Vaccination of adults with Wistar RA 27/3 rubella vaccine

Viral Vectors for the Induction of Broadly Neutralizing Antibodies against HIV

Extensive research on generating an efficient HIV vaccine is ongoing. A major aim of HIV vaccines is the induction of long-lasting, broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) that can confer sterile immunity for a prolonged period of time. Several strategies have been explored to reach this goal, i.e. protein immunization, DNA, or viral vectors, or a combination thereof. In this review, we give an overview of approaches using viral vectors for the induction of HIV-specific bnAbs. Many pre-clinical studies were performed using various replication-competent and -incompetent vectors. Amongst them, poxviral and adenoviral vectors were the most prevalent ones. In many studies, viral vectors were combined with a DNA prime or a protein boost. However, neutralizing antibodies were mainly induced against the homologous HIV-1 vaccine strain or tier 1 viruses, and in rare cases, against tier 2 viruses, indicating the need for improved antigens and vaccination strategies. Furthermore, we also review next generation Env antigens that are currently being used in protein vaccination approaches and point out how they could be utilized in viral vectors.

Enhancing global vaccine pharmacovigilance: Proof-of-concept study on aseptic meningitis and immune thrombocytopenic purpura following measles-mumps containing vaccination

New vaccines designed to prevent diseases endemic in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) are now being introduced without prior record of utilization in countries with robust pharmacovigilance systems. To address this deficit, our objective was to demonstrate feasibility of an international hospital-based network for the assessment of potential epidemiological associations between serious and rare adverse events and vaccines in any setting. This was done through a proof-of-concept evaluation of the risk of immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and aseptic meningitis (AM) following administration of the first dose of measles-mumps-containing vaccines using the self-controlled risk interval method in the primary analysis. The World Health Organization (WHO) selected 26 sentinel sites (49 hospitals) distributed in 16 countries of the six WHO regions. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) of 5.0 (95% CI: 2.5-9.7) for ITP following first dose of measles-containing vaccinations, and of 10.9 (95% CI: 4.2-27.8) for AM following mumps-containing vaccinations were found. The strain-specific analyses showed significantly elevated ITP risk for measles vaccines containing Schwarz (IRR: 20.7; 95% CI: 2.7-157.6), Edmonston-Zagreb (IRR: 11.1; 95% CI: 1.4-90.3), and Enders'Edmonston (IRR: 8.5; 95% CI: 1.9-38.1) strains. A significantly elevated AM risk for vaccines containing the Leningrad-Zagreb mumps strain (IRR: 10.8; 95% CI: 1.3-87.4) was also found. This proof-of-concept study has shown, for the first time, that an international hospital-based network for the investigation of rare vaccine adverse events, using common standardized procedures and with high participation of LMICs, is feasible, can produce reliable results, and has the potential to characterize differences in risk between vaccine strains. The completion of this network by adding large reference hospitals, particularly from tropical countries, and the systematic WHO-led implementation of this approach, should permit the rapid post-marketing evaluation of safety signals for serious and rare adverse events for new and existing vaccines in all settings, including LMICs.

The History of Rubella and Rubella Vaccination Leading to Elimination

Congenital rubella syndrome (CRS) was discovered in the 1940s, rubella virus was isolated in the early 1960s, and rubella vaccines became available by the end of the same decade. Systematic vaccination against rubella, usually in combination with measles, has eliminated both the congenital and acquired infection from some developed countries, most recently the United States, as is confirmed by the articles in this supplement. The present article summarizes the clinical syndrome of CRS, the process by which the vaccine was developed, and the history leading up to elimination, as well as the possible extension of elimination on a wider scale.

Vaccination-related adverse events

Vaccine-related adverse events are uncommon and typically mild. Children may experience conditions such as rashes, fevers, syncope, protracted crying, or seizures shortly after receiving their routine immunizations. When children are brought to the emergency department or clinic to be evaluated for one of these conditions, the health care provider may be called upon to determine the likelihood that it was caused by a recently administered set of vaccines. This determination has substantial implications for medical care, including the safety of administering future vaccines. This article reviews the current understanding of vaccine-related adverse events. Using this information, clinicians should be able to identify those events likely to be related to vaccine administration and those that are not. The appropriate management of vaccine-related adverse events is also discussed.

A review of licensed viral vaccines, some of their safety concerns, and the advances in the development of investigational viral vaccines

Viral vaccines could be considered among the most important medical achievements of the 20th century. They have prevented much suffering and saved many lives. Although some curative antiviral drugs exist, we desperately depend on efforts by academic, governmental and industrial scientists in the advancement of viral vaccines in the prevention and control of infectious diseases. In the next decade, we hope to see advancement in the development of current and investigational viral vaccines against childhood and adult infections. In this article, we will review the licensed viral vaccines, some of their safety concerns, and the advances in the development of investigational viral vaccines.

Vaccines and immunotherapies for the prevention of infectious diseases having cutaneous manifestations

Although the development of antimicrobial drugs has advanced rapidly in the past several years, such agents act against only certain groups of microbes and are associated with increasing rates of resistance. These limitations of treatment force physicians to continue to rely on prevention, which is more effective and cost-effective than therapy. From the use of the smallpox vaccine by Jenner in the 1700s to the current concerns about biologic warfare, the technology for vaccine development has seen numerous advances. The currently available vaccines for viral illnesses include Dryvax for smallpox; the combination measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine; inactivated vaccine for hepatitis A; plasma-derived vaccine for hepatitis B; and the live attenuated Oka strain vaccine for varicella zoster. Vaccines available against bacterial illnesses include those for anthrax, Haemophilus influenzae, and Neisseria meningitidis. Currently in development for both prophylactic and therapeutic purposes are vaccines for HIV, herpes simplex virus, and human papillomavirus. Other vaccines being investigated for prevention are those for cytomegalovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, parainfluenza virus, hepatitis C, and dengue fever, among many others. Fungal and protozoan diseases are also subjects of vaccine research. Among immunoglobulins approved for prophylactic and therapeutic use are those against cytomegalovirus, hepatitis A and B, measles, rabies, and tetanus. With this progress, it is hoped that effective vaccines soon will be developed for many more infectious diseases with cutaneous manifestations.

Safety of routine childhood vaccinations. An epidemiological review

Immunisations have been one of the most cost-effective public health interventions in human history. Despite remarkable progress, several challenges face immunisation programs worldwide. Paradoxically, despite vaccines' clear effectiveness in reducing risks of diseases that were previously widely prevalent and caused substantial morbidity and mortality, current vaccination policies have become increasingly controversial due to concerns about vaccine safety. Vaccines, like other pharmaceutical products, are not entirely risk-free. While most known adverse effects are minor and self-limited, some vaccines have been associated with very rare but serious adverse effects. Because such rare effects are often not evident until vaccines come into widespread use, ongoing surveillance programs to monitor vaccine safety are needed. Such monitoring will be essential if the public is to accept the increasing number of new vaccines made possible by biotechnology. The interpretation of data from vaccine safety research is complex and is associated with some uncertainty. Effectively communicating this uncertainty and continuing to improve understanding of rare risks and risk factors are essential for "mature" immunisation programs to maintain public confidence in immunisations.

Rubella vaccines: past, present and future

The association between rubella in pregnancy and congenital anomalies was first reported 50 years ago, by N. McAlister Gregg, an Australian ophthalmologist [1]. During the next 20 years his findings were confirmed by others (reviewed in [2]). However, the first reports of the isolation of rubella virus in cell cultures and development of tests for neutralizing antibodies were not published until 1962 [3, 4]. Subsequent studies conducted in the UK and North America during a pandemic of rubella in 1963–4, were therefore able to make a more accurate estimate of the risks of maternal rubella at different stages of pregnancy. It was estimated that about 30000 rubella-damaged babies were born in the USA alone in 1963–4 [5]. This emphasized the importance of developing a vaccine to prevent infection in pregnancy and thereby, the birth of babies with rubella-induced congenital defects.

Rubella-associated arthritis. I. Comparative study of joint manifestations associated with natural rubella infection and RA 27/3 rubella immunisation

Joint manifestations observed during the course of a prospective RA 27/3 rubella immunisation trial were compared with those observed during an intercurrent wild rubella epidemic in an outlying community. Among 44 rubella haemagglutination inhibition (HAI) negative females ranging in age from 17 to 33 years who received rubella vaccine, six (13.6%) developed acute polyarticular arthritis within two to four weeks postvaccine and two (4.5%) had continuing or recurrent arthropathy lasting longer than 18 months. In contrast, among 23 females ranging in age from 11 to 39 years undergoing wild rubella infection, 12 (52.2%) developed acute polyarticular arthritis and seven (30.4%) had recurrent arthropathy 18 months postinfection. Among 23 males ranging in age from 13 to 54 years undergoing wild rubella infection, only two (8.7%) developed acute arthritis and both individuals had continuing joint manifestations 18 months postinfection. Wild rubella infection in adult populations is associated with a higher incidence, increased severity, and more prolonged duration of joint manifestations than is seen after RA 27/3 rubella immunisation.

Lymphoblast proliferation and humoral antibody response after rubella vaccination

Twenty-eight sero-negative young women were vaccinated with RA 27/3 or HPV-77/DE5 strain live attenuated rubella vaccine. Haemagglutination-inhibiting antibody developed in all but one of the subjects. Rubella-specific IgM antibodies were demonstrable 3–6 weeks after vaccination. Complement-fixing and platelet-aggregation antibodies were more often detectable after RA 27/3 than after HPV-77/DE5 vaccination. After vaccination the blood lymphoblast count increased with a peak at 2 weeks. In one subject no humoral antibody response was detectable but even in this case there was a lymphoblast response. A marked increase in blasts was detected in a single case of natural rubella infection. In the vaccinated subjects the tuberculin skin test did not reveal suppression of delayed hypersensitivity 3 weeks after vaccination, nor was there a change in the responsiveness of lymphocytes to PHA in vitro 2 weeks after vaccination. No significant decrease in platelet count was seen in any of the subjects.