A single dose, combined vaccine against typhoid fever and hepatitis A: consistency, immunogenicity and reactogenicity

Adverse Events Following Immunization With Combined vs Concurrent Monovalent Hepatitis A and Typhoid Vaccines in Children

Combined hepatitis A and typhoid vaccine is available in Australia, but licensed for use from age 16 years; however it is used "off-label" in children. The combined vaccine is well tolerated in children aged 2-16 years and the risk of adverse events is similar to those receiving concurrent monovalent vaccines.

Hepatitis A immunisation in persons not previously exposed to hepatitis A

This review is withdrawn because it is outdated. A new review is to be published by the end of 2019.

A patient with typhoid fever, Giardia lamblia gastroenteritis and hepatitis E

Marked elevation of transaminases is rare in typhoid enteric fever. Co-infections with hepatitis A or E, dengue, or other pathogens should be suspected and investigated. Here we report a case of a 29-year-old Bangladesh man who presented with typhoid, hepatitis E and Giardia lamblia complicated by severely deranged liver enzymes. With early institution of antibiotics and active supportive treatment, the patient clinically recovered. The underlying mechanism of co-infection is still not clear. As clinicians, comprehensive workup for potential pathogens helps expedite diagnosis, especially in patients from endemic areas or patients who deteriorate rapidly. Current diagnostic methods, treatment modalities and preventive measures still need to be improved in the future.

The tolerability of a combined hepatitis A and typhoid vaccine in children aged 2-16 years: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Combined hepatitis A and typhoid vaccines have been widely used globally and proven to be safe, well tolerated and efficacious in adults. The combined hepatitis A and typhoid vaccine (Vivaxim) available in Australia is licenced for use from age 16 years but the monovalent components are approved for use from age 2 years. Advantages of a single injection have led to widespread 'off-label' use of Vivaxim in children. This study aimed to investigate the tolerability of Vivaxim in children aged 2-16 years.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted at Travel Medicine Alliance clinics across Australia. Children who required vaccination for both hepatitis A and typhoid were offered the option of receiving Vivaxim. Parents were contacted 3 days post-vaccination and asked to respond to a questionnaire on adverse events following immunization (AEFIs). Reactions to Vivaxim were compared with reported reactions to the monovalent vaccines.

RESULTS

Our study included 425 children who received Vivaxim, including 189 (44.5%) who received other vaccines on the same day. No serious AEFIs were reported, and 26.8% did not experience any side effects. In children who did not receive other vaccines in the same arm as Vivaxim (n = 325), most common local reactions were sore arm (70.5%), redness (16.0%) and swelling (11.1%). Reports of local AEFIs in our subjects was significantly more common than those reported for the individual monovalent vaccines. In children who did not receive other vaccines on the same day (n = 236), the most common systemic reactions were tiredness/lethargy/malaise (5.9%), headache (4.2%), fever (3.4%) and sore muscles and joints (3.4%). Fever was more common in children aged <6 years. Less than 5% of children reported missing school, sport or other regular activities.

CONCLUSIONS

Vivaxim was well tolerated in children aged 2-16 years. Parents should be advised about AEFIs to Vivaxim so that they can make informed decisions about vaccination options.

Recurrent paratyphoid fever A co-infected with hepatitis A reactivated chronic hepatitis B

We report here a case of recurrent paratyphoid fever A with hepatitis A co-infection in a patient with chronic hepatitis B. A 26-year-old male patient, who was a hepatitis B virus carrier, was co-infected with Salmonella enterica serovar Paratyphi A and hepatitis A virus. The recurrence of the paratyphoid fever may be ascribed to the coexistence of hepatitis B, a course of ceftriaxone plus levofloxacin that was too short and the insensitivity of paratyphoid fever A to levofloxacin. We find that an adequate course and dose of ceftriaxone is a better strategy for treating paratyphoid fever. Furthermore, the co-infection of paratyphoid fever with hepatitis A may stimulate cellular immunity and break immunotolerance. Thus, the administration of the anti-viral agent entecavir may greatly improve the prognosis of this patient with chronic hepatitis B, and the episodes of paratyphoid fever and hepatitis A infection prompt the use of timely antiviral therapy.

Hepatitis A immunisation in persons not previously exposed to hepatitis A

BACKGROUND

In many parts of the world, hepatitis A infection represents a significant cause of morbidity and socio-economic loss. Whilst hepatitis A vaccines have the potential to prevent disease, the degree of protection afforded against clinical outcomes and within different populations remains uncertain. There are two types of hepatitis A virus (HAV) vaccine, inactivated and live attenuated. It is important to determine the efficacy and safety for both vaccine types.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical protective efficacy, sero-protective efficacy, and safety and harms of hepatitis A vaccination in persons not previously exposed to hepatitis A.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) up to November 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing HAV vaccine with placebo, no intervention, or appropriate control vaccines in participants of all ages.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were undertaken by two authors and verified by a third author. Where required, authors contacted investigators to obtain missing data. The primary outcome was the occurrence of clinically apparent hepatitis A (infectious hepatitis). The secondary outcomes were lack of sero-protective anti-HAV immunoglobulin G (IgG), and number and types of adverse events. Results were presented as relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Dichotomous outcomes were reported as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI), using intention-to-treat analysis. We conducted assessment of risk of bias to evaluate the risk of systematic errors (bias) and trial sequential analyses to estimate the risk of random errors (the play of chance).

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 11 clinical studies, of which only three were considered to have low risk of bias; two were quasi-randomised studies in which we only addressed harms. Nine randomised trials with 732,380 participants addressed the primary outcome of clinically confirmed hepatitis A. Of these, four trials assessed the inactivated hepatitis A vaccine (41,690 participants) and five trials assessed the live attenuated hepatitis A vaccine (690,690 participants). In the three randomised trials with low risk of bias (all assessing inactivated vaccine), clinically apparent hepatitis A occurred in 9/20,684 (0.04%) versus 92/20,746 (0.44%) participants in the HAV vaccine and control groups respectively (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.30). In all nine randomised trials, clinically apparent hepatitis A occurred in 31/375,726 (0.01%) versus 505/356,654 (0.18%) participants in the HAV vaccine and control groups respectively (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.17). These results were supported by trial sequential analyses. Subgroup analyses confirmed the clinical effectiveness of both inactivated hepatitis A vaccines (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.30) and live attenuated hepatitis A vaccines (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.17) on clinically confirmed hepatitis A. Inactivated hepatitis A vaccines had a significant effect on reducing the lack of sero-protection (less than 20 mIU/L) (RR 0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.03). No trial reported on a sero-protective threshold less than 10 mIU/L. The risk of both non-serious local and systemic adverse events was comparable to placebo for the inactivated HAV vaccines. There were insufficient data to draw conclusions on adverse events for the live attenuated HAV vaccine.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Hepatitis A vaccines are effective for pre-exposure prophylaxis of hepatitis A in susceptible individuals. This review demonstrated significant protection for at least two years with the inactivated HAV vaccine and at least five years with the live attenuated HAV vaccine. There was evidence to support the safety of the inactivated hepatitis A vaccine. More high quality evidence is required to determine the safety of live attenuated vaccines.

Sample size for equivalence trials: a case study from a vaccine lot consistency trial

For some trials, simple but subtle assumptions can have a profound impact on the size of the trial. A case in point is a vaccine lot consistency (or equivalence) trial. Standard sample size formulas used for designing lot consistency trials rely on only one component of variation, namely, the variation in antibody titers within lots. The other component, the variation in the means of titers between lots, is assumed to be equal to zero. In reality, some amount of variation between lots, however small, will be present even under the best manufacturing practices. Using data from a published lot consistency trial, we demonstrate that when the between-lot variation is only 0.5 per cent of the total variation, the increase in the sample size is nearly 300 per cent when compared with the size assuming that the lots are identical. The increase in the sample size is so pronounced that in order to maintain power one is led to consider a less stringent criterion for demonstration of lot consistency. The appropriate sample size formula that is a function of both components of variation is provided. We also discuss the increase in the sample size due to correlated comparisons arising from three pairs of lots as a function of the between-lot variance.

Prevention of hepatitis A by Havrix: a review

Hepatitis A is one of the most common vaccine-preventable infectious diseases in the world. With at least 1.5 million cases of hepatitis A worldwide each year, disease management constitutes a substantial economic burden. The first effective vaccine against hepatitis A, Havrix was introduced in 1992. This review summarizes data accumulated following more than a decade of clinical experience with this vaccine and compares clinical data with other currently available hepatitis A vaccines. Based on this data and on the current immunological knowledge, a recent consensus concluded that hepatitis A vaccines induce lifelong protection, and thus booster vaccinations against hepatitis A are unnecessary in fully immunized, healthy people. In view of this, current regulatory recommendations for the use of hepatitis A vaccines are reviewed and possible future strategies identified.

Combined typhoid fever and hepatitis A vaccine: comparison of immunogenicity and safety to concomitant monovalent vaccine over 3 years

BACKGROUND

The safety and immunogenicity of Viatim, a combined hepatitis A (HA) and typhoid fever (Vi) vaccine, were compared with the monovalent component vaccines up to and 1 month after a booster dose at 3 years.

METHODS

Healthy, adult volunteers were randomized to receive Viatim (group A, n = 179) or separate HA and Vi vaccines (group B, n = 181); subgroups were boosted after 3 years with Viatim (groups C and D, n = 56 and 46, respectively). Local and systemic reactions were recorded for 28 days postvaccination. Seroconversion and seroprotection rates and geometric mean antibody concentrations were measured at 14 and 28 days, 1, 2, and 3 years postvaccination, and 28 days after the booster dose.

RESULTS

Local and systemic safety profiles were equivalent between the two groups. Immediate local reactions were infrequent (1 in group A and 2 in group B). Local reactions, consisting mostly of mild or moderate pain, were least frequent with monovalent HA. Antibody concentrations to both antigens were similar in groups A and B, in which HA seroprotection rates (> or = 20 mIU/mL) were respectively, 98.7% and 100% at day 28, and 99.1% and 99.0% after 3 years, achieving 100% after the booster. Vi seroprotection rates (> or = 1 microg/mL) of 85.2% and 84.9% after 28 days fell to 32.1% and 35.6% after 3 years, increasing to 67.3% and 69.8% after the booster dose.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined HA/Vi vaccine, Viatim, had equivalent tolerability and safety and was as rapidly immunogenic as its component monovalent vaccines when given concurrently. A booster dose after 3 years significantly increased antibody levels with some evidence of relative hyporesponsiveness of the typhoid response.

Overlapping epidemiologies of hepatitis A and typhoid fever: the needs of the traveler

Hepatitis A and typhoid fever are endemic infectious diseases in many parts of the world. They share a common, simple mode of transmission--the fecal--oral route-associated with poor hygiene. The low endemicity of both diseases in developed countries, and the rise in travel to exotic destinations for business and leisure, mean that increasing numbers of travelers are being exposed to infection. Effective, established vaccines are available against both diseases, and recently new formulations combining both vaccines in one injection have been licensed. We review the present epidemiologic situation for both diseases, to determine the necessity to routinely vaccinate travelers against both diseases.

Vaccines administered simultaneously: directions for new combination vaccines based on an historical review of the literature

OBJECTIVES

The recognized benefits of administering vaccines simultaneously has encouraged vaccine producers to develop combination vaccines. If contemporary research and development can realize vaccines that achieve the current standards for safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy, other specific vaccine associations may also merit reconsideration as combination vaccines.

METHODS

An historical review of the vaccine association literature reveals two important themes: first, the programs of mass vaccination, in particular, the eradication of smallpox, sessions where multiple vaccines (other than the smallpox vaccine) were given concurrently, and the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI); and, second, the domain of travel vaccines, including travellers to a disease-endemic country (such as migrants, tourists, military personnel, or expatriates) and WHO requirements for international travellers.

RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS

Based on this historical review, combination vaccines worth reconsideration could fill epidemiologic niches in the EPI with, for instance, a measles--yellow fever, a measles--Japanese encephalitis or a pertussis-based paediatric combination rabies vaccine. Furthermore, other combinations could broaden protection against the pathogens responsible for meningitis, pneumonia, or enteric diseases. Nevertheless, complex issues such as necessity, feasibility, or affordability will ultimately determine if any one of these becomes a combination vaccine.

A randomized, open-label study of the immunogenicity and reactogenicity of three lots of a combined typhoid fever/hepatitis A vaccine in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Travelers are often advised to receive both the typhoid fever and hepatitis A virus (HAV) vaccines, particularly when going to areas where the 2 diseases are endemic. Thus, combined administration of these vaccines could make immunization more acceptable by reducing the number of injections needed.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the safety profiles and immunogenicity of 3 batches of a combined typhoid fever/HAV vaccine administered using a dual-chamber bypass syringe.

METHODS

This randomized, open-label study was conducted at 2 university-based travel clinics in Germany and Austria. Subjects received a single IM injection from 1 of 3 batches of the combined vaccine. Blood samples were drawn immediately before and 28 days after vaccination to evaluate the response to the 2 antigens by assessing geometric mean titers (GMTs) and rates of seroconversion and seroprotection. Subjects recorded all adverse events (AEs) occurring during the study period in a diary.

RESULTS

Six hundred ten healthy adults were enrolled in the study. Twenty-eight days after vaccination, 90.6% of the study population had protective typhoid Vi antibody titers (> or = 1 microg/mL) and 100% had protective HAV antibody titers (> or = 20 mIU/mL). Seroconversion rates and GMTs were not significantly different between the 3 batches. There were no differences with regard to local or systemic AEs between the 3 batches of vaccine. There were no immediate adverse reactions (within 30 minutes of vaccination) and no serious AEs related to vaccination. Of 609 evaluable subjects (1 was lost to follow-up after the first visit), 555 (91.1%) experienced > or = 1 local reaction within the first 7 days after vaccination, mainly pain at the injection site (550 [90.3%]), but only 26 (4.3%) described this pain as severe. Vaccine-related headache and mild to moderate asthenia were each reported by 54 subjects (8.9%). Symptoms resolved spontaneously in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3 batches of the combined typhoid fever/HAV vaccine administered by dual-chamber bypass syringe were equally well tolerated and effective in healthy adults, and did not differ significantly in terms of GMTs or seroconversion rates.

A combined dual-chamber typhoid/hepatitis A vaccine as a booster dose in hepatitis A primed adults

Vivaxim is a combined hepatitis A/typhoid fever vaccine (HA/Vi) licensed for vaccination of travellers, but long-term protection against hepatitis A requires two immunisations at least 6 months apart. A randomised, controlled study was performed in 116 healthy adults primed with hepatitis A vaccine (Avaxim) to compare immune responses to HA/Vi and Avaxim given as booster doses 6 months later. Both vaccines elicited marked booster responses achieving antibody geometric mean titres (GMTs) of 4576 and 3760 mIU/ml in the HA/Vi and Avaxim groups, respectively. Although twice as frequent in the HA/Vi group, local reactions (mostly pain) were mainly mild and transient, probably reflecting the larger volume injected (1ml). Vivaxim offers a convenient means of administering both HA and typhoid fever vaccines in subjects already primed for hepatitis A.

Vaccination options for last-minute travellers in need of travel-related prophylaxis against hepatitis A and B and typhoid fever: a practical guide

Last-minute travellers represent a particular challenge to travel healthcare professionals, as standard vaccination schedules can take a few months to complete. This has led researchers to investigate the value of alternative accelerated schedules and existing schedules among this group, particularly with respect to time taken for an individual to seroconvert, duration of protection and multiple vaccination requirements. This paper reviews the available options for the three most common vaccine preventable diseases among travellers-hepatitis A, hepatitis B and typhoid fever. Studies suggest that even if the first dose of hepatitis A vaccine is given on the day of travel, this will provide adequate protection, and that immunity to typhoid fever can be provided in over 70% of travellers following vaccination 1 week prior to departure. For hepatitis B, an accelerated schedule of 0, 7 and 21-days has been shown to induce early protection, and is considered to be of benefit to the last-minute traveller. Practical guidelines on vaccination options from one week up to one month, as well as one month or more prior to travel are presented. This should provide guidance for travel healthcare professionals, and reassure last-minute travellers that they need not begin their journey unprotected against these three serious infectious diseases.

Hepatitis A booster vaccination: is there a need?

Hepatitis A is one of the most common vaccine-preventable infectious diseases in the world. Effective vaccines against hepatitis A have been available since 1992, and they provide long-term immunity against the infection. However, there is no worldwide consensus on how long protection will last or whether there will be a need for hepatitis A virus (HAV) booster vaccinations in the future. In most countries, booster-vaccination policy is guided by manufacturers' recommendations, national authorities, or both. In June, 2002, a panel of international experts met to review the long-term immunogenicity and protection conferred by HAV vaccine in different population groups. Data have shown that after a full primary vaccination course, protective antibody amounts persist beyond 10 years in healthy individuals, and underlying immune memory provides protection far beyond the duration of anti-HAV antibodies. The group concluded that there is no evidence to lend support to HAV booster vaccination after a full primary vaccination course in a healthy individual. However, further investigations are needed before deciding if boosters can be omitted in special patient-groups.

Inactivated hepatitis A vaccine: immunogenicity, efficacy, safety and review of official recommendations for use

There is 10 years of marketing experience with the hepatitis A vaccine Havrix. It is highly immunogenic, provides lasting protection in healthy individuals and generates protective levels of antibodies in patients with chronic liver disease or impaired immunity. Postmarketing surveillance data have confirmed the outstanding safety profile of the vaccine. The timing of the booster dose is not critical to effectiveness, which has advantages for the protection of travelers to regions of high endemicity. The vaccine is effective in curbing outbreaks of hepatitis A and also when administered postexposure, due to rapid seroconversion and the long incubation period of the disease. In intermediate endemic regions, an epidemiological shift in hepatitis A infection has driven the development of universal preventive strategies to be added to the targeting of at-risk groups. Existing official recommendations and future directions for vaccine use are reviewed.

Combined vaccination against hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and typhoid fever: safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity

BACKGROUND

The etiological agents of hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and typhoid fever share similar patterns of global distribution, and cause significant disease burden in travelers to endemic countries. Combined vaccination against all three diseases, based on currently available vaccines, would promote compliance and convenience for travelers. This clinical study evaluated the feasibility of extemporaneously syringe-mixed hepatitis A and B vaccine (Twinrix) and a Vi polysaccharide vaccine (Typherix) in healthy adults, and compared this to concomitant administration of the vaccines in separate arms.

METHODS

The mixed dose of vaccine contained at least 720 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) units of the inactivated hepatitis A antigen, 20 microg of the recombinant hepatitis B antigen and 25 microg of the Vi polysaccharide typhoid antigen in 1.5 mL. The study was conducted in 200 healthy 18- to 45-year-old volunteers.

RESULTS

Equivalence between the vaccines mixed before administration and the concomitantly administered vaccines was shown in terms of seroconversion and seroprotection. With the exception of local injection site soreness, which was higher in the mixed administration group, the reactogencity was similar for both groups. In both vaccination groups more than 95% of the subjects were anti-hepatitis A virus and anti-Vi seropositive 1 month after the first vaccination. With regard to hepatitis B, a strong response was achieved in both groups, with more than two-thirds of the subjects protected 2 months after the start of the immunization course.

CONCLUSION

These results support the feasibility of extemporaneously syringe-mixed combined hepatitis A and B vaccine with a Vi polysaccharide typhoid vaccine, administered in healthy adults.