Tatiana M Lanzieri1, Stephanie R Bialek2, Ismael R Ortega-Sanchez2, Manoj Gambhir3. 1. National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA. Electronic address: tmlanzieri@cdc.gov. 2. National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA. 3. National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA; MRC Centre for Outbreak Analysis and Modelling, Imperial College London, UK; Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Understanding the potential for vaccination to change cytomegalovirus (CMV) epidemiology is important for developing CMV vaccines and designing clinical trials. METHODS: We constructed a deterministic, age-specific and time-dependent mathematical model of pathogen transmission, parameterized using CMV seroprevalence from the United States and Brazil, to predict the impact of vaccination on congenital CMV infection. FINDINGS: Concurrent vaccination of young children and adolescents would result in the greatest reductions in congenital CMV infections in populations with moderate and high baseline maternal seroprevalence. Such a vaccination strategy, assuming 70% vaccine efficacy, 90% coverage and 5-year duration of protection, could ultimately prevent 30-50% of congenital CMV infections. At equilibrium, this strategy could result in a 30% reduction in congenital CMV infections due to primary maternal infection in the United States but a 3% increase in Brazil. The potential for an increase in congenital CMV infections due to primary maternal infections in Brazil was not predicted with use of a vaccine that confers protection for greater than 5 years. INTERPRETATION: Modeling suggests that vaccination strategies that include young children will result in greater declines in congenital CMV infection than those restricted to adolescents or women of reproductive age. Our study highlights the critical need for better understanding of the relative contribution of type of maternal infection to congenital CMV infection and disease, the main focus of vaccine prevention. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
BACKGROUND: Understanding the potential for vaccination to change cytomegalovirus (CMV) epidemiology is important for developing CMV vaccines and designing clinical trials. METHODS: We constructed a deterministic, age-specific and time-dependent mathematical model of pathogen transmission, parameterized using CMV seroprevalence from the United States and Brazil, to predict the impact of vaccination on congenital CMV infection. FINDINGS: Concurrent vaccination of young children and adolescents would result in the greatest reductions in congenital CMV infections in populations with moderate and high baseline maternal seroprevalence. Such a vaccination strategy, assuming 70% vaccine efficacy, 90% coverage and 5-year duration of protection, could ultimately prevent 30-50% of congenital CMV infections. At equilibrium, this strategy could result in a 30% reduction in congenital CMV infections due to primary maternal infection in the United States but a 3% increase in Brazil. The potential for an increase in congenital CMV infections due to primary maternal infections in Brazil was not predicted with use of a vaccine that confers protection for greater than 5 years. INTERPRETATION: Modeling suggests that vaccination strategies that include young children will result in greater declines in congenital CMV infection than those restricted to adolescents or women of reproductive age. Our study highlights the critical need for better understanding of the relative contribution of type of maternal infection to congenital CMV infection and disease, the main focus of vaccine prevention. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Authors: Robert F Pass; Changpin Zhang; Ashley Evans; Tina Simpson; William Andrews; Meei-Li Huang; Lawrence Corey; Janie Hill; Elizabeth Davis; Cynthia Flanigan; Gretchen Cloud Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-03-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Paul Griffiths; Stanley Plotkin; Edward Mocarski; Robert Pass; Mark Schleiss; Philip Krause; Stephanie Bialek Journal: Vaccine Date: 2013-04-18 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Fernando A B Colugnati; Stephanie A S Staras; Sheila C Dollard; Michael J Cannon Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2007-07-02 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: Philip R Krause; Stephanie R Bialek; Suresh B Boppana; Paul D Griffiths; Catherine A Laughlin; Per Ljungman; Edward S Mocarski; Robert F Pass; Jennifer S Read; Mark R Schleiss; Stanley A Plotkin Journal: Vaccine Date: 2013-10-13 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Romain Ragonnet; James M Trauer; Justin T Denholm; Nicholas L Geard; Margaret Hellard; Emma S McBryde Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2015-10-20 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Diana L Martin; Ryan Wiegand; Brook Goodhew; Patrick Lammie; Carolyn M Black; Sheila West; Charlotte A Gaydos; Laura Dize; Harran Mkocha; Mabula Kasubi; Manoj Gambhir Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2015-12-21 Impact factor: 4.379