1
|
Gao BG, Huang LF, Xie P. Effectiveness and safety of a mumps containing vaccine in preventing laboratory-confirmed mumps cases from 2002 to 2017: A meta-analysis. Open Life Sci 2024; 19:20220820. [PMID: 38465337 PMCID: PMC10921504 DOI: 10.1515/biol-2022-0820] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2023] [Revised: 11/22/2023] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 03/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Emerging evidence has figured that serum conversion rate of mumps is a crucial link of mumps disease. Nevertheless, a rising number of mumps outbreaks caused our attention and studies examining the serum conversion cases were conducted in small samples previously; this meta-analysis was conducted to assess the immunogenicity and safety of a mumps containing vaccine (MuCV) before 2019. We identified a total of 17 studies from the year of 2002-2017. In the case-control studies, the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of MuCV in preventing laboratory-confirmed mumps was 68% (odds risk: 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.14-0.70) while in the cohort studies and randomised control trials, 58% (relative risk [RR]: 0.42; 95% CI, 0.26-0.69). Similar intervals of effectiveness rates were found during non-outbreak periods compared with outbreak periods (VE: 66%; RR: 0.34; 95% CI, 0.18-0.68 versus VE: 49%; RR: 0.51; 95% CI, 0.21-1.27). In addition, the MuCV group with two and three doses did not show enhanced laboratory-confirmed mumps than one dose (VE: 58%; RR: 0.42; 95% CI, 0.20-0.88 versus VE: 65%, RR: 0.35; 95% CI, 0.20-0.61) for the reason of the overlap of 95% CI. MuCV had comparable effectiveness comparing non-outbreak and outbreak period, one dose, and two or three doses. MuCV displayed acceptable adverse event profiles.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bu-Gang Gao
- Rehabilitation Teaching and Research Office, Department of Medicine, ChuZhou City Vocational College, Chuzhou, Anhui Province, China
| | - Ling-feng Huang
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Guangdong Medical University, Zhanjiang, Guangdong, China
- Community Health Service Center in Nantou, Zhongshan, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Ping Xie
- Rehabilitation Teaching and Research Office, Department of Medicine, ChuZhou City Vocational College, Chuzhou, Anhui Province, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Krow-Lucal E, Marin M, Shepersky L, Bahta L, Loehr J, Dooling K. Measles, Mumps, Rubella Vaccine (PRIORIX): Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2022; 71:1465-1470. [PMID: 36395065 PMCID: PMC9707358 DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7146a1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/30/2023]
Abstract
Vaccination is the main means for preventing measles, mumps, and rubella virus infections and their related complications (1,2). Achieving and maintaining high 2-dose measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination coverage in the United States has led to elimination of endemic measles in 2000, rubella and congenital rubella syndrome in 2004, and a sharp decrease in mumps cases. However, measles and rubella remain endemic in many countries, leading to importations of cases and occasional local transmission within the United States (3). Reported U.S. mumps cases declined >99% from the prevaccine period (4); however, mumps is endemic worldwide, and since 2006, the number of mumps cases and mumps outbreaks has increased in the United States, with wider geographic spread since 2016 (4). Given the risk for importation of measles and rubella and the resurgence of mumps, maintaining high measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination coverage is important. Since 1978, only one MMR vaccine, M-M-R II (Merck and Co., Inc.), has been available in the United States. On June 6, 2022, the Food and Drug Administration approved a second MMR vaccine, PRIORIX (GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals), for the prevention of measles, mumps, and rubella in persons aged ≥12 months. The three live attenuated viruses contained in PRIORIX are genetically similar or identical to the corresponding components in M-M-R II (Table) (5-7). On June 23, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) unanimously recommended PRIORIX as an option to prevent measles, mumps, and rubella according to the existing recommended schedules and for off-label uses (i.e., indications not included in the package insert)* (1,2). ACIP considered PRIORIX to be safe, immunogenic, and noninferior to M-M-R II. Both PRIORIX and M-M-R II are fully interchangeable for all indications for which MMR vaccination is recommended. This report contains ACIP recommendations specific to PRIORIX and supplements the existing ACIP recommendations for MMR use (1,2).
Collapse
|
3
|
|
4
|
Kuter BJ, Marshall GS, Fergie J, Schmidt E, Pawaskar M. Prevention of measles, mumps and rubella: 40 years of global experience with M-M-R II. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2021; 17:5372-5383. [PMID: 35130794 PMCID: PMC8903938 DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2021.2007710] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Measles, mumps, and rubella are highly contagious diseases that caused significant global mortality and morbidity in the pre-vaccine era. Since its first approval in the United States over 40 years ago, M-M-RII has been used in >75 countries for prevention of these diseases. The vaccine has been part of immunization programs that have achieved dramatic global reductions in case numbers and mortality rates, as well as the elimination of measles and rubella in several countries and regions. This report summarizes over four decades of global safety, immunogenicity, efficacy, and effectiveness data for the vaccine. We include studies on the use of M-M-RII in different age groups, concomitant use with other routine childhood vaccines, administration via different routes, persistence of immunity, and vaccine effectiveness during outbreaks of measles and mumps. We conclude that M-M-RII is well tolerated and has shown consistently high performance during routine use in multiple countries, in randomized controlled trials with diverse designs, and in outbreak settings, including use as measles postexposure prophylaxis. Physicians, parents, and the public can continue to have a high degree of confidence in the use of M-M-RII as a vital part of global public health programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Gary S. Marshall
- Norton Children’s and University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA
| | - Jaime Fergie
- Infectious Diseases, Driscoll Children’s Hospital, Corpus Christi, TX, USA
| | - Elvira Schmidt
- Certara Germany GmbH, Evidence and Access, Loerrach, Germany
| | - Manjiri Pawaskar
- Center for Observational and Real-World Evidence, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA,CONTACT Manjiri Pawaskar Merck & Co., Inc., Center for Observational and Real-World Evidence, 351 North Sumneytown Pike, North Wales, PA19454, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
van den Boogaard J, de Gier B, de Oliveira Bressane Lima P, Desai S, de Melker HE, Hahné SJM, Veldhuijzen IK. Immunogenicity, duration of protection, effectiveness and safety of rubella containing vaccines: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Vaccine 2021; 39:889-900. [PMID: 33454135 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.12.079] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2020] [Revised: 12/24/2020] [Accepted: 12/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Rubella containing vaccines (RCV) prevent rubella virus infection and subsequent congenital rubella syndrome (CRS). To update the evidence on immunogenicity, duration of protection, effectiveness and safety of RCV, we conducted a systematic literature review. METHODS We searched EMBASE and SCOPUS, using keywords for rubella vaccine in combination with immunogenicity (seroconversion and seropositivity), duration of protection, efficacy/effectiveness, and safety. Original research papers involving at least one dose of RCV (at any age), published between 1-1-2010 and 17-5-2019 were included. Where appropriate, meta-analyses were performed. Quality of included studies was assessed using GRADE methodology. RESULTS We included 36 papers (32 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 observational studies) on immunogenicity (RA27/3 strain) in children and adolescent girls, 14 papers (5 RCTs and 9 observational studies) on duration of protection, one paper on vaccine effectiveness (VE) (BRDII strain), and 74 studies on safety, including three on safety in pregnancy. Meta-analysis of immunogenicity data showed 99% seroconversion (95% CI: 98-99%) after a single dose of RCV in children, independent of co-administration with other vaccines. Seroconversion after RCV1 below 9 months of age (BRDII strain, at 8 months) was 93% (95% CI: 92-95%). For duration of protection, the included studies showed a seropositivity of 88%-100% measured 1-20 years after one or two RCV doses. The single study on VE of BRDII strain, reported 100% VE after one and two doses. Among 34,332 individuals participating in the RCTs, 140 severe adverse events (SAEs) were reported as possibly related to RCV. Among the case reports on SAEs, the association with RCV was confirmed in one report (on fulminant encephalitis). Among 3,000 pregnant women who were inadvertently vaccinated, no SAEs were reported. CONCLUSIONS One and two doses of RCV are highly immunogenic for a long period of time, effective in preventing rubella and CRS, and safe.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jossy van den Boogaard
- National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Centre for Infectious Disease Control (Cib), Bilthoven, the Netherlands; European Programme for Intervention Epidemiology Training (EPIET), European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), Stockholm, Sweden.
| | - Brechje de Gier
- National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Centre for Infectious Disease Control (Cib), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Priscila de Oliveira Bressane Lima
- National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Centre for Infectious Disease Control (Cib), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Shalini Desai
- World Health Organization, Department of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Hester E de Melker
- National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Centre for Infectious Disease Control (Cib), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Susan J M Hahné
- National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Centre for Infectious Disease Control (Cib), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Irene K Veldhuijzen
- National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Centre for Infectious Disease Control (Cib), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Ravault S, Friel D, Di Paolo E, Caplanusi A, Gillard P, Povey M, Carryn S. Assessment of Mumps Virus-Specific Antibodies: Comparison of Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test and Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay Estimates. J Infect Dis 2020; 220:1462-1468. [PMID: 31299077 PMCID: PMC6761965 DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiz345] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2019] [Accepted: 07/10/2019] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT), which measures a subset of immunoglobulin antibodies (functional neutralizing antibodies), and the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), which measures total immunoglobulin (neutralizing and nonneutralizing antibodies), characterize different aspects of the anti–mumps virus antibody response after vaccination. Methods Data from a recent phase 3 clinical trial (NCT01681992) of 2 measles-mumps-rubella vaccines were used to compare anti-mumps antibody responses measured using an unenhanced PRNT (GSK; seropositivity cutoff and threshold, 2.5 and 4 times the 50% end-point dilution, respectively) with those estimated using an ELISA (thresholds, 5 and 10 ELISA units/mL, respectively). Results Of 3990 initially seronegative samples, 3284 (82.3%) were seropositive after vaccination for anti-mumps antibodies in both assays. The Pearson correlation coefficient for double-positive samples was 0.57, indicative of a moderate correlation. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that an ELISA threshold of 51.7 ELISA units/mL best corresponded to the PRNT seroresponse threshold. There was no obvious vaccine brand effect on the correlation between assays. Conclusions The moderate correlation between the anti-mumps antibody measurements obtained with PRNT and ELISA reflects different aspects of the serological response. In the absence of a well-defined protective serological threshold, PRNT provides complementary information on the antibody response, whereas ELISA remains a critically useful measurement of vaccine immunogenicity.
Collapse
|
7
|
Javelle E, Colson P, Parola P, Raoult D. Measles, the need for a paradigm shift. Eur J Epidemiol 2019; 34:897-915. [DOI: 10.1007/s10654-019-00569-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2019] [Accepted: 10/03/2019] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
|
8
|
Immunogenicity and safety of measles-mumps-rubella vaccine at two different potency levels administered to healthy children aged 12–15 months: A phase III, randomized, non-inferiority trial. Vaccine 2018; 36:5781-8. [DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.07.076] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2018] [Revised: 07/23/2018] [Accepted: 07/30/2018] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
|