Exclusion of clinically atypical or microbiologically mixed diarrhoeal episodes from outcome events in a field trial of oral cholera vaccines

Vaccines for preventing enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) diarrhoea

BACKGROUND

Infection with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) bacteria is a common cause of diarrhoea in adults and children in developing countries and is a major cause of 'travellers' diarrhoea' in people visiting or returning from endemic regions. A killed whole cell vaccine (Dukoral®), primarily designed and licensed to prevent cholera, has been recommended by some groups to prevent travellers' diarrhoea in people visiting endemic regions. This vaccine contains a recombinant B subunit of the cholera toxin that is antigenically similar to the heat labile toxin of ETEC. This review aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of this vaccine and other vaccines designed specifically to protect people against diarrhoea caused by ETEC infection.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of vaccines for preventing ETEC diarrhoea.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Disease Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and http://clinicaltrials.gov up to December 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing use of vaccines to prevent ETEC with use of no intervention, a control vaccine (either an inert vaccine or a vaccine normally given to prevent an unrelated infection), an alternative ETEC vaccine, or a different dose or schedule of the same ETEC vaccine in healthy adults and children living in endemic regions, intending to travel to endemic regions, or volunteering to receive an artificial challenge of ETEC bacteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed each trial for eligibility and risk of bias. Two independent reviewers extracted data from the included studies and analyzed the data using Review Manager (RevMan) software. We reported outcomes as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-four RCTs, including 53,247 participants, met the inclusion criteria. Four studies assessed the protective efficacy of oral cholera vaccines when used to prevent diarrhoea due to ETEC and seven studies assessed the protective efficacy of ETEC-specific vaccines. Of these 11 studies, seven studies presented efficacy data from field trials and four studies presented efficacy data from artificial challenge studies. An additional 13 trials contributed safety and immunological data only. Cholera vaccinesThe currently available, oral cholera killed whole cell vaccine (Dukoral®) was evaluated for protection of people against 'travellers' diarrhoea' in a single RCT in people arriving in Mexico from the USA. We did not identify any statistically significant effects on ETEC diarrhoea or all-cause diarrhoea (one trial, 502 participants, low quality evidence).Two earlier trials, one undertaken in an endemic population in Bangladesh and one undertaken in people travelling from Finland to Morocco, evaluated a precursor of this vaccine containing purified cholera toxin B subunit rather than the recombinant subunit in Dukoral®. Short term protective efficacy against ETEC diarrhoea was demonstrated, lasting for around three months (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.71; two trials, 50,227 participants). This vaccine is no longer available. ETEC vaccinesAn ETEC-specific, killed whole cell vaccine, which also contains the recombinant cholera toxin B-subunit, was evaluated in people travelling from the USA to Mexico or Guatemala, and from Austria to Latin America, Africa, or Asia. We did not identify any statistically significant differences in ETEC-specific diarrhoea or all-cause diarrhoea (two trials, 799 participants), and the vaccine was associated with increased vomiting (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.16 to 3.45; nine trials, 1528 participants). The other ETEC-specific vaccines in development have not yet demonstrated clinically important benefits.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently insufficient evidence from RCTs to support the use of the oral cholera vaccine Dukoral® for protecting travellers against ETEC diarrhoea. Further research is needed to develop safe and effective vaccines to provide both short and long-term protection against ETEC diarrhoea.

Oral vaccines for preventing cholera

EDITORIAL NOTE

This review is superseded by the published Cochrane Review, Saif‐Ur‐Rahman 2024 [https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014573], which considers only the oral killed vaccines because the live oral vaccines do not have World Health Organization (WHO) prequalification. Saif‐Ur‐Rahman 2024 also considered only currently available WHO pre‐qualified oral killed cholera vaccines (Dukoral, Shanchol, and Euvichol/Euvichol‐Plus).

BACKGROUND

Cholera is a cause of acute watery diarrhoea which can cause dehydration and death if not adequately treated. It usually occurs in epidemics, and is associated with poverty and poor sanitation. Effective, cheap, and easy to administer vaccines could help prevent epidemics.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of oral cholera vaccines in preventing cases of cholera and deaths from cholera.

SEARCH STRATEGY

In October 2010, we searched the Cochrane Infectious Disease Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; LILACS; the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT), and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) for relevant published and ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of oral cholera vaccines in healthy adults and children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Each trial was assessed for eligibility and risk of bias by two authors working independently. Data was extracted by two independent reviewers and analysed using the Review Manager 5 software. Outcomes are reported as vaccine protective efficacy (VE) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

Seven large efficacy trials, four small artificial challenge studies, and twenty-nine safety trials contributed data to this review.Five variations of a killed whole cell vaccine have been evaluated in large scale efficacy trials (four trials, 249935 participants). The overall vaccine efficacy during the first year was 52% (95% CI 35% to 65%), and during the second year was 62% (95% CI 51% to 62%). Protective efficacy was lower in children aged less than 5 years; 38% (95% CI 20% to 53%) compared to older children and adults; 66% (95% CI 57% to 73%).One trial of a killed whole cell vaccine amongst military recruits demonstrated 86% protective efficacy (95% CI 37% to 97%) in a small epidemic occurring within 4 weeks of the 2-dose schedule (one trial, 1426 participants). Efficacy data is not available beyond two years for the currently available vaccine formulations, but based on data from older trials is unlikely to last beyond three years.The safety data available on killed whole cell vaccines have not demonstrated any clinically significant increase in adverse events compared to placebo.Only one live attenuated vaccine has reached Phase III clinical evaluation and was not effective (one trial, 67508 participants). Two new candidate live attenuated vaccines have demonstrated clinical effectiveness in small artificial challenge studies, but are still in development.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The currently available oral killed whole cell vaccines can prevent 50 to 60% of cholera episodes during the first two years after the primary vaccination schedule. The impact and cost-effectiveness of adopting oral cholera vaccines into the routine vaccination schedule of endemic countries will depend on the prevalence of cholera, the frequency of epidemics, and access to basic services providing rapid rehydration therapy.

Spatial and environmental connectivity analysis in a cholera vaccine trial

This paper develops theory and methods for vaccine trials that utilize spatial and environmental information. Satellite imagery is used to identify whether households are connected to one another via water bodies in a study area in rural Bangladesh. Then relationships between neighborhood-level cholera vaccine coverage and placebo incidence and neighborhood-level spatial variables are measured. The study hypothesis is that unvaccinated people who are environmentally connected to people who have been vaccinated will be at lower risk compared to unvaccinated people who are environmentally connected to people who have not been vaccinated. We use four datasets including: a cholera vaccine trial database, a longitudinal demographic database of the rural population from which the vaccine trial participants were selected, a household-level geographic information system (GIS) database of the same study area, and high resolution Quickbird satellite imagery. An environmental connectivity metric was constructed by integrating the satellite imagery with the vaccine and demographic databases linked with GIS. The results show that there is a relationship between neighborhood rates of cholera vaccination and placebo incidence. Thus, people are indirectly protected when more people in their environmentally connected neighborhood are vaccinated. This result is similar to our previous work that used a simpler Euclidean distance neighborhood to measure neighborhood vaccine coverage [Ali, M., Emch, M., von Seidlein, L., Yunus, M., Sack, D. A., Holmgren, J., et al. (2005). Herd immunity conferred by killed oral cholera vaccines in Bangladesh. Lancet, 366(9479), 44-49]. Our new method of measuring environmental connectivity is more precise since it takes into account the transmission mode of cholera and therefore this study validates our assertion that the oral cholera vaccine provides indirect protection in addition to direct protection.

Efficacy calculation in randomized trials: global or local measures?

This study tests whether the effect of a vaccine trial varies in space and why. Analytical z-score maps identify unusually high- and low-efficacy values in a trial area. Relationships between neighborhood efficacy and ecological variables are measured to explain why efficacy varies in space. Efficacy was found to vary regardless of neighborhood size and the variation is related to several ecological determinants. Local efficacy measures can help public health practitioners make better decisions about when and where to vaccinate populations. The concepts offered in this study are pertinent for any health intervention trial, not just vaccines.

Vaccines for preventing cholera

BACKGROUND

Oral cholera vaccines (either killed whole cell or live recombinant vaccines) are newer alternatives to the parenteral vaccines which have been thought to confer only moderate and short-term immunity.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effect of cholera vaccines in preventing cases of cholera and preventing deaths.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group trials register, Medline, Embase and reference lists of articles. We handsearched the journal Vaccine, contacted researchers in the field and manufacturers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised studies comparing cholera vaccines (killed or live) with placebo, control vaccines or no intervention, or comparing types, doses or schedules of cholera vaccine. We included adults and children irrespective of immune status or special risk category.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and assessment of trial quality was done independently by two reviewers.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-two trials were included. Seventeen efficacy trials of relatively good quality, testing parenteral and oral killed whole cell vaccines and involving over 2. 6 million adults, children and infants were included. Nineteen safety trials have been conducted for both types of killed whole cell vaccines and for live vaccines and have involved 11,459 people. For all types of vaccines compared to placebo, the relative risk of contracting cholera at 12 months was 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0. 41 to 0.59 (random effects model). This translates to an efficacy of 51%, 95% confidence interval 41% to 59%. Both parenteral and oral administration were relatively efficacious, but significant protection extended into the third year for oral killed whole cell vaccines. Children under 5 were only protected for up to a year, while older children or adults were protected for up to three years. Parenteral killed whole cell vaccines were associated with increased systemic and local adverse effects compared to placebo. Oral killed whole cell vaccines or oral live vaccines were not.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Cholera killed whole cell vaccines appear to be relatively effective and safe. Live oral recombinant vaccines appear to be safe, but efficacy data are not available. Protection against cholera appears to persist for up to two years following a single dose of vaccine, and for three to four years with an annual booster.