Jennifer D Loo1, Laura Conklin, Katherine E Fleming-Dutra, Maria Deloria Knoll, Daniel E Park, Jennifer Kirk, David Goldblatt, Katherine L O'Brien, Cynthia G Whitney. 1. From the *Respiratory Diseases Branch, Division of Bacterial Diseases, National Center for Immunizations and Respiratory Diseases; †Epidemic Intelligence Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA; ‡International Vaccine Access Center, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore; §Westat Inc., Rockville, MD; and ¶Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To aid decision making for pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) use in infant national immunization programs, we summarized the indirect effects of PCV on clinical outcomes among nontargeted age groups. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the English literature on infant PCV dosing schedules published from 1994 to 2010 (with ad hoc addition of 2011 articles) for outcomes on children >5 years of age and adults including vaccine-type nasopharyngeal carriage (VT-NP), vaccine-type invasive pneumococcal disease (VT-IPD) and syndromic pneumonia. RESULTS: Of 12,980 citations reviewed, we identified 21 VT-IPD, 6 VT-NP and 9 pneumonia studies. Of these 36, 21 (58%) included 3 primary doses plus PCV or pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) booster schedule (3+1 or 3+PPV23), 5 (14%) 3+0, 9 (25%) 2+1 and 1 (3%) 2+0. Most (95%) were PCV7 studies. Among observational VT-IPD studies, all schedules (2+1, 3+0 and 3+1) demonstrated reductions in incidence among young adult groups. Among syndromic pneumonia observational studies (2+1, 3+0 and 3+1), only 3+1 schedules showed significant indirect impact. Of 2 VT-NP controlled trials (3+0 and 3+1) and 3 VT-NP observational studies (2+1, 3+1 and 3+PPV23), 3+1 and 3+PPV23 schedules showed significant indirect effect. The 1 study to directly compare between schedules was a VT-NP study (2+0 vs. 2+1), which found no indirect effect on older siblings and parents of vaccinated children with either schedule. CONCLUSIONS: Indirect benefit of a 3+1 infant PCV dosing schedule has been demonstrated for VT-IPD, VT-NP and syndromic pneumonia; 2+1 and 3+0 schedules have demonstrated indirect effect only for VT-IPD. The choice of optimal infant PCV schedule is limited by data paucity on indirect effects, especially a lack of head-to-head studies and studies of PCV10 and PCV13.
BACKGROUND: To aid decision making for pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) use in infant national immunization programs, we summarized the indirect effects of PCV on clinical outcomes among nontargeted age groups. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the English literature on infant PCV dosing schedules published from 1994 to 2010 (with ad hoc addition of 2011 articles) for outcomes on children >5 years of age and adults including vaccine-type nasopharyngeal carriage (VT-NP), vaccine-type invasive pneumococcal disease (VT-IPD) and syndromic pneumonia. RESULTS: Of 12,980 citations reviewed, we identified 21 VT-IPD, 6 VT-NP and 9 pneumonia studies. Of these 36, 21 (58%) included 3 primary doses plus PCV or pneumococcalpolysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) booster schedule (3+1 or 3+PPV23), 5 (14%) 3+0, 9 (25%) 2+1 and 1 (3%) 2+0. Most (95%) were PCV7 studies. Among observational VT-IPD studies, all schedules (2+1, 3+0 and 3+1) demonstrated reductions in incidence among young adult groups. Among syndromic pneumonia observational studies (2+1, 3+0 and 3+1), only 3+1 schedules showed significant indirect impact. Of 2 VT-NP controlled trials (3+0 and 3+1) and 3 VT-NP observational studies (2+1, 3+1 and 3+PPV23), 3+1 and 3+PPV23 schedules showed significant indirect effect. The 1 study to directly compare between schedules was a VT-NP study (2+0 vs. 2+1), which found no indirect effect on older siblings and parents of vaccinated children with either schedule. CONCLUSIONS: Indirect benefit of a 3+1 infant PCV dosing schedule has been demonstrated for VT-IPD, VT-NP and syndromic pneumonia; 2+1 and 3+0 schedules have demonstrated indirect effect only for VT-IPD. The choice of optimal infant PCV schedule is limited by data paucity on indirect effects, especially a lack of head-to-head studies and studies of PCV10 and PCV13.
Authors: Robert Weatherholtz; Eugene V Millar; Lawrence H Moulton; Raymond Reid; Karen Rudolph; Mathuram Santosham; Katherine L O'Brien Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2010-05-01 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Didrik F Vestrheim; E Arne Høiby; Marianne R Bergsaker; Karin Rønning; Ingeborg S Aaberge; Dominique A Caugant Journal: Vaccine Date: 2010-01-05 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Gerwin D Rodenburg; Sabine C de Greeff; Angelique G C S Jansen; Hester E de Melker; Leo M Schouls; Eelko Hak; Lodewijk Spanjaard; Elisabeth A M Sanders; Arie van der Ende Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: Tamara Pilishvili; Catherine Lexau; Monica M Farley; James Hadler; Lee H Harrison; Nancy M Bennett; Arthur Reingold; Ann Thomas; William Schaffner; Allen S Craig; Philip J Smith; Bernard W Beall; Cynthia G Whitney; Matthew R Moore Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2010-01-01 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Yin-Bun Cheung; Syed M A Zaman; Ekpedeme David Nsekpong; Chris A Van Beneden; Richard A Adegbola; Brian Greenwood; Felicity T Cutts Journal: Pediatr Infect Dis J Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 2.129
Authors: Julie A Bettinger; David W Scheifele; James D Kellner; Scott A Halperin; Wendy Vaudry; Barbara Law; Gregory Tyrrell Journal: Vaccine Date: 2009-12-29 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Christian A W Bruhn; Stephen Hetterich; Cynthia Schuck-Paim; Esra Kürüm; Robert J Taylor; Roger Lustig; Eugene D Shapiro; Joshua L Warren; Lone Simonsen; Daniel M Weinberger Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 11.205