Safety and tolerability of a high-potency zoster vaccine in adults >/= 50 or years of age

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

BACKGROUND

Herpes zoster, commonly known as shingles, is a neurocutaneous disease caused by the reactivation of the virus that causes varicella (chickenpox). After resolution of the varicella episode, the virus can remain latent in the sensitive dorsal ganglia of the spine. Years later, with declining immunity, the varicella zoster virus (VZV) can reactivate and cause herpes zoster, an extremely painful condition that can last many weeks or months and significantly compromise the quality of life of the affected person. The natural process of ageing is associated with a reduction in cellular immunity, and this predisposes older adults to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of the VZV activates specific T-cell production avoiding viral reactivation. Two types of herpes zoster vaccines are currently available. One of them is the single-dose live attenuated zoster vaccine (LZV), which contains the same live attenuated virus used in the chickenpox vaccine, but it has over 14-fold more plaque-forming units of the attenuated virus per dose. The other is the recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) which does not contain the live attenuated virus, but rather a small fraction of the virus that cannot replicate but can boost immunogenicity. The recommended schedule for the RZV is two doses two months apart. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2010, and updated in 2012, 2016, and 2019.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this 2022 update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2022, Issue 10), MEDLINE (1948 to October 2022), Embase (2010 to October 2022), CINAHL (1981 to October 2022), LILACS (1982 to October 2022), and three trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies involving healthy older adults (mean age 60 years or older). We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine (any dose and potency) versus any other type of intervention (e.g. varicella vaccine, antiviral medication), placebo, or no intervention (no vaccine). Outcomes were cumulative incidence of herpes zoster, adverse events (death, serious adverse events, systemic reactions, or local reaction occurring at any time after vaccination), and dropouts.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two new studies involving 1736 participants in this update. The review now includes a total of 26 studies involving 90,259 healthy older adults with a mean age of 63.7 years. Only three studies assessed the cumulative incidence of herpes zoster in groups that received vaccines versus placebo. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries in Europe and North America and included healthy Caucasians (understood to be white participants) aged 60 years or over with no immunosuppressive comorbidities. Two studies were conducted in Japan and one study was conducted in the Republic of Korea. Sixteen studies used LZV. Ten studies tested an RZV. The overall certainty of the evidence was moderate, which indicates that the intervention probably works. Most data for the primary outcome (cumulative incidence of herpes zoster) and secondary outcomes (adverse events and dropouts) came from studies that had a low risk of bias and included a large number of participants. The cumulative incidence of herpes zoster at up to three years of follow-up was lower in participants who received the LZV (one dose subcutaneously) than in those who received placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56; risk difference (RD) 2%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 50; moderate-certainty evidence) in the largest study, which included 38,546 participants. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21) or deaths (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; moderate-certainty evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher cumulative incidence of one or more adverse events (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.11; RD 23%; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.3) and injection site adverse events (RR 3.73, 95% CI 1.93 to 7.21; RD 28%; NNTH 3.6; moderate-certainty evidence) of mild to moderate intensity. These data came from four studies with 6980 participants aged 60 years or older. Two studies (29,311 participants for safety evaluation and 22,022 participants for efficacy evaluation) compared RZV (two doses intramuscularly, two months apart) versus placebo. Participants who received the new vaccine had a lower cumulative incidence of herpes zoster at 3.2 years follow-up (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.23; RD 3%; NNTB 33; moderate-certainty evidence), probably indicating a favourable profile of the intervention. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups in cumulative incidence of serious adverse events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) or deaths (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; moderate-certainty evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher cumulative incidence of adverse events, any systemic symptom (RR 2.23, 95% CI 2.12 to 2.34; RD 33%; NNTH 3.0), and any local symptom (RR 6.89, 95% CI 6.37 to 7.45; RD 67%; NNTH 1.5). Although most participants reported that their symptoms were of mild to moderate intensity, the risk of dropouts (participants not returning for the second dose, two months after the first dose) was higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39; RD 1%; NNTH 100, moderate-certainty evidence). Only one study reported funding from a non-commercial source (a university research foundation). All other included studies received funding from pharmaceutical companies. We did not conduct subgroup and sensitivity analyses AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LZV (single dose) and RZV (two doses) are probably effective in preventing shingles disease for at least three years. To date, there are no data to recommend revaccination after receiving the basic schedule for each type of vaccine. Both vaccines produce systemic and injection site adverse events of mild to moderate intensity. The conclusions did not change in relation to the previous version of the systematic review.

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

BACKGROUND

Herpes zoster, commonly known as shingles, is a neurocutaneous disease caused by the reactivation of the virus that causes varicella (chickenpox). After resolution of the varicella episode, the virus can remain latent in the sensitive dorsal ganglia of the spine. Years later, with declining immunity, the varicella zoster virus (VZV) can reactivate and cause herpes zoster, an extremely painful condition that can last many weeks or months and significantly compromise the quality of life of the affected person. The natural process of aging is associated with a reduction in cellular immunity, and this predisposes older people to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of the VZV activates specific T-cell production avoiding viral reactivation. The USA Food and Drug Administration has approved a herpes zoster vaccine with an attenuated active virus, live zoster vaccine (LZV), for clinical use amongst older adults, which has been tested in large populations. A new adjuvanted recombinant VZV subunit zoster vaccine, recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV), has also been approved. It consists of recombinant VZV glycoprotein E and a liposome-based AS01B adjuvant system. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last updated in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this 2019 update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 1, January 2019), MEDLINE (1948 to January 2019), Embase (2010 to January 2019), CINAHL (1981 to January 2019), LILACS (1982 to January 2019), WHO ICTRP (on 31 January 2019) and ClinicalTrials.gov (on 31 January 2019).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine (any dose and potency) versus any other type of intervention (e.g. varicella vaccine, antiviral medication), placebo, or no intervention (no vaccine). Outcomes were incidence of herpes zoster, adverse events (death, serious adverse events, systemic reactions, or local reaction occurring at any time after vaccination), and dropouts.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 new studies involving 18,615 participants in this update. The review now includes a total of 24 studies involving 88,531 participants. Only three studies assessed the incidence of herpes zoster in groups that received vaccines versus placebo. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries in Europe and North America and included healthy Caucasians (understood to be white participants) aged 60 years or over with no immunosuppressive comorbidities. Two studies were conducted in Japan. Fifteen studies used LZV. Nine studies tested an RZV. The overall quality of the evidence was moderate. Most data for the primary outcome (incidence of herpes zoster) and secondary outcomes (adverse events and dropouts) came from studies that had a low risk of bias and included a large number of participants. The incidence of herpes zoster at up to three years follow-up was lower in participants who received the LZV (one dose subcutaneously) than in those who received placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56; risk difference (RD) 2%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 50; moderate-quality evidence) in the largest study, which included 38,546 participants. There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.21) or deaths (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; moderate-quality evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher incidence of one or more adverse events (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.11; RD 23%; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 4.3) and injection site adverse events (RR 3.73, 95% CI 1.93 to 7.21; RD 28%; NNTH 3.6) of mild to moderate intensity (moderate-quality evidence). These data came from four studies with 6980 participants aged 60 years or over. Two studies (29,311 participants for safety evaluation and 22,022 participants for efficacy evaluation) compared RZV (two doses intramuscularly, two months apart) versus placebo. Participants who received the new vaccine had a lower incidence of herpes zoster at 3.2 years follow-up (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.23; RD 3%; NNTB 33; moderate-quality evidence). There were no differences between the vaccinated and placebo groups in incidence of serious adverse events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03) or deaths (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; moderate-quality evidence). The vaccinated group had a higher incidence of adverse events, any systemic symptom (RR 2.23, 95% CI 2.12 to 2.34; RD 33%; NNTH 3.0), and any local symptom (RR 6.89, 95% CI 6.37 to 7.45; RD 67%; NNTH 1.5). Although most participants reported that there symptoms were of mild to moderate intensity, the risk of dropouts (participants not returning for the second dose, two months after the first dose) was higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.39; RD 1%; NNTH 100, moderate-quality evidence). Only one study reported funding from a non-commercial source (a university research foundation). All of the other included studies received funding from pharmaceutical companies. We did not conduct subgroup and sensitivity analyses AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: LZV and RZV are effective in preventing herpes zoster disease for up to three years (the main studies did not follow participants for more than three years). To date, there are no data to recommend revaccination after receiving the basic schedule for each type of vaccine. Both vaccines produce systemic and injection site adverse events of mild to moderate intensity.

The comparative efficacy and safety of herpes zoster vaccines: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We estimated the relative efficacy and safety of vaccines for prevention of herpes zoster (HZ) using network meta-analysis (NMA) based on evidence from randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

A systematic literature review evaluated two different HZ vaccines: adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) and zoster vaccine live (ZVL), with different formulations assessed. Detailed feasibility assessment indicated that a NMA was feasible for efficacy (incidence of HZ and postherpetic neuralgia [PHN]) and safety (serious adverse events [SAE] and reactogenicity [injection-site reactions, systemic reaction]) outcomes. Primary analyses included frequentist NMAs with fixed effects for efficacy outcomes, due to limited data availability, and both fixed and random effects for safety and reactogenicity outcomes. As age is a known effect modifier of vaccine efficacy (VE), VE analyses were stratified by age.

RESULTS

RZV demonstrated significantly higher HZ efficacy than ZVL in adults ≥60 years of age (YOA) (VERZV = 0.92 (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.88, 0.94), VEZVL = 0.51 (95%CI: 0.44, 0.57)) and adults ≥70 YOA (VERZV = 0.91 (95%CI: 0.87, 0.94), VEZVL = 0.37 (95%CI: 0.25, 0.48)). Similarly, RZV demonstrated significantly higher PHN efficacy than ZVL in adults ≥60 YOA (VERZV = 0.89 (95%CI: 0.70, 0.96), VEZVL = 0.66 (95%CI: 0.48, 0.78)) and adults ≥70 YOA (VERZV = 0.89 (95%CI: 0.69, 0.96), VEZVL = 0.67 (95%CI: 0.44, 0.80)). RZV was associated with significantly more injection-site and systemic reactions compared to most formulations of ZVL and placebo, however definitions and data collection procedures differed across the included studies. There were no statistically significant differences found between RZV and any formulation of ZVL or placebo for SAEs.

CONCLUSION

RZV is significantly more effective in reducing HZ and PHN incidence in adults ≥60 YOA, compared with ZVL. As anticipated with an adjuvanted vaccine, RZV results in more reactogenicity following immunization. No differences in SAEs were found between RZV and ZVL.

Understanding the immunology of Shingrix, a recombinant glycoprotein E adjuvanted herpes zoster vaccine

Herpes zoster is common in older and immune suppressed persons due to diminished VZV-specific cellular immunity. A recombinant herpes zoster vaccine (RZV) consisting of a single VZV glycoprotein and an adjuvant system stimulates robust and persistent VZV-specific antibody and CD4+ T cell responses in these high-risk populations. VZV-specific immune responses induced by RZV, including the generation of polyfunctional T cells, are driven by the synergistic actions of the components of the vaccine adjuvant system. RZV provides unprecedented protection against herpes zoster in older adults regardless of age at vaccination and is efficacious in immune suppressed populations. Adjuvanted subunit antigens may represent a general strategy for vaccines in the elderly and other individuals typically considered immunologically resistant to vaccination.

Efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of herpes zoster vaccines in adults aged 50 and older: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of the herpes zoster live attenuated vaccine with the herpes zoster adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine or placebo for adults aged 50 and older.

DESIGN

Systematic review with bayesian meta-analysis and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library (inception to January 2017), grey literature, and reference lists of included studies.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational studies that compared the live attenuated vaccine with the adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine, placebo, or no vaccine in adults aged 50 and older. Relevant outcomes were incidence of herpes zoster (primary outcome), herpes zoster ophthalmicus, post-herpetic neuralgia, quality of life, adverse events, and death.

RESULTS

27 studies (22 randomised controlled trials) including 2 044 504 patients, along with 18 companion reports, were included after screening 2037 titles and abstracts, followed by 175 full text articles. Network meta-analysis of five randomised controlled trials found no statistically significant differences between the live attenuated vaccine and placebo for incidence of laboratory confirmed herpes zoster. The adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine, however, was statistically superior to both the live attenuated vaccine (vaccine efficacy 85%, 95% credible interval 31% to 98%) and placebo (94%, 79% to 98%). Network meta-analysis of 11 randomised controlled trials showed the adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine to be associated with statistically more adverse events at injection sites than the live attenuated vaccine (relative risk 1.79, 95% credible interval 1.05 to 2.34; risk difference 30%, 95% credible interval 2% to 51%) and placebo (5.63, 3.57 to 7.29 and 53%, 30% to 73%, respectively). Network meta-analysis of nine randomised controlled trials showed the adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine to be associated with statistically more systemic adverse events than placebo (2.28, 1.45 to 3.65 and 20%, 6% to 40%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Using the adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine might prevent more cases of herpes zoster than using the live attenuated vaccine, but the adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine also carries a greater risk of adverse events at injection sites.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

Prospero CRD42017056389.

Herpes zoster vaccine live: A 10 year review of post-marketing safety experience

BACKGROUND

Zoster vaccine is a single dose live, attenuated vaccine (ZVL) indicated for individuals ≥50 years-old for the prevention of herpes zoster (HZ). Safety data from clinical trials and post-licensure studies provided reassurance that ZVL is generally safe and well tolerated. The objective of this review was to provide worldwide post-marketing safety information following 10 years of use and >34 million doses distributed.

METHODS

All post-marketing adverse experience (AE) reports received worldwide between 02-May-2006 and 01-May-2016 from healthcare professionals following vaccination with ZVL and submitted to the MSD AE global safety database, were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 23,556 AE reports, 93% non-serious, were reported. Local injection site reactions (ISRs), with a median time-to-onset of 2 days, were the most frequently reported AEs followed by HZ. The majority of HZ reports were reported within 2 weeks of vaccination and considered, based on time-to-onset, pathogenesis of HZ, and data from clinical trials, to be caused by wild-type varicella-zoster virus (VZV). HZ confirmed by PCR analysis to be VZV Oka/Merck vaccine-strain was identified in an immunocompetent individual 8 months postvaccination and in 4 immunocompromised individuals. Disseminated HZ was reported very rarely (<1%) with 38% occurring in immunocompromised individuals. All reports of disseminated HZ confirmed by PCR as VZV Oka/Merck vaccine-strain were in individuals with immunosuppressive conditions and/or therapy at the time of vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

The safety profile of ZVL, following 10 years of post-marketing use, was favorable and consistent with that observed in clinical trials and post-licensure studies.

STING Is Involved in Antiviral Immune Response against VZV Infection via the Induction of Type I and III IFN Pathways

Varicella zoster virus (VZV) is a human-restricted α-herpesvirus that exhibits tropism for the skin. The VZV host receptors and downstream signaling pathways responsible for the antiviral innate immune response in the skin are not completely understood. Here, we show that STING mediates an important host defense against VZV infection in dermal cells including human dermal fibroblasts and HaCaT keratinocytes. Inhibition of STING using small interfering-RNA or short hairpin RNA-mediated gene disruption resulted in enhanced viral replication but diminished IRF3 phosphorylation and induction of IFNs and proinflammatory cytokines. Pretreatment with STING agonists resulted in reduced VZV glycoprotein E expression and viral replication. Additionally, using RNA sequencing to analyze dual host and VZV transcriptomes, we identified several host immune genes significantly induced by VZV infection. Furthermore, significant up-regulation of IFN-λ secretion was observed after VZV infection, partly through a STING-dependent pathway; IFN-λ was shown to be crucial for antiviral defense against VZV in human dermal cells. In conclusion, our data provide an important insight into STING-mediated induction of type I and III IFNs and subsequent antiviral signaling pathways that regulate VZV replication in human dermal cells.

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

BACKGROUND

Herpes zoster, also known as 'shingles', is a neurocutaneous disease characterised by the reactivation of the latent varicella zoster virus (VZV), the virus that causes chickenpox when immunity to VZV declines. It is an extremely painful condition that can last many weeks or months and it can significantly compromise the quality of life of affected individuals. The natural process of aging is associated with a reduction in cellular immunity and this predisposes older people to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of VZV activates specific T cell production avoiding viral reactivation. The Food and Drug Administration has approved a herpes zoster vaccine with an attenuated active virus for clinical use among older adults, which has been tested in large populations. A new adjuvanted recombinant VZV subunit zoster vaccine has also been tested. It consists of recombinant VZV glycoprotein E and a liposome-based AS01B adjuvant system. This new vaccine is not yet available for clinical use.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For this 2015 update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1948 to the 3rd week of October 2015), EMBASE (2010 to October 2015), CINAHL (1981 to October 2015) and LILACS (1982 to October 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine with placebo or no vaccine, to prevent herpes zoster in older adults (mean age > 60 years).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently collected and analysed data using a data extraction form. They also performed 'Risk of bias' assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 13 studies involving 69,916 participants. The largest study included 38,546 participants. All studies were conducted in high-income countries and included only healthy Caucasian individuals ≥ 60 years of age without immunosuppressive comorbidities. Ten studies used live attenuated varicella zoster virus (VZV) vaccines. Three studies tested a new type of vaccine not yet available for clinical use. We judged five of the included studies to be at low risk of bias.The incidence of herpes zoster, at up to three years of follow-up, was lower in participants who received the vaccine than in those who received a placebo: risk ratio (RR) 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56, risk difference (RD) 2%, number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) 50; GRADE: moderate quality evidence. The vaccinated group had a higher incidence of mild to moderate intensity adverse events. These date came from one large study that included 38,546 people aged 60 years or older.A study including 8122 participants compared the new vaccine (not yet available) to the placebo; the group that received the new vaccine had a lower incidence of herpes zoster at 3.2 years of follow-up: RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.10, RD 3%, NNTB 33; GRADE: moderate quality evidence. The vaccinated group had a higher incidence of adverse events but most them were of mild to moderate intensity.All studies received funding from the pharmaceutical industry.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Herpes zoster vaccine is effective in preventing herpes zoster disease and this protection can last three years. In general, zoster vaccine is well tolerated; it produces few systemic adverse events and injection site adverse events of mild to moderate intensity.There are studies of a new vaccine (with a VZV glycoproteic fraction plus adjuvant), which is currently not yet available for clinical use.

[Vaccines against Herpes zoster: Effectiveness, safety, and cost/benefit ratio]

CONTEXT

A vaccination against herpes zoster and its complication is available in France since June 2015. Its exact benefit for public health is still controversial and its level of protection is not optimal. All those reasons seem to suggest a low acceptation rate from general practitioners.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness, the safety, and the cost/benefit ratio of the vaccination against herpes zoster in people aged 50 year or over.

DOCUMENTARY SOURCE

Systematic review in Medline and PubMed with research by key words: "herpes zoster vaccine", "zoster vaccine" and "post herpetic neuralgia vaccine".

SELECTION OF STUDIES

Randomized and observational studies published in English and French language have been selected by two readers.

RESULTS

On 1886 articles identified, 62 studies were included in this systematic review of which 21 randomized trials, 21 observational studies, and 17 medico-economic studies concerned the unadjuvanted vaccine. Considered studies showed an effectiveness of 50% against herpes zoster and 60% on post-herpetic neuralgia incidence of the unadjuvanted vaccine. Five randomized controlled studies were identified for the adjuvanted vaccine. The overall effectiveness of this vaccine was > 90% whatever the age of subjects including those over age 70 and 80. The medico-economic studies conducted in many countries have shown that vaccine policies were beneficial in individuals aged 60 years or over.

LIMITATION OF THE WORK

Most of data of effectiveness, and tolerance result from 2 large controlled studies only (SPS and ZEST) for the unadjuvanted vaccine and only one for the adjuvanted vaccine.

CONCLUSION

Despite controversy and few uncertainties, the vaccine significantly reduces herpes zoster and its complication incidence. In terms of public health objectives, it reduces the burden of the disease and has a positive medico-economic impact. Preliminary data concerning the adjuvanted vaccine, whilst very promising, are still too limited. Up to now, no group of people with particularly high risk of herpes zoster-related complication who will beneficiate the most of the vaccination has been identified yet and only an age criteria has been considered for the recommendation.

The immunogenicity and safety of zoster vaccine in Taiwanese adults

The efficacy and safety of ZOSTAVAX in subjects 60 years of age and older was established in the Shingles Prevention Study (SPS) and in subjects 50 to 59 years of age in the ZOSTAVAX Efficacy and Safety Trial (ZEST). We evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of ZOSTAVAX in a total of 150 Taiwanese subjects ≥50 years of age, who received a single dose of ZOSTAVAX. gpELISA was used to determine geometric mean titers (GMT) of the varicella-zoster virus (VZV) antibody. The geometric mean fold rise (GMFR) of the VZV antibody from the pre-vaccination to the 4 week post-vaccination time point was calculated. There was an overall increase in GMT from 128.45 to 391.85 at 4 weeks post-vaccination. The estimated GMFR was 3.05 (95% CI: 2.60 to 3.57).There were no serious adverse events for 28 days following vaccination. This study demonstrated the safety and immunogenicity of ZOSTAVAX among healthy Taiwanese adults.

Vaccination in the elderly: what can be recommended?

The age-associated increased susceptibility to infectious disease would suggest that vaccination should be a route to promote healthy aging and keep our seniors autonomous and independent. While vaccination represents a cost-effective and efficient strategy at community level, the ability of the immune system to mount a protective immune response is still unpredictable at the level of the individual. Thus, at a similar age, some individuals, including the elderly, might still be 'good' responders while some other, even younger, would definitely fail to mount a protective response. In this review, the current burden of vaccine-preventable diseases in the aging and aged population will be detailed with the aim to identify the ideal vaccine candidates over the age of 50 years. This article will conclude with potential strategies to reduce, as best as possible, this burden and the imperative need to overcome barriers in extending current vaccine coverage towards to a lifelong vaccine schedule.

Quantification of risk factors for herpes zoster: population based case-control study

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the effects of possible risk factors for herpes zoster at different ages.

DESIGN

Case-control study.

SETTING

UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink primary care data.

PARTICIPANTS

144 959 adults diagnosed with zoster between 2000 and 2011; 549,336 age, sex, and practice matched controls.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Conditional logistic regression was used to generate adjusted odds ratios to estimate the strength of association of each potential risk factor with zoster and assess effect modification by age.

RESULTS

The median age of the cases and controls was 62 years. Factors associated with increased risk of zoster included rheumatoid arthritis (3111 (2.1%) v 8029 (1.5%); adjusted odds ratio 1.46, 99% confidence interval 1.38 to 1.55), inflammatory bowel disease (1851 (1.3%) v 5118 (0.9%); 1.36, 1.26 to 1.46), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (6815 (4.7%) v 20 201 (3.7%); 1.32, 1.27 to 1.37), asthma (10 243 (7.1%) v 31 865 (5.8%); 1.21, 1.17 to 1.25), chronic kidney disease (8724 (6.0%) v 29 437 (5.4%); 1.14, 1.09 to 1.18), and depression (6830 (4.7%) v 22 052 (4.0%); 1.15, 1.10 to 1.20). Type 1, but not type 2, diabetes showed some association with zoster (adjusted odds ratio 1.27, 1.07 to 1.50). The relative effects of many assessed risk factors were larger in younger patients. Patients with severely immunosuppressive conditions were at greatest risk of zoster-for example, patients with lymphoma (adjusted odds ratio 3.90, 3.21 to 4.74) and myeloma (2.16, 1.84 to 2.53), who are not eligible for zoster vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

A range of conditions were associated with increased risk of zoster. In general, the increased risk was proportionally greater in younger age groups. Current vaccines are contraindicated in people at the greatest risk of zoster, highlighting the need for alternative risk reduction strategies in these groups.

Zostavax : a subcutaneous vaccine for the prevention of herpes zoster

INTRODUCTION

Herpes zoster (HZ) occurs as a reactivation of dormant varicella zoster virus (VZV), and occurs more frequently in the aging population or the immunocompromised due to waning cell-mediated immunity. Up to 1 million cases of HZ are reported annually in the USA with an estimated 10 - 30% of the population being affected by shingles in their lifetime. HZ is a debilitating illness, and while mortality is low, morbidity remains a significant cause for concern with prevention efforts aimed at reducing VZV reactivation and its complications. The HZ vaccine was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for individuals aged 50-years or older. However, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices recommends the vaccine in individuals aged 60-years or older.

AREAS COVERED

Recent literature investigating the efficacy and indications of live attenuated zoster vaccine.

EXPERT OPINION

Live attenuated zoster vaccine is safe and efficacious in preventing HZ and decreasing the morbidity associated with postherpetic neuralgia. The vaccine is FDA approved in individuals aged 50-years or older but further studies are warranted to investigate the vaccine's efficacy in immunosuppressed and immunocompromised patients.

Vaccines for preventing herpes zoster in older adults

BACKGROUND

Herpes zoster or, as it is commonly called, 'shingles' is a neurocutaneous disease characterised by the reactivation of varicella zoster virus (VZV), the virus that causes chickenpox, which is latent in the dorsal spinal ganglia when immunity to VZV declines. It is an extremely painful condition which can often last for many weeks or months, impairing the patient's quality of life. The natural aging process is associated with a reduction of cellular immunity which predisposes to herpes zoster. Vaccination with an attenuated form of VZV activates specific T cell production, therefore avoiding viral reactivation. A herpes zoster vaccine with an active virus has been approved for clinical use among older adults by the Food and Drug Administration and has been tested in large populations.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vaccination for preventing herpes zoster in older adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources for relevant studies: CENTRAL 2012, Issue 7, MEDLINE (1948 to July week 1, 2012), EMBASE (2010 to July 2012), LILACS (1982 to July 2012) and CINAHL (1981 to July 2012). We also reviewed reference lists of identified trials and reviews for additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing zoster vaccine with placebo or no vaccine, to prevent herpes zoster in older adults (mean age > 60 years).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently collected and analysed data using a data extraction form. They also carried out an assessment of risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight RCTs with a total of 52,269 participants. Three studies were classified at low risk of bias. The main outcomes on effectiveness and safety were extracted from one clinical trial with a low risk of bias. Four studies compared zoster vaccine versus placebo; one study compared high-potency zoster vaccine versus low-potency zoster vaccine; one study compared refrigerated zoster vaccine versus frozen zoster vaccine; one study compared live zoster vaccine versus inactivated zoster vaccine and one study compared zoster vaccine versus pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (pneumo 23).Confirmed cases of herpes zoster were less frequent in patients who received the vaccine than in those who received a placebo: risk ratio (RR) 0.49 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.56), with a risk difference (RD) of 2%, and number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) of 50. Analyses according to age groups indicated a greater benefit in participants aged 60 to 69 years, RR 0.36 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.45) and in participants aged 70 years and over, RR 0.63 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.75). Vaccine-related systemic adverse effects were more frequent in the vaccinated group (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.57, number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) = 100). The pooled data risk ratio for adverse effects for participants with one or more inoculation site adverse effect was RR 4.51 (95% CI 2.35 to 8.68), and the NNTH was 2.8 (95% CI 2.3 to 3.4). Side effects were more frequent in younger (60 to 69 years) than in older (70 years and over) participants.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Herpes zoster vaccine is effective in preventing herpes zoster disease. Although vaccine benefits are larger in the younger age group (60 to 69 years), this is also the age group with more adverse events. In general, zoster vaccine is well tolerated; it produces few systemic adverse events and injection site adverse effects of mild to moderate intensity.

Adaptation of a previously validated vaccination report card for use in adult vaccine clinical trials to align with the 2007 FDA Toxicity Grading Scale Guidance

The Adult/Adolescent Vaccination Report Card (VRC) was developed and validated by Merck in 1998 for use in vaccine clinical trials to collect information from trial subjects on complaints for both local and systemic events after vaccination. This short report describes the revision to the original validated VRC in order to align with the guidelines outlined in the 2007 FDA Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials. Since the VRC elicits trial subjects' self-reports of any adverse experiences (AE) occurring post vaccination, it was important that subsequent modifications of the VRC retained the original user-friendly characteristics while gathering the appropriate information to align with the FDA Guidance. A convenience sample of 15 participants (71% females, 87% white and mean (SD) age 45 (13) years was recruited to obtain feedback in order to revise the Adult/Adolescent VRC. Based on the feedback received, the following were slightly revised: ruler for the measurements of local systemic reactions, severity ratings, and general instructions. The revised VRC is currently being used in Merck vaccine clinical trials.

Safety and tolerability of zoster vaccine in adults ≥60 years old

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the general safety of zoster vaccine (ZV) in adults ≥60 years old.

PATIENTS/METHODS

Subjects were enrolled in a 1:1 ratio to receive 1 dose of ZV or placebo. Subjects were followed for serious adverse experiences (SAEs) for 42 days (primary follow-up period) and 182 days (secondary follow-up period) postvaccination. Relative-risks (ZV/placebo) for SAEs during both safety periods were calculated.

STUDY PERIOD

17-Sep‑2007 to 09-Jan-2009.

RESULTS

Overall, 5,983 subjects received ZV and 5,997 received placebo. Within the primary 42-day follow-up period, 84 ZV subjects and 67 placebo subjects reported SAEs. The estimated risk of SAEs within 42 days was 1.41% for ZV versus 1.12% for placebo, with a relative-risk of 1.26 (95% CI 0.91,1.73); indicating no statistically significant difference between groups, meeting the pre-specified success criterion. During the 182-day follow-up period, 340 ZV subjects and 300 placebo subjects reported SAEs. The estimated risk of SAEs within 182 days was 5.68% for ZV versus 5.01% for placebo, with a relative-risk of 1.13 (95% CI 0.98,1.32), indicating no statistically significant difference between groups. Two subjects in the ZV group reported SAEs deemed by the investigator to be vaccine-related (uveitis and sciatica; onset Day 5 and 4, respectively). One subject in the placebo group reported a SAE deemed by the investigator to be vaccine-related (lumbar radiculopathy; onset Day 51). There were 24 fatal SAEs in the ZV group and 17 in the placebo group (relative risk = 1.41; CI: 0.77, 2.60); 6 and 5, respectively, with SAE onset during the primary 42-day follow-up period. No deaths were deemed vaccine-related.

CONCLUSIONS

ZV and placebo groups had similar safety profiles in terms of SAEs during the primary (Day 1 to 42) and secondary (Day 1 to 182) follow-up periods.

Vaccination for preventing postherpetic neuralgia

BACKGROUND

Herpes zoster virus vaccine was recommended for the prevention of herpes zoster and its sequelae by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in 2006. To date the efficacy and safety of vaccination for preventing the most common complication of zoster, postherpetic neuralgia, has not been systematically reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of vaccination in preventing postherpetic neuralgia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE (January 1966 to December 2010), EMBASE (January 1980 to January 2011), LILACS (January 1982 to December 2010), the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease (NMD) Group Specialized Register (10 January 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (10 January 2010 in the Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2010) and the Chinese Biomedical Retrieval System (January 1978 to December 2010). We also checked the references of published studies to identify additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials comparing varicella zoster virus vaccination with placebo, no vaccination or another intervention, irrespective of publication status or language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality, then extracted and analysed data from the trials which met the inclusion criteria. We collected adverse effects information from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

One trial, which involved 38,546 subjects and compared vaccination with placebo, met our inclusion criteria. This included study was of high quality. However, its participants were all aged 60 years or more and most of them were white, which may mean that its findings are not applicable to all populations. The vaccine was effective in decreasing the incidence of herpes zoster, but there was no evidence that it had efficacy in reducing the incidence of postherpetic neuralgia beyond its effect on the incidence of herpes zoster. Adverse events at the injection site were more common among vaccine recipients than placebo recipients, but they were mild and resolved in a few days. Serious adverse events were rare.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient direct evidence from specialised trials to prove the efficacy of vaccine for preventing postherpetic neuralgia beyond its effect on reducing herpes zoster, although vaccination may be efficacious and safe for preventing herpes zoster and thus reduce the incidence of postherpetic neuralgia in adults aged 60 years or older.

Comparison of the levels of immunogenicity and safety of Zostavax in adults 50 to 59 years old and in adults 60 years old or older

Zostavax has been shown to be efficacious in the prevention of herpes zoster and generally well tolerated in clinical trials among subjects 60 years old or older. This prespecified combined analysis from two studies compares the levels of immunogenicity and safety of Zostavax in subjects 50 to 59 years old versus those in subjects >or=60 years old. Varicella-zoster virus (VZV) antibody (Ab) titers were measured by glycoprotein enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay at baseline and 4 weeks postvaccination. Noninferiority was evaluated by estimated geometric mean severalfold rise (GMFR) ratio (50 to 59 years old/>or=60 years old) and two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI). Success was defined by a lower bound (LB) of the 95% CI of the GMFR ratio of >0.67. Acceptability of postvaccination VZV Ab was defined by an LB of the 95% CI of the GMFR of >1.4. Safety data were recorded for 28 days postvaccination by standardized vaccination report card. The estimated GMFRs from baseline to 4 weeks postvaccination were 2.6 (95% CI, 2.4, 2.9) in subjects 50 to 59 years old and 2.3 (95% CI, 2.1, 2.4) in subjects >or=60 years old. The estimated GMFR ratio (50 to 59 years old/>or=60 years old) was 1.13 (95% CI, 1.02, 1.25). No serious Zostavax-related adverse experiences were reported. After a dose of Zostavax, the GMFR of the VZV Ab response in subjects 50 to 59 years old was noninferior to that in subjects >or=60 years old. The VZV Ab response was acceptable in both age groups. Zostavax was generally well tolerated in both age groups.

Zoster vaccine live for the prevention of shingles in the elderly patient

Shingles, also known as herpes zoster, is a common disease in the elderly population that is caused by reactivation of latent varicella zoster virus. Its manifestations and complications can lead to significant short- and long-term morbidity. In 2006, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved Zoster Vaccine Live (Zostavax) for the prevention of herpes zoster in immunocompetent adults age 60 and over. The approval was based on the results ofa large, multi-center clinical trial, the Shingles Prevention Study. This study showed that vaccination significantly decreased shingles incidence, burden of illness due to disease, and the development of, and severity of postherpetic neuralgia. This review offers an overview of varicella zoster virus infection and complications, a summary of the Shingles Prevention Study, and a critical analysis designed to aid the practicing physician who has questions about vaccine administration.

Discriminating between varicella-zoster virus vaccine and wild-type strains by loop-mediated isothermal amplification

The loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) method was developed to distinguish between the varicella-zoster virus (VZV) vaccine (vOka) strain and wild-type strains. Two single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (nucleotide [nt] 105705 for VR-1 VZV LAMP and nt 106262 for VR-2 VZV LAMP) located in the open reading frame 62 gene were selected as LAMP targets. Amplified vOka DNA demonstrated a typical ladder pattern; however, no LAMP product was detected in reactions performed with DNAs from other human herpesviruses by either VR-1 VZV LAMP or VR-2 VZV LAMP. This result was confirmed by a turbidity assay. The sensitivities of both VR-1 and VR-2 VZV LAMP determined by either the turbidity assay or agarose gel electrophoresis were 100 copies per reaction. To discriminate the vOka strain from wild-type strains, VR-1 and VR-2 VZV LAMP products were digested with the appropriate restriction enzymes (SacII for VR-1 LAMP and SmaI for VR-2 LAMP). The digested products were clearly different in the vOka strain and wild-type strains. To evaluate the utility of the LAMP methods for rapid differentiation, viral DNA (without DNA extraction) in swab samples was directly tested. Wild-type VZV DNA was detected in 20 swab samples by either VR-1 VZV LAMP or VR-2 VZV LAMP. Sequence analysis confirmed the expected SNPs in the LAMP products amplified from the vOka strain and the five wild-type strains.

Vaccination to prevent herpes zoster in older adults

Herpes zoster causes substantial morbidity, especially among older adults. Although the acute cutaneous manifestations can be painful and troublesome, the most important consequence of herpes zoster (shingles) is the chronic pain syndrome known as postherpetic neuralgia (PHN). Previous studies have suggested that declining varicella-zoster virus (VZV)-specific cell-mediated immune (CMI) responses account for the increased frequency of herpes zoster seen in older adults. This led to the idea that immunization designed to boost VZV-specific CMI responses might reduce the risk of herpes zoster. This hypothesis was tested in a large, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial called the Shingles Prevention Study (SPS). Compared with the placebo group, herpes zoster vaccine recipients had a 61.1% reduction in zoster "burden of illness" (an index incorporating incidence and severity of herpes zoster); a 66.5% reduction in the incidence of postherpetic neuralgia; and a 51.3% reduction in the incidence of herpes zoster. The incidence of serious adverse events was not different between the overall vaccine and placebo populations. The most frequently encountered adverse event among vaccine recipients was local reactogenicity, with self-limited and generally mild tenderness, warmth, or erythema occurring at the injection site in about one-half of vaccine recipients. The zoster vaccine was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2006 and is indicated for prevention of herpes zoster in immunocompetent persons aged 60 years and older.

PERSPECTIVE

The herpes zoster vaccine provides physicians with an effective means for reducing a patient's risk for developing shingles and its attendant complications. No significant safety concerns regarding the vaccine have been identified. Indications for use of the attenuated-virus vaccine in special subpopulations continue to evolve.

Infection in the elderly

Many functional, demographic, and immunologic changes associated with aging are responsible for increasing the incidence and severity of infectious diseases in the elderly. Management is complicated by age-related organ system changes. Because many of the elderly are on multiple medications for underlying illnesses, antimicrobial therapy needs to be chosen keeping drug interactions and adverse events in mind. Common infections seen in the elderly are infections of skin and soft tissue, urinary tract, respiratory tract, and gastrointestinal tract. Organized and well-funded programs to address infectious disease issues in the elderly are the only way to improve care.

Safety and immunogenicity profile of the concomitant administration of ZOSTAVAX and inactivated influenza vaccine in adults aged 50 and older

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of ZOSTAVAX administered concomitantly with inactivated influenza vaccine or sequentially in adults aged 50 and older.

DESIGN

Randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled study.

SETTING

Thirteen U.S. and seven European study sites.

PARTICIPANTS

Three hundred eighty-two concomitantly, 380 sequentially vaccinated subjects.

INTERVENTION

The concomitant vaccination group received influenza vaccine and ZOSTAVAX at separate injection sites on Day 1 and placebo at Week 4. The nonconcomitant vaccination group received influenza vaccine and placebo at separate injection sites on Day 1 and ZOSTAVAX at Week 4.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary safety endpoints: vaccine-related serious adverse experiences (AEs) within 28 days postvaccination (PV); and diary card-prompted local and systemic AEs. Primary immunogenicity endpoints: geometric mean titer (GMT) and geometric mean fold rise (GMFR) from baseline of varicella-zoster virus (VZV) antibody (Ab) at 4 weeks PV according to glycoprotein enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (gpELISA) and GMT of influenza Ab for the three vaccine strains (2005-2006 influenza season) at 4 weeks PV according to hemagglutination inhibition assay. Secondary immunogenicity endpoint: influenza seroconversion rates (SCRs).

RESULTS

No serious AEs related to ZOSTAVAX were observed during the study. VZV Ab GMTs 4 weeks PV for the concomitant and sequential groups were 554 and 597 gpELISA U/mL, respectively. The estimated VZV Ab GMT ratio was 0.9 (95% confidence interval (CI)=0.8-1.0), indicating noninferior (P<.001 for the null hypothesis of GMT ratio <0.67) responses. Estimated VZV Ab GMFR from baseline in the concomitant group was 2.1 (95% CI=2.0-2.3), indicating acceptable fold rise. Estimated GMT ratios (concomitant/sequential) for influenza strains A(H1N1), A(H3N2), and B were 0.9 (95% CI=0.8-1.1), 1.1 (95% CI=0.9-1.3), and 0.9 (95% CI=0.8-1.1), respectively, and SCRs were comparable across both groups, with more than 85% achieving titers of 1:40 or greater, meeting regulatory criteria.

CONCLUSION

ZOSTAVAX and influenza vaccine given concomitantly are generally well tolerated in adults aged 50 and older. Ab responses were similar whether ZOSTAVAX and influenza vaccine were given concomitantly or sequentially.

Prévention des infections à papillomavirus et du zona : nouveaux vaccins

Two new vaccines have been recently licensed : a quadrivalent vaccine against Human papillomavirus infections (HPV) 6, 11, 16 and 18, recommended to children from 9 years old and to young adults under the age of 26 years, and a vaccine against herpes zoster for adults from 60 years old onwards. A bivalent vaccine against HPV 16 and 18 will be shortly available. HPV vaccines are composed of the L1 structural proteins of 2 or 4 HPV genotypes, produced by genetic engineering and self-assembled. These inert vaccines are devoid of genetic materials and mimic the viral particle (virus-like particle, VLP). They allow, as suggested by the 4.5 to 5 years follow-up, to prevent HPV infections and the onset of pre-cancerous lesions associated with genotypes contained within the vaccine. They represent a major overhang in the vaccinology field, and, as anti-hepatitis B vaccine, will probably be effective in cancer prevention. Their use must be associated with the continued detection of cervix cancer by smears and also with the prevention of other sexually transmitted diseases. The herpes zoster vaccine is a living attenuated vaccine produced from the OKA/Merck strain already used in the vaccine against varicella. Its safety is good among persons 50 years old and over and its efficiency on lowering herpes zoster incidence, on the burden of illness and on post-herpetic neuralgia has been demonstrated in persons over 60 years old.