus vaccine was used for polio control in Japan for more than half a century but has now been removed from the list of vaccines licensed for routine immunization. This paper reviews the development, introduction, characterization, and global status of IPV derived from attenuated Sabin strains.     

Adjuvants and inactivated polio vaccine: A systematic review

Poliomyelitis is nearing universal eradication; in 2011, there were 650 cases reported globally. When wild polio is eradicated, global oral polio vaccine (OPV) cessation followed by use of universal inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) is believed to be the safest vaccination strategy as IPV does not mutate or run the risk of vaccine derived outbreaks that OPV does. However, IPV is significantly more expensive than OPV. One strategy to make IPV more affordable is to reduce the dose by adding adjuvants, compounds that augment the immune response to the vaccine. No adjuvants are currently utilized in stand-alone IPV; however, several have been explored over the past six decades. From aluminum, used in many licensed vaccines, to newer and more experimental adjuvants such as synthetic DNA, a diverse group of compounds has been assessed with varying strengths and weaknesses. This review summarizes the studies to date evaluating the efficacy and safety of adjuvants used with IPV.     

Antigenic diversity of type 1 polioviruses and its implications for the efficacy of polio vaccines

Inactivated Polio Vaccines (IPV) and live Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) were introduced in the mid-20th century, and their coordinated worldwide use led to almost complete elimination of the disease, with only one serotype of poliovirus remaining endemic in just two countries. Polio eradication will lead to discontinuation of OPV use and its replacement with IPV or other vaccines that are currently under development that will need to be tested in clinical trials. Despite decades of research, questions remain about the serological correlates of polio vaccine efficacy, specifically whether the vaccines are equally protective against immunologically different strains of the same serotype. The absence of significant morbidity does not allow use of a protection endpoint in clinical trials, so the answer could be obtained only by using surrogate markers such as immunogenicity. In this study, a panel of wild and vaccine-derived polioviruses of serotype 1 were tested in neutralization assays with sera from vaccine-immunized individuals. The results demonstrated that there was a significant difference in titers of neutralizing antibodies in human sera when measured against different strains. When measured with a homologous strain used for vaccine manufacture all subjects had detectable levels of antibodies, while neutralization tests with some heterologous strains failed to detect neutralizing antibodies in a number of subjects. Administration of a booster dose of IPV led to a significant increase in neutralizing titers against all strains. Results of the experiments using animal sera, performed to obtain more information on protectivity of neutralizing antibodies against heterologous strains, were consistent with the results obtained in the assays using human sera. These results are discussed in the context of serological biomarkers of protection against poliomyelitis, suggesting that potency of vaccines made from serologically different strains should be determined against both homologous and heterologous challenge viruses.     

Polio vaccines: WHO position paper,January 2014 – Recommendations

This article presents the World Health Organizations (WHO) evidence and recommendations for the use of polio vaccination from the WHO position paper on polio vaccines – January 2014 recently published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper summarizes the WHO position on the introduction of at least one dose of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) into routine immunization schedules as a strategy to mitigate the potential risk of re-emergence of type 2 polio following the withdrawal of Sabin type 2 strains from oral polio vaccine (OPV). The current document replaces the position paper on the use of polio vaccines published in 2010 [2].     

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.     

Aluminium hydroxide potentiates a protective Th1 biased immune response against polio virus that allows for dose sparing in mice and rats

BackgroundThe development of new low cost inactivated polio virus based vaccines (IPV) is a high priority and will be essential for the complete eradication of polio. Since the aluminium hydroxide adjuvant is widely used in humans we tested this adjuvant with IPV in two models. Our objective was twofold; to examine the IPV dose sparing effect of aluminium hydroxide and how the adjuvant effect of aluminium hydroxide affected the immunity induced by IPV.MethodsMice and rats were immunized with IPV formulated with Aluminium hydroxide and subjected to immunological analyses and serum polio virus neutralization titer determination.ResultsAddition of aluminium hydroxide to IPV led to a ten times dose sparing effect compared to IPV alone, measured by virus neutralization titers in serum. Aluminium hydroxide changed the kinetics of the response against IPV leading to a faster and stronger response, which due to IPV induced immune dominance was characterized as a strong Th1-biased cellular/humoral immune response.ConclusionsThe IPV-aluminium hydroxide formulation constitutes a promising vaccine capable of generating strong Th1 immunity against infection with all three serotypes. A phase I/II clinical study was recently initiated.     

Intradermal fractional dose inactivated polio vaccine: a review of the literature

Oral polio vaccine (OPV) will likely be insufficient to completely eradicate polio due to its propensity to mutate into neurovirulent forms and its inability to produce adequate immunity in certain areas of the world. Inactivated polio vaccine (IPV), a killed vaccine which therefore cannot mutate, may be more effective than OPV in certain populations, and will likely be required for global polio eradication. However, the high cost of IPV is prohibitive in many areas of the world. Intradermal administration has the potential to lower the dose, and thus the cost, of IPV. This article reviews the clinical studies to date on intradermal fractional dose polio vaccination. We conclude that intradermal IPV vaccination shows potential as a means to reduce the cost and increase the ease of administration of IPV, but that additional research is needed to determine the optimal fractional dose, timing, and role of adjuvants in intradermal IPV vaccination as well as the clinical significance of different antibody titers above the threshold for seroconversion.     

Polio vaccines: WHO position paper,March 2016–recommendations

This article presents the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations on the use of polio vaccine excerpted from the WHO position paper on polio vaccines – March 2016, published in the Weekly Epidemiological Record [1]. This position paper on polio vaccines replaces the 2014 WHO position paper [2]. The position paper summarizes the WHO position on the introduction of at least one dose of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) into routine immunization schedules as a strategy to mitigate the potential risk of re-emergence of type 2 polio following the withdrawal of Sabin type 2 strains from oral polio vaccine (OPV) [3].Footnotes to this paper provide a number of core references including references to grading tables that assess the quality of the scientific evidence, and to the evidence-to-recommendation table. In accordance with its mandate to provide guidance to Member States on health policy matters, WHO issues a series of regularly updated position papers on vaccines and combinations of vaccines against diseases that have an international public health impact. These papers are concerned primarily with the use of vaccines in large-scale immunization programmes; they summarize essential background information on diseases and vaccines, and conclude with WHO’s current position on the use of vaccines in the global context. This position paper reflects the global switch from trivalent to bivalent OPV which took place in April 2016. Recommendations on the use of polio vaccines have been discussed on multiple occasions by SAGE, most recently in October 2016; evidence presented at these meetings can be accessed at: http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/previous/en/index.html.     

Polio control after certification: major issues outstanding

Now that the global eradication of wild poliovirus is almost within sight, planning for the post-certification era is becoming a priority issue. It is agreed that a stockpile of appropriate polio vaccines will need to be established, and a surveillance and response capacity will need to be maintained, in order to protect the world against any possible future outbreaks attributable either to the persistence of wild poliovirus or vaccine-derived polioviruses (VDPVs) or to the unintentional or intentional release of poliovirus from a laboratory or vaccine store. Although it has been suggested that the stockpile should consist of monovalent oral poliovirus vaccine (mOPV), many questions remain concerning its nature, financing, management, and use--in particular, because of uncertainties over future national vaccination policies, and over the availability of different vaccines, after the certification of wild poliovirus eradication. There are further uncertainties concerning the possible role and efficacy of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) used either routinely or in outbreak control in low-hygiene settings, the potential for rapid geographical spread of polioviruses should an outbreak occur after certification, and the risks inherent in introducing additional oral polio vaccine (OPV) viruses into populations in which the vaccine coverage and prevalence of immunity have declined, and which may thus favour the spread of VDPVs. Given these important gaps in knowledge, no country should discontinue polio vaccination until a coordinated policy for the post-certification era has been developed and the recommended measures have been put in place.     

Dynamic profiles of neutralizing antibody responses elicited in rhesus monkeys immunized with a combined tetravalent DTaP-Sabin IPV candidate vaccine

The World Health Organization has recommended that a Sabin inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) should gradually and synchronously replace oral polio vaccines for routine immunizations because its benefits in eliminating vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis have been reported in different phases of clinical trials. It is also considered important to explore new tetravalent diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis-Sabin IPV (DTaP-sIPV) candidate vaccines for possible use in developing countries. In this study, the immunogenicity of a combined tetravalent DTaP-sIPV candidate vaccine was investigated in primates by evaluating the neutralizing antibody responses it induced. The dynamic profiles of the antibody responses to each of the separate antigenic components and serotypes of Sabin IPV were determined and their corresponding geometric mean titers were similar to those generated by the tetravalent diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis-conventional IPV (DTaP–cIPV), the tetravalent diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis (DTaP), and Sabin IPV vaccines in the control groups. This implies that protective immunogenic effects are conferred by this combined tetravalent formulation.     

Method for the simultaneous assay of the different poliovirus types using surface plasmon resonance technology

The inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) contains viral samples that belong to serotypes 1, 2 and 3. We report here a surface plasmon resonance (SPR)-based technique that permits the simultaneous assay of the individual viral types in the IPV as well as in different bulk intermediates from the industrial vaccine production process. Monoclonal antibodies specific to each of the 3 viral types along with a negative control antibody are captured via an anti-IgG antibody on the surface of the 4 flow cells of the SPR instrument. The viral samples are then injected over these flow cells and the increase in resonance units as a result of virus binding is measured. The method was calibrated by an analysis of the European Working Standard (EWS) for poliovirus vaccines. We show that the antibodies used recognize viruses with functional affinities in the picomolar range permitting an effective capture of the antigen. In addition we demonstrate that the antibodies are highly specific to a given virus type and that the heat induced destruction of the D-antigen abolishes antibody recognition entirely. The technique was found to be reproducible and robust and its response was linear to the antigen concentration. Due to the rapidity of analysis this technique permits an almost real-time follow-up of the industrial production process and may present an alternative to the established ELISA assay for the analysis of the intermediates and the final product.     

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.