Efficacy of the oral pentavalent rotavirus vaccine in Mali

Correlates of immune protection against human rotaviruses: natural infection and vaccination

Species A rotaviruses are the leading viral cause of acute gastroenteritis in children under 5 years of age worldwide. Despite progress in the characterization of the pathogenesis and immunology of rotavirus-induced gastroenteritis, correlates of protection (CoPs) in the course of either natural infection or vaccine-induced immunity are not fully understood. There are numerous factors such as serological responses (IgA and IgG), the presence of maternal antibodies (Abs) in breast milk, changes in the intestinal microbiome, and rotavirus structural and non-structural proteins that contribute to the outcome of the CoP. Indeed, while an intestinal IgA response and its surrogate, the serum IgA level, are suggested as the principal CoPs for oral rotavirus vaccines, the IgG level is more likely to be a CoP for parenteral non-replicating rotavirus vaccines. Integrating clinical and immunological data will be instrumental in improving rotavirus vaccine efficacy, especially in low- and middle-income countries, where vaccine efficacy is significantly lower than in high-income countries. Further knowledge on CoPs against rotavirus disease will be helpful for next-generation vaccine development. Herein, available data and literature on interacting components and proposed CoPs against human rotavirus disease are reviewed, and limitations and gaps in our knowledge in this area are discussed.

Healthcare provider perspectives on delivering next generation rotavirus vaccines in five low-to-middle-income countries

Background

Live oral rotavirus vaccines (LORVs) have significantly reduced rotavirus hospitalizations and deaths worldwide. However, LORVs are less effective in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Next-generation rotavirus vaccines (NGRVs) may be more effective but require administration by injection or a neonatal oral dose, adding operational complexity. Healthcare providers (HPs) were interviewed to assess rotavirus vaccine preferences and identify delivery issues as part of an NGRV value proposition.

Objective

Determine HP vaccine preferences about delivering LORVs compared to injectable (iNGRV) and neonatal oral (oNGRV) NGRVs.

Methods

64 HPs from Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Peru, and Senegal were interviewed following a mixed-method guide centered on three vaccine comparisons: LORV vs. iNGRV; LORV vs. oNGRV; oNGRV vs. iNGRV. HPs reviewed attributes for each vaccine in the comparisons, then indicated and explained their preference. Additional questions elicited views about co-administering iNGRV+LORV for greater public health impact, a possible iNGRV-DTP-containing combination vaccine, and delivering neonatal doses.

Results

Almost all HPs preferred oral vaccine options over iNGRV, with many emphasizing an aversion to additional injections. Despite this strong preference, HPs described challenges delivering oral doses. Preferences for LORV vs. oNGRV were split, marked by disparate views on rotavirus disease epidemiology and the safety, need, and feasibility of delivering neonatal vaccines. Although overwhelmingly enthusiastic about an iNGRV-DTP-containing combination option, several HPs had concerns. HP views were divided on the feasibility of co-administering iNGRV+LORV, citing challenges around logistics and caregiver sensitization.

Conclusion

Our findings provide valuable insights on delivering NGRVs in routine immunization. Despite opposition to injectables, openness to co-administering LORV+iNGRV to improve efficacy suggests future HP support of iNGRV if adequately informed of its advantages. Rationales for LORV vs. oNGRV underscore needs for training on rotavirus epidemiology and stronger service integration. Expressed challenges delivering existing LORVs merit further examination and indicate need for improved delivery.

Understanding Rotavirus Vaccine Efficacy and Effectiveness in Countries with High Child Mortality

Rotavirus claims thousands of lives of children globally every year with a disproportionately high burden in low- and lower-middle income countries where access to health care is limited. Oral, live-attenuated rotavirus vaccines have been evaluated in multiple settings in both low- and high-income populations and have been shown to be safe and efficacious. However, the vaccine efficacy observed in low-income settings with high rotavirus and diarrheal mortality was significantly lower than that seen in high-income populations where rotavirus mortality is less common. Rotavirus vaccines have been introduced and rolled out in more than 112 countries, providing the opportunity to assess effectiveness of the vaccines in these different settings. We provide an overview of the efficacy, effectiveness, and impact of rotavirus vaccines, focusing on high-mortality settings and identify the knowledge gaps for future research. Despite lower efficacy, rotavirus vaccines substantially reduce diarrheal disease and mortality and are cost-effective in countries with high burden. Continued evaluation of the effectiveness, impact, and cost–benefit of rotavirus vaccines, especially the new candidates that have been recently approved for global use, is a key factor for new vaccine introductions in countries, or for a switch of vaccine product in countries with limited resources.

The efficacy and safety of rotavirus vaccines in countries in Africa and Asia with high child mortality

Rotavirus remains a leading cause of diarrhoeal morbidity and mortality in young children and rotavirus vaccines are critical for reducing global disease burden. This report addresses the performance of rotavirus vaccines in countries with high child mortality. We performed a sensitivity analysis as part of a systematic review on rotavirus vaccines to inform development of World Health Organization vaccine recommendations. The efficacy of four prequalified vaccines against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis was similar across high mortality settings in Asia and Africa. Within the first year following vaccination, vaccine efficacy for the four vaccines ranged from 48% to 57% while in the second year, efficacy ranged from 29% to 54%. The four vaccines showed no increase in intussusception risk in these settings. All four vaccines appear to prevent significant numbers of severe rotavirus gastroenteritis episodes with no measurable increase in intussusception risk in high mortality settings in Africa and Asia.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus is a common cause of diarrhoea, diarrhoea-related hospital admissions, and diarrhoea-related deaths worldwide. Rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include Rotarix (GlaxoSmithKline), RotaTeq (Merck), and, more recently, Rotasiil (Serum Institute of India Ltd.), and Rotavac (Bharat Biotech Ltd.).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 30 November 2020, we searched PubMed, the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Social Science & Humanities. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies, and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in children that compared rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO with either placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risk of bias. One author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analyses by under-five country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 228,233 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed Rotarix, 15 trials RotaTeq (88,934 participants), five trials Rotasiil (11,753 participants), and four trials Rotavac (8432 participants). Rotarix Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In low-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 93% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (14,976 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 52% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (3874 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (31,671 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 36% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (26,479 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 58% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (15,882 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 90% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (18,145 participants, 6 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 51% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (6269 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence).   In medium-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 77% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (28,834 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 26% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (23,317 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (13,768 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (2764 participants, 1 trial; high-certainty evidence). RotaTeq Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 97% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (5442 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (3863 participants, 1 trial; low-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6775 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 96% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (5442 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (3863 participants, 1 trial; low-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 44% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6744 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  We did not identify RotaTeq studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low- or medium-mortality countries. Rotasiil Rotasiil has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low or medium child mortality. Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In high-mortality countries, Rotasiil prevented 48% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and resulted in little to no difference in severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In high-mortality countries, Rotasiil prevented 44% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and resulted in little to no difference in severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Rotavac Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low or medium child mortality.  Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In high-mortality countries, Rotavac prevented 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In high-mortality countries, Rotavac prevented 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence); no Rotavac studies have reported on severe all-cause diarrhoea at two-years follow-up. Safety No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) was detected with Rotarix (103,714 participants, 31 trials; high-certainty evidence), RotaTeq (82,502 participants, 14 trials; moderate to high-certainty evidence), Rotasiil (11,646 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), or Rotavac (8210 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Deaths were infrequent and the analysis had insufficient evidence to show an effect on all-cause mortality. Intussusception was rare.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Rotarix, RotaTeq, Rotasiil, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. The relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, but more episodes are prevented in high-mortality settings as the baseline risk is higher. In high-mortality countries some results suggest lower efficacy in the second year. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events, including intussusception, from any of the prequalified rotavirus vaccines.

Transparent reporting of recruitment and informed consent approaches in clinical trials recruiting children with minor parents in sub-Saharan Africa: a secondary analysis based on a systematic review

Background

Standardised checklists of items to be addressed in clinical study protocols and publications are promoting transparency in research. However, particular specifications for exceptional cases, such as children with minor parents are missing. This study aimed to examine the level of transparency regarding recruitment and informed consent approaches in publications of clinical trials recruiting children with minor parents in sub-Saharan Africa. We thereby focused particularly on the transparency about consenting persons (i.e. proxy decision-makers) and assessed the need to expand reporting guidelines for such exceptional cases.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of clinical trial publications previously identified through a systematic review. Multiple scientific databases were searched up to March 2019. Clinical trial publications addressing consent and potentially recruiting children with minor parents in sub-Saharan Africa were included. 44 of the in total 4382 screened articles met our inclusion criteria. A descriptive analysis was performed.

Results

None of the included articles provided full evidence on whether any recruited children had minor parents and how consent was obtained for them. Four proxy decision-maker types were identified (parents; parents or guardians; guardians; or caregivers), with further descriptions provided rarely and mostly in referenced clinical trial registrations or protocols. Also, terminology describing proxy decision-makers was often used inconsistently.

Conclusions

Reporting the minimum maternal age alongside maternal data provided in baseline demographics can increase transparency on the recruitment of children with minor mothers. The CONSORT checklist should require clinical trial publications to state or reference exceptional informed consent procedures applied for special population groups. A standardized definition of proxy decision-maker types in international clinical trial guidelines would facilitate correct and transparent informed consent for children and children with minor parents.

Study registration

CRD42018074220.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-11079-y.

Association of Rotavirus Vaccines With Reduction in Rotavirus Gastroenteritis in Children Younger Than 5 Years: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Observational Studies

IMPORTANCE

Rotavirus vaccines have been introduced worldwide, and the clinical association of different rotavirus vaccines with reduction in rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE) after introduction are noteworthy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative benefit, risk, and immunogenicity of different rotavirus vaccines by synthesizing randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant studies published in 4 databases: Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched until July 1, 2020, using search terms including "rotavirus" and "vaccin*."

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials and cohort and case-control studies involving more than 100 children younger than 5 years that reported the effectiveness, safety, or immunogenicity of rotavirus vaccines were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

A random-effects model was used to calculate relative risks (RRs), odds ratios (ORs), risk differences, and 95% CIs. Adjusted indirect treatment comparison was performed to assess the differences in the protection of Rotarix and RotaTeq.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcomes were RVGE, severe RVGE, and RVGE hospitalization. Safety-associated outcomes involved serious adverse events, intussusception, and mortality.

RESULTS

A meta-analysis of 20 RCTs and 38 case-control studies revealed that Rotarix (RV1) significantly reduced RVGE (RR, 0.316 [95% CI, 0.224-0.345]) and RVGE hospitalization risk (OR, 0.347 [95% CI, 0.279-0.432]) among children fully vaccinated; RotaTeq (RV5) had similar outcomes (RVGE: RR, 0.350 [95% CI, 0.275-0.445]; RVGE hospitalization risk: OR, 0.272 [95% CI, 0.197-0.376]). Rotavirus vaccines also demonstrated higher protection against severe RVGE. Additionally, no significant differences in the protection of RV1 and RV5 against rotavirus disease were noted in adjusted indirect comparisons. Moderate associations were found between reduced RVGE risk and Rotavac (RR, 0.664 [95% CI, 0.548-0.804]), Rotasiil (RR, 0.705 [95% CI, 0.605-0.821]), and Lanzhou lamb rotavirus vaccine (RR, 0.407 [95% CI, 0.332-0.499]). All rotavirus vaccines demonstrated no risk of serious adverse events. A positive correlation was also found between immunogenicity and vaccine protection (eg, association of RVGE with RV1: coefficient, -1.599; adjusted R2, 99.7%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The high protection and low risk of serious adverse events for rotavirus vaccines in children who were fully vaccinated emphasized the importance of worldwide introduction of rotavirus vaccination. Similar protection provided by Rotarix and RotaTeq relieves the pressure of vaccines selection for health care authorities.

Rotavirus vaccine efficacy up to 2 years of age and against diverse circulating rotavirus strains in Niger: Extended follow-up of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus vaccination is recommended in all countries to reduce the burden of diarrhea-related morbidity and mortality in children. In resource-limited settings, rotavirus vaccination in the national immunization program has important cost implications, and evidence for protection beyond the first year of life and against the evolving variety of rotavirus strains is important. We assessed the extended and strain-specific vaccine efficacy of a heat-stable, affordable oral rotavirus vaccine (Rotasiil, Serum Institute of India, Pune, India) against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis (SRVGE) among healthy infants in Niger.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

From August 2014 to November 2015, infants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive 3 doses of Rotasiil or placebo at approximately 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age. Episodes of gastroenteritis were assessed through active and passive surveillance and graded using the Vesikari score. The primary endpoint was vaccine efficacy of 3 doses of vaccine versus placebo against a first episode of laboratory-confirmed SRVGE (Vesikari score ≥ 11) from 28 days after dose 3, as previously reported. At the time of the primary analysis, median age was 9.8 months. In the present paper, analyses of extended efficacy were undertaken for 3 periods (28 days after dose 3 to 1 year of age, 1 to 2 years of age, and the combined period 28 days after dose 3 to 2 years of age) and by individual rotavirus G type. Among the 3,508 infants included in the per-protocol efficacy analysis (mean age at first dose 6.5 weeks; 49% male), the vaccine provided significant protection against SRVGE through the first year of life (3.96 and 9.98 cases per 100 person-years for vaccine and placebo, respectively; vaccine efficacy 60.3%, 95% CI 43.6% to 72.1%) and over the entire efficacy follow-up period up to 2 years of age (2.13 and 4.69 cases per 100 person-years for vaccine and placebo, respectively; vaccine efficacy 54.7%, 95% CI 38.1% to 66.8%), but the difference was not statistically significant in the second year of life. Up to 2 years of age, rotavirus vaccination prevented 2.56 episodes of SRVGE per 100 child-years. Estimates of efficacy against SRVGE by individual rotavirus genotype were consistent with the overall protective efficacy. Study limitations include limited generalizability to settings with administration of oral polio virus due to low concomitant administration, limited power to assess vaccine efficacy in the second year of life owing to a low number of events among older children, potential bias due to censoring of placebo children at the time of study vaccine receipt, and suboptimal adapted severity scoring based on the Vesikari score, which was designed for use in settings with high parental literacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Rotasiil provided protection against SRVGE in infants through an extended follow-up period of approximately 2 years. Protection was significant in the first year of life, when the disease burden and risk of death are highest, and against a changing pattern of rotavirus strains during the 2-year efficacy period. Rotavirus vaccines that are safe, effective, and protective against multiple strains represent the best hope for preventing the severe consequences of rotavirus infection, especially in resource-limited settings, where access to care may be limited. Studies such as this provide valuable information for the planning of national immunization programs and future vaccine development.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02145000.

Safety of vaccines used for routine immunization in the United States: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Understanding the safety of vaccines is critical to inform decisions about vaccination. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of the safety of vaccines recommended for children, adults, and pregnant women in the United States.

METHODS

We searched the literature in November 2020 to update a 2014 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality review by integrating newly available data. Studies of vaccines that used a comparator and reported the presence or absence of key adverse events were eligible. Adhering to Evidence-based Practice Center methodology, we assessed the strength of evidence (SoE) for all evidence statements. The systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020180089).

RESULTS

Of 56,603 reviewed citations, 338 studies reported in 518 publications met inclusion criteria. For children, SoE was high for no increased risk of autism following measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. SoE was high for increased risk of febrile seizures with MMR. There was no evidence of increased risk of  intussusception with rotavirus vaccine at the latest follow-up (moderate SoE), nor of diabetes (high SoE). There was no evidence of increased risk or insufficient evidence for key adverse events for newer vaccines such as 9-valent human papillomavirus and meningococcal B vaccines. For adults, there was no evidence of increased risk (varied SoE) or insufficient evidence for key adverse events for the new adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine and recombinant adjuvanted zoster vaccine. We found no evidence of increased risk (varied SoE) for key adverse events among pregnant women following tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccine, including stillbirth (moderate SoE).

CONCLUSIONS

Across a large body of research we found few associations of vaccines and serious key adverse events; however, rare events are challenging to study. Any adverse events should be weighed against the protective benefits that vaccines provide.

The performance of licensed rotavirus vaccines and the development of a new generation of rotavirus vaccines: a review

Rotavirus, which causes acute gastroenteritis and severe diarrhea, has posed a great threat to children worldwide over the last 30 y. Since no specific drugs and therapies against rotavirus are available, vaccination is considered the most effective method of decreasing the morbidity and mortality related to rotavirus-associated gastroenteritis. To date, six rotavirus vaccines have been developed and licensed by local governments. Notably, Rotarix™ and RotaTeq™ have been recommended as universal agents against rotavirus infection by the World Health Organization; however, lower efficacies were found in less-developed and developing regions with medium and high child mortality than well-developed ones with low child mortality. For now, two promising novel vaccines, Rotavac™ and RotaSiil™ were pre-qualified by the World Health Organization in 2018. Other rotavirus vaccines in the pipeline including neonatal strain (RV3-BB) and several non-replicating rotavirus vaccines with a parenteral delivery strategy are currently undergoing investigation, with the potential to improve the performance of, and eliminate the safety concerns associated with, previous live oral rotavirus vaccines. This paper reviews the important developments in rotavirus vaccines in the last 20 y and discusses problems and challenges that require investigation in the future.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus results in more diarrhoea-related deaths in children under five years than any other single agent in countries with high childhood mortality. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in countries with low childhood mortality. Rotavirus vaccines that have been prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include a monovalent vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline), a pentavalent vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck), and, more recently, another monovalent vaccine (Rotavac, Bharat Biotech).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO (RV1, RV5, and Rotavac) for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 April 2018 we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, and BIOSIS. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in children comparing rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risks of bias. One review author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analysis by country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 216,480 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed RV1, 15 trials (88,934 participants) RV5, and four trials (8432 participants) Rotavac. RV1 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 84% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.26; 43,779 participants, 7 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 41% of cases of severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.74; 28,051 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 63% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60; 6114 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; 5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.23; 36,002 participants, 9 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 37% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 39,091 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries RV1 probably prevents 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83; 13,768 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96; 2764 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.88 95% CI 0.83 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence). There were 30 cases of intussusception reported in 53,032 children after RV1 vaccination and 28 cases in 44,214 children after placebo or no intervention (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.05; low-certainty evidence). RV5 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV5 probably prevents 92% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.22; 4132 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62; 5916 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.11; 1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; 7318 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 41% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; 5885 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; 5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; moderate to high-certainty evidence). There were 16 cases of intussusception in 43,629 children after RV5 vaccination and 20 cases in 41,866 children after placebo (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.45; low-certainty evidence). Rotavac Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low child mortality. In India, a high-mortality country, Rotavac probably prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60; 6799 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); the trial did not report on severe all-cause diarrhoea at one-year follow-up. Children vaccinated and followed up for two years Rotavac probably prevents 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases in India (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; 6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02; moderate-certainty evidence). There were eight cases of intussusception in 5764 children after Rotavac vaccination and three cases in 2818 children after placebo (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.35 to 5.02; very low-certainty evidence). There was insufficient evidence of an effect on mortality from any rotavirus vaccine (198,381 participants, 44 trials; low- to very low-certainty evidence), as the trials were not powered to detect an effect at this endpoint.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

RV1, RV5, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. Whilst the relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, there is a greater number of episodes prevented in these settings as the baseline risk is much higher. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events. 21 October 2019 Up to date All studies incorporated from most recent search All published trials found in the last search (4 Apr, 2018) were included and 15 ongoing studies are currently awaiting completion (see 'Characteristics of ongoing studies').

Quantifying the Impact of Natural Immunity on Rotavirus Vaccine Efficacy Estimates: A Clinical Trial in Dhaka, Bangladesh (PROVIDE) and a Simulation Study

Background

The low efficacy of rotavirus vaccines in clinical trials performed in low-resource settings may be partially explained by acquired immunity from natural exposure, especially in settings with high disease incidence.

Methods

In a clinical trial of monovalent rotavirus vaccine in Bangladesh, we compared the original per-protocol efficacy estimate to efficacy derived from a recurrent events survival model in which children were considered naturally exposed and potentially immune after their first rotavirus diarrhea (RVD) episode. We then simulated trial cohorts to estimate the expected impact of prior exposure on efficacy estimates for varying rotavirus incidence rates and vaccine efficacies.

Results

Accounting for natural immunity increased the per-protocol vaccine efficacy estimate against severe RVD from 63.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 33.0%-79.7%) to 70.2% (95% CI, 44.5%-84.0%) in the postvaccination period, and original year 2 efficacy was underestimated by 14%. The simulations demonstrated that this expected impact increases linearly with RVD incidence, will be greatest for vaccine efficacies near 50%, and can reach 20% in settings with high incidence and low efficacy.

Conclusions

High rotavirus incidence leads to predictably lower vaccine efficacy estimates due to the acquisition of natural immunity in unvaccinated children, and this phenomenon should be considered when comparing efficacy estimates across settings.

Clinical Trials Registration

NCT01375647.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus results in more diarrhoea-related deaths in children under five years than any other single agent in countries with high childhood mortality. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in countries with low childhood mortality. Rotavirus vaccines that have been prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include a monovalent vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline), a pentavalent vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck), and, more recently, another monovalent vaccine (Rotavac, Bharat Biotech).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO (RV1, RV5, and Rotavac) for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 April 2018 we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, and BIOSIS. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in children comparing rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risks of bias. One review author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analysis by country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 216,480 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed RV1, 15 trials (88,934 participants) RV5, and four trials (8432 participants) Rotavac.RV1 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 84% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.26; 43,779 participants, 7 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 41% of cases of severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.74; 28,051 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 63% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60; 6114 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; 5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).Children vaccinated and followed up for two yearsIn low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.23; 36,002 participants, 9 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 37% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 39,091 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries RV1 probably prevents 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83; 13,768 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96; 2764 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence).No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.88 95% CI 0.83 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence). There were 30 cases of intussusception reported in 53,032 children after RV1 vaccination and 28 cases in 44,214 children after placebo or no intervention (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.05; low-certainty evidence).RV5 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV5 probably prevents 92% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.22; 4132 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62; 5916 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.11; 1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).Children vaccinated and followed up for two yearsIn low-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; 7318 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 41% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; 5885 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; 5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; moderate to high-certainty evidence). There were 16 cases of intussusception in 43,629 children after RV5 vaccination and 20 cases in 41,866 children after placebo (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.45; low-certainty evidence).Rotavac Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low child mortality. In India, a high-mortality country, Rotavac probably prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60; 6799 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); the trial did not report on severe all-cause diarrhoea at one-year follow-up.Children vaccinated and followed up for two yearsRotavac probably prevents 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases in India (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; 6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence).No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02; moderate-certainty evidence). There were eight cases of intussusception in 5764 children after Rotavac vaccination and three cases in 2818 children after placebo (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.35 to 5.02; very low-certainty evidence).There was insufficient evidence of an effect on mortality from any rotavirus vaccine (198,381 participants, 44 trials; low- to very low-certainty evidence), as the trials were not powered to detect an effect at this endpoint.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

RV1, RV5, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. Whilst the relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, there is a greater number of episodes prevented in these settings as the baseline risk is much higher. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events.

Effectiveness of Rotavirus Vaccination: A Systematic Review of the First Decade of Global Postlicensure Data, 2006-2016

Two rotavirus vaccines, Rotarix (RV1) and RotaTeq (RV5), were licensed for global use in 2006. A systematic review of 48 peer- reviewed articles with postlicensure data from 24 countries showed a median RV1 vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 84%, 75%, and 57% in countries with low, medium, and high child mortality, respectively, and RV5 VE of 90% and 45% in countries with low and high child mortality, respectively. A partial vaccine series provided considerable protection, but not to the same level as a full series. VE tended to decline in the second year of life, particularly in medium- and high-mortality settings, and tended to be greater against more severe rotavirus disease. Postlicensure data from countries across geographic regions and with different child mortality levels demonstrate that under routine use, both RV1 and RV5 are effective against rotavirus disease, supporting the World Health Organization recommendation that all countries introduce rotavirus vaccine into their national immunization program.

Timing and predictors of severe rotavirus gastroenteritis among unvaccinated infants in low- and middle-income countries

Delays in rotavirus vaccine schedule could improve performance in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, delaying the first dose could be detrimental if infants experience severe rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE) early in life. Our objective was to describe the timing and predictors of severe RVGE in unvaccinated children in LMICs. We analysed the placebo arms from two clinical trials (cohort 1: NCT00241644; cohort 2: NCT00362648). We estimated the rate, cumulative incidence (per 1000 infants) and age distribution of severe RVGE episodes. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between baseline factors and severe RVGE. Cumulative incidence at 6 months of age was 23/1000 (95% CI 15-30) in cohort 1 and 6/1000 (95% CI 3-8) in cohort 2. Early antibiotic use (compared with no use) was associated with 2.03 (95% CI 1.18-3.48) and 1.41 (95% CI 0.80-2.51) times the rate of severe RVGE in cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. The cumulative incidence of severe RVGE was low at 6 months of age, suggesting that a 4-week delay in the vaccination schedule may not result in a large number of severe RVGE episodes prior to vaccine receipt.

Genotypic and epitope characteristics of group A porcine rotavirus strains circulating in Canada

Surveillance of Rotavirus A (RVA) infections in North America swine populations are limited and not performed over a significant time period to properly assess the diversity of RVA strains in swine. The VP7 (G) and VP4 (P) genes of 32 Canadian RVA strains, circulating between 2009 and 2015 were sequenced, identifying the G3P[13], G5P[7], G9P[7], G9[13], and G9[19] genotype combinations. The Canadian RVA strains were compared to the RVA strains present in the swine ProSystems RCE rotavirus vaccine. The comparison revealed multiple amino acid differences in the G and P antigenic epitopes, regardless of the G and P genotypes but specifically in the Canadian G3, P[13] and P[19] genotypes. Our study further contributes to the characterization of RVA's evolution and disease mitigation among swine, which may optimize target vaccine design, thereby minimizing RVA disease in this economically important animal population.

Efficacy, safety and effectiveness of licensed rotavirus vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis for Latin America and the Caribbean

BACKGROUND

RotaTeq™ (RV5; Merck & Co. Inc., USA) and Rotarix™ (RV1, GlaxoSmithKline, Belgium) vaccines, developed to prevent rotavirus diarrhea in children under five years old, were both introduced into national immunization programs in 2006. As many countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have included either RV5 or RV1 in their routine childhood vaccination programs, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze efficacy, safety and effectiveness data from the region.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE, Scielo, Lilacs and the Cochrane Central Register, for controlled efficacy, safety and effectiveness studies published between January 2000 until December 2011, on RV5 and RV1 across Latin America (where both vaccines are available since 2006). The primary outcome measures were: rotavirus-related gastroenteritis of any severity; rotavirus emergency department visits and hospitalization; and severe adverse events.

RESULTS

The results of the meta-analysis for efficacy show that RV1 reduced the risk of any-severity rotavirus-related gastroenteritis by 65% (relative risk (RR) 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25; 0.50), and of severe gastroenteritis by 82% (RR 0.18, 95%CI 0.12; 0.26) versus placebo. In trials, both vaccines significantly reduced the risk of hospitalization and emergency visits by 85% (RR 0.15, 95%CI 0.09; 0.25) for RV1 and by 90% (RR 0.099, 95%CI 0.012; 0.77) for RV5. Vaccination with RV5 or RV1 did not increase the risk of death, intussusception, or other severe adverse events which were previously associated with the first licensed rotavirus vaccine. Real-world effectiveness studies showed that both vaccines reduced rotavirus hospitalization in the region by around 45-50% for RV5 (for 1 to 3 doses, respectively), and, by around 50-80% for RV1 (for 1 to 2 doses, respectively). For RV1, effectiveness against hospitalization was highest (around 80-96%) for children vaccinated before 12 months of age, compared with 5-60% effectiveness in older children. Both vaccines were most effective in preventing more severe gastroenteritis (70% for RV5 and 80-90% for RV1) and severe gastroenteritis (50% for RV5 and 70-80% for RV1).

CONCLUSION

This systematic literature review confirms rotavirus vaccination has been proven effective and well tolerated in protecting children in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Heterogeneity of Rotavirus Vaccine Efficacy Among Infants in Developing Countries

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus is the leading cause of severe diarrhea worldwide in young children. Although rotavirus vaccine efficacy is high in developed countries, efficacy is lower in developing countries. Here, we investigated heterogeneity of rotavirus vaccine efficacy by infant characteristics in developing countries.

METHODS

An exploratory, post hoc analysis was conducted using randomized controlled trial data of the pentavalent rotavirus vaccine (RV5) conducted in Africa and Asia (NCT00362648). Infants received either 3 doses of vaccine/placebo and were followed for up to 2 years. Within subgroups, vaccine efficacies and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) against rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE) were estimated using Poisson regression. We assessed heterogeneity of efficacy by age at first dose, gender, breastfeeding status and nutrition status.

RESULTS

African children receiving the first dose at <8 weeks had lower efficacy (23.7%; 95% CI: -8.2%-46.3%) than those vaccinated at ≥8 weeks (59.1%; 95% CI: 34.0%-74.6%). Marginally statistically significant differences were observed by age at first dose, gender and underweight status in Ghana and gender in Asian countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Heterogeneity of efficacy was observed for age at first dose in African countries. This was an exploratory analysis; additional studies are needed to validate these results.

Immunogenicity and protective efficacy of rotavirus VP8* fused to cholera toxin B subunit in a mouse model

In attempts to develop recombinant subunit vaccines against rotavirus disease, it was previously shown that the N-terminal truncated VP8* protein, VP8-1 (aa26-231), is a good vaccine candidate when used for immunization in combination with Freund's adjuvant. However, this protein stimulated only weak immune response when aluminum hydroxide was used as an adjuvant. In this study, the nontoxic B subunit of cholera toxin (CTB) was employed as intra-molecular adjuvant to improve the immunogenicity of VP8-1. Both, the N-terminal and C-terminal fusion proteins, were purified to homogeneity, at which stage they formed pentamers, and showed significantly higher immunogenicity and protective efficacy than a VP8-1/aluminum hydroxide mixture in a mouse model. Compared to VP8-1-CTB, CTB-VP8-1 showed higher binding activity to both, GM1 and the conformation sensitive neutralizing monoclonal antibodies specific to VP8. More importantly, CTB-VP8-1 elicited higher titers of neutralizing antibodies and conferred higher protective efficacy than VP8-1-CTB. Therefore, the protein CTB-VP8-1, with enhanced immunogenicity and immunoprotectivity, could be considered as a viable candidate for further development of an alternative, replication-incompetent, parenterally administered vaccine against rotavirus disease.

A Systematic Review of the Effect of Rotavirus Vaccination on Diarrhea Outcomes Among Children Younger Than 5 Years

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus is the leading cause of vaccine-preventable diarrhea among children under 5 globally. Rotavirus vaccination has been shown to prevent severe rotavirus infections with varying efficacy and effectiveness by region.

METHODS

We sought to generate updated region-specific estimates of rotavirus vaccine efficacy and effectiveness. We systematically reviewed published vaccine efficacy and effectiveness studies to assess the region-specific effect of rotavirus vaccination on select diarrheal morbidity and mortality outcomes in children under 5 years of age. We employed meta-analytic methods to generate pooled effect sizes by Millennium Development Goal region.

RESULTS

Rotavirus vaccination was both efficacious and effective in preventing rotavirus diarrhea, severe rotavirus diarrhea and rotavirus hospitalizations among children under 5 across all regions represented by the 48 included studies. Efficacy against severe rotavirus diarrhea ranged from 90.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 82.3-95.0] in the developed region to 88.4% (95% CI: 67.1-95.9) in Eastern/Southeastern Asia, 79.6% (95% CI: 71.3-85.5) in Latin America and the Caribbean, 50.0% (95% CI: 34.4-61.9) in Southern Asia and 46.1% (95% CI: 29.1-59.1) in sub-Saharan Africa. Region-specific effectiveness followed a similar pattern. There was also evidence of vaccine efficacy against severe diarrhea and diarrheal hospitalizations.

CONCLUSION

Our findings confirm the protective efficacy and effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination against rotavirus diarrheal outcomes among children under 5 globally.

Exploring the role of environmental enteropathy in malnutrition, infant development and oral vaccine response

Environmental enteropathy (EE) is a poorly defined state of intestinal inflammation without overt diarrhoea that occurs in individuals exposed over time to poor sanitation and hygiene. It is characterized pathologically by small intestine villous blunting and inflammation. In children from low-income countries, it is implicated as a cause of malnutrition, oral vaccine failure and impaired cognitive development. Here we review the search for non-invasive biomarkers to measure EE non-invasively, and assess the current evidence linking EE to malnutrition, vaccine failure and neurocognitive development.

Comparative analysis of pentavalent rotavirus vaccine strains and G8 rotaviruses identified during vaccine trial in Africa

RotaTeqTM is a pentavalent rotavirus vaccine based on a bovine rotavirus genetic backbone in vitro reassorted with human outer capsid genes. During clinical trials of RotaTeqTM in Sub-Saharan Africa, the vaccine efficacy over a 2-year follow-up was lower against the genotypes contained in the vaccine than against the heterotypic G8P[6] and G8P[1] rotavirus strains of which the former is highly prevalent in Africa. Complete genome analyses of 43 complete rotavirus genomes collected during phase III clinical trials of RotaTeqTM in Sub-Saharan Africa, were conducted to gain insight into the high level of cross-protection afforded by RotaTeqTM against these G8 strains. Phylogenetic analysis revealed the presence of a high number of bovine rotavirus gene segments in these human G8 strains. In addition, we performed an in depth analysis on the individual amino acid level which showed that G8 rotaviruses were more similar to the RotaTeqTM vaccine than non-G8 strains. Because RotaTeqTM possesses a bovine genetic backbone, the high vaccine efficacy against G8 strains might be partially explained by the fact that all these strains contain a complete or partial bovine-like backbone. Altogether, this study supports the hypothesis that gene segments other than VP7 and VP4 play a role in vaccine-induced immunity.

Rotavirus VP7 epitope chimeric proteins elicit cross-immunoreactivity in guinea pigs

VP7 of group A rotavirus (RVA) contains major neutralizing epitopes. Using the antigenic protein VP6 as the vector, chimeric proteins carrying foreign epitopes have been shown to possess good immunoreactivity and immunogenicity. In the present study, using modified VP6 as the vector, three chimeric proteins carrying epitopes derived from VP7 of RVA were constructed. The results showed that the chimeric proteins reacted with anti-VP6 and with SA11 and Wa virus strains. Antibodies from guinea pigs inoculated with the chimeric proteins recognized VP6 and VP7 of RVA and protected mammalian cells from SA11 and Wa infection in vitro. The neutralizing activities of the antibodies against the chimeric proteins were significantly higher than those against the vector protein VP6F. Thus, development of chimeric vaccines carrying VP7 epitopes using VP6 as a vector could be a promising alternative to enhance immunization against RVAs.

Characterization and protective efficacy in an animal model of a novel truncated rotavirus VP8 subunit parenteral vaccine candidate

The cell-attachment protein VP8* of rotavirus is a potential candidate parenteral vaccine. However, the yield of full-length VP8 protein (VP8*, residues 1-231) expressed in Escherichia coli was low, and a truncated VP8 protein (ΔVP8*, residues 65-231) cannot elicit efficient protective immunity in a mouse model. In this study, tow novel truncated VP8 proteins, VP8-1 (residues 26-231) and VP8-2 (residues 51-231), were expressed in E. coli and evaluated for immunogenicity and protective efficacy, compared with VP8* and ΔVP8*. As well as ΔVP8*, the protein VP8-1 and VP8-2 were successfully expressed in high yield and purified in homogeneous dimeric forms, while the protein VP8* was expressed with lower yield and prone to aggregation and degradation in solution. Although the immunogenicity of the protein VP8*, VP8-1, VP8-2 and ΔVP8* was comparable, immunization of VP8* and VP8-1 elicited significantly higher neutralizing antibody titers than that of VP8-2 and ΔVP8* in mice. Furthermore, when assessed using a mouse maternal antibody model, the efficacy of VP8-1 to protect against rotavirus-induced diarrhea in pups was comparable to that of VP8*, both were dramatically higher than that of VP8-2 and ΔVP8*. Taken together, the novel truncated protein VP8-1, with increased yield, improved homogeneity and high protective efficacy, is a viable candidate for further development of a parenterally administrated prophylactic vaccine against rotavirus infection.

Whole genome detection of rotavirus mixed infections in human, porcine and bovine samples co-infected with various rotavirus strains collected from sub-Saharan Africa

Group A rotaviruses (RVA) are among the main global causes of severe diarrhea in children under the age of 5years. Strain diversity, mixed infections and untypeable RVA strains are frequently reported in Africa. We analysed rotavirus-positive human stool samples (n=13) obtained from hospitalised children under the age of 5years who presented with acute gastroenteritis at sentinel hospital sites in six African countries, as well as bovine and porcine stool samples (n=1 each), to gain insights into rotavirus diversity and evolution. Polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) analysis and genotyping with G-(VP7) and P-specific (VP4) typing primers suggested that 13 of the 15 samples contained more than 11 segments and/or mixed G/P genotypes. Full-length amplicons for each segment were generated using RVA-specific primers and sequenced using the Ion Torrent and/or Illumina MiSeq next-generation sequencing platforms. Sequencing detected at least one segment in each sample for which duplicate sequences, often having distinct genotypes, existed. This supported and extended the PAGE and RT-PCR genotyping findings that suggested these samples were collected from individuals that had mixed rotavirus infections. The study reports the first porcine (MRC-DPRU1567) and bovine (MRC-DPRU3010) mixed infections. We also report a unique genome segment 9 (VP7), whose G9 genotype belongs to lineage VI and clusters with porcine reference strains. Previously, African G9 strains have all been in lineage III. Furthermore, additional RVA segments isolated from humans have a clear evolutionary relationship with porcine, bovine and ovine rotavirus sequences, indicating relatively recent interspecies transmission and reassortment. Thus, multiple RVA strains from sub-Saharan Africa are infecting mammalian hosts with unpredictable variations in their gene segment combinations. Whole-genome sequence analyses of mixed RVA strains underscore the considerable diversity of rotavirus sequences and genome segment combinations that result from a complex evolutionary history involving multiple host species.

Evaluating associations between vaccine response and malnutrition, gut function, and enteric infections in the MAL-ED cohort study: methods and challenges

Most vaccine assessments have occurred in well-nourished populations of higher socioeconomic status. However, vaccines are often used in populations with high incidences of malnutrition and infections, in whom the effectiveness of some vaccines is inferior for unknown reasons. The degree and extent of vaccine underperformance have not been systematically studied for most vaccines across differing epidemiologic settings. This paper outlines the methods used and challenges associated with measuring immunological responses to oral vaccines against poliovirus and rotavirus, and parenteral vaccines against pertussis, tetanus, and measles in an observational study that monitored daily illness, monthly growth, intestinal inflammation and permeability, pathogen burden, dietary intake, and micronutrient status in children in 8 countries. This evaluation of vaccine response in the context of low- and middle-income countries is intended to address the gaps in knowledge of the heterogeneity in vaccine response in diverse epidemiological settings and the interplay between infections, nutrition, and immune response.

Correlates of protection against human rotavirus disease and the factors influencing protection in low-income settings

Rotaviruses (RV) are the leading cause of gastroenteritis in infants and children worldwide and are associated with high mortality predominately in low-income settings. The virus is classified into G and P serotypes and further into P genotypes based on differences in the surface-exposed proteins VP7 and VP4, respectively. Infection results in a variable level of protection from subsequent reinfection and disease. This protection is predominantly homotypic in some settings, whereas broader heterotypic protection is reported in other cohorts. Two antigenically distinct oral RV vaccines are licensed and are being rolled out widely, including in resource-poor setting, with funding provided by the GAVI alliance. First is a monovalent vaccine derived from a live-attenuated human RV strain, whereas the second is a pentavalent bovine-human reassortment vaccine. Both vaccines are highly efficacious in high-income settings, but greatly reduced levels of protection are reported in low-income countries. Here, the current challenges facing mucosal immunologists and vaccinologists aiming to define immunological correlates and to understand the variable levels of protection conferred by these vaccines in humans is considered. Such understanding is critical to maximize the public health impact of the current vaccines and also to the development of the next generation of RV vaccines, which are needed.

Early childhood diarrhoeal diseases and cognition: are we missing the rest of the iceberg?

Risk factors which interfere with cognitive function are especially important during the first 2 years of life - a period referred to as early child development and a time during which rapid growth and essential development occur. Malnutrition, a condition whose effect on cognitive function is well known, has been shown to be part of a vicious cycle with diarrhoeal diseases, and the two pathologies together continue to be the leading cause of illness and death in young children in developing countries. This paper reviews the burden of early childhood diarrhoeal diseases globally and the emerging evidence of their relationship with global disparities in neurocognitive development. The strength of evidence which indicates that the severe childhood diarrhoeal burden may be implicated in cognitive impairment of children from low- and middle-income counties is discussed. Findings suggest that greater investment in multi-site, longitudinal enteric infection studies that assess long-term repercussions are warranted. Furthermore, economic analyses using the concept of human capital should play a key role in advancing our understanding of the breadth and complexities of the health, social and economic ramifications of early childhood diarrhoeal diseases and enteric infections. This broadened awareness can serve to help advocate for more effective interventions, particularly in developing economies.

Safety of vaccines used for routine immunization of U.S. children: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Concerns about vaccine safety have led some parents to decline recommended vaccination of their children, leading to the resurgence of diseases. Reassurance of vaccine safety remains critical for population health. This study systematically reviewed the literature on the safety of routine vaccines recommended for children in the United States.

METHODS

Data sources included PubMed, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices statements, package inserts, existing reviews, manufacturer information packets, and the 2011 Institute of Medicine consensus report on vaccine safety. We augmented the Institute of Medicine report with more recent studies and increased the scope to include more vaccines. Only studies that used active surveillance and had a control mechanism were included. Formulations not used in the United States were excluded. Adverse events and patient and vaccine characteristics were abstracted. Adverse event collection and reporting was evaluated by using the McHarm scale. We were unable to pool results. Strength of evidence was rated as high, moderate, low, or insufficient.

RESULTS

Of 20 478 titles identified, 67 were included. Strength of evidence was high for measles/mumps/rubella (MMR) vaccine and febrile seizures; the varicella vaccine was associated with complications in immunodeficient individuals. There is strong evidence that MMR vaccine is not associated with autism. There is moderate evidence that rotavirus vaccines are associated with intussusception. Limitations of the study include that the majority of studies did not investigate or identify risk factors for AEs; and the severity of AEs was inconsistently reported.

CONCLUSIONS

We found evidence that some vaccines are associated with serious AEs; however, these events are extremely rare and must be weighed against the protective benefits that vaccines provide.

Compliance of mothers following recommendations to breastfeed or withhold breast milk during rotavirus vaccination in North India: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Neutralizing antibodies in breast milk may adversely influence the immune response to live oral vaccines. Withholding breastfeeding around the time of vaccine administration has been suggested for improving vaccine performance. However, we do not know whether mothers find withholding breastfeeding around the time of vaccination acceptable and how they perceive this recommendation.

METHODS

In a clinical study designed to examine predictors of poor immune response to rotavirus vaccine in infants in India, Rotarix® was administered to infants at 6 and 10 weeks with other childhood vaccines. For the study, 400 mother-infant pairs were randomized into two groups in a 1:1 ratio. Mothers were either recommended to withhold breastfeeding or were encouraged to breastfeed half an hour before and after administration of Rotarix®. The mother-infant pairs were observed and the breastfeeding intervals were recorded during this period. Mothers were administered a questionnaire about their perception of the intervention after the infants received the second dose of Rotarix®.

RESULTS

Almost 98% (391/400) of the infants received both doses of Rotarix®. Adherence to the recommendations was high in both groups. All mothers in the group who were asked to withhold breastfeeding did so, except one who breastfed her infant before the recommended time after the first dose of Rotarix®. Of the mothers, 4% (7/195) reported that the recommendation to withhold breastfeeding was difficult to follow. All mothers in this group reported that they would withhold breastfeeding at the time of vaccination if they were asked to by a health-care provider. Only one mother responded that withholding breastfeeding would be a reason for not giving rotavirus vaccine to her infant.

CONCLUSIONS

Withholding breastfeeding half an hour before and after vaccination appears to be acceptable to mothers in this setting. If withholding breastfeeding produces an improvement in the performance of the vaccine, it could be used to increase the public health impact of rotavirus immunization.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trial Registry, India (CTRI/2012/10/003057), Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01700127).Date of Registration: Clinical Trial Registry, India: 28 September 2012, Clinicaltrials.gov: 3 October 2012.

Rotavirus surveillance in Kisangani, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, reveals a high number of unusual genotypes and gene segments of animal origin in non-vaccinated symptomatic children

Group A rotavirus (RVA) infections form a major public health problem, especially in low-income countries like the Democratic Republic of the Congo (COD). However, limited data on RVA diversity is available from sub-Saharan Africa in general and the COD in particular. Therefore, the first aim of this study was to determine the genetic diversity of 99 RVAs detected during 2007–2010 in Kisangani, COD. The predominant G-type was G1 (39%) and the most predominant P-type was P[6] (53%). A total of eight different G/P-combinations were found: G1P[8] (28%), G8P[6] (26%), G2P[4] (14%), G12P[6] (13%), G1P[6] (11%), G9P[8] (4%), G4P[6] (2%) and G8P[4] (1%). The second aim of this study was to gain insight into the diversity of P[6] RVA strains in the COD. Therefore, we selected five P[6] RVA strains in combination with the G1, G4, G8 (2x) or G12 genotype for complete genome analysis. Complete genome analysis showed that the genetic background of the G1P[6] and G12P[6] strains was entirely composed of genotype 1 (Wa-like), while the segments of the two G8P[6] strains were identified as genotype 2 (DS-1-like). Interestingly, all four strains possessed a NSP4 gene of animal origin. The analyzed G4P[6] RVA strain was found to possess the unusual G4-P[6]-I1-R1-C1-M1-A1-N1-T7-E1-H1 constellation. Although the majority of its genes (if not all), were presumably of porcine origin, this strain was able to cause gastro-enteritis in humans. The high prevalence of unusual RVA strains in the COD highlights the need for continued surveillance of RVA diversity in the COD. These results also underline the importance of complete genetic characterization of RVA strains and indicate that reassortments and interspecies transmission among human and animal RVAs strains occur regularly. Based on these data, RVA vaccines will be challenged with a wide variety of different RVA strain types in the COD.

Efficacy of a monovalent human-bovine (116E) rotavirus vaccine in Indian infants: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus is the most common cause of severe dehydrating gastroenteritis in developing countries. Safe, effective, and affordable rotavirus vaccines are needed in these countries. We aimed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of a monovalent human-bovine rotavirus vaccine for severe rotavirus gastroenteritis in low-resource urban and rural settings in India.

METHODS

We did a randomised double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial at three sites in Delhi (urban), Pune (rural), and Vellore (urban and rural) between March 11, 2011, and Nov 5, 2012. Infants aged 6-7 weeks were randomly assigned (2:1), via a central interactive voice or web response system with a block size of 12, to receive either three doses of oral human-bovine natural reassortant vaccine (116E) or placebo at ages 6-7 weeks, 10 weeks, and 14 weeks. Infants' families, study investigators, paediatricians in referral hospitals, laboratory staff, and committee members were all masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was incidence of severe rotavirus gastroenteritis (≥11 on the Vesikari scale). Efficacy outcomes and adverse events were ascertained through active surveillance. Analysis was by intention to treat and per protocol. The trial is registered with Clinical Trial Registry-India (CTRI/2010/091/000102) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01305109).

FINDINGS

4532 infants were assigned to receive the 116E vaccine and 2267 to receive placebo, of whom 4354 (96%) and 2187 (96%) infants, respectively, were included in the primary per-protocol efficacy analysis. 71 events of severe rotavirus gastroenteritis were reported in 4752 person-years in infants in the vaccine group compared with 76 events in 2360 person-years in those in the placebo group; vaccine efficacy against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis was 53·6% (95% CI 35·0-66·9; p=0·0013) and 56·4% (36·6-70·1; p<0·0001) in the first year of life. The number of infants needed to be immunised to prevent one severe rotavirus gastroenteritis episode was 55 (95% CI 37-97). The incidence of severe rotavirus gastroenteritis per 100 person-years was 1·5 in the vaccine group and 3·2 in the placebo group, with an incidence rate ratio of 0·46 (95% CI 0·33-0·65). Prevalence of immediate, solicited, and serious adverse events was similar in both groups. One case of urticaria in the vaccine group and one each of acute gastroenteritis and suspected sepsis in the placebo group were regarded as related to the study product. We recorded six cases of intussusception in the vaccine group and two in the placebo group, all of which happened after the third dose. 25 (<1%) infants in the vaccine group and 17 (<1%) in the placebo group died; no death was regarded as related to the study product.

INTERPRETATION

Monovalent human-bovine (116E) rotavirus vaccine is effective and well tolerated in Indian infants.

FUNDING

Department of Biotechnology and the Biotechnology Industry Research Assistance Council, Government of India; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to PATH, USA; Research Council of Norway; UK Department for International Development; National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA; and Bharat Biotech International, Hyderabad, India.

Improved characteristics and protective efficacy in an animal model of E. coli-derived recombinant double-layered rotavirus virus-like particles

Live rotavirus vaccines that are effective in middle- and high-income countries have been found to be less immunogenic and effective in infants in resource-limited settings. The virus-like particle (VLP) approach is promising for rotavirus vaccine development, but challenges remain for VLP production at large scale. In this study, rotavirus capsid VP2 and VP6 proteins were expressed in Escherichia coli and were assembled with high efficiency into homogeneous single-layered VP6-VLPs or double-layered VP2/6-VLPs (dl2/6-VLPs) through a post-purification assembly process. The dl2/6-VLPs were observed to have better thermal stability and antigenicity. Although the immunogenicity of VP6 trimers, VP6-VLPs and dl2/6-VLPs was comparable, the efficacy of the dl2/6-VLPs to protect against rotavirus-induced diarrhea in pups was significantly higher than that of the trimeric VP6 or the VP6-VLPs when assessed using a mouse maternal antibody model. Taken together, the recombinant dl2/6-VLP antigen, which is highly analogous to rotavirus virion-derived double-layered particles, is a viable candidate for vaccine development and has the potential to be a parenterally administered safe and efficacious rotavirus vaccine.

Detection of unusual G6 rotavirus strains in Italian children with diarrhoea during the 2011 surveillance season

Two rare G6 rotavirus A (RVA) strains, designated as RVA/human-wt/ITA/CEC06/2011/G6P[6] and RVA/human-wt/ITA/PG05/2011/G6P[9], were identified in stool specimens from children hospitalized in Central Italy. After PCR genotyping, the samples CEC06 and PG05 gave G-UD-P[6] and G-UD-P[9] genotypes, respectively. To determine the G-type and to characterize further the two strains, sequencing of 8 of the 11 genomic segments was performed. CEC06 and PG05 strains were found to possess unusual genotype constellations: G6-P[6]-I2-A2-N2-T2-E2-H2 and G6-P[9]-I2-A3-N2-T3-E3-H3, respectively. This study reports the first detection of rare G6P[6] and G6P[9] RVA strains in peninsular Italy. Phylogenetic analysis of VP4 (VP8*), VP7, VP6, and NSP1-5 showed no evidence of zoonosis or inter-species reassortment, revealing for both strains constellations previously associated to human cases.

Interventions to address deaths from childhood pneumonia and diarrhoea equitably: what works and at what cost?

Global mortality in children younger than 5 years has fallen substantially in the past two decades from more than 12 million in 1990, to 6·9 million in 2011, but progress is inconsistent between countries. Pneumonia and diarrhoea are the two leading causes of death in this age group and have overlapping risk factors. Several interventions can effectively address these problems, but are not available to those in need. We systematically reviewed evidence showing the effectiveness of various potential preventive and therapeutic interventions against childhood diarrhoea and pneumonia, and relevant delivery strategies. We used the Lives Saved Tool model to assess the effect on mortality when these interventions are applied. We estimate that if implemented at present annual rates of increase in each of the 75 Countdown countries, these interventions and packages of care could save 54% of diarrhoea and 51% of pneumonia deaths by 2025 at a cost of US$3·8 billion. However, if coverage of these key evidence-based interventions were scaled up to at least 80%, and that for immunisations to at least 90%, 95% of diarrhoea and 67% of pneumonia deaths in children younger than 5 years could be eliminated by 2025 at a cost of $6·715 billion. New delivery platforms could promote equitable access and community platforms are important catalysts in this respect. Furthermore, several of these interventions could reduce morbidity and overall burden of disease, with possible benefits for developmental outcomes.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus results in more diarrhoea-related deaths in children less than five years of age than any other single agent in countries with high childhood mortality. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in countries with low childhood mortality. Currently licensed rotavirus vaccines include a monovalent rotavirus vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals) and a pentavalent rotavirus vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck & Co., Inc.). Lanzhou lamb rotavirus vaccine (LLR; Lanzhou Institute of Biomedical Products) is used in China only.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines approved for use (RV1, RV5, and LLR) for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed) (1966 to May 2012), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (10 May 2012), CENTRAL (published in The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 5), EMBASE (1974 to 10 May 2012), LILACS (1982 to 10 May 2012), and BIOSIS (1926 to 10 May 2012). We also searched the ICTRP (10 May 2012), www.ClinicalTrials.gov (28 May 2012) and checked reference lists of identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in children comparing rotavirus vaccines approved for use with placebo, no intervention, or another vaccine.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We stratified the analysis by child mortality, and used GRADE to evaluate evidence quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-one trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 186,263 participants. Twenty-nine trials (101,671 participants) assessed RV1, and 12 trials (84,592 participants) evaluated RV5. We did not find any trials assessing LLR.RV1Children aged less than one year: In countries with low-mortality rates, RV1 prevents 86% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.26; 40,631 participants, six trials; high-quality evidence), and, based on one large multicentre trial in Latin America and Finland, probably prevents 40% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.72; 17,867 participants, one trial; moderate-quality evidence). In countries with high-mortality rates, RV1 probably prevents 63% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.75; 5414 participants, two trials; moderate-quality evidence), and, based on one trial in Malawi and South Africa, 34% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.98; 4939 participants, one trial; moderate-quality evidence).Children aged up to two years: In countries with low-mortality rates, RV1 prevents 85% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.20; 32,854 participants, eight trials; high-quality evidence), and probably 37% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 39,091 participants, two trials; moderate-quality evidence). In countries with high-mortality rates, based on one trial in Malawi and South Africa, RV1 probably prevents 42% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.79; 2764 participants, one trial; moderate-quality evidence), and 18% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.95; 2764 participants, one trial; moderate-quality evidence).RV5Children aged less than one year: In countries with low-mortality rates, RV5 probably prevents 87% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.45; 2344 participants, three trials; moderate-quality evidence), and, based on one trial in Finland, may prevent 72% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.48; 1029 participants, one trial; low-quality evidence). In countries with high-mortality rates, RV5 prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62; 5916 participants, two trials; high-quality evidence), but there was insufficient data to assess the effect on severe all-cause diarrhoea.Children aged up to two years: Four studies provided data for severe rotavirus and all-cause diarrhoea in countries with low-mortality rates. Three trials reported on severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases and found that RV5 probably prevents 82% (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.50; 3190 participants, three trials; moderate-quality evidence), and another trial in Finland reported on severe all-cause diarrhoea cases and found that RV5 may prevent 96% (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.70; 1029 participants, one trial; low-quality evidence). In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 41% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; 5885 participants, two trials; high-quality evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; 5977 participants, two trials; high-quality evidence).There was no evidence of a vaccine effect on mortality (181,009 participants, 34 trials; low-quality evidence), although the trials were not powered to detect an effect on this end point.Serious adverse events were reported in 4565 out of 99,438 children vaccinated with RV1 and in 1884 out of 78,226 children vaccinated with RV5. Fifty-eight cases of intussusception were reported in 97,246 children after RV1 vaccination, and 34 cases in 81,459 children after RV5 vaccination. No significant difference was found between children receiving RV1 or RV5 and placebo in the number of serious adverse events, and intussusception in particular.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

RV1 and RV5 prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. The vaccine efficacy is lower in high-mortality countries; however, due to the higher burden of disease, the absolute benefit is higher in these settings. No increased risk of serious adverse events including intussusception was detected, but post-introduction surveillance studies are required to detect rare events associated with vaccination.

Rotavirus in diarrheal children in rural Burkina Faso: high prevalence of genotype G6P[6]

Group A rotavirus (RVA) is the most common cause of severe gastroenteritis in young children globally, and responsible for a significant number of deaths in African countries. While vaccines are available, trials have shown a lesser efficacy in Africa. One of the reasons could be the prevalence and/or emergence of unusual or novel RVA strains, as many strains detected in African countries remain uncharacterized. In this study, we characterized RVA positive specimens from two remote rural areas in Burkina Faso, West Africa. In total 56 RVA positive specimens were subgrouped by their VP6 gene, and G-and P typed by PCR and/or sequencing of the VP7 and VP4 genes, respectively. Notably, we found a high prevalence of the unusual G6P[6]SGI strains (23%). It was the second most common constellation after G9P[8]SGII (32%); and followed by G1P[8]SGII (20%) and G2P[4]SGI (9%). We also detected a G8P[6]SGI strain, for the first time in Burkina Faso. The intra-genetic diversity was high for the VP4 gene with two subclusters within the P[8] genotype and three subclusters within the P[6] genotype which were each associated with a specific G-type, thereby suggesting a genetic linkage. The G6P[6]SGI and other SGI RVA strains infected younger children as compared to SGII strains (p<0.05). To conclude, in this study we observed the emergence of unusual RVA strains and high genetic diversity of RVA in remote rural areas of Burkina Faso. The results highlight the complexity of RVA epidemiology which may have implication for the introduction of rotavirus vaccines currently being evaluated in many African countries.

Human rotavirus-specific IgM Memory B cells have differential cloning efficiencies and switch capacities and play a role in antiviral immunity in vivo

Protective immunity to rotavirus (RV) is primarily mediated by antibodies produced by RV-specific memory B cells (RV-mBc). Of note, most of these cells express IgM, but the function of this subset is poorly understood. Here, using limiting dilution assays of highly sort-purified human IgM(+) mBc, we found that 62% and 21% of total (non-antigen-specific) IgM(+) and RV-IgM(+) mBc, respectively, switched in vitro to IgG production after polyclonal stimulation. Moreover, in these assays, the median cloning efficiencies of total IgM(+) (17%) and RV-IgM(+) (7%) mBc were lower than those of the corresponding switched (IgG(+) IgA(+)) total (34%) and RV-mBc (17%), leading to an underestimate of their actual frequency. In order to evaluate the in vivo role of IgM(+) RV-mBc in antiviral immunity, NOD/Shi-scid interleukin-2 receptor-deficient (IL-2Rγ(null)) immunodeficient mice were adoptively transferred highly purified human IgM(+) mBc and infected with virulent murine rotavirus. These mice developed high titers of serum human RV-IgM and IgG and had significantly lower levels than control mice of both antigenemia and viremia. Finally, we determined that human RV-IgM(+) mBc are phenotypically diverse and significantly enriched in the IgM(hi) IgD(low) subset. Thus, RV-IgM(+) mBc are heterogeneous, occur more frequently than estimated by traditional limiting dilution analysis, have the capacity to switch Ig class in vitro as well as in vivo, and can mediate systemic antiviral immunity.