Cargando…
Alternative observational designs to estimate the effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine in Lusaka, Zambia
We conducted a matched case-control (MCC), test-negative case-control (TNCC) and case-cohort study in 2016 in Lusaka, Zambia, following a mass vaccination campaign. Confirmed cholera cases served as cases in all three study designs. In the TNCC, control-subjects were cases with negative cholera cult...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7163804/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32167038 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S095026882000062X |
_version_ | 1783523226496794624 |
---|---|
author | Ferreras, E. Blake, A. Chewe, O. Mwaba, J. Zulu, G. Poncin, M. Rakesh, A. Page, A. L. Quilici, M. L. Azman, A. S. Cohuet, S. Ciglenecki, I. Malama, K. Chizema-Kawesha, E. Luquero, F. J. |
author_facet | Ferreras, E. Blake, A. Chewe, O. Mwaba, J. Zulu, G. Poncin, M. Rakesh, A. Page, A. L. Quilici, M. L. Azman, A. S. Cohuet, S. Ciglenecki, I. Malama, K. Chizema-Kawesha, E. Luquero, F. J. |
author_sort | Ferreras, E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | We conducted a matched case-control (MCC), test-negative case-control (TNCC) and case-cohort study in 2016 in Lusaka, Zambia, following a mass vaccination campaign. Confirmed cholera cases served as cases in all three study designs. In the TNCC, control-subjects were cases with negative cholera culture and polymerase chain reaction results. Matched controls by age and sex were selected among neighbours of the confirmed cases in the MCC study. For the case-cohort study, we recruited a cohort of randomly selected individuals living in areas considered at-risk of cholera. We recruited 211 suspected cases (66 confirmed cholera cases and 145 non-cholera diarrhoea cases), 1055 matched controls and a cohort of 921. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine (OCV) was 88.9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 42.7–97.8) in the MCC study, 80.2% (95% CI: 16.9–95.3) in the TNCC design and 89.4% (95% CI: 64.6–96.9) in the case-cohort study. Three study designs confirmed the short-term effectiveness of single dose OCV. Major healthcare-seeking behaviour bias did not appear to affect our estimates. Most of the protection among vaccinated individuals could be attributed to the direct effect of the vaccine. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7163804 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Cambridge University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71638042020-04-23 Alternative observational designs to estimate the effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine in Lusaka, Zambia Ferreras, E. Blake, A. Chewe, O. Mwaba, J. Zulu, G. Poncin, M. Rakesh, A. Page, A. L. Quilici, M. L. Azman, A. S. Cohuet, S. Ciglenecki, I. Malama, K. Chizema-Kawesha, E. Luquero, F. J. Epidemiol Infect Original Paper We conducted a matched case-control (MCC), test-negative case-control (TNCC) and case-cohort study in 2016 in Lusaka, Zambia, following a mass vaccination campaign. Confirmed cholera cases served as cases in all three study designs. In the TNCC, control-subjects were cases with negative cholera culture and polymerase chain reaction results. Matched controls by age and sex were selected among neighbours of the confirmed cases in the MCC study. For the case-cohort study, we recruited a cohort of randomly selected individuals living in areas considered at-risk of cholera. We recruited 211 suspected cases (66 confirmed cholera cases and 145 non-cholera diarrhoea cases), 1055 matched controls and a cohort of 921. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine (OCV) was 88.9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 42.7–97.8) in the MCC study, 80.2% (95% CI: 16.9–95.3) in the TNCC design and 89.4% (95% CI: 64.6–96.9) in the case-cohort study. Three study designs confirmed the short-term effectiveness of single dose OCV. Major healthcare-seeking behaviour bias did not appear to affect our estimates. Most of the protection among vaccinated individuals could be attributed to the direct effect of the vaccine. Cambridge University Press 2020-03-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7163804/ /pubmed/32167038 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S095026882000062X Text en © The Author(s) and Epicentre 2020 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Ferreras, E. Blake, A. Chewe, O. Mwaba, J. Zulu, G. Poncin, M. Rakesh, A. Page, A. L. Quilici, M. L. Azman, A. S. Cohuet, S. Ciglenecki, I. Malama, K. Chizema-Kawesha, E. Luquero, F. J. Alternative observational designs to estimate the effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine in Lusaka, Zambia |
title | Alternative observational designs to estimate the effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine in Lusaka, Zambia |
title_full | Alternative observational designs to estimate the effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine in Lusaka, Zambia |
title_fullStr | Alternative observational designs to estimate the effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine in Lusaka, Zambia |
title_full_unstemmed | Alternative observational designs to estimate the effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine in Lusaka, Zambia |
title_short | Alternative observational designs to estimate the effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine in Lusaka, Zambia |
title_sort | alternative observational designs to estimate the effectiveness of one dose of oral cholera vaccine in lusaka, zambia |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7163804/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32167038 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S095026882000062X |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ferrerase alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT blakea alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT cheweo alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT mwabaj alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT zulug alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT poncinm alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT rakesha alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT pageal alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT quiliciml alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT azmanas alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT cohuets alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT cigleneckii alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT malamak alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT chizemakaweshae alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia AT luquerofj alternativeobservationaldesignstoestimatetheeffectivenessofonedoseoforalcholeravaccineinlusakazambia |