BACKGROUND: Poliovirus types 1 and 3 co-circulate in poliomyelitis-endemic countries. We aimed to assess the immunogenicity of a novel bivalent types 1 and 3 oral poliovirus vaccine (bOPV). METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial to assess the superiority of monovalent type 2 OPV (mOPV2), mOPV3, or bOPV over trivalent OPV (tOPV), and the non-inferiority of bivalent vaccine compared with mOPV1 and mOPV3. The study was done at three centres in India between Aug 6, 2008, and Dec 26, 2008. Random allocation was done by permuted blocks of ten. The primary outcome was seroconversion after one monovalent or bivalent vaccine dose compared with a dose of trivalent vaccine at birth. The secondary endpoints were seroconversion after two vaccine doses compared with after two trivalent vaccine doses and cumulative two-dose seroconversion. Parents or guardians and study investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Because of multiple comparisons, we defined p≤0·01 as statistically significant. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN 64725429. RESULTS:900 newborn babies were randomly assigned to one of five vaccine groups (about 180 patients per group); of these 70 (8%) discontinued, leaving 830 (92%) for analysis. After the first dose, seroconversion to poliovirus type 1 was 20% for both mOPV1 (33 of 168) and bOPV (32 of 159) compared with 15% for tOPV (25 of 168; p>0·01), to poliovirus type 2 was 21% (35 of 170) for mOPV2 compared with 25% (42 of 168) for tOPV (p>0·01), and to poliovirus type 3 was 12% (20 of 165) for mOPV3 and 7% (11 of 159) for bOPV compared with 4% (7 of 168) for tOPV (mOPV3 vs tOPV p=0·01; bOPV vs tOPV; p>0·01). Cumulative two-dose seroconversion to poliovirus type 1 was 90% (151 of 168) for mOPV1 and 86% (136 of 159) for bOPV compared with 63% (106 of 168) for tOPV (p<0·0001), to poliovirus type 2 was 90% (153 of 170) for mOPV2 compared with 91% (153 of 168) for tOPV (p>0·01), and to poliovirus type 3 was 84% (138 of 165) for mOPV3 and 74% (117 of 159) for bOPV compared with 52% (87 of 168) for tOPV (p<0·0001). The vaccines were well tolerated. 19 serious adverse events occurred, including one death; however, these events were not attributed to the trial interventions. INTERPRETATION: The findings show the superiority of bOPV compared with tOPV, and the non-inferiority of bOPV compared with mOPV1 and mOPV3. FUNDING: GAVI Alliance, World Health Organization, and Panacea Biotec.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Poliovirus types 1 and 3 co-circulate in poliomyelitis-endemic countries. We aimed to assess the immunogenicity of a novel bivalent types 1 and 3 oral poliovirus vaccine (bOPV). METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial to assess the superiority of monovalent type 2 OPV (mOPV2), mOPV3, or bOPV over trivalent OPV (tOPV), and the non-inferiority of bivalent vaccine compared with mOPV1 and mOPV3. The study was done at three centres in India between Aug 6, 2008, and Dec 26, 2008. Random allocation was done by permuted blocks of ten. The primary outcome was seroconversion after one monovalent or bivalent vaccine dose compared with a dose of trivalent vaccine at birth. The secondary endpoints were seroconversion after two vaccine doses compared with after two trivalent vaccine doses and cumulative two-dose seroconversion. Parents or guardians and study investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Because of multiple comparisons, we defined p≤0·01 as statistically significant. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN 64725429. RESULTS: 900 newborn babies were randomly assigned to one of five vaccine groups (about 180 patients per group); of these 70 (8%) discontinued, leaving 830 (92%) for analysis. After the first dose, seroconversion to poliovirus type 1 was 20% for both mOPV1 (33 of 168) and bOPV (32 of 159) compared with 15% for tOPV (25 of 168; p>0·01), to poliovirus type 2 was 21% (35 of 170) for mOPV2 compared with 25% (42 of 168) for tOPV (p>0·01), and to poliovirus type 3 was 12% (20 of 165) for mOPV3 and 7% (11 of 159) for bOPV compared with 4% (7 of 168) for tOPV (mOPV3 vs tOPV p=0·01; bOPV vs tOPV; p>0·01). Cumulative two-dose seroconversion to poliovirus type 1 was 90% (151 of 168) for mOPV1 and 86% (136 of 159) for bOPV compared with 63% (106 of 168) for tOPV (p<0·0001), to poliovirus type 2 was 90% (153 of 170) for mOPV2 compared with 91% (153 of 168) for tOPV (p>0·01), and to poliovirus type 3 was 84% (138 of 165) for mOPV3 and 74% (117 of 159) for bOPV compared with 52% (87 of 168) for tOPV (p<0·0001). The vaccines were well tolerated. 19 serious adverse events occurred, including one death; however, these events were not attributed to the trial interventions. INTERPRETATION: The findings show the superiority of bOPV compared with tOPV, and the non-inferiority of bOPV compared with mOPV1 and mOPV3. FUNDING: GAVI Alliance, World Health Organization, and Panacea Biotec.
Authors: Kimberly M Thompson; Mark A Pallansch; Radboud J Duintjer Tebbens; Steve G Wassilak; Jong-Hoon Kim; Stephen L Cochi Journal: Risk Anal Date: 2013-03-05 Impact factor: 4.000
Authors: Radboud J Duintjer Tebbens; Mark A Pallansch; Konstantin M Chumakov; Neal A Halsey; Tapani Hovi; Philip D Minor; John F Modlin; Peter A Patriarca; Roland W Sutter; Peter F Wright; Steven G F Wassilak; Stephen L Cochi; Jong-Hoon Kim; Kimberly M Thompson Journal: Risk Anal Date: 2013-03-28 Impact factor: 4.000
Authors: Cara C Burns; Jing Shaw; Jaume Jorba; David Bukbuk; Festus Adu; Nicksy Gumede; Muhammed Ali Pate; Emmanuel Ade Abanida; Alex Gasasira; Jane Iber; Qi Chen; Annelet Vincent; Paul Chenoweth; Elizabeth Henderson; Kathleen Wannemuehler; Asif Naeem; Rifqiyah Nur Umami; Yorihiro Nishimura; Hiroyuki Shimizu; Marycelin Baba; Adekunle Adeniji; A J Williams; David R Kilpatrick; M Steven Oberste; Steven G Wassilak; Oyewale Tomori; Mark A Pallansch; Olen Kew Journal: J Virol Date: 2013-02-13 Impact factor: 5.103