Cargando…

Interventions to improve oral vaccine performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Oral vaccines underperform in low-income and middle-income countries compared with in high-income countries. Whether interventions can improve oral vaccine performance is uncertain. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions designed to increase oral vaccine e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Church, James A, Parker, Edward P, Kirkpatrick, Beth D, Grassly, Nicholas C, Prendergast, Andrew J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Science ;, The Lancet Pub. Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6353819/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30712836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30602-9
_version_ 1783391034566246400
author Church, James A
Parker, Edward P
Kirkpatrick, Beth D
Grassly, Nicholas C
Prendergast, Andrew J
author_facet Church, James A
Parker, Edward P
Kirkpatrick, Beth D
Grassly, Nicholas C
Prendergast, Andrew J
author_sort Church, James A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Oral vaccines underperform in low-income and middle-income countries compared with in high-income countries. Whether interventions can improve oral vaccine performance is uncertain. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions designed to increase oral vaccine efficacy or immunogenicity. We searched Ovid-MEDLINE and Embase for trials published until Oct 23, 2017. Inclusion criteria for meta-analysis were two or more studies per intervention category and available seroconversion data. We did random-effects meta-analyses to produce summary relative risk (RR) estimates. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017060608). FINDINGS: Of 2843 studies identified, 87 were eligible for qualitative synthesis and 66 for meta-analysis. 22 different interventions were assessed for oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV), oral rotavirus vaccine (RVV), oral cholera vaccine (OCV), and oral typhoid vaccines. There was generally high heterogeneity. Seroconversion to RVV was significantly increased by delaying the first RVV dose by 4 weeks (RR 1·37, 95% CI 1·16–1·62) and OPV seroconversion was increased with monovalent or bivalent OPV compared with trivalent OPV (RR 1·51, 95% CI 1·20–1·91). There was some evidence that separating RVV and OPV increased RVV seroconversion (RR 1·21, 95% CI 1·00–1·47) and that higher vaccine inoculum improved OCV seroconversion (RR 1·12, 95% CI 1·00–1·26). There was no evidence of effect for anthelmintics, antibiotics, probiotics, zinc, vitamin A, withholding breastfeeding, extra doses, or vaccine buffering. INTERPRETATION: Most strategies did not improve oral vaccine performance. Delaying RVV and reducing OPV valence should be considered within immunisation programmes to reduce global enteric disease. New strategies to address the gap in oral vaccine efficacy are urgently required. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, and WHO Polio Research Committee.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6353819
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier Science ;, The Lancet Pub. Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63538192019-02-08 Interventions to improve oral vaccine performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis Church, James A Parker, Edward P Kirkpatrick, Beth D Grassly, Nicholas C Prendergast, Andrew J Lancet Infect Dis Article BACKGROUND: Oral vaccines underperform in low-income and middle-income countries compared with in high-income countries. Whether interventions can improve oral vaccine performance is uncertain. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions designed to increase oral vaccine efficacy or immunogenicity. We searched Ovid-MEDLINE and Embase for trials published until Oct 23, 2017. Inclusion criteria for meta-analysis were two or more studies per intervention category and available seroconversion data. We did random-effects meta-analyses to produce summary relative risk (RR) estimates. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017060608). FINDINGS: Of 2843 studies identified, 87 were eligible for qualitative synthesis and 66 for meta-analysis. 22 different interventions were assessed for oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV), oral rotavirus vaccine (RVV), oral cholera vaccine (OCV), and oral typhoid vaccines. There was generally high heterogeneity. Seroconversion to RVV was significantly increased by delaying the first RVV dose by 4 weeks (RR 1·37, 95% CI 1·16–1·62) and OPV seroconversion was increased with monovalent or bivalent OPV compared with trivalent OPV (RR 1·51, 95% CI 1·20–1·91). There was some evidence that separating RVV and OPV increased RVV seroconversion (RR 1·21, 95% CI 1·00–1·47) and that higher vaccine inoculum improved OCV seroconversion (RR 1·12, 95% CI 1·00–1·26). There was no evidence of effect for anthelmintics, antibiotics, probiotics, zinc, vitamin A, withholding breastfeeding, extra doses, or vaccine buffering. INTERPRETATION: Most strategies did not improve oral vaccine performance. Delaying RVV and reducing OPV valence should be considered within immunisation programmes to reduce global enteric disease. New strategies to address the gap in oral vaccine efficacy are urgently required. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, and WHO Polio Research Committee. Elsevier Science ;, The Lancet Pub. Group 2019-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6353819/ /pubmed/30712836 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30602-9 Text en © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Church, James A
Parker, Edward P
Kirkpatrick, Beth D
Grassly, Nicholas C
Prendergast, Andrew J
Interventions to improve oral vaccine performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Interventions to improve oral vaccine performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Interventions to improve oral vaccine performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Interventions to improve oral vaccine performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Interventions to improve oral vaccine performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Interventions to improve oral vaccine performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort interventions to improve oral vaccine performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6353819/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30712836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30602-9
work_keys_str_mv AT churchjamesa interventionstoimproveoralvaccineperformanceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT parkeredwardp interventionstoimproveoralvaccineperformanceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT kirkpatrickbethd interventionstoimproveoralvaccineperformanceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT grasslynicholasc interventionstoimproveoralvaccineperformanceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT prendergastandrewj interventionstoimproveoralvaccineperformanceasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis