Persistence of antibody response following a booster dose of Hib-MenC-TT glycoconjugate vaccine to five years: a follow-up study

Safety of routine childhood vaccine coadministration versus separate vaccination

INTRODUCTION

As new vaccines are developed more vaccine coadministrations vaccines are being offered to make delivery more practical for health systems and patients. We compared the safety of coadministered vaccines with separate vaccination for 20 coadministrations by considering nine types of adverse events following immunisation (AEFI).

METHODS

Real-life immunisation and adverse event data for this observational cohort study were extracted from the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre for children registered in the database between 2008 and 2018. We applied the self-controlled case series method to calculate relative incidence ratios (RIR) for AEFI. These RIRs compare the RI of AEFI following coadministration with the RI following separate administration of the same vaccines.

RESULTS

We assessed 3 518 047 adverse events and included 5 993 290 vaccine doses given to 958 591 children. 17% of AEFI occurred less and 11% more frequently following coadministration than would have been expected based on the RIs following separate vaccinations, while there was no significant difference for 72% of AEFI. We found amplifying interaction effects for AEFI after five coadministrations comprising three vaccines: for fever (RIR 1.93 (95% CI 1.63 to 2.29)), rash (RIR 1.49 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.74)), gastrointestinal events (RIR 1.31 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.49)) and respiratory events (RIR 1.27 (1.17-1.38)) following DTaP/IPV/Hib+MenC+ PCV; gastrointestinal events (RIR 1.65 (95% CI 1.35 to 2.02)) following DTaP/IPV/Hib+MenC+ RV; fever (RIR 1.44 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.90)) and respiratory events (RIR 1.40 (95% CI 1.25 to 1.57)) following DTaP/IPV/Hib+PCV+ RV; gastrointestinal (RIR 1.48 (95% CI 1.20 to 1.82)) and respiratory events (RIR 1.43 (95% CI 1.26 to 1.63)) following MMR+Hib/MenC+PCV; gastrointestinal events (RIR 1.68 (95% CI 1.07 to 2.64)) and general symptoms (RIR 11.83 (95% CI 1.28 to 109.01)) following MMR+MenC+PCV. Coadministration of MMR+PCV led to more fever (RIR 1.91 (95% CI 1.83 to 1.99)), neurological events (RIR 2.04 (95% CI 1.67 to 2.49)) and rash (RIR 1.06 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.11)) compared with separate administration, DTaP/IPV/Hib+MMR to more musculoskeletal events (RIR 3.56 (95% CI 1.21 to 10.50)) and MMR+MenC to more fever (RIR 1.58 (95% CI 1.37 to 1.82)). There was no indication that unscheduled coadministrations are less safe than scheduled coadministrations.

CONCLUSION

Real-life RIRs of AEFI justify coadministering routine childhood vaccines according to the immunisation schedule. Further research into the severity of AEFI following coadministration is required for a complete understanding of the burden of these AEFI.

Polysaccharide structure dictates mechanism of adaptive immune response to glycoconjugate vaccines

Glycoconjugate vaccines are among the most effective interventions for preventing several serious infectious diseases. Covalent linkage of the bacterial capsular polysaccharide to a carrier protein provides CD4⁺ T cells with epitopes that facilitate a memory response to the polysaccharide. Classically, the mechanism responsible for antigen processing was thought to be similar to what was known for hapten-carrier conjugates: protease digestion of the carrier protein in the endosome and presentation of a resulting peptide to the T cell receptor on classical peptide-recognizing CD4⁺ T cells. Recently, an alternative mechanism has been shown to be responsible for the memory response to some glycoconjugates. Processing of both the protein and the polysaccharide creates glycopeptides in the endosome of antigen-presenting cells. For presentation, the peptide portion of the glycopeptide is bound to MHCII, allowing the covalently linked glycan to activate carbohydrate-specific helper CD4⁺ T cells (Tcarbs). Herein, we assessed whether this same mechanism applies to conjugates prepared from other capsular polysaccharides. All of the glycoconjugates tested induced Tcarb-dependent responses except that made with group C Neisseria meningitidis; in the latter case, only peptides generated from the carrier protein were critical for helper T cell recognition. Digestion of this acid-sensitive polysaccharide, a linear homopolymer of α(2 → 9)-linked sialic acid, to the size of the monomeric unit resulted in a dominant CD4⁺ T cell response to peptides in the context of MHCII. Our results show that different mechanisms of presentation, based on the structure of the carbohydrate, are operative in response to different glycoconjugate vaccines.

Update on the use of meningococcal serogroup C CRM₁₉₇-conjugate vaccine (Meningitec) against meningitis

Meningitec is a CRM197-conjugated meningococcal serogroup C (MenC) vaccine, first licensed in 1999. It has been used as a primary and booster vaccine in infants, toddlers, older children and adults, and has been shown to be immunogenic and well-tolerated in all age groups, including premature infants. Vaccine effectiveness has been demonstrated using combined data on all three licensed MenC conjugate vaccines. Evidence from clinical trials, however, suggests that the different MenC conjugate vaccines behave differently with respect to the induction and persistence of bactericidal antibody and generation of immune memory. It appears that Meningitec has a less favorable immunologic profile compared particularly to tetanus toxoid (TT) MenC conjugate vaccines. Data from comparative trials have raised interesting questions on priming of the immune system by conjugate vaccines, particularly in infants. The results from these and other studies are reviewed here with specific focus on Meningitec.

Phase II study of a three-dose primary vaccination course of DTPa-IPV/Hib-MenC-TT followed by a 12-month Hib-MenC-TT booster in healthy infants

AIM

To test for immunologic noninferiority of antibody responses to Hib and MenC using a 6-in-1 combination vaccine (DTPa-IPV/Hib-MenC-TT) compared with DTPa-IPV-Hib plus MenC-CRM197, before and after a 12-month Hib-MenC-TT booster.

METHODS

Pragmatic open-label, randomized, multicenter, UK study. "6-in-1" group received DTPa-IPV/Hib-MenC-TT at 2, 3 and 4 months; control group received DTPa-IPV-Hib at 2, 3 and 4 months and MenC-CRM197 at 3 and 4 months. Both groups received Hib-MenC-TT at 12 months. Concomitant vaccines: pneumococcal conjugate vaccine at 2, 4 and 13 months, and measles, mumps and rubella vaccine at 13 months.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-two children were randomized to each group. One hundred children in the "6-in-1" group and 112 control group children completed the study according-to-protocol. One month postprimary immunizations: 100% of "6-in-1" group and 93.3% of control children had anti-polyribosylribitol phosphate (PRP) IgG ≥0.15 µg/mL; 96.2% and 100%, respectively, had rSBA-MenC titers ≥1:8. One month after booster all children met these thresholds, with anti-PRP geometric mean concentrations of 66.7 (53.3; 83.5) in "6-in-1" recipients and 26.9 (20.9; 34.6) in control children (4.4 [3.5; 5.4] and 3.0 [2.2-4.2] postprimary immunizations, respectively,). rSBA-MenC geometric mean titers were 3062.9 (2421.2; 3874.6) and 954.0 (761.3; 1195.5), respectively, postbooster and 393.2 (292.5; 528.7) and 3110.5 (2612; 3704.2) postprimary.

CONCLUSION

Noninferiority of DTPa-IPV/Hib-MenC-TT compared with DTPa-IPV/Hib plus MenC-CRM197 was demonstrated. In the "6-in-1" group, lower postprimary and greater postbooster rSBA-MenC geometric mean titers suggest memory B-cell priming may be favored by this vaccine over plasma cell induction. Furthermore, greater immunogenicity of TT conjugates used in both primary and booster vaccines in this group may be important.