Cargando…

Evaluation of Hepatitis A Vaccine in Post-Exposure Prophylaxis, The Netherlands, 2004-2012

BACKGROUND: The secondary attack rate of hepatitis A virus (HAV) among contacts of cases is up to 50%. Historically, contacts were offered immunoglobulin (IG, a human derived blood product) as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Amid safety concerns about IG, HAV vaccine is increasingly recommended ins...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Whelan, Jane, Sonder, Gerard J., Bovée, Lian, Speksnijder, Arjen, van den Hoek, Anneke
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3798299/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24147144
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078914
_version_ 1782287753348644864
author Whelan, Jane
Sonder, Gerard J.
Bovée, Lian
Speksnijder, Arjen
van den Hoek, Anneke
author_facet Whelan, Jane
Sonder, Gerard J.
Bovée, Lian
Speksnijder, Arjen
van den Hoek, Anneke
author_sort Whelan, Jane
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The secondary attack rate of hepatitis A virus (HAV) among contacts of cases is up to 50%. Historically, contacts were offered immunoglobulin (IG, a human derived blood product) as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Amid safety concerns about IG, HAV vaccine is increasingly recommended instead. Public health authorities’ recommendations differ, particularly for healthy contacts ≥40 years old, where vaccine efficacy data is limited. We evaluated routine use of HAV vaccine as an alternative to immunoglobulin in PEP, in those considered at low risk of severe infection in the Netherlands. METHODS: Household contacts of acute HAV cases notified in Amsterdam (2004-2012) were invited ≤14 days post-exposure, for baseline anti-HAV testing and PEP according to national guidelines: immunoglobulin if at risk of severe infection, or hepatitis A vaccine if healthy and at low risk (aged <30, or, 30-50 years and vaccinated <8 days post-exposure). Incidence of laboratory confirmed secondary infection in susceptible contacts was assessed 4-8 weeks post-exposure. In a vaccinated subgroup, relative risk (RR) of secondary infection with estimated using Poisson regression. RESULTS: Of 547 contacts identified, 191 were susceptible to HAV. Per-protocol, 167 (87%) were vaccinated (mean:6.7 days post-exposure, standard deviation(sd)=3.3) and 24 (13%) were given immunoglobulin (mean:9.7 days post-exposure, sd=2.8). At follow-up testing, 8/112 (7%) had a laboratory confirmed infection of whom 7 were symptomatic. All secondary infections occurred in vaccinated contacts, and half were >40 years of age. In healthy contacts vaccinated per-protocol ≤8 days post-exposure, RR(ref. ≤15 years) of secondary infection in those >40 years was 12.0 (95%CI:1.3-106.7). CONCLUSIONS: Timely administration of HAV vaccine in PEP was feasible and the secondary attack rate was low in those <40 years. Internationally, upper age-limits for post-exposure vaccination vary. Pending larger studies, immunoglobulin should be considered PEP of choice in people >40 years of age and those vulnerable to severe disease.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3798299
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37982992013-10-21 Evaluation of Hepatitis A Vaccine in Post-Exposure Prophylaxis, The Netherlands, 2004-2012 Whelan, Jane Sonder, Gerard J. Bovée, Lian Speksnijder, Arjen van den Hoek, Anneke PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: The secondary attack rate of hepatitis A virus (HAV) among contacts of cases is up to 50%. Historically, contacts were offered immunoglobulin (IG, a human derived blood product) as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Amid safety concerns about IG, HAV vaccine is increasingly recommended instead. Public health authorities’ recommendations differ, particularly for healthy contacts ≥40 years old, where vaccine efficacy data is limited. We evaluated routine use of HAV vaccine as an alternative to immunoglobulin in PEP, in those considered at low risk of severe infection in the Netherlands. METHODS: Household contacts of acute HAV cases notified in Amsterdam (2004-2012) were invited ≤14 days post-exposure, for baseline anti-HAV testing and PEP according to national guidelines: immunoglobulin if at risk of severe infection, or hepatitis A vaccine if healthy and at low risk (aged <30, or, 30-50 years and vaccinated <8 days post-exposure). Incidence of laboratory confirmed secondary infection in susceptible contacts was assessed 4-8 weeks post-exposure. In a vaccinated subgroup, relative risk (RR) of secondary infection with estimated using Poisson regression. RESULTS: Of 547 contacts identified, 191 were susceptible to HAV. Per-protocol, 167 (87%) were vaccinated (mean:6.7 days post-exposure, standard deviation(sd)=3.3) and 24 (13%) were given immunoglobulin (mean:9.7 days post-exposure, sd=2.8). At follow-up testing, 8/112 (7%) had a laboratory confirmed infection of whom 7 were symptomatic. All secondary infections occurred in vaccinated contacts, and half were >40 years of age. In healthy contacts vaccinated per-protocol ≤8 days post-exposure, RR(ref. ≤15 years) of secondary infection in those >40 years was 12.0 (95%CI:1.3-106.7). CONCLUSIONS: Timely administration of HAV vaccine in PEP was feasible and the secondary attack rate was low in those <40 years. Internationally, upper age-limits for post-exposure vaccination vary. Pending larger studies, immunoglobulin should be considered PEP of choice in people >40 years of age and those vulnerable to severe disease. Public Library of Science 2013-10-17 /pmc/articles/PMC3798299/ /pubmed/24147144 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078914 Text en © 2013 Whelan et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Whelan, Jane
Sonder, Gerard J.
Bovée, Lian
Speksnijder, Arjen
van den Hoek, Anneke
Evaluation of Hepatitis A Vaccine in Post-Exposure Prophylaxis, The Netherlands, 2004-2012
title Evaluation of Hepatitis A Vaccine in Post-Exposure Prophylaxis, The Netherlands, 2004-2012
title_full Evaluation of Hepatitis A Vaccine in Post-Exposure Prophylaxis, The Netherlands, 2004-2012
title_fullStr Evaluation of Hepatitis A Vaccine in Post-Exposure Prophylaxis, The Netherlands, 2004-2012
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Hepatitis A Vaccine in Post-Exposure Prophylaxis, The Netherlands, 2004-2012
title_short Evaluation of Hepatitis A Vaccine in Post-Exposure Prophylaxis, The Netherlands, 2004-2012
title_sort evaluation of hepatitis a vaccine in post-exposure prophylaxis, the netherlands, 2004-2012
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3798299/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24147144
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078914
work_keys_str_mv AT whelanjane evaluationofhepatitisavaccineinpostexposureprophylaxisthenetherlands20042012
AT sondergerardj evaluationofhepatitisavaccineinpostexposureprophylaxisthenetherlands20042012
AT boveelian evaluationofhepatitisavaccineinpostexposureprophylaxisthenetherlands20042012
AT speksnijderarjen evaluationofhepatitisavaccineinpostexposureprophylaxisthenetherlands20042012
AT vandenhoekanneke evaluationofhepatitisavaccineinpostexposureprophylaxisthenetherlands20042012