S'abonner

Fractional dose compared with standard dose inactivated poliovirus vaccine in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis - 29/07/21

Doi : 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30693-9 
Thandiwe R Mashunye, MD a, , Duduzile E Ndwandwe, PhD d, Kopano R Dube, MSc d, Muki Shey, PhD b, e, Mary Shelton, BA c, Charles S Wiysonge, ProfPhD a, d
a Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa 
b Department of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa 
c Health Sciences Library, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa 
d Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa 
e Wellcome Centre for Infectious Disease Research in Africa (CIDRI-Africa), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa 

* Correspondence to: Dr Thandiwe R Mashunye, Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town 7925, South Africa Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics School of Public Health and Family Medicine Faculty of Health Sciences University of Cape Town Cape Town 7925 South Africa

Summary

Background

Since WHO recommended introduction of at least a single dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) in routine immunisation schedules, there have been global IPV shortages. Fractional-dose IPV (fIPV) administration is one of the strategies to ensure IPV availability. We reviewed studies comparing the effects of fractional with full-dose IPV vaccination to determine when seroconversion proportions with each strategy become similar in children aged 5 years and younger.

Method

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched 16 databases in July, 2019, for trials and observational studies, including ongoing studies that compare immunogenicity and adverse events of fractional-dose (0·1 mL) to full-dose (0·5 mL) IPV in healthy children aged 5 years or younger regardless of study design, number of doses, and route of administration. Screening, selection of articles, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were done in duplicate, and conflicts were resolved by discussion or arbitration by a third author. We assessed immunogenicity, the main outcome, as proportion of seroconverted participants and changes in geometric mean titres of anti-poliovirus antibodies. Timepoints were eligible for analysis if measurements were done at least 4 weeks after vaccination. Summary estimates were pooled by use of random-effects meta-analysis. Analysis was stratified by study design, type of outcome measure, type of poliovirus, and number of doses given. We assessed heterogeneity using the χ2 test of homogeneity and quantified it using the I2 statistic. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. The study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018092647.

Findings

860 records were screened for eligibility, of which 36 potentially eligible full-text articles were assessed and 14 articles were included in the final analysis: two ongoing trials and 12 articles reporting on ten completed studies. For poliovirus type 2, there were no significant differences in the proportions of seroconversions between fractional and full doses of IPV for two or three doses: the risk ratio for serconversion at one dose was 0·61 (95% CI 0·51–0·72), at two doses was 0·90 (0·82–1·00), and at three doses was 0·95 (0·91–1·00). Geometric mean titres (GMTs) for poliovirus type 2 were lower for fIPV than for full-dose IPV: −0·51 (95% CI −0·87 to −0·14) at one dose, −0·49 (−0·70 to −0·28) at two doses, and −0·98 (−1·46 to −0·51) at three doses. The seroconversion meta-analysis for the three-dose comparison was homogeneous (p=0·45; I2=0%), whereas heterogeneity was observed in the two-dose (p<0·00001; I2=88%) and one-dose (p=0·0004; I2=74%) comparisons. Heterogeneity was observed in meta-analyses of GMTs for one-dose (p<0·00001; I2=92%), two-dose (p=0·002; I2=80%), and three-dose (p<0·00001; I2=93%) comparisons. Findings for types 1 and 3 were similar to those for type 2. The certainty of the evidence was high for the three-dose comparisons and moderate for the rest of the comparisons.

Interpretation

There is no substantial difference in seroconversion between three doses of fIPV and three doses of full-dose IPV, although the full dose gives higher titres of antibodies for poliovirus type 1, 2, and 3. Use of fractional IPV instead of the full dose can stretch supplies and possibly lower the cost of vaccination.

Funding

South African Medical Research Council and the National Research Foundation of South Africa.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Plan


© 2021  Elsevier Ltd. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 21 - N° 8

P. 1161-1174 - août 2021 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Efficacy and safety of ascending doses of moxidectin against Strongyloides stercoralis infections in adults: a randomised, parallel-group, single-blinded, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase 2a trial
  • Daniela Hofmann, Somphou Sayasone, Khanpaseuth Sengngam, Bounthunh Chongvilay, Jan Hattendorf, Jennifer Keiser
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Measuring health-care delays among privately insured patients with tuberculosis in the USA: an observational cohort study
  • Jessica El Halabi, Nathan Palmer, Michael McDuffie, Jonathan J Golub, Kathe Fox, Isaac Kohane, Maha R Farhat

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.